Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Celebration

(15,812 posts)
Tue Mar 6, 2012, 10:11 PM Mar 2012

Titanic Sunk by "Supermoon" and Celestial Alignment?

National Geographic Article

Just weeks before the Titanic shipwreck's hundredth anniversary, scientists have a brand-new theory as to what might have helped spur modern history's most famous maritime disaster. (See pictures of Titanic's rediscovery in 1985.)

An ultrarare alignment of the sun, the full moon, and Earth, they say, may have set the April 14, 1912, tragedy in motion, according to a new report.

R.M.S. Titanic went down on a moonless night, but the iceberg that sank the luxury liner may have been launched in part by a full moon that occurred three and a half months earlier, scientists say.

That full moon, on January 4, 1912, may have created unusually strong tides that sent a flotilla of icebergs southward—just in time for Titanic's maiden voyage, said astronomer Donald Olson of Texas State University-San Marcos.
24 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Titanic Sunk by "Supermoon" and Celestial Alignment? (Original Post) Celebration Mar 2012 OP
Maybe we didn't go far enough when we bombed the moon. laconicsax Mar 2012 #1
Ain't that the truth. Too little, too late. montanto Mar 2012 #20
A cosmic event! orpupilofnature57 Mar 2012 #2
A full moon is no more powerful- digonswine Mar 2012 #3
Full moon and new moon coincide with "spring" tides ... eppur_se_muova Mar 2012 #7
Little nitpick: laconicsax Mar 2012 #8
Also, the Sun doesn't have a human face. :) eppur_se_muova Mar 2012 #12
The sun does too have a human face. laconicsax Mar 2012 #14
Yeah, this is quite a stretch. harmonicon Mar 2012 #11
Yes--I spoke too soon- digonswine Mar 2012 #19
Woo is not excluded, but for other reasons. :) nt eppur_se_muova Mar 2012 #24
Ok-actually read the article- digonswine Mar 2012 #4
No! It was caused by the ghosts of dinosaurs! DCKit Mar 2012 #5
The fault does not lie in the stars Sanity Claws Mar 2012 #6
That's an interesting hypothesis and may even be true, but GETPLANING Mar 2012 #9
doesn't matter what celestial alignment occurred SemperEadem Mar 2012 #10
Just goes to show how far NatGeo has sunk. sybylla Mar 2012 #13
No kidding... their Cable Channel is nothing but Military Industrial Complex propaganda fascisthunter Mar 2012 #16
it didn't use to be like it is now shanti Mar 2012 #23
Where was Newt's moonbase when we needed it... (n/t) thesquanderer Mar 2012 #15
If you believe this... RoccoR5955 Mar 2012 #17
They probably would have made it if they hadn't tried to turn. AtheistCrusader Mar 2012 #18
I thought they already blamed it on dihydrogen monoxide. tclambert Mar 2012 #21
i found an old 20's astrology book years ago at an estate sale. according to the 'stars' pansypoo53219 Mar 2012 #22

digonswine

(1,485 posts)
3. A full moon is no more powerful-
Tue Mar 6, 2012, 10:17 PM
Mar 2012

than a new moon--just brighter--from reflected light from the sun!! Wowee!

eppur_se_muova

(36,227 posts)
7. Full moon and new moon coincide with "spring" tides ...
Wed Mar 7, 2012, 03:04 AM
Mar 2012

because the tidal forces of sun and moon are acting in concert. Half-moon (waxing or waning) coincide with weaker "neap" tides.



OTOH -- Either there was an iceberg in the ship's path or there wasn't. Saying the Titanic sank "because" of an unusally strong tide is stretching the word "because" beyond any reasonable meaning.

eppur_se_muova

(36,227 posts)
12. Also, the Sun doesn't have a human face. :)
Wed Mar 7, 2012, 02:56 PM
Mar 2012

And the tidal bulges aren't nearly that big. Sometimes you can't draw things to scale and make the point -- I doubt the deviation from the Earth-Moon axis is really large enough to be visible unless greatly exaggerated:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tidal_acceleration#Effects_of_Moon.27s_gravity

harmonicon

(12,008 posts)
11. Yeah, this is quite a stretch.
Wed Mar 7, 2012, 01:10 PM
Mar 2012

It's just a case of putting something catching in a headline to report an otherwise boring science study, no matter how tenuous the connection.

digonswine

(1,485 posts)
19. Yes--I spoke too soon-
Wed Mar 7, 2012, 06:22 PM
Mar 2012

before I looked at the article--I should know better. I was assuming woo where there was none!

digonswine

(1,485 posts)
4. Ok-actually read the article-
Tue Mar 6, 2012, 10:23 PM
Mar 2012

I still don't buy it--

The Earth is directly between the Sun and moon for every full moon. I find it hard to believe that the idea that the moon was closer, and the sun was closer to the earth at that time can be blamed for this.

