Posted by MHK on August 18, 2004 at 23:46:40:
In Reply to: Team Diving posted by Tribes on August 18, 2004 at 10:45:35:
Many of you have sent me e-mails requesting my comment on this thread. While I normally don't contribute to this list, it seems that in the instant case there isn't much of a reason to comment on Jim's post. It seems to me that Jim is suggesting that what GUE is currently promoting, ie; team diving, isn't a groundbreaking concept. He supports his notion by suggesting that L.A. County and/or the YMCA has been teaching "team" diving since the 50's. Now in my mind it seems to me as a waste of time to comment on Jim's post since the only point he is trying to raise is that the "YMCA" teaches this, or " L.A. County" teaches that and "GUE teaches this".. The fact of the matter is that Jim in neither a YMCA instructor, nor is he a L.A. County instructor, nor is he a GUE instructor. So in my mind listening to him pontificate about what is taught in those classes seems to me silly. Jim has no clue, so it's similiar to listening to Siskel or Roper review a movie they never saw. It's speculation at best, and it's silliness in the extreme and Jim's bias is a matter of public record so why bother responding to ill-advised comments posted by some who lacks actual facts??
Moreover, the real point that Jim so obviously distorting is that he claims that YMCA and L.A. county teach "team" diving, but then goes on to chronicle the very distinction that GUE has exposed which is the difference between the "buddy system" and "team" diving. As usual, Jim Hoffman of Scuba Toys in Orange County misidentifies the salient issue, he offers a potential solution to a fact pattern that he suggests, but ignores reality.
I've scanned this board, and given Jim's pontificating posture, and given what I've read from Elaine's account of her DCI issue, it seems to me that this list is less willing to respond to comments predicated in Elaine's post that cavieted her position that she wanted "other's to learn from the issue". You can't do accident analysis with a pre-disposed position to political correctness and a lack of willingness to actually point out that "something went wrong". If it didn't go wrong, we wouldn't be talking about it, but all too many want to sugar coat the reality.
Guys like Jim Hoffman & Ken Kurtis et. al. represent an old-school mentality that is so invested in the status-quo that they are afraid of true reform, guys like Ken Kurtis that regularly speak out against Nitrox and refuse to allow Nitrox in principle are by-in-large responsible for the laxadasical attitude respecting Nitrox. I've read MSBluecow's account of her DCI hit on a Reef Seekers trip, I've read Elaine's trip report and from my analysis had either one of them been using Nitrox, in lieu of air, neither one of them would have been bent, While for certain I can't prove that and it's speculation and hypothetical, no one who has a clue about mixed gas diving would even consider Elaine's and/or MSBlucowe's fact pattern and conclude anything other then had they did the same exact dive(s) and had been using a 32% EANx that they would not have been bent.
The point is that old-timer's like Jim Hoffman and/or Ken Kurtis are clinging to outdated, pavlovian-dog like habits while newer and fresher ideas bypass their respective shops, so rather then embrace these newer ideas they formate ad-hoc defenses and imaginary legal issues to justify the indefensible.
Post a Followup