[quote:f6fd5b2110="Rosie1912"][quote:f6fd5b2110="keepoot"]it was about a year or two ago- RIGHT after they got the big piece (succesfully) Ballard rallied to her side, her relative was a great aunt or something. she actually went as far to request that ALL artifacts recovered in the past 18 years be returned to the ocean floor. I'm just glad I'm not related to her.
good points on the grave site stuff, but, if the titanic is a grave site, so are many current arceological digs, especally the ones that are NOT accedents, but ment to BE graves. (pyramids, ancient tombs, and such)[/quote:f6fd5b2110]


He would, wouldn't he.... And her great aunt or something?? Wouldn't that be too disatant to win such a court hearing?? IF this story is true, she ONLY won due to Ballard. But I don't believe she did, or if she did no one is taking it seriously since artifacts are still being retrieved. Hense why Ballard took a trip down there and made it clear throughout that documentory "leave the artifacts, we have a motto, look but dont touch the ship" or whatever it was.[/quote:f6fd5b2110]from what I understood, they made it law when it went to norfolk virgina about not touching anything inside the ship. outside (the debris field) was still OK. there probobly is way too much legal issue on ownership of all the artifacts removed to return them to the ocean floor: sale of the items, $$$$ changing hands, who pays to have them returned to the bottom, etc. so I'd expect nothing more to come of that. I was just using that as an example of how nutty this lady was (is). Ballard is kinda like that too, though I do feel bad that his memorial that he placed on titanic's bow was stolen by pirates. anyone else catch that on TLC during the live show, bout 2 months ago? he placed a new one next to the ship.

im saying that is impossible to take her out, not because shes in pieces but because shes buried too deep.

[quote:69ef778feb="keepoot"]it was about a year or two ago- RIGHT after they got the big piece (succesfully) Ballard rallied to her side, her relative was a great aunt or something. she actually went as far to request that ALL artifacts recovered in the past 18 years be returned to the ocean floor. I'm just glad I'm not related to her.
good points on the grave site stuff, but, if the titanic is a grave site, so are many current arceological digs, especally the ones that are NOT accedents, but ment to BE graves. (pyramids, ancient tombs, and such)[/quote:69ef778feb]


He would, wouldn't he.... And her great aunt or something?? Wouldn't that be too disatant to win such a court hearing?? IF this story is true, she ONLY won due to Ballard. But I don't believe she did, or if she did no one is taking it seriously since artifacts are still being retrieved. Hense why Ballard took a trip down there and made it clear throughout that documentory "leave the artifacts, we have a motto, look but dont touch the ship" or whatever it was.

The hull was only saved after 2 attempts. And, I really do not believe the restof Titanic is as strong as a small section of the hull.

[quote:55fd9dd9aa="rose89"]keepoot, i like your way of thinking. i am also for taking the titanic out, but its not possible. :([/quote:55fd9dd9aa]right, but in sectoins & pieces, (like the hull that has been saved) it is possible

keepoot, i like your way of thinking. i am also for taking the titanic out, but its not possible. :(

[quote:3f6863a873="Rosie1912"]I used to live in Fla and never heard of the thing with the St. Pete lady. When was this?? Recently? Few years ago??

Each is intitled to their own opinion on if it's a grave site, if things should be salvaged, etc. I think because people died there, even though their remains are no longer there that it still is and should be considered a grave site. Those people are not buried in a cemetary, so that is their grave site.

I see what you mean by the Leo teeny boppers. Back when the film came out people flocked to trimmer J Dawson's grave thinking it was Leo's... One would think people would have a bit more common sense.

