Видео

Thank you, but it is not a theory. It is the survivor accounts. The iceberg collision is also not a theory. It is the survivor accounts. If you are confused about the physics involved I made a basic study of it here: ruclips.net/video/1qJhxuJnZVo/видео.html

@flourypathgamermolinaquese9301 Thank you. I researched and presented what the survivors said for historical reference. I have no interest in any theories because the survivors had already told us how the ship sank, so I really find it strange that people want to make up theories about the sinking when they just have to read what the survivors had witnessed. Remember when nobody in the community believed the ship broke despite the fact that many of the survivors said it did? The reason the community did not believe them was for the fact that they could not understand how a large ship could break apart on her maiden voyage. They did not want to debate it or even give it a second thought. Most of the community seemed to be Americans who had some bizarre fantasy idea of the Titanic being stunning and perfect in every way and they did not want to think about the idea that it broke apart, so they ignored the survivors who mentioned it until the wreck was found and their delusions were confronted with reality. The ship was not some perfect trophy to idolise over. It was just a ship that broke apart and sank. Yet people today still try to idolise it and they ignore anything they fail to understand about the sinking. Many people in the community told me the ship did not list to port and they wasted so many years saying it was physically impossible for the ship to list to port. They called it my theory and mocked the idea and the survivors who mentioned it. I ignored the trolls because I understand how the ship listed to port and I researched exactly what the survivors told us. I believe the port list also returned to an even keel and yet again many people in the community tried to say it was physically impossible and they called it my theory and tried to debunk the survivors who witnessed it happen. It sadly seems to take decades for the community to read the survivor accounts and understand them, when it only needs to be a few days. It was clear that the community was primarily children, movie fanboys, and people who exploit disasters to make money sadly. Regarding what people in the community refer to as the v break. It is just another one people foolishly call my theory for just researching what the survivors told us. I've stated many times what I believe and it does not look anything like the v break theories they come up with, which goes to show that they never even bothered to look at my videos which only show a very shallow v break as the air inside the back half of the bow was pushed forwards by the sea rushing into the broken decks, and the rapid movement of air inside the ship being pushed quickly forwards and up through the forward vents would naturally cause the forward end to regain a small amount of buoyancy which is why the survivors saw it very slightly bob as the air was pushed out of the forward vents and then it plunged head down and sank head down. Yet people in the community never bother to see what I had presented and they instead come up with their own ideas which they exaggerate and they think that their own idea of it is my theory, when it is not, and they never reference what I actually showed to any of their viewers. They then debunk their own ideas of it and convince their paying viewers that the survivors were all mistaken, confused or fake so they can continue to promote whatever outdated ideas of the sinking they happen to be selling on their channels as their content is always monetised to make money and many of them sell merchandise on their channel stores and receive money from live streams. To them it is all about making money and manipulating their viewers to get it. They are salesmen. I am not. I promote nothing and everything I show is non-profit because the Titanic is my heritage and I respect the disaster and always will. My videos are for historical reference for those who genuinely care about my heritage. kind regards, The real Aaron1912

@railroadinsight Thank you. I researched the survivor accounts that were mostly forgotten and ignored y the community for decades. I guess that is why the presentations I showed were hard for them to even consider thinking about. Even the port list was denied by so many in the community until recent years. I have got used to everything the survivors said being referred to as my theory. I would not be surprised if the iceberg collision was referred as my theory. I made a study of the gradual bending and physics of the flooding during the break up here: ruclips.net/video/1qJhxuJnZVo/видео.html Kind regards, The real Aaron1912

@@Aaron1912RecordsAndResearch Thank you for replying I respect your work and I also respect your opinion. Thank you. Kind Regards Railroad Insight

I personally regard today's music as very uninteresting. The music of the 1920's had its own style, grace, and a unique sense of class and upbeat optimism that made the era of the 1920's stand out with timeless quality and positivity to life.

She had, has and will always have class and character above all others. Such a wonderful ocean liner. The newer cruise ships look like hotels on keels, built to hold thousands of passengers and make as much money as they can per cruise.

I do the real research by going to the libraries, national archives, holding the original documents, visiting historic locations, talking to people who served and sailed on the old ships and putting the spotlight on subjects that people in the community never even thought of e.g. the possibility of the ship losing a propeller blade, the effects of thermal stress and the fracturing of the hull as she twisted from starboard to port and back to starboard again, the survivors who witnessed the ship break twice. The list goes on. I think we can safely say that I have conducted real research. All at my own expense, with nothing promoted, all sources presented, and all non-profit because the Titanic disaster is part of my heritage and I respect it with the utmost integrity. kind regards, The real Aaron1912

@ThatOneIrishLad432 I believe the ship sank based on the survivor testimony. I do not regard their testimony as any kind of 'theory'. It is strange that people want to make theories of the sinking when all they have to do is read the survivor accounts and not make up pointless theories every year just for clicks, money and attention. The survivors told us what happened over a century ago and I presented what they said for historical reference for anyone who genuinely is interested in the Titanic. kind regards, The real Aaron1912

@AoDahRoh21404 I believe the survivors. They saw the ship break twice. The first break was felt, heard and witnessed before the sea had reached the bridge. The second break was felt, heard, and witnessed after the stern buckled into the air and then it turned around and broke apart and settled back. It is sad that people still think the break up was just one event when the survivors told us repeatedly that it was two separate events. If you are interested in the survivors who saw the stern lights remain on after the first break, or the survivors who said it was a very bright night and that everything was still clearly visible after the lights went out, or if you are genuinely interested in the physics regarding the gradual bending of the hull and localised flooding caused by the port holes on multiple decks spanning the entire length of the ship, then you can see my non-profit presentations in my playlist. kind regards, The real Aaron1912

