Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It took Ballard 73 years to find the wreck. If you think they are going to find them if they did implode within weeks, you are sorely mistaken.

Exploration and discovery are not without risk be it on the ocean floor or in space.

after a certain number of days - i assume they won't keep looking. is there any point in finding the vessel once weeks have passed? even if they do find its location - i don't think there is any way to raise it.

Can a radar on a boat even identify something that far down? Or do you mean researchers might send down an unmanned device to look for it.

no idea how they are searching the depths. i really think we're never going to find them and will just have to assume what happened.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is the same excess of wealth, hubris, and reliance on flawed, yet cutting edge technology that led to the sinking of the Titanic. The parallels give me chills. What an unnecessary nightmare. I hope for a good outcome.

Although well-intentioned, this kind of tourism should stop. The parallels drawn in other posts to Gettysburg, etc., aren't the same because those are far more accessible- no great wealth required.

Why should it stop? These people spent their own money and went in voluntarily having assessed the risks and resolved them to their satisfaction. Presumably, with the kind of money the spent on a frolic, they were pretty sophisticated.

If it turns out they guessed wrong, that’s on them. People have a right to decide things for themselves.

Great, but what about the people who are rescuing them? and the taxpayers paying that bill? It's not all about the people who went.

You have a valid point about the rescuers but not the tax money spent. That is not an important consideration when we are talking about peoples' lives. Regardless of what you think got them into that situation.

You people are soulless a$$holes.

PP here. if you click to show earlier quotes, I didn't suggest that money is more important than lives. Just that it's not as simple as "the adventurers wanted to go so that ends that." Their decision affects a lot of other people, and it's too dangerous, and I think they should stop the industry.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It took Ballard 73 years to find the wreck. If you think they are going to find them if they did implode within weeks, you are sorely mistaken.

Exploration and discovery are not without risk be it on the ocean floor or in space.

after a certain number of days - i assume they won't keep looking. is there any point in finding the vessel once weeks have passed? even if they do find its location - i don't think there is any way to raise it.

I don’t think Ballard actually spent seventy-three years to find the Titanic.

No one did especially earlier on since there was no technology for many decades after it sank.

No but his first mission was in 1977 and being there are just 3 vessels that can currently go to those depths…

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It took Ballard 73 years to find the wreck. If you think they are going to find them if they did implode within weeks, you are sorely mistaken.

Exploration and discovery are not without risk be it on the ocean floor or in space.

after a certain number of days - i assume they won't keep looking. is there any point in finding the vessel once weeks have passed? even if they do find its location - i don't think there is any way to raise it.

Can a radar on a boat even identify something that far down? Or do you mean researchers might send down an unmanned device to look for it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It took Ballard 73 years to find the wreck. If you think they are going to find them if they did implode within weeks, you are sorely mistaken.

Exploration and discovery are not without risk be it on the ocean floor or in space.

after a certain number of days - i assume they won't keep looking. is there any point in finding the vessel once weeks have passed? even if they do find its location - i don't think there is any way to raise it.

I don’t think Ballard actually spent seventy-three years to find the Titanic.

No one did especially earlier on since there was no technology for many decades after it sank.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I just can't get over how ramshackle this thing was. Even if inclined towards taking risks, I'd think you would want to see a HIGHLY technical, slick looking thing before you got into it to risk your life. Controlled by a video game controller? That didn't set off any red flags for these people?

Buying off the shelf is smart, the components are well understood, work, and are cost effective. Not ramshackle.

Deep sea, like space, is dangerous. It is high risk. I know of several people who have died scuba diving. But they loved doing it.

Dumbest epitaph ever: “They died doing what they loved”. Usually accompanied by a description of someone falling off a rock or freezing to death on a mountaintop or apparently diving where sane people fear to tread.

I find the saying “They died doing what they loved….” really dumb.

So Adam loves to surf 🏄🏼‍♂️ but he gets eaten by a shark after being spliced to death for minutes prior.
How is he dying doing what he loved??!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I just can't get over how ramshackle this thing was. Even if inclined towards taking risks, I'd think you would want to see a HIGHLY technical, slick looking thing before you got into it to risk your life. Controlled by a video game controller? That didn't set off any red flags for these people?

