Hi Neptune!

My favourite is Bruce Beveridge and Steve Hall's 'Olympic & titanic the Truth Behind The Conspiracy.' Try Amazon.co.uk or com -- or a shop!

Best,

Mark.

Hello Mark,
thanks for your reply i willhav a lookat my local W H Smiths and see if they have it in stock.failing that i will try Amazon. Thanks again, Neptune

I keep looking for Captian Smith on the grassy knoll photos or evidence the Roswell Hanger 18 has a ship in it stored! How do we know that they didn't switch the two ships? Easy, which one is laying at the bottom of the ocean, photographed regularly and which ship was decomissioned in April 1935 and sold for scrap? Just look at the photos, the two ship are quite different even at a glance. This is one of those rumors that is simple answered, simply puts it to rest.

Unfortunetly it is not as simple as that too many coinsidences add to the theroy but most can be answered. Regardless 1500 died on an olympic class liner that night.

It is that simple, there are just too many trees in the way for some to not be able to see the forrest. Please give some "facts" to support even a few of your coincidences! Coincidences as Webster defines them "the occurrence of events that happen at the same time by accident but seem to have some connection; also : any of these occurrences".
If you research you will find that on April 12 1914 the Olympic is docked in plain sight in Southampton England awaiting sail. April 24 1912 As the Titanic's sister ship Olympic is about to leave Southampton, her "black gang" (stokers) go out on strike. They will not work on a ship that does not carry enough lifeboats 285 crew desert ship, and the Olympic's voyage is canceled. You can't confuse the two ships appearance if you know the specs of the two. Check these photos I have of the two ships.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v607/sundancekid17/Titanic%20compared%20Olympic/compare.jpg
Are you disputing the ship laying on the ocean floor is not the Titanic? And are you disputing that the ship that was decommissioned and scraped out in April 1935 was not the Olympic, and photographed thousands of times after the Titanic sank? I have numerous archival film footage of the Olympic running about after the Titanic sank. Oh please amuse us with some coincidences, just give a couple so we might have a chance to discuss them intelligently. After all this is a discussion group. Have a nice day.

Am well aware of how it is defined and please don't antagorise me or intimidate me for I will not stand for it in amy manour of the word no matter how webster's dictionary defines it a will spare you the tedium of writting it for you. Pitty you could't extend me such curtecy. Am also well aware of the differences between both ships such as the open plan promanade deck on Olympic.

I have also researched this story and a did come to a expected conclusion it was't switched. All coinsidences are just that however I was pointing out how such a conspiracy theroy can't be blown over just like that and people are allowed an opinion on such a theroy as we are in all stories.

Why don't you look at it from a sceptical point of view as I did it gives you a more satisfying conclusion.

Also you said 'Are you disputing the ship laying on the ocean floor is not the Titanic? '

hmmm as far as am aware I did't say that and did't hint in the least what my view of the theroy was so you are meerley speculating and therefore don't have the right to antagorise me. Also could you re-frase that for you are not making any sense as far as i can telll from that you are sayin. For what you wrote would mean I don't believe the conspiracy. So therefore what you then wrote is sarcastic re-marks for no apparant reason. Or maybe I miss understood.

Also basing such theroys on pictures is not a good idea with the Olympic apperaring in more than 90% of aleged photos of Titanic it then becomes dificult to tell the difference from a front or back view nor is it easy to define either of the two super liners. It then becomes difficult to say witch is which because of how both ships are said to be either or. This therefore means people are forgiven for being misslead and can't be catogorized as gulable. For they don't know what differences to look out for.

I hope you now understand and I don't wish to waste anymore of my time on this good day.

Nobody is trying to I believe the word you were trying to convey was antagonize. You just said and I quote "Unfortunetly it is not as simple as that too many coinsidences add to the theroy but most can be answered."
Please explain then, why is it not so simple? As I said "which one is laying at the bottom of the ocean, photographed regularly and which ship was decomissioned in April 1935 and sold for scrap?" I think it answers this silly rumor's own questions. But please if it's not so simple try and enlighten us then!

I think I like the post that just came out tonight by a authority on Titanic Exhibitions from John White of White Star Memories.CO.UK

Ref: alleged Titanic/Olympic conspiracy
I own White Star Memories and we are Europe's leading Titanic exhibition specialists.

It never ceases to amaze me the amount of people who believe this jackanory, sorry, story !!!

I mean, really,

I for one have no doubt it is Titanic lying at the bottom of the Atlantic Ocean and Olympic was scrapped in 1935 and I had weetabix for breakfast this morning !!!!!!!

It just shows how gullible people can be.

P.S I heard we never really landed on the moon.

John White
White Star Memories.CO.UK

I quess that with any iconic event in history there is always going to be someone adding a conspiracy theory.

Like for instance: More than 3500 people die in car wrecks each day but still nobody seems to believe that a princes (Diana) can also die in a mere car crash. Nobody is more powerful than something as simple as an accident. But still people believe that it must have been something more sinister. "No she couldn't have died because she was traveling in a fast car through a narrow tunnel". People still think Elvis is alive and that millions of man hours were spend on the Titanic's construction just for the show, so that she could be sunk on purpose...after being swaped with the Olympic of course.

Who knows maybe Elvis and Adolf is having a drink on the Titanic as we speak.

Fine a'll give my opinion in the least complex way I can for you.

In my view the conspiracy makes for good reading how all the little coinsidenses on the run up to Titanics maiden voyage can be answerd by looking at it from a technical point of view and how all can be cast to the side as been rubbish. However there are too many of them, which in turn gives rise to the belief there was a switch which is why people can be forgiven for thinking that.

So therefore such a theroy can't be dissmissed so easily even though it can be dissmissed.

I don't believe the conspiracy a don't know why you think I do I have not said in the least, you have guessed that.

Everyone is intitle of their opinion in a democracy and on this site, people have constructivly critisied each other on possible theroys. So in that respect I don't believe insulting them is the way to go. The gentleman am refering to is that which you quoted. I also don't like the reference to the moon has nothing to do with Titanic in the least.

On such example comes from when I did believe the switch the author Mark chirnside when he answer my posts never tried any intimidating action he meerley and constructivly highlighted flaws with the theroy.

'Who knows maybe Elvis and Adolf is having a drink on the Titanic as we speak'

Clinton I don't think that joke is in good taste.

What are you talking about?