Posted by Dan Cherry on April 26, 1999 at 08:33:40 in 209.130.145.56 :
In Reply to: Re: Titanic-Discovery special posted by Scott Andrews on April 26, 1999 at 08:00:46:
Scott,
Regarding the engineers ignoring all the survivor testimony, you also have to take into consideration that one of the organizations involved with this expedition also were among those that claimed that a coal dust explosion sank the Titanic and not an iceberg, again ignoring all survivor acounts and common sense.
I, too, did have to agree that the one good segment was the bow model sinking sequences. I'd have gladly traded the second show for the first in the time slots and in length of time.
As for the steel test, putting the brittle steel theory (which I think has more weight than this broadcast test) down made me raise my eyebrows as well. It just seems that RMST wants to be the 'Shell Answer Man' and have all the answers to all things Titanic, and it was obvious they don't recognize Ballard's works, theories and works, especially since their 'revelations' were all talked about and proven before RMST was even formed, not to mention the fact that the narrator announced the wreck was discovered in 1987, not 1985, which pushes Ballard right out of the picture and RMST right into the spotlight starting with the ill-fated "Tulloch & Telly's Titanic Television Tackiness".
Dan