• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

The Sinking of MS Estonia: Case Re-opened Part II

Status
Not open for further replies.
Captain_Swoop said:
So you have no evidence for any 'formal warnings' from Russia that they were going to sink a ship at midnight.

I don't have any punctured tyres, what does that have to do with it?
Click to expand...

Your neighbour gives you two stern warnings about parking your car on his drive. You do it again and you find your car vandalised shortly after.

Any clue who might be responsible?
 
Vixen said:
The Russian intelligence services at the time were well known for doing their own thing with Yeltsin having no control over them. Or do you dispute this observation?
Click to expand...

What is your evidence for this? Are you now claiming to have knowledge and expertise?

If you dispute this then make a case saying you dispute it instead of claiming they have been unfairly slimed.
Click to expand...

I made no claim for them being 'unfairly slimed'. You are making claims, you should support them.
 
Vixen said:
Your neighbour gives you two stern warnings about parking your car on his drive. You do it again and you find your car vandalised shortly after.

Any clue who might be responsible?
Click to expand...

Did my neighbour give me a 'formal warning' that he would vandalise my car at midnight?
 
I did not spot the retraction.

However you still felt able to make pronouncements on something you clearly knew nothing about and are still hinting at some form of Russian involvement.

Speaking of vindictive, care to present some of those callous jokes others were making yet?
 
Vixen said:
The Russian intelligence services at the time were well known for doing their own thing with Yeltsin having no control over them. Or do you dispute this observation? If you dispute this then make a case saying you dispute it instead of claiming they have been unfairly slimed.
Click to expand...

Oh come on, for ****'s sake: scepticism 101. you make a claim, it's on you to prove it. The whole reversal of the burden of proof schtick is beneath you, surely?
 
Last edited:
Vixen said:
You have been told the KGB dissolved in 1991 at the fall of the Soviet Union. The Estonia accident happened 1994.
Click to expand...

You're being asked about this post: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=13597334#post13597334

Yes, it's obvious even from that context that you are aware that the KGB was disbanded years before the Estonia accident. And most of your critics have acknowledged either knowing it or having been informed of it. Therefore the question is why you brought up the KGB in the linked post. You were not asked about the generally nefarious character of Russian intelligence agencies, however they are named or whenever they were active. You were asked what specific relevance the KGB has to your overall argument.
 
Last edited:
Vixen said:
Your neighbour gives you two stern warnings about parking your car on his drive. You do it again and you find your car vandalised shortly after.



Any clue who might be responsible?
Click to expand...
Was the car in the middle of the driveway or off to one side? If the latter, which side? A good investigator doesn't overlook these important clues.
 
Vixen said:
Your neighbour gives you two stern warnings about parking your car on his drive. You do it again and you find your car vandalised shortly after.

Any clue who might be responsible?
Click to expand...

Yourself, scraping it last night whilst driving drunk, but getting a story prepared to blame somebody else…
 
Vixen said:
Your neighbour gives you two stern warnings about parking your car on his drive. You do it again and you find your car vandalised shortly after.

Any clue who might be responsible?
Click to expand...
Terrible analogy. Vandalism has an obvious human agency. A poorly maintained bow visor coming off in heavy seas does not. I honestly can't think of an apt analogy involving a car.

How about this, instead?

Russia (allegedly) issues "stern warnings" about stealing their secrets. Some time later, a poorly-maintained, poorly-crewed ferry that may have previously been used to transport some secrets founders in heavy weather, apparently due to a mechanical failure of a critical subsystem. Is there any reason to think the Russians somehow arranged this? If they wanted to send a message, wouldn't they make some effort to indicate that a messenger was involved?
 
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2004/05/a-sea-story/302940/

Adjective laden description but it does give a good indication of the weather conditions and what happened based on the passengers testimony. Surprisingly, it doesn't mention mines, submarines, explosions, Israel, Bill Clinton, MI6 or Putin.

" On a stormy night on the Baltic Sea, more than 850 people lost their lives when a luxurious ferry sank below the waves. From a mass of material, including official and unofficial reports and survivor testimony, our correspondent has distilled an account of the Estonia's last moments—part of his continuing coverage for the magazine of anarchy on the high seas

That night the ship knifed ahead at its full 19 knots, with all four main engines fully throttled up to their combined output of 23,500 horsepower, driving the hull across the gently accumulating seas. The vessel's motion was at first barely noticeable to the passengers

As the weather grew worse and the ship began to roll more heavily, the waiters had trouble moving among the chairs with their trays, and a speaker on wheels began to move back and forth dangerously on the stage; at one point a dancing girl fell into the band.

It was soon afterward that Thiger heard a heavy, metallic-sounding blow that reverberated sharply through the ship's structure. At first he thought it must have been caused by a heavy wave, but it didn't quite feel like ordinary "slamming." He wondered if a truck might have overturned on the car deck—but no, the impact was too strong for that; it was almost as if a whiplash had run through the bulkheads."
 
Last edited:
RolandRat said:
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2004/05/a-sea-story/302940/

Adjective laden description but it does give a good indication of the weather conditions and what happened based on the passengers testimony. Surprisingly, it doesn't mention mines, submarines, explosions, Israel, Bill Clinton, MI6 or Putin.

" On a stormy night on the Baltic Sea, more than 850 people lost their lives when a luxurious ferry sank below the waves. From a mass of material, including official and unofficial reports and survivor testimony, our correspondent has distilled an account of the Estonia's last moments—part of his continuing coverage for the magazine of anarchy on the high seas

That night the ship knifed ahead at its full 19 knots, with all four main engines fully throttled up to their combined output of 23,500 horsepower, driving the hull across the gently accumulating seas. The vessel's motion was at first barely noticeable to the passengers

As the weather grew worse and the ship began to roll more heavily, the waiters had trouble moving among the chairs with their trays, and a speaker on wheels began to move back and forth dangerously on the stage; at one point a dancing girl fell into the band.

It was soon afterward that Thiger heard a heavy, metallic-sounding blow that reverberated sharply through the ship's structure. At first he thought it must have been caused by a heavy wave, but it didn't quite feel like ordinary "slamming." He wondered if a truck might have overturned on the car deck—but no, the impact was too strong for that; it was almost as if a whiplash had run through the bulkheads."
Click to expand...
Yes, the prose is ornate but it's worth reading. None of the witnesses report an explosion. Two report the missing bow thingy. Do we believe the survivors?
 
whoanellie said:
Yes, the prose is ornate but it's worth reading. None of the witnesses report an explosion. Two report the missing bow thingy. Do we believe the survivors?
Click to expand...

That depends on what claim you’re about to make, apparently….
 
Captain_Swoop said:
How does it do that?

If the ship had sailed on time or made a different speed because of conditions or the wind and waves had been with it instead of against it then it would have been at a different position at midnight.

Would they then have sunk it at midnight or at a different time when it was half way?
Click to expand...


Perhaps the Russians wanted to send a clear message that they control the weather.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom