New Evidence Suggests Titanic Didn't Sink Because Of An Iceberg
We all know what sunk the Titanic, right? It hit a massive iceberg and then Kate Winslet let Leonardo DiCaprio sink into a watery grave because she couldn't be arsed moving over a bit.
The shit! Credit: 20th Century Fox
Well, maybe not. New research suggests that the ship's demise was actually caused by a fire in the hull, which, they believe, burned unnoticed for almost three weeks ahead of the collision.
For some time now experts have acknowledged that there was a fire, but until now it was never considered the primary cause. However, rarely seen photographs have now changed that.
Sean Moloney, a journalist who has spent 30 years researching the disaster, spent some time looking at photographs taken by the ship's electrical engineers and spotted 30ft long scorch marks at the front right-hand side of the hull, near to where the iceberg hit, before the ship even set sail.
Experts confirmed these marks were likely to have been caused by a fire in the fuel store.
More Like ThisMore Like This
Credit: Channel 4
Sean (who seemed to be all ready for a metaphor fest), said: "The official Titanic inquiry branded the sinking as an act of God. This isn't a simple story of colliding with an iceberg and sinking. It's a perfect storm of extraordinary factors coming together: fire, ice and criminal negligence.
"Nobody has investigated these marks before. It totally changes the narrative. We have metallurgy experts telling us that when you get that level of temperature against steel it makes it brittle, and reduces its strength by up to 75 percent.
"The fire was known about, but it was played down. She should never have been put to sea."
Over 1,500 people died whn the ship sank in April 1912. The new evidence is being presented in a Channel 4 documentary: Titanic: The New Evidence, which is to be shown later today.
Featured image credit: PA
Chosen for YouChosen for You
Most Read StoriesMost Read