@FazbearEntertainment414 I have no desire to waste time watching people make the same old animations and parroting each other for clicks, likes, subs, and all of that rubbish which so many in social media obsess about because they have no life 'outside the internet'. I go to the museums, the archives and records offices and spoke to people who lived in 1912. You know, the actual physical research. I don't bother with people on the internet who regard the disaster as some kind of entertainment, those who exploit it to make money, people who obsess over the ship and give little regard for the tragic loss of life, or those who treat the ship like some kind of character in Thomas and Friends. It was a manmade object dolled up to look nice so the company could sell tickets. Anything other than that is pure illusion. We should remember the people who were on it and what they had to say. As one survivor put it - 'the loss of one life was worth more than the whole ship.' I wish people would respect my heritage, stop making games of it, stop worshipping and idolising everything about the ship and just allow the dead to rest in peace. I showed the Titanic listing to port and I was the only one on youtube to show it. Did I care what other people on youtube were showing? No. I showed the port list returning to an even keel. I was the only one on youtube to show it (for years). Did I care what other people showed? No. I was the only one to show......the list goes on with every aspect of the sinking. The v break which people always show wrong and never bother to study is just another aspect of the sinking which the majority have never bothered to research. They dismissed the survivors who said the ship broke and then they accepted they were right. They dismissed the survivors who said the ship listed to port and then they accepted they were right. The list goes on and on regarding everything the survivors said. The survivor accounts don't change. Only people's understanding and acceptance of them. I believe the survivors and that is why I showed the sinking in the video above. kind regards, The real Aaron1912

@luciagoncalves9808 The bow did not weigh 90,000 tons. The vessel displaced the water around her and the buoyant force kept her afloat. The damage caused by the iceberg and open portholes allowed the water to enter the ship which pushed the air out and allowed the ship to settle lower in the sea, roll over to port, twist back to starboard, fracture amidships and break. The bridge took a sudden lurch as the ship partially broke apart and the sea rushed into the broken decks in the middle like a tidal wave. The enormous amount of air still inside the back half of the bow was pushed by the sea rushing into the broken decks like a tidal wave and this pushed the air forwards and out. This gave the bow forward momentum and as it moved forwards it dragged the broken stern behind it which increased the break. The air inside the back half of the bow was pushed forwards and out of the forward vents. This allowed the forward part of the boat deck to very slightly resurface as the air was rapidly pushed out and the bow sank down by the head again. The funnels fell and the immediate area was covered in smoke. Before the smoke had cleared some of the survivors did not realize the ship had broke apart. They watched the stern buckle upwards and then it too broke apart. The ship broke twice and the second one was much more noticeable as the stern had buckled upwards high into the air and then settled slowly back. Some saw the first shallow break, others saw the second high break, and some saw both. kind regards, The real Aaron1912

@FalloutAddict-qc1pm I used Windows movie maker. kind regards Aaron1912

@@Aaron1912RecordsAndResearch thanks!

@juanleon3875 I have no interest in 'theories'. I researched what the survivors said because the Titanic is my heritage. I presented what they said in complete context with all sources so that viewers can verify exactly what the survivors said themselves. They are not fake, not twisted, and not out of context. I believe the ship listed to port because the survivors told us. It is bizarre that the survivors were ignored for decades, not just about the break up, but everything else. The port list was called my theory for many years by people who could not be bothered to do the research. The port list returning to an even keel was also bizarrely called my theory for years. The list goes on. The wreck simply validates what the survivors had already told us back in 1912. The v break which people exaggerate (the strange one Titanic Animations promoted) is not my 'theory'. Kids fed him false information and I'm told that he apologised and abandoned his channel, but the damage was done and I've had to put up with clickbait channels faking what I believe and their viewers (mostly children) don't even care. I am aware children were on forums and gaming platforms and had pretended to be me. I made a video called 'An Ulsterman's Perspective' in the hopes that children and immature adults will stop spreading false information and faking what I believe. My content is for historical reference to those who are genuinely interested in what the survivors said and those who respect my heritage. kind regards, The real Aaron1912

@wallydolly1 It is survivor Edith Rosenbaum's account. I believe she was telling the truth. She was there. I went on the Nomadic again recently and read a copy of her letter while looking out of the portholes and tried to imagine the Titanic towering high against the Nomadic. A unique experience. kind regards, The real Aaron1912

