The author lays out a very compelling case against Stanley Lord, but the problem is that he just doesn’t stop. His well laid-out argument devolves into a rant, and eventually a screed. By the end, he goes full armchair psychologist, pathologizing Lord’s actions and sticking him with a diagnosis. The author also likes to put forward theories as though they are facts; while i personally find the notion that Britannic was originally to be named “Gigantic” very compelling (all three ships would have had names that are synonyms for “very large”), nobody has ever found any definitive evidence for this theory and it’s bad form for the author to state it as a fact. There are also just some straight-up factual errors, such as when Carpathia is referred to as having a pair of 10 cylinder quadruple-expansion steam engines—a type of marine engine that as far as I’m aware does not exist. In reality, Carpathia’s engines each had 4 cylinders, which was the typical amount of cylinders for a quadruple-expansion marine steam engine.