Posted by MHK on February 07, 2001 at 15:23:29:
In Reply to: Re: A question for MHK from FF posted by CalDiver on February 06, 2001 at 14:46:02:
>
George, as the Director of the WKPP let's see if Karl Shreeves can come on here
and explain his thinking to you (and us). If someone will contact me I will
gladly provide my credit card and pay for Karl's first month. I doubt he will
accept the offer, but I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt in order
to dialouge on these points.
Everything I posted is correct (pursuant to Shreeves clarifications) and has
included direct quotes on each matter. Shreeves believes that his deep air
program is "well founded and reasonable" because it is only "one atmopshere"
deeper than the 130' current recreational ceiling and we are "basing [our]
entire opinion on a number. Is that a reasonable approach" according to him?
Shreeves also goes on to add as credulance for his deep air standards that,
"much of the commercial industry has used the same limit for air as well" and
"in many countries outside the U.S., 50 metres (165 feet) has been the
recreational limit for decades..."
It's hard to believe that the head of PADI's Tec program would head for the
bottom of the industries barrel (instead of taking the high ground) in order to
legitimatize their own ill-conceived program, but that seems to be the case
here.
Tod
p.s. Thanks fpr the indivual who met Karl at DEMA and provided Terrence
Tysall's [paraphrased] comment about our needing to "develop a comfort level
with air, in case [we] ever have to chase a student at depth" That makes a heck
of a lot of sense; why didn't we think of that!
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: quest-unsubscribe@gue.com
For additional commands, e-mail: quest-help@gue.com