Posted by Kendall Raine on February 13, 2001 at 14:10:06:
In Reply to: Re: Tegner's Report/solo posted by Ken Kurtis on February 13, 2001 at 12:37:35:
What are you getting at? Little is ever certain in accident analysis except the fact of the accident itself. Would having a buddy have saved Mia's life? Who knows. So what!? Would having a buddy have allowed her to be brought to the surface for first aid and evac? Yes. Without being able to go back in time and recreate events accident analysis is always subject to uncertainty. The objective is to assemble the facts and construct lessons for increasing the odds of survival the next time around. The operative phrase is INCREASING THE ODDS. Sorry to shout. That's simple common sense. You know that from your training and experience. To suggest that the facts as available in this case don't clearly argue that having a buddy would have helped Mia's chances for survival is nonsense. Ending your post with the pablum of "regardless of how you dive, make good choices" is thereby rendered meaningless. Are you just parsing words? Are we to learn nothing from this tragedy? How clear does something have to be before it's too obvious to deny or obfuscate?
With all due respect, I expected better.
Post a Followup