@IloveCruiseShips1912 I believe the 4th funnel was seen to fall by survivor Thomas Dillon. He testified that it fell after the stern settled back. He also testified that he swam away from the port side after it fell and afterwards he turned and witnessed the stern rise up again and go down. This would confirm that the funnel remained upright during the break up and did not fall during the final plunge, but rather, it fell when the stern was floating independently and then suddenly the stern rolled heavily to port and the funnel fell over to port. Survivor Alfred White said he was standing at the top of the 4th funnel and watched the stern breaking apart as he looked down and that he held onto the funnel as it fell down and swam away. I believe that if the funnel remained intact then he would have been sucked down into it, and if it fell hard against the deck behind then he would have been killed. I believe it fell when the base was partially submerged and that it was a softer crash over to port and the top dipped down into the water as the stern rolled to port which cushioned his fall and he swam away, and then the stern rocked back and rolled over again as it turned up and turned around. Survivor Frederick Scott looked at the stern after the ship had broken apart. He testified and was asked: Q - Where did she break? A - The after-funnel. Q - Do you mean the break was aft of her last funnel? - Yes, just aft of the last funnel. Q - Aft of the ventilating funnel? A - Yes, that is right. He believed the ship broke behind the fourth funnel because he could see the stern afloat and the 4th funnel was no longer standing and he assumed that the ship had broken behind the 4th funnel because it had fallen. Survivors who assumed it was still standing can easily be explained because when the stern turned around they would only see the keel and propellers and so they would only assume it was still standing as the stern keeled over to port and turned around and rose up. The survivors who thought it was still standing were not able to see it after the stern turned around e.g. Jack Thayer 'thought' it was still standing but he would not be able to see it because the stern had turned around. The curved shape of the funnel allowed it to shine against the stars after the lights went out and it was described as "white" after the lights went out. After the Titanic went down some of the survivors could see the upturned collapsible boat which also appeared white above the water and some of the survivors mistakenly thought it was the top of the 4th funnel poking above the surface. Mr. Clench testified and said - "I saw a boat in the way that appeared to be like a funnel. We started to back away then. We thought it was the top of the funnel. I put my head over the gunwale and looked along the water's edge and saw some men on a raft." As you can see it was easy for some of the other survivors to mistakenly believe the last thing they saw was 4th funnel poking above the water, when in reality it was just the collapsible boat appearing white with its wet planks glistening under the stars and through the haze and rising steam on the water they said - "It appeared to be like a funnel." As it crashed onto the deck it could have been wedged against the structure and sank with the stern, or dragged down with it by the many cables and davit ropes entangled in and around it. As you can see it is very important to read all of the survivor accounts before reaching any conclusions. For instance the reason many did not see the ship break was due to the enormous amount of smoke which surrounded the ship and covered the sea between the ship and the lifeboats and this is why some did not see it and others did, depending on which side the lifeboats were in relation to which side the funnels fell which pushed the smoke towards them, while others could see it as the smoke drifted away from them was on the opposite side of the ship. You also have to remember that the survivors said the ship broke twice. It commenced before the sea reached the bridge and this resulted in the sudden lurch that was felt near the bridge as the ship twisted and broke apart. Jack Thayer and William Mellors both described the sounds of the ship breaking before the sea reached the bridge and then suddenly the forward half lurched and this was before any of the funnels had fallen. When they did fall there naturally would be an enormous amount of smoke on the water around the ship which hid the first break to many, while others confirmed that they saw it happen this early. Then the stern buckled upwards and it broke apart at a high angle as it rose up, turned around and settled back and this was the big break which was very noticeable to many, while others could not see it as the stern was in the process of turning, and the sea was still covered in smoke. This was the second break which survivors described. It is sad that people today still neglect to read the survivors who clearly saw the first break, while others saw the second break, and others described both. The old excuse that it was 'too dark' is just an excuse to not read the survivor accounts who saw the break and said it was very clear and noticeable. This old excuse was the reason why nobody in the community had bothered to ask the survivors about the break up until after the wreck had been found. To give you an idea how bright it was, survivor Colonel Gracie said he was underneath the water and he could see the surface above him because he said the stars illuminated the sea 'below the surface' and he swam up in that direction because he said it was brighter in that direction while underneath the water. The wireless operator on the SS Parisian said the night was so clear and bright that he said you could play a game of football. The atmosphere was so unique that night it would be almost impossible for anyone to replicate on land. The combination of temperatures of the sea and air, the steam rising from the water, the stars above and phosphorous shining on the water below made the entire atmosphere bright and very visible. The white wet planks of the upturned collapsible could be seen, the 4th funnel shining against the stars could be seen. The water was described as dark blue, and not black. The lifeboats were described as silver in the night, the white lifejackets could be seen and they could read the time on their watches. The reason it was hard to see was due to perspective, the crowded conditions in the lifeboats, the unwillingness to admit in public something that would make headlines and put them in the spotlight, their patriotic spirit to defend British shipbuilding, those who wanted to protect their careers, and above all because there was so much smoke on the water as the funnels fell, which made it hard for some to say with confidence that the liner had broke apart, while others were very vocal about it and they said the forward half was even mistaken for another ship which gives a clear indication that the forward half was not under the water when the first break commenced. Regarding the stern rolling heavily to port. Here is footage of a ship being launched and the uneven distribution of weight caused it to roll over to port. This is very similar to how the stern of the Titanic would have behaved as it broke free and hundreds of people who were waiting on the aft well deck for much of the evacuation were thrown over the port side. There was a massive roar of people screaming as they slid over the side. Some of the survivors thought this roar was 'cheering'. Mrs Rosenbaum said the people in her lifeboat cheered back because they thought "the big shout was one of thanksgiving" and that the stern would stay afloat when it had suddenly rolled to port and spilled many into the water. As it rocked and tried to steady itself, the funnel would remain on for a moment and then break and collapse side ways onto the deck as its base became partially submerged. This is when Thomas Dillon swam away from the port side. He then turned and testified that the stern rose up again and sank. Footage of ship suddenly rolling to port - similar to the Titanic's stern rolling to port and rocking back. ruclips.net/video/GLdXEwhsDiM/видео.html A long response, but I rarely engage in short answers as the sinking of the Titanic can't be explained without going into the complexities like the gradual bending and twisting of the hull, the port side compressing and the starboard side buckling open, the open portholes which created localised flooding in different parts of the ship and everything else etc. kind regards, The real Aaron1912

@@Aaron1912RecordsAndResearch Thanks for reply, I personally disagree about the fourth funnel falling. Dillon specified it was after the stern righted itself and not during. 3858. (Mr. Raymond Asquith.) Before the ship actually went down did you see her make any movements? - Yes, she took one final plunge and righted herself again. 3859. She gave a plunge and righted herself again? - Yes. 3860. Did you notice anything about the funnel? - Not then. 3861. Did you afterwards notice something about the funnel? - Yes. 3862. What? - When she went down. 3863. Was that after you had left the ship? - Before I left the ship. 3864. What did you notice? - Well, the funnel seemed to cant up towards me. 3865. It seemed to fall aft? - Yes; it seemed to fall up this way. (motioned) 3866. Was that the aftermost funnel? - Yes. 3867. Did you get the idea that the ship was breaking in two? - No. 3868. Did the funnel seem to fall towards you? - Yes. 3869. (The Commissioner.) That is the after funnel? - Yes, my Lord. Several on the port side also saw the funnel still standing and couldn't have mistook it with a boat since they said they saw it still standing after the stern righted and also never mentioned it fall. For example, no one in Boats 4 or 10 which were likely very close to the ship didn't mention it fall and would have mentioned it if it did happen but instead, said they were able to tell what the stern was doing after break. It also allowed many to tell where the ship broke, if it fell, they wouldn't have been able to tell. Dillon was likely drunk at this stage as he had earlier had some alcohol as mentioned in his testimony. The funnel is also close to the ship and was built very strongly so it couldn't have fallen unless the stern crashed back. The majority said it settled. The majority that mentioned the funnel said it was still standing when the stern righted. Fredrick Scott had got into Boat 4 a few minutes ago and could have mistook something else and thought it broke their. I personally account for him by showing the lights going out in sections. He also mentioned the stern didn't rise after it righted itself which contradicts the others that said rose post break. Jack Thayer - Her stern was gradually rising into the air... the last funnel was about on the surface on the water... I do not believe it fell. Her deck was turned slightly towards us... the great after part of the ship, two hundred and fifty feet of it, rose into the sky, till it reached a sixty-five- or seventy-degree angle. Ida Hippach - The Titanic had keeled to one side and was slowly sinking. Less than twenty minutes after we touched the water, we heard two loud explosions. The explosions occurred almost simultaneously. The giant ship quivered from stem to stern. It parted almost in the centre and slowly sank. The last I saw of it was a single smokestack, which remained above water for several minutes Edward Buley - Q. Notwithstanding the darkness you could see the outline of the ship? A. Yes, sir; we could see the outline of the ship. Q. You could see the funnel? A. Quite plainly. George Crowe - After getting clear of the ship the lights were still burning very bright, but as we got away she seemed to go lower and lower, and she almost stood up perpendicular, and her lights went dim, and presently she broke clean in two, probably two-thirds of the length of the ship...one-third of the aft funnel sticking up. The after part floated back, ... then there was an explosion, and the aft part turned on end and sank Sorry for any offence, no offence meant.

