Re: Make it a 100 HP ...

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ California Scuba Diving BBS ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by seahunt on May 02, 2001 at 17:21:42:

In Reply to: Re: Make it a 100 HP ... posted by MHK on May 02, 2001 at 14:49:20:

I must be really bored if I'm bothering to yank on your chain, but it is fun to see what
silly answers you come up with. After looking at your robust response and my replys, I
guess it's just easiest to say that there are other good, safe ways to dive than DIR and
you are in no way qualified to judge me. You just don't have what it takes.
Your beliefs about how a person must learn to dive show that you really just don't know
anything about me or what I do know. I also think your obscessive belief that training
makes the diver is dumb. I guess that NASDS claimed the same thing though.
What was it that scared you so bad that you obscess about diving fears? yOur brain sure
does seem to be stuck in one position.
Enjoy, seahunt

A) Why in the hell would you risk going to 150', on air, if you weren't into wrecks????;
> Actually, I didn't know the depth, but I did make two dives to the Gordo Banks at 150
or so, because it was there I and I hadn't been... Pretty place.

B) Because, as we have demonstrated on numerous occasions, the algorithms in the computer
models are less than ideal for this type of diving;
>But quite apparently adaquate.

C) As you, yourself, have indicated when getting into *this tpye* of diving, DIR is the way to go
and we all know that you are miles and miles from DIR;
>DIR is a good way I am sure, but it is not the only way to dive practically and safely.

D) This type of dive should NEVER be done on air;
>So you say. You got pretty well roasted for that one on the RSD board. Narcosis has never
presented a problem for me at that depth unless I was cold.

E) You aren't OE trained and as such shouldn't be at 150', on air, in a wreck;
I didn't even know you could go in that wreck and anyway, when I have visited wrecks I have
never been interested in going in them.

F) You aren't qualified;
>According to you I'm not even qualified to dive. Aside from a NITROX ticket, I only have a NAUI
Beginning Scuba Diver cert. If my certifications were what makes me as a diver, I would have
been in serious trouble long ago, but actually in my chosen dive environment, I have demonstrated
a diving skill that few could match regardless of the certifications they have accumulated. I
doubt you have ever developed near the rough water skills I learned in the Central and North
Coast or my huntin skills in So Cal.

G) This type of diving takes training, dedication, mindset and preparation the sum total of which
you have demonstrated time and time again that you are unwilling to understand;
>My mindset is not something you are capable of judging. My dedication has been demonstrated to
exceed that of most divers that ever hit the water. You have no idea what my preparation is. Do
you figure that I got certified and my brain died? And per the last, training, DIR does not have
a monopoly on dive training. Actually there are a lot of extremely good divers that have never
heard of DIR. There are many ways to learn anything, it's just that most people have one best way
to learn things and so if they don't know better, they assume that their way is the best or (if
they are arrogant enough) only way.

H) Anyone who thinks that following an outdated and ill-equipped algorithm for this type of dive is
obviously NOT prepared to make this dive;
>An algorithm is a method. How does a method get ill equiped?
Just because a method is not the latest, does not mean it doesn't work fine.
Just because something is new add has advocates, does not validate it.
You can ask the .COM folks about that one.

I) You can't justify your ridiculous overweighting nonsense at 150';
>You just can't get that right can you. I said I carried more weight than I like, not that I was
overweighted. I further said that I have more problem with too much bouyancy than too little. I had
no problem with it at the Gordo Banks...

J) What would you do if your *computer[s]* failed and you were in deco????? ( ie: lock up, as
most do in deco);
>I don't deco dive. We made two dives to 150+ at the Gordo Banks... (and not that I think about it,
those were with 104 AL's). The surface interval was only 45 minutes (amazing, long stop at 25 feet)
and we still had a fair amount of bottom time with no deco... A computer was really nice there.
It worked great there, I would expect it to work fine elsewhere.
I should mention that we started doing our stops at 20 feet. We stopped for a long time. I expect
that if we had gone to the surface directly, the computer would have said that we were in deco.