You can't really go on Ballards request to take things from the debris field only because in the latest documentory he was pissed that things had been taken period. The bell for example he was furious.. From the debris field OR the ship. He would scan accross things in the debris field "look at that, just how it landed here..do you want to bring it up or look at it how it landed there and has stayed that way for this long".. He wants her left in peace (that won't happen ofcourse)... it is my opinion he's just mad he didn't "claim" her and make the money off retrieving the artifacts and so now he's lashing out by "don't take the artifacts, leave her in peace"... Yeah HE'S one to talk, he has the funds to go dive down there whenever he feels like it. I'm not too keen on Ballard, he seems to have a thick head and gives the "I'm better than you" attitude..[/quote:3f6863a873]it was about a year or two ago- RIGHT after they got the big piece (succesfully) Ballard rallied to her side, her relative was a great aunt or something. she actually went as far to request that ALL artifacts recovered in the past 18 years be returned to the ocean floor. I'm just glad I'm not related to her.
good points on the grave site stuff, but, if the titanic is a grave site, so are many current arceological digs, especally the ones that are NOT accedents, but ment to BE graves. (pyramids, ancient tombs, and such)

I used to live in Fla and never heard of the thing with the St. Pete lady. When was this?? Recently? Few years ago??

Each is intitled to their own opinion on if it's a grave site, if things should be salvaged, etc. I think because people died there, even though their remains are no longer there that it still is and should be considered a grave site. Those people are not buried in a cemetary, so that is their grave site.

I see what you mean by the Leo teeny boppers. Back when the film came out people flocked to trimmer J Dawson's grave thinking it was Leo's... One would think people would have a bit more common sense.

You can't really go on Ballards request to take things from the debris field only because in the latest documentory he was pissed that things had been taken period. The bell for example he was furious.. From the debris field OR the ship. He would scan accross things in the debris field "look at that, just how it landed here..do you want to bring it up or look at it how it landed there and has stayed that way for this long".. He wants her left in peace (that won't happen ofcourse)... it is my opinion he's just mad he didn't "claim" her and make the money off retrieving the artifacts and so now he's lashing out by "don't take the artifacts, leave her in peace"... Yeah HE'S one to talk, he has the funds to go dive down there whenever he feels like it. I'm not too keen on Ballard, he seems to have a thick head and gives the "I'm better than you" attitude..

looked around some local paaper sites for the lady's name to no avail, can anyone help me out on this? I did find this quote from ballard on this site:
In his congressional testimony, Mr Ballard stated: "Since many beautiful artefacts lie outside the ship itself, scattered over the rolling alpine-like countryside around it and are vulnerable to crude and damaging salvage attempts, I am proposing to both our government and the government of France that any future revisits to the Titanic which would involve the deep diving submersibles of our two countries, or any country for that matter, dedicate a portion of their diving time to carefully recording and recovering those delicate items [i:b11f3fecac]lying outside the hull [/i:b11f3fecac]of the ship itself.

[quote:65c9ba811d="Rosie1912"]Um, one lady who states her family was on the Titanic doesn't have the proper "say" be able to restrict a public grave site from being vistied, thing taken, etc. Not even with a court order, due to RMS Ti owns the Titanic's wreck site and RMS Ti is the only company AUTHORIZED to raise artifacts. So despite that lady's court order, RMS Ti still can raise artifacts (even from inside the ship) if they please and from my knowledge, they still are.

It is indeed a grave site, people died there and their remains are still there, so it is indeed a grave site.[/quote:65c9ba811d]still raising artifacts from the debris field, not inside the ship. seems stupid, but she had it done. can't remember her name, but she's from st pete, took it to court here in tampa, where then it went to court in Norfolk VA.
And again, just because a body dies there does not make it a grave. A grave is ment to remember someone by. If my father died on that ship, I would not remember the ship or how he died, but the life he lived up until then. Even if you never retrieve a body ( some were retrieved and buried, the rest are LONG gone, even ballard said that when he visited in 86 ) but if one is not retrieved, people are buried without remains all the time, to give closure. It's just flesh, and even that isn't around forever. Titanic is less of a grave then the pyrimids, but we scavange those.

In some ways that teeny booper movie with leo hurt scientific expiditions. too many leo fans think they're scientists now. .... people: leo's body's not down there.