@IloveCruiseShips1912 Thank you, but as I mentioned above I believe the ship broke twice and that the 4th funnel remained intact during the first and second break and fell after the second break, not during. Survivors were accused of being drunk, even 5th officer Lowe and Quartermaster Hichens were accused of being drunk. I take the reports of survivors being drunk with a pinch of salt. People just didn't like what they had to say and brush their accounts aside by saying they were all drunk. Regarding Jack Thayer. He said - "Gradually she turned her deck away from us, as though to hide from our sight the awful spectacle. We had an oar on our overturned boat. In spite of several men working it, amid our cries and prayers, we were being gradually sucked in toward the great pivoting mass. I looked upwards. We were right underneath the three enormous propellers. For an instant, I thought they were sure to come right down on top of us. Then, with the deadened noise of the bursting of her last few gallant bulkheads, she slid quietly away from us into the sea." From the above we can see that he was in no position to see the 4th funnel collapse as the keel and propellers were facing him. What should also be noted is that he heard the second break commencing as the stern faced the opposite way which he referred to as the bursting of the bulkheads. This was the moment the stern cracked and broke apart and the 4th funnel fell soon afterwards. By this stage of the sinking Mr. Thayer was looking up at the rudder and propellers and not in any position to notice what was happening to the 4th funnel. Surviving was his top priority. The turning of the stern and second break was described by Lawrence Beesley. He said - "She tilted slowly up, revolving apparently about a centre of gravity just astern of amidships, until she attained a vertically upright position; and there she remained-motionless! As she swung up, her lights, which had shone without a flicker all night, went out suddenly, came on again for a single flash, then went out altogether, and as they did so, there came a noise which many people, wrongly I think, have described as an explosion.....Then, first sinking back a little at the stern, I thought, she slid slowly forwards through the water and dived slantingly down." He essentially described the same thing as Mr. Thayer in that both men described seeing the stern rise up and turn around and they both heard a loud rumble. Mr. Beesley saw the stern settle back slightly and Mr. Thayer thought the propellers were going to land on him. We know from many survivors including Mr. Thayer that the first break happened much earlier when the sea approached the bridge and that the settling back of the stern was the moment the 2nd break happened as the stern rose very high into the air, turned around and broke apart. Survivor Thomas Dillon testified and said: She gave a plunge and righted herself again? - Yes. 3860. Did you notice anything about the funnel? - Not then. 3861. Did you afterwards notice something about the funnel? - Yes. 3862. What? - When she went down. 3863. Was that after you had left the ship? - Before I left the ship. 3864. What did you notice? - Well, the funnel seemed to cant up towards me. 3865. It seemed to fall aft? - Yes; it seemed to fall up this way. 3866. Was that the aftermost funnel? - Yes. From the above we can see that the ship broke apart and the 4th funnel collapsed towards him soon afterwards as the stern rolled to port after she broke. He was on the port side and found himself in the sea as the stern rolled to port. 3871. How did you get off the ship into the water? - I went down with the ship, and shoved myself away from her into the water. The port side then rolled back to normal as it tried to steady itself as it was rocking and then it rose up again and sank. Dillon was then in the water and when he reached the surface he looked back at the stern and watched it rise upwards again and sink. 3883. She had sunk when you came up again? - Well, I saw what I thought would be the afterpart of her coming up and going down again, final. 3884. Then she had not sunk? - She came up and went down again. 3885. You saw what you thought was the afterpart coming up again? - I thought it was the ship coming up again. She came up and went down again - finish. From his perspective. The stern settled back. The stern rolled to port. The 4th funnel fell towards him. The port side dipped under the water as it rolled over. He swam away from the port side. As he swam away the stern rolled back to normal and began to rise up again. He then turned and watched the stern as it rose up again and sank. I have seen people make animations and they base it off his account, but they always fail to read his entire account when he states the stern rose up again after the funnel fell. As noted in my previous comment the collapsible boat was mistaken for the funnel. It is quite understandable if a survivor yelled out the question "Has the ship gone down?" and another survivor was to yell back "No, I can still see a funnel poking out of the water." without realizing that it was a collapsible boat which had the appearance of a top of a funnel. kind regards, The real Aaron1912

@@Aaron1912RecordsAndResearch I had read in OASOG that he had earlier gone to the ships bar earlier in the sinking. He said it fell after the stern righted. If it did fall, I think it would have had to have fallen atleast 30 seconds after the stern righted. I will still be sticking to it breaking off in the descent due to the above reasons but I am happy to hear your views on it. 2 questions: Do you believe their were emergency lights on post break? Do you believe their was an oil lamp on after the break? Thanks, for reply. Sorry for any offence, no offence meant,

@IloveCruiseShips1912 Harold Bride testified and said - "Toward the end the lights sank and we were ready to stand by with emergency apparatus and candles." I believe the crew would have done their best to keep the ship's lights on for as long as possible in order for them to be visible to any approaching ships and would have emergency apparatus ready for use in the event that the main power supply should fail. In 1895 the French liner SS La Champagne was struck by a large wave which damaged the ship and caused the electric power to fail plunging the ship into darkness. Reports at the time said 'candles and lamps' had to be used. As it was 1895 the crew would have regarded electric lighting as new and experimental and would not entirely trust its efficiency. The Titanic sailed 17 years later and I'm sure the older members of the crew including Captain Smith would likely have their own plans and procedures on their minds regarding the placing of lanterns and candles with the expectation that the electricity would fail and that emergency procedures would need to be engaged. However the survivors testified that the electricity remained on the stern - "all the lights aft" after the ship broke apart, indicating that the power supply was being fed into the stern section. The wreck shows us that the steam pipes did not immediately snap because we can see they are wrenched out and bent, indicating that the decks snapped, but the pipes remained connected for a moment afterwards until the complete separation of the lower decks. Here is a collection of survivor accounts referring to the stern lights staying on after the ship broke apart. ruclips.net/video/Owxm7AZ0IWI/видео.html kind regards, The real Aaron1912

