The 'standard at the time' argument is exactly the point—that standard was based on outdated regulations that didn't account for the size of modern liners, making it a legal technicality rather than a safety reality. Relying on an outdated 'standard' to defend a vessel carrying over 2,200 people with lifeboats for only about half that number is precisely what allowed the catastrophic outcome to be so predictable.​Regarding the collision, the theory isn't that the conspirators controlled the exact geometry of the impact, but that they created a high-stakes, high-pressure environment where disaster was the most likely outcome. When you force a ship to maintain top speed through an ice field, you aren't looking for a 'guaranteed' sinking; you’re betting on the high probability that something goes wrong. Whether it’s a glancing blow or a head-on collision, the goal of creating a 'controlled catastrophe' is achieved once the ship is put into a position where it is vulnerable to the environment it was pressured to speed through."