It seems very weird to me that ultimately, according to Wikipedia, they buried he ship with pebbles. Why was this done, I thought most sunken ships were left alone.
second, the sea is one of the few places where there's still some sort of non-monetary, honour-based system where people will help each other if needed. I've personally helped folks in trouble with risk to my own boat, and I'd expect someone else to do the same if I was in a tight spot. It probably has to do with the environment - the sea is very lonely. If you are having an emergency there will be no police, ambulance or firetruck coming. You have to fix it yourself. If you're lucky another ship is close by.
Then in this information vacuum ordinary people do the rest by alleging anyone who questions the official line is a "conspiracy theorist".
I mean science can answer so many questions, but only when you have trace evidence to examine.
The reason for covering the wreck is that the disaster was a major national catastrophe; if 800+ hadn't died it would never have been considered.
Says Wikipedia:
"In the aftermath of the disaster, many relatives of the deceased demanded that their loved ones be raised from international waters and given a land burial. Demands were also made that the entire ship be raised so that the cause of the disaster could be discovered by detailed inspection.[27][28]
Citing the practical difficulties and the moral implications of raising decaying bodies from the sea floor (the majority of the bodies were never recovered), and fearing financial burden of lifting the entire hull to the surface and the salvage operation, the Swedish government suggested burying the whole ship in situ with a shell of concrete.[29][30] As a preliminary step, thousands of tons of pebbles were dropped on the site.[28] The Estonia Agreement 1995, a treaty among Sweden, Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Poland, Denmark, Russia and the United Kingdom, declared sanctity over the site, prohibiting their citizens from even approaching the wreck.[31]"
The Titanic was different; it lies below 4000 metres of water.
In this case, I think its reasonable to thing that covering up the ship and bodies are to protect dignity.
Your clothes analogy is a straw man. People conspire all the time. There are many, many instances of people conspiring. There are many instances of conspiracy theories thought to be rubbish that turned out to be true. Watergate, anyone? Or more recently, if you had suggested that the NSA had tapped every major network in the world and created viruses that burrow down into the chips themselves and so on, you'd have been called a conspiracy theorist. Then came Edward Snowden.
Yes, covering with pebbles doesn't provide any evidence for a conspiracy theory. But equally your argument provides no refutation that it's a conspiracy.
Science however can offer concrete facts. For example: laboratory tests on debris recovered illegally from Estonia's bow yielded trace evidence of an explosion.
So how do you review that? By performing independent tests on other salvaged material. Which could be quite simple to do, if it wasn't covered in stones. Just think, if it wasn't covered in stones, you could recover some of the wreck, test it and show that there is no trace evidence of any explosions.
Now that we only have that trace evidence, I suppose we just have to be content with the idea that it was sunk with an explosion. Unless you have some kind of evidence that refutes it?
You may think the reverse, that this evidence cant be trusted, and that the official line should be trusted. But you would be wrong. That is unscientific. You would have to prove that the work done by Jutta Rabe is false by doing your own lab work and making your own observations.
Interesting how the pebbles stop all further investigation, isn't it? But I know, I know. Governments would never do that. They are so trustworthy. They never lie. etc. etc.
Good luck with your understanding of geopolitics, clothes and carpentry...
I mean I hear you, it's a wonderful thing, but I don't see how it's in any way strange or surprising.
But yeah, definitely haunting stuff. Recordings from astronauts always get me, like Komarov's, or the supposed one of a female astronaut in 1961 both during failed re-entry.