I don't even go grocery shopping without GPS

That submersible looks like a meat smoker. Would never set foot in that thing.

Anonymous wrote:It took Ballard 73 years to find the wreck. If you think they are going to find them if they did implode within weeks, you are sorely mistaken.

Exploration and discovery are not without risk be it on the ocean floor or in space.

after a certain number of days - i assume they won't keep looking. is there any point in finding the vessel once weeks have passed? even if they do find its location - i don't think there is any way to raise it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:$250,000 per person.

This is some massive irony here, if they aren't rescued.

Why, I don't understand.

This is almost the definition of irony. People die tragically at sea after having spent a quarter million to gawk at people who died tragically at sea.

So true.
I personally am too chicken to take a sub underwater (even the submarine at Disneyland scares me! 😧 No kidding!!) but I cannot judge others who are courageous enough to do so.

Plus a lot of people are actually very interested in shipwrecks and may find an experience such as this worth every penny if they can afford to do so.

I think if i wasn’t so claustrophobic or scared - I would find great interest in visiting such a historic place before there is nothing left.

I really do not think any of the five souls in the sub will survive.
However if they were my loved ones I would be hoping that by some miracle they would.
I mean miracles ✨ can happen.
Look at how those young kids survived forty days after their plane crashed.

I am holding out hope, for the sake of the loved ones that a similar miracle will occur here….

It took Ballard 73 years to find the wreck. If you think they are going to find them if they did implode within weeks, you are sorely mistaken.

Exploration and discovery are not without risk be it on the ocean floor or in space.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I just can't get over how ramshackle this thing was. Even if inclined towards taking risks, I'd think you would want to see a HIGHLY technical, slick looking thing before you got into it to risk your life. Controlled by a video game controller? That didn't set off any red flags for these people?

I don't even go grocery shopping without GPS

GPS doesn't work deep underwater.

Anonymous wrote:

I just can't get over how ramshackle this thing was. Even if inclined towards taking risks, I'd think you would want to see a HIGHLY technical, slick looking thing before you got into it to risk your life. Controlled by a video game controller? That didn't set off any red flags for these people?

I don't even go grocery shopping without GPS

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

They are British citizens, moron.

Not all, the one guy and his poor son were Pakistani nationals.

No, they are from a prominent Parkistani family, but are British citizens themselves. .

He is one of Pakistan’s richest men? Doesn’t that make him Pakistani?

Are you slow?

No, I am rather swift actually

Then why ask stupid questions?

Well, because every single article out there refers to him as a Pakistani businessman, no mention of him being British. Which is odd, meaningless but odd.

The articles I’ve seen all describe the father as being from one of the wealthiest families in Pakistan but a British national. It isn’t uncommon among rich people from the subcontinent.

Who cares? But it’s like calling Elon Musk an African entrepreneur. It’s not completely accurate.

What’s not accurate? That he’s a British citizen?

Like I said, it’s like referring to Elon Musk as a Dutch or Afrikaans entrepreneur, and no mention that he has lived in the US longer than anywhere else, most likely. Just call the guy British, not Pakistani.

https://www.insider.com/titan-submarine-ceo-complained-about-obscenely-safe-regulations-2023-6

The maker of the lost Titan submersible previously complained about strict passenger-vessel regulations, saying the industry was 'obscenely safe'

Hmmm...

The founder of the company behind the Titan submersible previously described his industry as "obscenely safe" and complained that passenger-vessel regulations held back innovation.

OceanGate Expeditions CEO Stockton Rush is understood to be aboard the Titan, the submersible that lost contact with the surface Sunday, prompting fears for his safety.

Describing the industry in a 2019 interview, Rush said that there had been no injuries in the field for decades, adding: "It's obscenely safe because they have all these regulations. But it also hasn't innovated or grown — because they have all these regulations."

OceanGate did not immediately respond to a request for comment, sent outside working hours.

Company was sued in 2018 by a whistleblower over safety concerns: https://newrepublic.com/post/173802/missing-titanic-sub-faced-lawsuit-depths-safely-travel-oceangate