@UndeadGaming-mi5gn The video link you provided has got nothing to do with the v break or my study. That video was made by some random American who thought he was debating the Titanic with me, but it turned out he was debating with kids who used my username. They fed him with false information and he basically made an immature attempt to debunk something that I never even showed. e.g. He shows the ship sinking down as far as the 3rd funnel at a high angle and then breaking, and then for some bizarre reason the bow rises up again from an incredible depth back to the surface again. That is not what I believe and I have never shown that in any of my studies. I showed a shallow break and a twisting motion as the ship broke into three. That is not what he debunked at all. It was clear that kids were just feeding him with false information and he took their bait and made a debunk video to debunk something that I did not even show. He got so many clicks out of the video that he made a second one, but his viewers realized that kids were just making a fool out of him and I'm told that he stopped and that he apologised and has even abandoned his channel. The penny should have dropped when he said the survivor accounts were fake and out of context, because any true historian knows they are not fake and not out of context. The trouble is the vast majority of people who are interested in the Titanic are children and are easily misled by clickbait channels who clearly are only interested in the clicks and selling merchandise which is apparent when you visit any of their channels. They are basically just salesmen exploiting disasters to make money. I have spent many years researching and presenting my own heritage and what the survivors said by showing the original handwritten letters so that everyone can see for themselves exactly what the survivors said. Sadly people just click on whatever random video is trending and don't even consider that the people they are listening to are scamming them to get their views and to sell merchandise which they sell on their channels. My channel is entirely non-profit and for educational research. I promote nothing and I travelled around the world and filmed many historic cities because I genuinely respect and appreciate my heritage. I made a video on my channel called - An Ulsterman's Perspective - to give you an idea of what I had to put up with for years. Glad to say most of them have moved on. kind regards, The real Aaron1912

@Astrailian_mate The first funnel fell over to starboard as we can see the damage caused by the collapsing funnel on the starboard side of the wreck. The second funnel also fell over to starboard because survivors on the starboard side witnessed it fall towards them. The third funnel fell during the breaking up. Its direction is unknown because the survivors at that time were more concerned about their own safety and were not in a position to know or care which direction it fell. There was also a tremendous amount of smoke covering the area when the ship broke apart which made it difficult for some of the survivors to see the ship breaking, especially after the smoke had cleared and they were not aware what had happened. After the bow broke free it lurched from side to side as the air rushed out rapidly. The stern turned around and rose up by the weight of the engines inside it, which rapidly caused the broken stern to rise high up and it broke apart and settled back. The fourth funnel was seen to fall back and over to port. The sinking was very long and complex. It is unfortunate that books and films try to simplify the events of the sinking because most of the Titanic community seem to be children and are not able to comprehend the complexities involved. kind regards, The real Aaron1912

@Aaron1912RecordsAndResearch How would the fourth funnel fall when survivors claimed to see the fourth funnel on the ship until it went down. Also how could the second funnel fall first and not the first funnel when charles lightoller saw the ships first funnel falling first.

@@Aaron1912RecordsAndResearch On the wreck the forward starboard side of the officers' quarters is more damaged than the port side, this indicates indeed that the forward funnel fell to starboard. Also back in the 80s, when the gymnasium was still intact, the roof was somewhat crushed and buckled inward, this too indicates that the second funnel fell to starboard. It's unclear when and how the third stack fell because of the lack of testimonies; Anyhow it likely fell when the ship broke and the forward superstructure tower detached from the aft tower and the stern section. And finally, the fourth funnel fell aft because of the forward momentum of the sinking stern. (This was said by surviving trimmer Patrick Dillon). Some believe that it fell underwater moslty because of Tayer's testimony (he mentions the aftermost funnel and that he never saw it fall), but due to the stern sinking in a semicirle, Tayer was behind it and had a view of the rudder and the screws when the 4th funnel actually fell, so he didn't have a clear sight. (also he was in a life or death situation so he clearly wasn't paying attention). -PS, i'm in a rush so excuse any grammar errors that i've made

@@Astrailian_mateThe breaking of the ship happened before any of the funnels fell. Survivor John B. Thayer junior and others could hear the sound of the ship breaking while they were still on the deck and close to the bridge. The breaking of the ship caused the forward half to lurch suddenly into the water. This lurch was felt by many which caused a wave to wash over the deck as the ship partially began to break and detach and the air deep inside was rapidly pushed up and out by the rush of water coming into the broken decks like a tidal wave pushing all of the remaining air forwards and up which the survivors witnessed and described the forward end dipping and then bounding up slightly and then sinking down again as the air inside was rapidly pushed out. The rapid expulsion of air also caused 2nd officer Lightoller to be blown up to the surface as he felt the rapid release of air from deep inside the ship bursting out of the forward ventilators which allowed him to escape the suction and reach the surface. The breaking of the ship would cause the 2nd funnel to immediately dislodge and fall over. Survivors said it fell to starboard and narrowly missed the survivors on the collapsible boat which was close by. The 1st funnel fell afterwards because Mr. Thayer said it was still standing. Mr. Brown testified that he was beside the 1st funnel when he turned and saw the ship breaking apart. After the 2nd funnel fell it created suction which drew the collapsible towards it and sparks were seen rushing out of the funnel. After all of this had come and gone 2nd officer Lightoller rose to the surface by the escape of imprisoned air bursting out of the forward vents. He said the collapse of the 1st funnel caused a wave which pushed the collapsible far away from the area. So the collapse of the 2nd funnel drew the collapsible and the people in the water towards the ship as the water rushed into the broken decks, and afterwards when all of the air had escaped and there was no more suction there came the collapse of the 1st funnel which pushed the collapsible far away from the ship because there was no more suction left to drag anyone towards the sinking bow. The 4th funnel was seen to fall by survivor Thomas Dillon. He testified that it fell after the stern settled back. He also testified that he swam away after it fell and afterwards he turned and witnessed the stern rise up again and go down. So the 4th funnel from his perspective had already fallen when the stern rose up and sank again. The survivors who did not see it fall would not be able to know it had fallen because the stern turned around as it sank which made it very difficult to see the fourth funnel was no longer there because they would only see the rudder and propellers. The curved shape of the funnel allowed it to shine against the stars after the lights went out and it was described as "white" after the lights went out. After the Titanic went down some of the survivors could see the upturned collapsible boat which also appeared white and some of the survivors mistakenly thought it was the top of a funnel poking above the surface. Mr. Clench testified and said - "I saw a boat in the way that appeared to be like a funnel. We started to back away then. We thought it was the top of the funnel. I put my head over the gunwale and looked along the water's edge and saw some men on a raft." Survivor Frederick Scott looked at the stern after the ship had broken apart. He testified and was asked: Q - Where did she break? A - The after-funnel. Q - Do you mean the break was aft of her last funnel? - Yes, just aft of the last funnel. Q - Aft of the ventilating funnel? A - Yes, that is right. He believed the ship broke behind the fourth funnel because he could see the stern afloat and the 4th funnel was no longer standing and he assumed that the ship had broken behind the 4th funnel. As you can see it is very important to read all of the survivor accounts before reaching any conclusions. kind regards, The real Aaron1912