 

DCKit

(18,541 posts)
5. No! It was caused by the ghosts of dinosaurs!
Tue Mar 6, 2012, 10:25 PM
Mar 2012

Geez, people, there's a reason they're called accidents.

Then again, who was supposed to be watching out ahead of the ship for obstacles? It's not as if they had radar, or sonar, GPS or accurate charts in those days.

At least the captain of the Titanic didn't push women and children out of his way in order to reach the first lifeboat - in those days, even most of the 1% didn't do that, and some ended up going down with the ship, becoming heroes. Not all, but some.

Sanity Claws

(21,822 posts)
6. The fault does not lie in the stars
Tue Mar 6, 2012, 10:37 PM
Mar 2012

"The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars,
But in ourselves, that we are underlings."

GETPLANING

(846 posts)
9. That's an interesting hypothesis and may even be true, but
Wed Mar 7, 2012, 10:58 AM
Mar 2012

the builder's decision to use thinner steel in the hull to save weight (and cost) was the reason the Titanic sank after striking an iceberg. Thinner steel held in place with smaller rivets was more brittle in the freezing water and fractured rather than bent inwards in the collision. I believe there was an expedition down to the Titanic to examine the hull to determine whether the failure of the hull was a gash in the metal plates, or failure of the rivets, and the rivets were found to have been the culprits.

SemperEadem

(8,053 posts)
10. doesn't matter what celestial alignment occurred
Wed Mar 7, 2012, 12:20 PM
Mar 2012

to send a gazillion ice bergs... fact of the matter was Captain Smith, on Bruce Ismay's orders, was running the ship too fast through the ice field in order to break the record of sailing to New York. He ignored the warnings sent earlier in the day regarding the icebergs in his path.

Had there been more spy glasses for the men on watch in the crow's nest and had the ship not been barrelling through the ocean, things may have turned out differently. Had there been enough lifeboats for every passenger, the loss of life would probably not have been so high.

sybylla

(8,461 posts)
13. Just goes to show how far NatGeo has sunk.
Wed Mar 7, 2012, 03:31 PM
Mar 2012

Okay, that might have put the iceberg there, but that didn't put the stupid in charge.

And that's a huge MAYBE.

Scientists know better than make such blatantly idiotic connections on pure speculation.

I thought it was just their crappy cable channel that did the dumbest non-science BS. Apparently they can even out-stupid the History Channel.

shanti

(21,670 posts)
23. it didn't use to be like it is now
Wed Mar 7, 2012, 11:53 PM
Mar 2012

nat geo was my favorite channel (dog whisperer, etc.), but over the past few years it has become increasingly filled with right wingnuttery. have definitely noticed a huge increase in military/police oriented shows, which i refuse to watch. really, there's not that much to watch on cable anymore; i'm considering dropping it.

 

RoccoR5955

(12,471 posts)
17. If you believe this...
Wed Mar 7, 2012, 06:16 PM
Mar 2012

I have a bridge for sale, cheap.
How many times are people going to buy into some stupid notion, with no proof, and what kind of rag is the National Geographic turning into, by spewing such bovine fecal matter?

AtheistCrusader

(33,982 posts)
18. They probably would have made it if they hadn't tried to turn.
Wed Mar 7, 2012, 06:17 PM
Mar 2012

Well, anyone not in the forward 3 compartments, or standing too close to glasswork, etc.

tclambert

(11,080 posts)
21. I thought they already blamed it on dihydrogen monoxide.
Wed Mar 7, 2012, 07:09 PM
Mar 2012

Nasty stuff. It can be found in every cancerous tumor, too.

pansypoo53219

(20,906 posts)
22. i found an old 20's astrology book years ago at an estate sale. according to the 'stars'
Wed Mar 7, 2012, 11:11 PM
Mar 2012

is was doomed. neat old book. so yes. now the stars REALLY did it.

Latest Discussions»Culture Forums»Science»Titanic Sunk by "Sup...