Re: Picking and choosing which *rules* apply

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

Posted by seahunt on August 13, 2001 at 20:27:56:

In Reply to: Re: Picking and choosing which *rules* apply posted by MHK on August 13, 2001 at 15:56:50:

I think part of my frustration with you is that you cling to mindset that has moved on.. I don't want that to seem inflamatory inasmuch as I've concluded that we just don't see eye to eye..
>That's OK, but the main difference we have relates to solo and consoles/computers.
>I think it fair to say that the first relates to human nature and the second to
>practicality, so I think they will both be around for a long time no matter how
>passe they may seem to you.

If you put aside our history and take a look at the numbers perhaps you'll see what I'm talking about, and why I don't think it's productive to discuss *subjective* issues since we could go round and round and never get anywhere..
>I gave you numbers and their results in the diving culture. You have a point,
>but so do I and other divers do to.

Ken Kurtis posted some DAN numbers a few weeks ago.. It basically said that in the entire state of California we had 8 fatalities in 1999.. Fast forward to 2000 we had 13 that I'm aware of and that solely related from Los Angeles to San Diego, I'm unaware of what went on up north.. That's an increase of over 50% just in So Cal.. 2001 we have had 7 already, and it's only mid-August.. Once again I'm speaking specifically from L.A. to San Diego, and I'm not up to speed on what is going on up north, nor do I represent that I'm aware of every fatality.
>You're right, we're lucky that this is such a relatively safe sport
>and practically no impact injuries either!!

To that end we have a trend.. You guys can differentiate each specific fatality and distinguish your particular diving habits from the decedants all day long.. But at some point you've got to stop and take a look and say what the hell is going on, why has the fatality rate increased so dramatically and what can be done to reduce it..

Based solely on what I've read from you, you do not have the requisite mindset that I would require to be on our team. I resognize that that doesn't mean anything to you since our diving habits are diametrically opposite.
>I dunno. I was buddy diving this past weekend, got seperated, counted to 27 and
>my buddy found me... as planned. Sounds standard to me.
>Remember, I've done far more (quantity) dangerous things than you, often as an occupation
>and I never have been hurt. I collect procedures as a hobby. My modus oporandi is to adapt.
>If I want to, I can adapt to DIR as much as I want. It's not hard. I don't tell a prespective
>buddy how to dive or how I dive. I ask how they dive and adapt to that.

However, in response to an alarming increas in fatalities DIR has adopted a proven system that works.. It seems to me that part of the reluctance of some of the more experience diver's to adopt, or even investigate, DIR is because diving never had any such thing.. A system wasn't what diving was suppose to be about back when you started. And perhaps if they still had the *limited* number of hard core diver's that you had back then, maybe you'd be right. But the fact of the matter is that the industry needs to constantly reinvent itself and needs to constantly feed itself. So the result isn't that you get hard core divers anymore that are willing to put up with the rigorous training of days gone by. Today you have 8 year olds, you have weekend certifications, you have discover scuba, the physical fitness tests are a joke and convience has replaced quality training... It's not implausible that you could have an 18 year old with one month experience in Cayman teaching diver's here in SoCal how to dive and certifying them for life..
>No matter how they begin, no matter the classes they take, it is still up to the diver.
>There will always be hardcore divers.
>Maybe you don't remember NASDS and the sillinous they foisted off. They were worse than PADI
>and were so bad that they caused some regulation of the dive industry in LA. But it
>didn't last and never will, because the ocean is the determiner. Not the instructor or the agency.
>In that context, your crusade against bad training standards makes sense to protect newbies,
>but not the rest. Beyond beginning diving, the ocean is their judge.
>Remember, I've read and analyzed the DIR sites. I've read what you said that relates to
>CA diving. I learn real good. Perhaps if I disagree, it's not out of ignorance.
>I can point to at least 2 major holes in your analysis/position of the DIR system.
>Still, I repeat as I have, that I think the system is generally good. I've even said why.
>I also say that the philosophy of non-adaptability goes against all engineering and
>biological principles. For me, that is critial. For you it's not on your radar.

In response to that, what is wrong with advancing a system??? I've dove in just about every environment that you could imagine and it seems to me once the *myth* about DIR is burst, or perhaps offered in a more PC, sensitive way, I'll bet many will adopt the system and wonder what took so long..
>I've never complained about the idea of the system. If it was a bit adaptable, it might
>be near as good as you claim. The problem is the people involved and their dogmatic
>approach. can you name any other system based on dogma, besides religion, that has

Have you ever wondered why the military issues everyone the same gear??? It's because if something happens in battle everyone is configured in like kind.. All parts are interchangeable, all bullets work in each gun and so on and so forth.. What is so wrong with applying that same logic once you get 100' underwater???
>Uh, sorry, that's for economic reasons and training, primarily, simplicity secondarily and
>effectiveness lastly. The horrible shortcomings of that system are well known. Widely varying
>systems with high degrees of adaptedness are always superior and why soldiers in the field
>always specialize and adapt their equipment.

I was hoping that this thread would take a different direction, but it doesn't appear as though it will go where I had hoped..
>That's OK, it was civilized and clear. You brought it up and I thought I gave good
>REASONS as you requested.

>Answer this. In just two cases I mentioned with specialized tasks, hunting and photography,
>will you claim that a buddy team is as practical for photography or as effective for hunting,
>as solo divers?

Enjoy the diving, seahunt

Follow Ups:

Post a Followup




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