K) Buhlman algorithms provide for 5 minutes at 150' ( pre NDL's) and given a descent rate of 60
fpm you would have 2 1/2 minutes at depth and it would be STUPID to risk the dangers for 2 1/2
minutes BT;
>Just goes to show that a computer is a better way to go. I had far more time than that at the
Gordo Banks. besides, I got the impression that 150 feet was max on the Moody, not typical.

L) You are not tri-mixed trained and lack the fundemental understanding to complete this dive in a
safe manner;
>BS. The Gordo Banks was near identical in depth or deeper.

M) We have already had too many deaths at the Moody;
>You have a problem with that. Not me.

N) You don't rate safety as your number 1 priority;
>Well, for a dive like that I likely would.
I adapt to different dive conditions. Unlike you, I don't just dive one way all the time for
different conditions.

0) You have little, if any, experience in a buddy team and as such would a liability;
>BS again. As is often the case, not only don't you know, but I have written a fair amount about
buddy diving and have made it clear that I can be pretty rigid about procedures when I feel it
is important.

P) Your gear configuration is a liability;
>Please describe my gear. You've assumed in the past that I use no BC or console. Why should I
think you know what I dive with? Of course you do love jumping to conclusions with little or no

Q) If you changed your gear configuration to an acceptable set up you wouldn't know what the
hell you were doing since it would be all knew to you;
>Using scuba gear may present a technical challenge to you, but not me. my philosophy of diving
is that I should never have to think of my gear. It is something that gets me somewhere. Not
something I have to play with while I am there.
Considering that I have read your essay on the subject and the Halycon site, I have read and
reviewed (in writing) George Irvine's and Jerrod Jablonski's web sites on the subject, you can
figure that I have actually picked up a fair understanding of the relatively simple gear system
promoted by DIR. It is a lot like the ScubaPro backpack of the 70's you know.
Besides, with my mechanical and skills and general technical knowledge, a system like scuba is
not much of a puzzle. I get paid for much more amusing challenges than that.
That gear may present a challenge to you, but as an accountant, I don't expect you to have
extensive mechanical/technical training. I do.
It's a matter of philosophy for me. I always try to achieve maximum adaptability. If I go to a
computer I have never seen, I don't adjust it to my tastes. I learn to use it the way the
previous user set it up for themselves. It trains adaptability and I may learn something. I try
to do this in all things.

R) You have little, if any, acceptable level of experience at these depths;
>Oh, and you know all about the deep dives I've made. Maybe not acceptable to you, but luckily
that doesn't matter any. The main hazard is narcosis and I am quite familiar with that. Also, as
I said, I do consider a buddy appropriate for that type of dive.

S) Who in the world would dive with someone they didn't know for the 1st time at 150'???;
>A person with sense enough to trust their personal evaluation of another diver and who doesn't
depend on their buddy unavoidably. You are constantly testing your buddy from the moment you meet
them until the end of the dive. Life is about making judgements. Live it.

T) You know NOTHING about decompression diving and that is what you would be attempting;
>Not quite so. You havwe no knowledge of my deco knowledge, because I have never mentioned it,
anywhere. Besides, it wasn't necessary at Gordo Banks. Why should it be here?

U) Would you be able to hold a deco stop with all that weight???;
>Sure, I never have problems below 15 feet and if I worry about my bouyancy, I would bring some
more weight. I guess I couldn't do my usual there and pick up a rock before ascending.

V) Why in the world would you attempt a dive like the Moody without deco gas??? ;
>I still don't know why to go there anyway and (see above) it was no problem at Gordo Banks.
Besides, technical diving has never attracted me.

W) You exercise a poor attitude with respect to what can happen if things go wrong???
>Was that a question???... That's why you bring a buddy on that type of dive.

X) You have no contingency planning;
>See buddy above.

Y) You have no support divers;
>Divers with some beans have been calling that a sport dive for years and don't use
a support diver. What's he supposed to do? I live a life based on self sufficiencey,
not dependancy. I plan it that way.

Follow Ups:

Post a Followup




[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ California Scuba Diving BBS ] [ FAQ ]