Titanic was an inside job

If ice is stronger than steel, why don't they build ships out of ice? It would be cheaper
 
there was no concrete in the hull of the titanic
;)

yes there was because i have pictures of the steel as it was being built. i also have MS PAINT and can draw arrows. therefore is is a fact and can not be refuted.

Concrete would be proof that they intended the Titanic to sink. Since nobody has provided proof that there was no concrete in the bow, I will submit that as irrefutable fact that it was intended for the Titanic to sink.

Notice how the Titanic is going down by its bow. This is clear proof that there was concrete present, otherwise the ship would have settled evenly in the water.

titanic_sinking.jpg
 
there was no concrete in the hull of the titanic
;)

yes there was because i have pictures of the steel as it was being built. i also have MS PAINT and can draw arrows. therefore is is a fact and can not be refuted.

Concrete would be proof that they intended the Titanic to sink. Since nobody has provided proof that there was no concrete in the bow, I will submit that as irrefutable fact that it was intended for the Titanic to sink.

Notice how the Titanic is going down by its bow. This is clear proof that there was concrete present, otherwise the ship would have settled evenly in the water.

titanic_sinking.jpg

Until someone can prove that the Illuminati was not involved in this, it will remain one of the greatest terrorist attacks in this history of the world.

Neigh, in the history of the galaxy.

I will await the OCTAs to show how this was all an "accident".
 
yes there was because i have pictures of the steel as it was being built. i also have MS PAINT and can draw arrows. therefore is is a fact and can not be refuted.

Concrete would be proof that they intended the Titanic to sink. Since nobody has provided proof that there was no concrete in the bow, I will submit that as irrefutable fact that it was intended for the Titanic to sink.

Notice how the Titanic is going down by its bow. This is clear proof that there was concrete present, otherwise the ship would have settled evenly in the water.

titanic_sinking.jpg

Until someone can prove that the Illuminati was not involved in this, it will remain one of the greatest terrorist attacks in this history of the world.

Neigh, in the history of the galaxy.

I will await the OCTAs to show how this was all an "accident".

There are no "accidents"

Was it an "accident" that someone placed an iceberg in the path of the Titanic to make it look like ice sank the ship?
 
Concrete would be proof that they intended the Titanic to sink. Since nobody has provided proof that there was no concrete in the bow, I will submit that as irrefutable fact that it was intended for the Titanic to sink.

Notice how the Titanic is going down by its bow. This is clear proof that there was concrete present, otherwise the ship would have settled evenly in the water.

titanic_sinking.jpg

Until someone can prove that the Illuminati was not involved in this, it will remain one of the greatest terrorist attacks in this history of the world.

Neigh, in the history of the galaxy.

I will await the OCTAs to show how this was all an "accident".

There are no "accidents"

Was it an "accident" that someone placed an iceberg in the path of the Titanic to make it look like ice sank the ship?

Have you seen the youtube video of the secret Mason submarine project, where a submarine could latch onto an iceburg and actually ram it into the ship?

Of course, that is only after the submarine torpedoes the ship first. The iceburg is merely cover to make it look like an accident.

We know this was no accident.
 
Prove me wrong

That;s not the way it works asswipe.. prove youself RIGHT.
Bye.

Thats not the way it works on the Conspiracy board. You make an assertion based on assumptions and half-truths. Then when you are presented with contradictory facts you are allowed to ignore those facts and restate your original assertion.

Just thought I would help you with the rules
 
Prove me wrong

That;s not the way it works asswipe.. prove youself RIGHT.
Bye.

Thats not the way it works on the Conspiracy board. You make an assertion based on assumptions and half-truths. Then when you are presented with contradictory facts you are allowed to ignore those facts and restate your original assertion.

Just thought I would help you with the rules

Wow.

I do believe the not-so-subtle humor of this thread went straight over Soggy's head.

There is no way that anyone can prove to me that the Titanic was not torpedoed by a submarine with an iceburg attached to it and then subsequently rammed by the iceburg to make it look like an accident.

