Sometimes I think, that you did not learn anything with this thread and did not really changed opinion regarding the first statements you have made here.
Beleive it or not, I dont think I can learn anything from you in regards to the Bounty nor did anyone apoint you the authority or teacher here. While you are somewhat of a good reasource on boats you have shown to be less than knowledgeable about many other subjects I have seen you post about. You continue to post these giant posts of other statements or authors and consider them fact. They are not fact sir.
Also even if you were somewhat of an authority on something its very difficult to get past your ridiculing others oppiniopns by calling them stupid and many other words. In your last post alone is an example.
See the problem here is you cand play in the sandbox and accept others have opinions without ridicule. You say you want people to learn but no one learns
from someone who puts down others. I also recognize that I have not been perfect in this to others and will work on that. The first part of realiziing there is a problem is to recognoize that yourself, which you fail to do.
It is obviously a very stupid and wrong thing to say
Operator error on the pumps???? if someone on that boat deserves credit is Barksdale, the one responsible by engines and pumps working.
And you know this how, by his own statement. Did it ever occur to you it was self serving? He admitted turning one off.
It seems that you don't read what is posted on this thread. Barksdale had stated that the pumps were clogged and that they, including the Captain were despairingly trying to unclog the pumps.
And he said he never saw the Captain.
And I am saying that because unlike what you are saying this was not an isolated incident, it was just the one where he run out of luck. He was taking unreasonable risks with that boat and the crew for a long time
What you are saying here is really based on some of the other statements made in the past and your humble opinion that you neleive that he was reckless in the past.
See Paulo there is a fact that is irreuftable. NO ONE who has sailed with him has said this about him. NO ONE who has sailed with him said he was reckless in the past. NO ONE who knew him personally even remotely says what you preach about him.
Heres a fact
. You are sitting in front of your computer in Portugal making statements you call fact which really are nothing than YOUR OPINION. The fact is you have no first hand knwledge. The fact is you generalize and post incomplete data, The fact is you ridicule those who do not deleive what you say. The fact is the people who really knew this man DO NOT say anything which even remotely supports you theory about this man. You misuse the English language constantly calling your opinions facts.
Here is the Oxford Dictionarys definituion of the word fact
a thing that is known or proved to be true: the most commonly known fact about hedgehogs is that they have fleas [mass noun]: a body of fact
(facts) information used as evidence or as part of a report or news article: even the most inventive journalism peters out without facts, and in this case there were no facts
(the fact that) used to refer to a particular situation under discussion: despite the fact that I’m so tired, sleep is elusive
[mass noun] chiefly Law the truth about events as opposed to interpretation: there was a question of fact as to whether they had received the letter
Paulo, you know what doesnt make sense here, is that despite be challenged by myself and others on your use of things you consider FACTS and your definition of that you dont even learn from that you overstep and dont know the difference between your opinion and facts. You keep ramming thes down mine and others throats and I guess I am stupid enough to have taken the bait and keep responding to your mistaken statements of fact.
What is funny here is that we all are expected to have opinions here as this is an internet blog site. You seem to the one fixated that your opinions are facts though. I dont feel my opinions are facts just one humble sailors opinion from my perch here in the US.
As it was stated by him, the organization, the crew and his wife, the ship had been sailed by him previously several times in hurricanes or near hurricanes. Considering that XVII century designed wooden ship that is a reckless behavior that only a reckless captain would indulge.
in this is that he said he sailed in hurricanes previous.....your interrpretation
is that this was reckless behavior.
Why was he never brough up on charges if this was reckless behavior?
I have learned some things on this post from others Paulo. I learn a lot on this forum called Sailnet. I have stated many times that the Captain is responsible for this tradgedy. Icannot wrap my head around why he would sail into a hurricane or anywhwre near one. I am not trying to figure out why, because I dont understand it from my refernce point and experience and he is not here anymore to ask him. Therefore I have to live with that. He did it. I will never know why and that anyone who attributes a reason why is just hypothesizing as no one can prove it factual. Its bad enough he did this and cost lives. I dont need to build some ever growing hypothetical story around it.
Along with him, I await ( in years I am sure) the results of the inquirey for some of the factors which actuyallu phsically caused the sinking which maybe we can learn from and prevent to amke things safer in the future ( IE construction, certifications, build quality, ballast, pumps, engines, crew etc.). That is where the learning will take place..not acusing the dead captain of further eckless behavior and denigrating his person.
I dont think we can find a way to test or predict when people make aggregious decuisions ahead of time, so this will happen again. Every day in fact. The facts from the investigation which may turn up physical problems we can remedy will be the only learning experience which we can help makes things safer from.
Since it appears that we will not ever agree on things concerning this topic, I suggest in fairness to others we stop burdening them with the obvious disagreement between us and hold of posting responses to each other in this thread. It serves no purpose. I will not answer your posts in this thread anymore, but will continue to correspond with others. Lets just call it an agreement to disagree. Can you do that.....or do you still need the last word here.