what makes a diving agency a diving agency?

[Thalassamania]

... People die because they make ****-poor judgement calls. This has little or nothing to do with "diving agencies." It's about ignorance...

And how do we cure ignorance?

With training ... of course.

And where does training come from?

Why instructors ... of course.

And who defines what (and often how) instructors teach?

Why agencies ... of course.

So ... it rather logically follows, that at least to some degree, agencies bear some level of responsibility for diver ignorance.

...

Let's look at the reality of the situation. No agency has a horrible safety record. None of them are even close. As it is, I can find agencies that require snorkels, at least one that will let me opt out due to conditions and another one that believes that snorkels on Scuba are as useful as a screen on a submarine. As an instructor, I can pick and choose the agency I want based just on snorkels... or just on fin pivots... or on a litany of practices and procedures that are important to me and my students. When you have a ruling body, most of these variances would cease to be and I would be forced to conform. Fortunately, our cumulative safety records don't suggest that this is needed or even desired. Viva le difference!

If you subscribe to the concept, as I do, that diver training is a zero-defect undertaking, then even a single accident is a "horrible safety record;" and it follows that most all agencies, therefore, have a horrible safety record.

If you do not subscribe to that concept, then (at least in my view) then you fail the critical test of "would I permit this instructor to teach my loved ones to dive?"

My questions are along the lines of: "Does the knowledge and skill to use a snorkel, or conduct an CESA, or use a compass, or understand both tables and computers, etc., add or subtract from diver training as a zero-defect undertaking under all circumstances?"

For example: if someone is only going to cave dive, or is never going to be more than twenty feet from waist deep water, a snorkel is an irrelevancy, but if they are going to dive in any circumstances in which a long surface swim, or long wait on the surface, might be required, then competence with a snorkel is a good tool to have in the kit ... not the only tool, but a good one. The same holds true for a litany of skills and topics that have been, and continue to be, removed from diver training programs for what appear, at least to me, to be nothing more than making courses, "more marketable," all part of the continuing race to the bottom, so to speak.

Though effective, and demonstrable, consensual standards are, IMHO, preferable, "your" collective cumulative safety record does suggest that some sort of governing body, that is more interested in safety than it is in sales, is "needed and even desired." One accident is way too many accidents, especially to the family and friends of the victim.

 

[The Chairman]

One accident is one accident too many, especially to the family and friends of the victim.

Kinda funny. I have never had a student of mine have an accident. Using your quantifier, I am golden as is my teaching regimen.

As Twain once twanged: "There are lies, damn lies and statistics." Going your route would eliminate the sport of diving as we know it. It's not doing so well anyway and I would hate to have draconian measures based on chutzpah hasten it's demise.

 

[chillyinCanada]

What do you mean the sport of diving isn't "doing so well anyway"?

Apparently, the tips in Coz are way up.

But on a serious note, what did you mean? I'm not an instructor - obviously, just an addict. Please, I'm genuinely curious.

 

[The Chairman]

Only a few manufacturers, agencies and resorts are really growing. Overall, there is a lack luster economic performance among most Scuba entities.

 

[chillyinCanada]

Oh. You mean like the world-wide economic problem. Understandable. Of course, in these times, that probably means it is the best of the best that are doing well (or those that have the best marketing department)

 

[Thalassamania]

No Pete, using my "quantifier" you hold yourself up as a sample of one, representing a new system of training that has not been around long enough to have a meaningful track record as of yet. So what you are is, at best, is a statistic without much significance (in mathematical terms). I, on the other hand, am an example, not of a statistic or a sub-sample, but a census, a compete and absolute inventory or all who have done things in a give way, for sixty years now. What Clemens said about statistics (funny, and ignorant, as it is) does not hold for a census, which is not a statistic. All my route is: zero-defects. Are you advocating something else?

 

[The Chairman]

No Pete, using my "quantifier" you hold yourself up as a sample of one, representing a new system of training that has not been around long enough

Yet, you have no problem lambasting us and touting your way as superior. I get it. Everyone else sucks but you. 'Nuff said: you're perfect and a legend in your own mind. I bet you even have a bridge to sell me somewhere, but I'm not buying.

 

[Thalassamania]

Yet, you have no problem lambasting us and touting your way as superior. I get it. Everyone else sucks but you. 'Nuff said: you're perfect and a legend in your own mind. I bet you even have a bridge to sell me somewhere, but I'm not buying.

Am I superior? I don't know. Is my product superior? Absolutely. That is not a matter of something that is, "in my own mind," that is quite demonstrable. Why is my product superior? Greater knowledge base, greater skill training, better water adaptation prior to training, higher academic experience prior to training (esp., in math and the sciences), likely somewhat brighter. Perhaps that makes you the superior teacher, given that you teach less capable candidates than I and should not be expected to routinely raise them to the same level that I do in less than one third of the time that I take.

Now, let's get real. I never said any of the things that you attribute to me, perhaps that's what you read, but you need to look inside yourself to determine the reasons that you so misunderstand.

 

[paolov]

scuba with no equipment ?

good attitude will make the sport safe?

hmmm..... scuba is growing on this side of the world.

 

[The Chairman]

Now, let's get real.

That's what most of the agencies have done, and you seem to resent it. Real training for fun diving. Most people come to the sport to have a bit of fun. That's the reality of the situation.