Shadow Divers – Exposed U 869

[Chaseh]

It's not about being cheap, shoot I'll burn the $25 on bubble gum, but I won't give it to him just cause he's be shown to hurl poo with the best chimps in the zoo.

Good example of any attention's gonna be possitive. Make this a heated debate and he'll make his small fortune on other's coattails.

The timing's almost perfect, the movie directed by Ridley Scott isn't out till at least next year (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0466328/) but if he can get some following now, he'll really get that "truth behind the DaVinvi Code" parasitic success for himself.

How about producing something original?

 

[wreckedinri]

How about producing something original?

Like the truth?

Buy it, borrow it, or check it out at the library. If a 360 page book is a duanting read to some, then simply read chapter three to give credit where credit is due. Or continue to leave cookies out for Santa.

 

[Diesel298]

I have not YET read this book, but i will.
it seems tat the negative opinions from the people on here are from the way that the book is promoted "we 've been duped" and need thye "real story"
Shadow divers was wrighten for divers and non divers alike... and rergardless of some of the smaller details that might have been wrong. it was for entertainment..
Garys books are more geared for divers....
Im sure garys book is good, and i will read it. but i just hope its not to try and thro mud or tarnish the reputations of otheres as its being promoted my some.
if thats the case mabye the next book shold be..
the real story of "into the blue"
but from what i can see so far. its not that.......
garys "friends" might be doing more damage than good in helping him with the promotion of his book



Ray

 

[Chaseh]

Like the truth?

Buy it, borrow it, or check it out at the library. If a 360 page book is a duanting read to some, then simply read chapter three to give credit where credit is due. Or continue to leave cookies out for Santa.

Yes, that's it, it's a daunting read. I am in the middle of reading the Principia Mathematica and the search for the Panchen Lama right now, but afterwards, maybe I can tackle this with some assistance, if I can locate $25.

The last post is actually a much more intelligent response. Perhaps this is full of great information, but since it's being promotted as an attack on Shadow Divers and those who were featured there, I find it in really poor taste, and have no interest. I do find it troublesome that many seem to agree but say that they'll buy the book first then decide, since it only rewards the tactics.

 

[lamont]

i'll probably buy it after it comes out in paperback and goes on sale...

 

[Dean810]

I just bought the book today and am currently on chapter three. Haven't found the damning evidence yet on fraud. He seems to claim that Chatterton and Kohler ignored some evidence. About 40% of the book is Appendix's, apparently to spare the general reader from details they might not be interested in. I have to say that the anger and bitterness in the Prologue is very off putting. Sounds like a real axe grind and detracts from what he is saying. By the way, the book is in paperback only I think.

 

[joe rock]

Sorry, I came by this thread late in it's life. I have read Shadow Divers several times, the first before I became certified or knew anything about diving. After getting certified and starting to do Jersey wreck diving, I bought Gary's books, Shipwrecks of New Jersey. The book on Central sites contains a write up on the U-869. The copy write is 2001. The 12 page summary is VERY consistant with the story in Shadow Divers and actually Gary make's a strong case in this write-up for the own torpedoes theory (pages 217 & 218). I take no sides in this. I don't know any of these people except via books and television. I like Gary's books on wrecks and I enjoy watching Deep Sea Detectives . I will make the following observation from reading Gary's book(s). On page 215 of his write-up on the U-who? he states and I quote " I was completely out of the picture - if, indeed, I had ever truly been in the picture, except in the out-of-focus background. At that time, the American researchers felt that I did not have a "need to know"" (earlier he refers to the American researchers as Chatteron, Yurga, Kohler, Coppock, and McKellar.) As to self promoting, I'll say he consistantly refer's readers to his other works for more information in almost everyone of his wreck descriptions. My only question is why he would take such a negative approach to this new book 5 years after writing something very consistant with Shadow Divers, and he was very complimentary (IMHO) to Chatterton in the write-up.

 

[Chaseh]

Why? Could it be because Shadow Divers was a huge commercial success with a movie being made, and he sees an opportunity to ride the coattails?

I'm sure he's accomplished a tremendous amount, but none of it has lead to so much financial success as SD has for the author and the main figures.

This may make him some dough, but I would sure rather have seen him address new topics which I would have been more inclined to purchase and read.

 

[joe rock]

Why? Could it be because Shadow Divers was a huge commercial success with a movie being made, and he sees an opportunity to ride the coattails?

I'm sure he's accomplished a tremendous amount, but none of it has lead to so much financial success as SD has for the author and the main figures.

This may make him some dough, but I would sure rather have seen him address new topics which I would have been more inclined to purchase and read.

With the commercial success of Shadow Divers, do you think there would be a lot of interest if he took a positive position of adding to the story based on new/additional information? Seems he would avoid a lot of the ridicule he's facing on this thread.

 

[Dean810]

The more I read this book, the more it comes across to me as a vicious diatribe. What good points he might present are overwhelmed by the relentless attacks he throws on not just on "Shadow Divers" or "Deep Sea Detectives", but on other works such as "The Last Dive" and the PBS documentary "Hitler's Lost Sub". Anyone with the stain of Chatterton and Kohler upon them is a target.

The one revelation that caused for me the most potential problem was the tag recovery event as depicted by Gentile. This is the event where Chatterton removed his single tank and pushed it ahead of him to enter the electric motor room to find the parts box with the famous U-869 tag on it. Apparently, someone entered the room BEFORE Chatterton, following a more direct and easier route, one that didn't require him to remove his DOUBLES! The diver apparently couldn't, or didn't make any attempt to find the parts box, but left behind a strobe. Gentile implies, but does not say outright, that Chatterton chose his route simply because it looked more dramatic on camera. If that were the case, then that does not speak well for Chatterton. However, he does not say whether Chatterton was aware of any other route, nor whether the other diver knew in advance that route existed or just happened upon it while exploring, nor does he explain why the other diver did not try to locate the tag himself. Whatever the case, Gentile poo-poos the entire incident anyway, stating that wreck divers knew "for years" the true identity of the sub, and that the tag retrival was "anti-climatic"

In general, this book is very distastful reading. I would hope that people reading "Shadow Divers" would not do so with the idea that it is a definitive history. It is not. It is facinating reading and a great story. It's historical details are worthy of correction. "Shadow Divers Exposed" is a horrible, bitter read, even if it corrects omissions and mistakes made in the first book. Gentile writes as though history is a single set of rock solid facts, that come to a single conclusion. In this case his own. Any omission of details can only be the result of a sinister conspiracy to dupe the public. The conceit in this book is overwhelming. Gentile goes so far as to accuse the reader who does not end up sharing his views as having a personality disorder. I think he needs to look into his own heart.