And there have been zero auto accidents involving Trabants in the USA which makes them the safest automobile by your reckoning.Doesn't matter. Zero is Zero. Anyway you spin it, its still Zero.
Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.
Benefits of registering include
And there have been zero auto accidents involving Trabants in the USA which makes them the safest automobile by your reckoning.Doesn't matter. Zero is Zero. Anyway you spin it, its still Zero.
And there have been zero auto accidents involving Trabants in the USA which makes them the safest automobile by your reckoning.
So?By your reckoning, the rebreathers used by UTD was made no later than 1990. Next.
So?
If there's 5 in the world, and only 1 of those gets a dive a year, that's still less than 30 dives by now. I wouldn't expect any deaths on it.
So unless you can provide the numbers of dives that are done on the ubber-dubber-safe UTD RB, the claim of "there's 0 accidents on our rebreather" is bs. But I guess you're buddies with AD and BH...
Don't need statistics. Here is a direct quote from your beloved leader Andrew Geogitsis taken from the UTD blog. Anyone who understands rebreathers will get that AG doesn't understand them and has no business teaching on them.You guys make the claim that it is dangerous, so why don't you guys provide the number and proof instead? So until you can provide the numbers and statistics that it is ubber-dubber dangerous, the claim is just as BS, I guess you are just haters then?
Next.
Don't need statistics. Here is a direct quote from your beloved leader Andrew Geogitsis taken from the UTD blog. Anyone who understands rebreathers will get that AG doesn't understand them and has no business teaching on them.
In laymans terms he is suggesting that this experiment he did in a pool is indicative of what would happen at depth. His theory would hold that a diver would run out of loop volume before a dangerous level of PO2 existed in the loop is absolutely bullocks and if he is teaching this application of loop volume is only by sheer luck someone didn't get killed.
So you call me out here:Seriously Dave, let's start a thread in the rebreather forum if you want. But I'm sure you already had your debate with AG himself and you probably can't prove anything and now you are taking it out in a thread discussing Essentials of recreational diving. What's your motive?
then when I rise to the challenge you play victim and call me a hater. I would call out any instructor promoting dangerous activities. So with the rebreather thing and ratio deco thing how is this me being a hater? My motive? To make sure divers know what they are getting themselves into.You guys make the claim that it is dangerous, so why don't you guys provide the number and proof instead? So until you can provide the numbers and statistics that it is ubber-dubber dangerous, the claim is just as BS, I guess you are just haters then?
Next.
So you call me out here:
then when I rise to the challenge you play victim and call me a hater. I would call out any instructor promoting dangerous activities. So with the rebreather thing and ratio deco thing how is this me being a hater? My motive? To make sure divers know what they are getting themselves into.