@Astrailian_mate ruclips.net/video/EsGtRT5rtz4/видео.html The watertight doors were able to close with a device inside each one that would automatically trigger the door to close when water inside rose up to a certain level that would trigger the device to close. However the doors would not be able to close if the ship was listing to port or starboard because the angle would cause the door to jam. Survivors witnessed various doors on various decks jamming owing to the gradual bending of the hull and twisting of the hull as her forward half leaned over to starboard and then port and then starboard again, while her back half was in a sense tagging behind and twisting over in the same direction as the bow but with a natural bending and twisting motion. The ship was not a static sheet of metal from bow to stern. She was constantly bending and flexing as she steamed across the ocean. Thermal stress was also very high in the location where the Titanic sank which would cause the hull to fracture and break apart much more easily due to the rapid change in temperature in the air and sea. Survivors said their cabins smelled of fresh paint. This would cause them to keep many port holes open. Survivors witnessed many port holes open on the port side of the ship. This would cause the sea to flood into their cabins and cause the ship to list over to port. There was no order given to close the port holes. Most of the crew did not know the ship would sink. It was her maiden voyage after all and she was in their minds one of the safest ships in the world to be on. The idea that she could sink on her maiden voyage and break apart was unthinkable. There is evidence that one of the gangway doors might have been open, but it would not create the port list because the water coming in would simply wash in and spill over to the starboard side and increase the list to starboard. The open portholes inside the port side cabins would cause the water to be trapped inside the cabins on the port side and increase the list to port as the open windows on B, C, D, E decks would cause the port side to sink lower and lower. Survivors witnessed the port list change to an even keel, and then list over to port again, and then list to starboard again. They felt the ship rocking from side to side. I showed a study of this which can be seen in my playlist. The sparks that were seen were described as a tremendous shower. The survivor accounts can also be seen in my playlist. The possible boiler explosion or implosion is unknown because nobody has explored that area of the wreck inside boiler rooms 6, 5, 4, 3. There are plenty of survivors who were accused of being drunk. Charles Joughin, Thomas Dillon, Robert Hichens, 5th officer Lowe. Even the Captain, Murdoch, and the lookouts were accused of being drunk and asleep whilst on duty. There is no evidence of course. It is unfortunate that people exaggerate and make up claims about the passengers and crew rather than examine the events of the sinking which they do not wish to examine. I base my beliefs on the sinking on the survivor accounts which can be read at the Titanic Inquiry website, newspaper archives, and their personal handwritten letters which are held mostly at public records buildings and libraries here in the United Kingdom. kind regards, The real Aaron1912

@blockowocka1728 I made most of them in 2009 using Daz 3D Studio.

@cochu444yt I have no interest in theories. I researched the survivor accounts and presented them with all sources provided for historical reference. I've got used to everything the survivors said being branded about as my theory. Every few years the community seems to change their minds about the sinking. Their record for dismissing and then later accepting what the survivors said is sadly very common. When I first presented the ship listing to port back in 2009 I was rudely told that it was physically impossible for the ship to list to port because she struck the iceberg on the starboard side. They had no interest in reading the survivor accounts or understanding the basic concept of flooding and buoyancy. I reuploaded a basic video about the flooding and air which can be seen in my playlist. The overwhelming majority have never seen my videos so they instead fake what I believe and make up V break videos which do not represent what I believe at all About 99% of what you see on social made about the V break has got nothing to do with what I actually showed and the people who claimed they debated with me did not. There have been at least a dozen kids who pretended to be me on social media and they faked what I believe for their own perverse amusement. They just enjoy twisting everything I believe completely out of context and others take the bait the make pointless debunk videos based on something that I did not even show. Most of the popular Titanic channels sell tacky merchandise and monetize their videos to make money. They are salesmen after all. It is sad to see my heritage and shipping disasters in general being exploited by so many for clicks and money. I hope the victims are looking down at them all with utter disgust. May they rest in peace. kind regards, The real Aaron1912

@Cursed_sc0ut I recommend that you watch the rest of the video because the survivors specifically refer to the bow as "the forward end". For years people in the community tried to twist the survivor accounts to mean the ship did not break at all and that they only saw a funnel fall. If the wreck was never found then that would still be the narrative today and they would insult me for believing the ship broke in half because I believe the survivors who said it did. I was the first to animate the ship listing to port more than 15 years ago and I was rudely told that the survivors were wrong and that the ship never listed to port because it was not shown in James Cameron's film. Their excuse back then was that the survivors were confused and in shock and they did not know the difference between port and starboard. Pathetic isn't it. The survivors said the port list returned to an even keel. That is why I showed it 15+ years ago and again I was told that it never happened because the survivors were apparently confused and they did not mean what they actually said. Survivor Ruth Becker used her fingers to show the ship breaking between the 2nd and 3rd funnel. First they argued that she was wrong and that she only saw a funnel fall, and when they accepted the ship did break they said she was still wrong for believing the ship broke between the 2nd and 3rd funnel because her account did not match James Cameron's film and I was insulted for believing Ruth Becker. They eventually accepted she was right after all. I showed the Titanic breaking between the 2nd and 3rd funnel at a shallow angle and again at a higher angle between the 3rd and 4th funnel (the double break) because the survivors said the ship broke twice and we have survivors who turned in their seats and witnessed the shallow break, and we have survivors who turned in their seats and saw the second break, with others who saw both. That is why I showed the double break. Yet people today still choose to ignore the survivors accounts and interpret them to mean something completely different. I believe what the survivors literally said and do not interpret them to mean anything else. The survivor accounts never change, only people's understanding of them. I believe what they literally told us. They said "the forward end bounded up again" and those on the starboard side of the deck near the bridge felt the deck rise very slightly. If you are interested in a study of the flooding, air and physics involved there is a video on my channel about it. kind regards, The real Aaron1912

while its true that saying words in plural opposed to singular was a slang term used back in the day, if you look at it from a grammatical stand point and you remove the plural wording, Her account says "she just broke in two and the end were sticking up" which does not make a lot of sense from a grammatical Point of view.

