Hi Friends,
Hopefully some of you will be able to help in a somewhat long-winded
argument/debate that has been taking place
in Titanic research circies lately, regarding the iceberg that was seen
and inflicted the fatal blow on the ship.

The traditional story is this: the Titanic, moving at 22.5 knots on an
ice cold night (close to an ice field, but
with very clear skies and no wind) headed towards an iceberg. The
lookout who saw the berg seemed
curiously unable to offer estimates of the bergs size at the US
Inquiry, although he did say it was as big
as "two tables" when first seen. It is estimated that the berg was less
than 500 metres away from the Titanic
when first seen. The officers of the watch issued manoeuvres, and the
Titanic turned to port. The berg
sheared along the starboard side causing a fatal injury below the
waterline on the starboard side over a lenght
of some 250 feet.

The berg, originally "two tables" in size, turned out to be higher than
the boat deck, 60 feet above the waterline.
As the berg passed, the collision dumped tons of ice on the foreward
part of the ship, maybe some 35 feet above
the waterline. A variety of witnesses, at all locations and heights saw
the wall of ice slide by.

However, one researcher, with expertise in ice navigation, has
concocted a truly remarkable hypothesis.
The Titanic hit field ice, perhaps 6 feet above the waterline. The "two
tables" berg, which most people would
attribute to perspective of a berg seen 500 metres away, was the ice
pack. As the berg approached the Titanic,
an optical illusion caused the field ice to grow visibly in size until
it was huge.

-----
Not many researchers believe the second story; perhaps one of you can
verify whether such a meterological
optical illusion has ever been seen, or whether it is even possible?

TIA

Paul
--
http://www.paullee.com

Nah, aliens froze a large section of the sea causing the wrech of the
Titanic. Everybody knows this is so!

--
Yeppie, Bush is such an idiot that He usually outwits
everybody else. How dumb!

wrote in message
ps.com...
Hi Friends,
Hopefully some of you will be able to help in a somewhat long-winded
argument/debate that has been taking place
in Titanic research circies lately, regarding the iceberg that was seen
and inflicted the fatal blow on the ship.

The traditional story is this: the Titanic, moving at 22.5 knots on an
ice cold night (close to an ice field, but
with very clear skies and no wind) headed towards an iceberg. The
lookout who saw the berg seemed
curiously unable to offer estimates of the bergs size at the US
Inquiry, although he did say it was as big
as "two tables" when first seen. It is estimated that the berg was less
than 500 metres away from the Titanic
when first seen. The officers of the watch issued manoeuvres, and the
Titanic turned to port. The berg
sheared along the starboard side causing a fatal injury below the
waterline on the starboard side over a lenght
of some 250 feet.

The berg, originally "two tables" in size, turned out to be higher than
the boat deck, 60 feet above the waterline.
As the berg passed, the collision dumped tons of ice on the foreward
part of the ship, maybe some 35 feet above
the waterline. A variety of witnesses, at all locations and heights saw
the wall of ice slide by.

However, one researcher, with expertise in ice navigation, has
concocted a truly remarkable hypothesis.
The Titanic hit field ice, perhaps 6 feet above the waterline. The "two
tables" berg, which most people would
attribute to perspective of a berg seen 500 metres away, was the ice
pack. As the berg approached the Titanic,
an optical illusion caused the field ice to grow visibly in size until
it was huge.

-----
Not many researchers believe the second story; perhaps one of you can
verify whether such a meterological
optical illusion has ever been seen, or whether it is even possible?

TIA

Paul
--
http://www.paullee.com


This all sounds rather confusing. If the "berg" was actually an ice pack
only 6 feet above the waterline then how did it manage to dump all that ice
onto the deck of the Titantic which was, maybe, 35 feet above the waterline?
Would that have been possible? I assume the ice on the deck was not an
illusion. Or am I not interpreting your statements correctly.

Alex

No, the ice on deck certainly wasn't illusory!