The article for New York Times (Document B) is more believable because it goes in depth about how the boat might’ve blown up.
First, In Document B, it shows the reporter decided to take a step further and interview Captain Schuley, an expert on War ships and Secretary Long. In Document B, it states, “Captain Schuley, who knows a great deal about war ships, did not entertain the idea that the Maine had been destroyed on purpose. He said that fires would sometimes start in the coal bunkers, and he told of such a fire on board another war ship that started very close to the magazine.” While in Document A, they only got a testimony from Navy Theodore Roosevelt’s secretary. In Document A, it states, “Assistant Secretary of the Navy Theodore …show more content…
In the text, it states, “The Spaniards, it is believed, arranged to have the Maine drop anchor over a harbor mine. Wires connected the mine to the magazine of the ship. If this is true, the brutal nature of the Spaniards will be shown by the fact that they waited to explode the mine until all the men had gone to sleep.” However, in Document B, the writer explains why differently. The writer interviewed Captain Schuley. The captain explained that sometimes fires would start in the coal bunkers. The coal bunkers were put very close to the magazine. The fire might’ve gotten so hot that it burned down the steel wall separating the fire and ammunition before the bunkers and magazine were full of water. The text in Document B states, “Captain Schuley, who knows a great deal about war ships, did not entertain the idea that the Maine had been destroyed on purpose. He said that fires would sometimes start in the coal bunkers, and he told of such a fire on board another war ship that started very close to the magazine. The fire became so hot that the heat blistered the steel wall between the fire and the ammunition before the bunkers and magazine were flooded with water to stop the