I show all sources. Nothing is fake and nothing was taken out of context. The person you are referring to is probably Titanic Animations. The survivor accounts he claimed were fake are not fake. He simply was not aware of their existence. The survivor accounts he thought were out of context were not. I showed them with their sources so that all viewers could confirm themselves that they were genuine and not out of context. I am told that he admitted he was mistaken and had apologised but the damage was done. Ask yourself why was I the only one to animate the Titanic listing to port and righting back to normal. They argued that it was impossible for the ship to list to port and they laughed at the idea of the port list righting back to normal Fast forward many years and they all accept that it did happen and the survivors they argued were wrong were magically now all correct. Why did they tell me it was physically impossible and then do a complete u-turn and accept that it did happen. The same thing happened when I showed the ship breaking between the 2nd and 3rd funnel and again (the second break) just behind the 3rd funnel. They laughed at the idea of the ship breaking more than once, and now they believe it. You get used to everything the survivors said being mocked and discredited, only to be believed and accepted years later. The shallow v break is nothing new. The survivors told us all about it in 1912 just as they did about every other aspect of the sinking. It was a very small part of my study which some people became obsessed about. They always put the angle of the break up too high which of course makes the bow fully flooded. Since none of them bothered to even watch my study about the flooding and air (available on playlist) then of course they will not understand it, because they never even attempted to watch it. I shined a light on all of the survivor accounts that many were not aware of e.g. 4th officer Boxhall said he could not get into the wheelhouse room because the starboard side door was jammed and he had to enter from the port side. It may be a small trivial detail that means nothing, or a very important detail which could lead into an entire discussion about how many other doors were jammed. You see, that is why it is important to preserve all of the survivor accounts. I am not interested if anyone agrees with the survivors. The Titanic is my heritage and my interest has been to preserve what they said for historical reference because I respect the tragedy. For generations nobody discussed the break up with the survivors and many questions were left unanswered, so all we have are the private letters, testimonies, and correspondence. My interest has been to visit all of the archive offices and document what the survivors said for historical reference. You get used to strangers creating drama for clicks and telling their audience it is all fake so they can promote whatever monetized content they are selling. My research is all non-profit. If you are interested in what I had to put up with for years with kids pretending to be me, then you can see my reaction in my video - An Ulsterman's Perspective. kind regards, The real Aaron1912 Belfast

@@Aaron1912RecordsAndResearch Respectfully your sources have been disproven by the research that has been done. There is nothing you will provide that will make me think otherwise when I have seen the proof. There was no V Break. Have a good one.

Respectfully the sources I showed have not been 'disproven'. The guy who said they were fake was mistaken. People did not want to believe the survivors who said the ship broke. After that they did not believe the survivors who said the ship listed to port. After that they did not believe the survivors who said the port list returned to an even keel. After that they did not believe the survivors who saw the ship break at a shallow angle between the 2nd and 3rd funnel. After that they did not believe the survivors who saw the stern turn around as it sank. Need I go on. Sources that were not believed have the uncanny habit of being believed years later. The only reason people keep going on about the v break is for the exact same reason that all of the above were not believed. They simply could not understand how they could happen. Ruth Becker saw the ship break in half and they told her it was only a funnel which had fallen. They took her account out of context to mean something completely different. I believe the ship listed to port and I was told the port list was impossible and that the survivors mixed up their words and they meant to say starboard list and not port list. I believe the ship broke between the 2nd and 3rd funnel and again I was told that the sources were wrong and the survivors were mistaken because they put their entire faith in James Cameron and what he showed in his movie. You see what it is like. I research what the survivors actually said and do not waste people's time trying to prove the survivors were wrong. I respect the survivors and believe them. I believe the ship broke at a shallow angle and again at a higher angle because the survivors told us it did. People today don't look into thermal stress which was common in that area of the Atlantic and known to be a contributing factor in ships breaking, they don't look at the open portholes, the localized flooding occurring in other parts of the ship as she settled lower and rolled over to port, and they don't look into how many doors might have jammed, or the unequal distribution of weight along her bottom as she listed heavily to port and had a slight elevation of her stern which would cause her to break at a much lower angle as the stress would be greater on one side. The list goes on. What I'm saying is they have barely begun to investigate the causes of the break up or begun to read and understand the survivor accounts that were largely forgotten for more than a century. My interest has been to preserve the survivor accounts for historical reference. kind regards, The real Aaron1912

@@Aaron1912RecordsAndResearch Listen you have your belief and I have mine my friend. We just disagree. Anyway have a good one and stay safe.

Yes, and I respect what other people believe, but they have absolutely no respect for my beliefs. They fake what I believe, pretend to be me, steal my videos and reupload them to their channels and make millions of views from them, they disrespected the survivor when they were alive, and insult their memory after they had passed away. You only have to see the amount of money they make on their channels (merchandise, monetized videos) to see the kind of people they really are and what their real interest is as they exploit my heritage to make money and manipulate their viewers to achieve it. No matter how many times I ask to be left alone they keep making up false claims about my beliefs, faking them, taking them out of context, having to put up with kids pretending to be me (for years), adults who exploit my heritage to make money and people with no real genuine interest at all in what I actually showed in my non-profit studies which the overwhelming majority have never seen, but love to insult without ever bothering to look. As long as they know they can make money from it, they will not allow the victims to rest in peace or respect the memory of the survivors who witnessed the ship go down. I hope that future generations will be more kind and mature and respect each others beliefs. kind regards, The real Aaron1912