Accounts from the accident note two very distinct explosions well before the boat struck the iceburg.

Of course, these people refuse to be be named for fear of Illuminati retribution, but I've got a youtube video if anyone is interested.
 
Conspiracy?

No doubt about it

Here is what we know about the Titanic sinking so far

1. There is no way ice can sink a metal ship
2. Ice is just frozen water
3. Survivors are either dead or claim they can't remember the sinking
4. Concrete in the bow would have caused the Titanic to sink bow first
5. A submarine could have towed an iceberg into Titanics path
6. Ships don't sink at freefall speeds
7. Nobody ever bothered to check the iceberg for damage....Coverup
 
Conspiracy?

No doubt about it

Here is what we know about the Titanic sinking so far

1. There is no way ice can sink a metal ship
2. Ice is just frozen water
3. Survivors are either dead or claim they can't remember the sinking
4. Concrete in the bow would have caused the Titanic to sink bow first
5. A submarine could have towed an iceberg into Titanics path
6. Ships don't sink at freefall speeds
7. Nobody ever bothered to check the iceberg for damage....Coverup

Ships don't sink at freefall speeds.....my nom for POTY!!!
:clap2::clap2::clap2::clap2:
 
Conspiracy?

No doubt about it

Here is what we know about the Titanic sinking so far

1. There is no way ice can sink a metal ship
2. Ice is just frozen water
3. Survivors are either dead or claim they can't remember the sinking
4. Concrete in the bow would have caused the Titanic to sink bow first
5. A submarine could have towed an iceberg into Titanics path
6. Ships don't sink at freefall speeds
7. Nobody ever bothered to check the iceberg for damage....Coverup

It is painfully obvious that a submarine towed an iceberg into the path of the Titanic under the cover of darkness. Nobody has ever denied this
 
It is painfully obvious that a submarine towed an iceberg into the path of the Titanic under the cover of darkness. Nobody has ever denied this

And we all know that a lack of denial equates to absolute proof.
lack of proof is "they" took it all so we cant prove it

Now isn't that convenient. They unleashed global warming to melt the ice berg so we can't prove it was there so theres no way to trace it back to hitting the alleged Titanic.

By the way, have you seen the ship up close? When, in the history, of water, has there been this much made out of a sinking?
 
Don't forget this was the White Star Line! Obviously a Klan Front.

There are numerous claims that the Titanic was sunk as a way to blame the Jews. Nobody has ever denied that an iceberg was towed in front of the ship under cover of darkness
 
If metal is harder than ice, then why do ships navigate around icebergs? Under that theory a ship just be able to plough right through an iceberg?

If you are going to look at this rationally, you have to look are more factors than just ice against metal. There were a lot of forces at play, the immovability and density of the iceberg, the torque of the ship, the angle of the strike, the brittleness of the metal. I think it is quite conceivable that an iceberg can sink a ship.

There are many things that appear impossible but scientific exploration has actually created the conditions which make them possible.

The youtube vids on this are completely funny -- a toy ship beating an ice cube....not the same. Not the same at all.
 
If metal is harder than ice, then why do ships navigate around icebergs? Under that theory a ship just be able to plough right through an iceberg?

If you are going to look at this rationally, you have to look are more factors than just ice against metal. There were a lot of forces at play, the immovability and density of the iceberg, the torque of the ship, the angle of the strike, the brittleness of the metal. I think it is quite conceivable that an iceberg can sink a ship.

There are many things that appear impossible but scientific exploration has actually created the conditions which make them possible.

The youtube vids on this are completely funny -- a toy ship beating an ice cube....not the same. Not the same at all.

Don't bring your pseudo-scientific thought on here and think you are going to impress us with facts and data.

As we have already pointed out: no one has ever denied that the sinking of the Titanic was an illuminati conspiracy that entalled a submarine torpedoing the ship and then dragging an iceburg into the path of the ship to make it look like an accident.

Since no one has denied that, it must all be true.

It's as simple as that.
 

Forum List

Back
Top