In Reply to: Pathetic posted by seahunt on September 14, 2006 at 08:19:48:

Seahunt wrote:

"In this world are hundreds of different kinds of cars, trucks and other vehicles with hundreds of different uses. "

So if I said that a Rolls Royce was a better car then a Hyundai, would you get all hysterical that we judged one better then the other based upon the merits of the respective automobiles?

You also wrote:

"The most amazing thing to me is that isn't true to diving or at least so I am told. There is only one way to do that. "

It is time for you to be called out and demanded to supply specifics. You can't keep spreading the same lie without being called to respond. Please point to ANYWHERE where we have suggested that there is only one way to dive??? You guys keep spreading this campaign of lies and no one calls you out. We have repeatedly said time and time again that there are a 1000 ways to dive. In fact, we acknowledge so severly the numerous other ways to dive that we constantly ask to compare and contrast the other various styles of diving against the way we do things. You guys keep avoiding that debate and rather prefer to keep misdirecting any such discussion and attempt to bring it back around to teh same tired old DIR arguments. In the face of that backdrop, how can you continue this mantra of "they say there is only one way to do it"???

Please answer that very specific, very pointed and very direct question..

For sure we believe that our way is safer and more efficient, and we based that upon our experiences diving in a wide variety of environments and in a wide variety of methodologies. For example, I used to solo dive, I used to deep on air, I used to dive with ad hoc gear configurations. I made just about every mistake there was to make underwater, and based upon those experiences coupled with learning a new way to approach diving, I have concluded that the DIR style of diving is safer and more efficient. If you feel as though you can make a compelling argument that suggests that diving solo, or diving deep on air, or whatever style of diving one advocates is safer and more efficient, I'd love to have the discussion. But by definition, more often then not your side of the discussion disclaims that "we acknowledge the added risk and we accept it". Great, good for you and good luck, but please don't get all sanctamonious when we advance our style of diving which is designed to minimize, not increase, risk. To further your auto analogy about choices, if you make a bad choice in the selection of your auto, will that poor choice result of loss of life or serious injury if the problem isn't solved in the amount of time a diver can hold one breath? You are comparing apples to oranges.

Later

• Re: Come on, give us a break Josh.C 20:25:04 09/14/06 (0)