@Deavelous I did not 'twist' their words. I showed exactly what the survivors said. I went to the original sources to verify and hold the original hand written letters and documents to prove their authenticity. For years people told me the ship did not list to port and that all of the survivors who mentioned it were confused and mistaken. When they finally accepted the ship did list to port they gave me no apology, and instead they insulted me for showing the port list righting back to normal and they said it was 'physically impossible' for the port list to return back to normal. Fast forward 15 years and they all accept it. They said the first funnel fell over to starboard and that was the only evidence they needed to argue the ship did not list to port, and when they finally accepted the ship did list to port they argued that the first funnel did fall over to port as well. They told me the survivors who saw it fall over to starboard were wrong. When they finally accepted that the port list did return to an even keel they changed the direction of the first funnel again and had it fall over to starboard again and all of the survivors they had discredited and insulted before were magically correct again. They only follow whatever their favourite Hollywood director or click bait creator tells them to believe, and then to keep the interest and money rolling in they continue to support them without realizing they are being fed incorrect and out of date information. My interest has been to research and show exactly what the survivors told us for historical reference. I believe the survivors because they were there. Regarding the physics involved, I made a basic study showing the flooding and air within the ship. Most people have never seen it, because they can't be bothered to read what the survivors actually said. ruclips.net/video/1qJhxuJnZVo/видео.html Regards, The real Aaron1912

@@Aaron1912RecordsAndResearch Hey Aaron. You may have not "twisted" their words as I said however you have taken them completely out of context. Regarding your theory, it is nonsensical. In your video, you can see the water travelling through E deck which is simply impossible considering the ship bow is tilting downwards. Your theory suggests that she went down nearly vertically, which is ALSO not true as per survivors. The passengers that didn't feel the list didn't feel it because their bodies got used to it, this is what happened during the filming of Titanic, the actors would forget about the list in minutes. Let's talk about the V - Break, again that is IMPOSSIBLE. The ships bow was almost entirely filled with water making it weigh around 70k - 80k tons therefore making It's rise back up into the air impossible. The only way the bow could move back up into the air was if the stern was to push it back up which would AGAIN still be impossible considering the stern was full of air and STILL couldn't have been able to rise it back up if it was full of water. I am not attacking your theory however it is purely based off survivor accounts and even those are picked by hand to support your theory. Kind regards

@Deavelous The survivor accounts are in context. I showed the survivor accounts who said the Titanic listed to port and I showed the Titanic listing to port in my study because that is what they said. That is what keeping something 'in context' means. I showed the port list returning to normal because that is what the survivors told us. I showed that in the animation 'in context' to match what the survivors had said. I showed every aspect of the sinking 'in context'. I showed the ship breaking at a shallow angle and again at a high angle because that is what the survivors who witnessed it had told us. That is what keeping it in context means. It is other people who change and take them out of context. For years the survivors told the community they had seen the ship break in half. Nobody believed them because most of the survivor witnesses who were vocal about it were women and the were overruled by the crew. The survivors wrote to author Walter Lord and told him it broke in half, but he assumed they were mistaken and that it was only a funnel which had fallen. Survivor Ruth Becker spoke to a room filled with enthusiasts. She told them she had seen the ship break in half. Nobody believed her until the wreck was found. I showed the ship breaking between the 2nd and 3rd funnel because Ruth had used her fingers to show the same thing. That is what keeping it 'in context' means. For years I was told Ruth was wrong and to ignore her account because it did not match James Cameron's Hollywood film. Imagine that, the community were more eager to believe in a Hollywood movie than in the survivors. It was like that for many survivors that did not match their favourite films. I respect the survivors, and that is why I show their version of the events, and not the Hollywood version or whatever version is trendy. I am not interested in theories. For years I was told the port list was just my 'theory' because it was not shown in James Cameron's film. The port list righting was also rudely called my 'theory' by people who could not be bothered to read the survivor accounts. The v break is just another example of ignorant rude children and immature adults calling the survivor accounts my 'theory' for the simple fact they can't be bothered to read the survivor accounts and instead depend entirely on what other people tell them in films and click bait youtubers who exploit the Titanic to make money and fool their fanbases with incredible ease because the vast majority of the community are young children and easy for them to manipulate for clicks, likes, subs and money. I am not interested in theories. I researched what the survivors said because the Titanic is my heritage. I presented their survivor accounts, kept everything in context, and showed all sources for historical reference. All non-profit. Please ignore the trolls who fake what I believe and create fake bogus accounts pretending to be me. They fooled some guy called Titanic Animations. I am told he apologised but the damage was done. Now if people can't accept the ship listed to port, then it is up to them to 'work it out'. If they can't accept the port list returned to normal then they should 'work it out'. Instead they just mock and attempt to discredit the survivors and those of us who believe the survivors. They don't want to believe the survivors, trust me I get it. They are an inconvenience because they don't understand them and don't want to. Those of us who do respect them and spend our time and our own money and resources working out how they were right, while timewasters waste their viewers time trying to prove the survivors were wrong. To me, that is disrespectful to them and their memory. There is no evidence that the bow was fully flooded when she broke. All four funnels were I believe still intact when she broke at a shallow angle with a heavy list to port because that is what the survivors who saw it had told us. The stern became independent and rose up by the weight of the main engines inside it and it also broke apart, but at a much greater and noticeable angle. People are only starting to accept the ship broke twice. I showed it 15 years ago because I researched the survivor accounts. Much of the air was pushed up against the starboard side because she had rolled over to port. When she broke the survivors felt the bow take a sudden lurch and then rebound very slightly as the air inside was pushed out by the rush of water coming into the broken decks. The survivors felt a tremendous amount air burst out of the forward vents. They also felt the starboard side of the deck rise up under their feet because the air deep inside was forced against the starboard side as she rolled over to port and rapidly out of the ship as she broke. Regarding the shallow v break. I do not believe the ship sank vertically. I believe it sank mostly horizontal until she broke because the survivors saw many open portholes on the port side which is why the ship listed heavily to port and settled bodily and broke apart. She had a heavy list to port and her stern was very slightly elevated. This would mean the weight on her bottom was distributed unevenly owing to the heavy list to port and she broke early. The forward half righted, twisted over to starboard and broke. I don't wish to explain my entire study for the hundredth time. If you are genuinely interested then I made a basic study here. ruclips.net/video/1qJhxuJnZVo/видео.html kind regards, The real Aaron1912

December 31st 1933.

Thanks. The weather was beautiful the day I visited Putney Vale Cemetery and it was very peaceful. I got the train to Putney station and walked down to it. A long but pleasant walk. I believe there is a bus stop near the entrance to the cemetery called West Lodge and serves the number 85 bus service. There is also a large ASDA superstore close by with a car park. The grave of Ismay is hidden at the back of the cemetery on the south west corner. Here is a map showing it: i.postimg.cc/wv6WGG5w/Ismay-grave-Putney.png kind regards, Aaron1912