I'll add a rebuttal to your rebuttal. Soon we'll be swimming in butts.
Just kidding, thought I'd elaborate on a few points:
Diver0001 once bubbled...
Thought I'd throw in a rebuttle from the puddlestompers perspective.
2) Dive computers do not allow proper planning as divers can't properly "study" the impact of various mixture and decompression choices.
Doesn't apply. Puddlestompers don't do mix and they don't do deco.
Every single dive you do is a deco dive. If you are not stopping at all, then you are decompressing on ascent. If you do a safety stop...you are doing a DECO stop. Even rec divers can benefit from understanding how deco works, and how to properly ascend from any dive. As for mix, plently of recreational divers use nitrox. Some even use trimix.
3) Dive computers are of very limited educational benefit as they do not induce questioning, or proper planning discussions as can be found with tables and most particularly with deco programs
Who cares? Puddlestompers want to have fun. And what's all this about "proper planning"..... you get in the water, you swim around and you come out at 50bar. That sounds like a plan to me. It might not work for JJ but it works for millions of other divers.
That works fine, until you are on a liveaboard and doing 5 dives a day. Every diver will eventually want to plan a dive. Even if you don't plan, the simple fact is that your brain is a much better computer than the one on your wrist.
4) Dive computer programmers often play games with computational process so that they can take insulate themselves from the risk of taking largely square profile data and utilizing it on a multilevel dive. These games tend to result in odd and often ridiculous levels of conservation.
Better safe than sorry. I don't see the problem here.
There is no problem as long as you don't have any reason to push things. However, when you go on that liveaboard trip, you'll want to maximize your diving. It's far better to know where to stand, than to push against some invisible line somwhere.
5) Dive computers are expensive and in some cases leave divers with limited resources carrying equipment that is of far less benefit than other equipment that may have been purchased.
How much does that fancy Halcyon rebreather cost that JJ rides? And all those scooters? Jeeez. For the money he spends on *fills* a typical diver could buy a new set of gear every year. A computer is a drop in the bucket. And frankly if someone want to spend money on a computer instead of fancy tekky-toys, who is JJ to judge?
I think you are being a little bit disingenous here, so I'll just let it go.
6) Dive computers significantly limit the likelihood that divers will
track their residual nitrogen groups.
So what? The computer tracks them. That's what a computer is *for*. To take your mind off of these details.
Until your computer fails, and you sit out for 2 days, or worse, your battery contacts have a poor connection and after 4 days of heavy diving your computer thinks it's the FIRST dive again. This actually happened to a buddy of mine, but because he's an exceptional diver he immediately noticed that the times the computer were giving him were unrealistic. Don't stake your health on some electronics surrounded by salt water.
I don't know if I would call this "details", but if it is, then 'the devil is in the details'
7) Dive computers do not allow for Helium diving in any formats but the bulkiest and most questionable format.
And that's a damned good thing too because if it accounted for helium most divers would be paying functionality they *really* don't need.
Yes, no one needs a computer that can do helium. However, anyone diving below 80 fsw or so should definitely dive Helium. Just my opinion, you understand.
8) Dive computers will often generate longer decompressions than could be figured by an astute, well educated diver with experience.
Who cares. PUddlestompers don't do deco.
Yeah, until they get in trouble somehow and end up having 8 minutes of deco showing on the computer. More likely than not they'll race for the first stop that the computer indicates, which is at 20 fsw. Now that's REAL healthy.
9) Dive computers often create confusion by giving the user to much useless information, sometimes even obscuring depth and time in favor of blinking CNS and/or deco limitations.
No they don't. Maybe some of them do but not the good ones. This is simply untrue. Maybe JJ has trouble with them because in terms of computers he's a newbie.
That's really funny, I almost drenched my monitor! Actually, most computers that I know of display the NDL time in much larger numbers than the dive time, so I'd have to say JJ is right on this one
12) Dive computers do not offer divers as much flexibility in the
generation of profiles with varying conservation. For example the right mix would allow 100 min at 60 vs 60 at 60 but I might prefer to do one or the other and indeed might like a compromise. Computers confuse this issue by not providing divers with the proper information.
Mix? What's that? is like Air because that's what puddlestopmers dive with. Who cares about all these bells and whistles. Most divers don't need or want them.
Plenty of divers use nitrox. Air is great though, it gets me to the dive site. I put it in my tires.
13) Dive computers users often ignore table proficiency and therefore do not learn tables properly. When confronted with a situation where they can't dive the computer (failure, loss, travel etc) these divers are at a serious handicap.
Table proficiency? Many puddlestompers don't learn the tables well enough to use them a month after they're certified. For better or for worse the computer has become and will remain an essential piece of dive gear. It's like a buoyancy controller. BCD's never used to be standard gear either but people adopted them because they work and it makes diving easier and more fun. Anyone out there still dive without one? I see JJ has one.
The point is (yes, I am going to spell it out) is that JJ (et al) take their paradigm and project it onto everything and everybody but their paradigm doesn't fit everything and everybody. Doing so sounds as rediculous to me as saying "oh. just take your al80 and swim 5km into a cave with it. You should be ok as long as you're out with 50 bar". The puddlestomper paradigm doesn't fit JJ either. These are two different worlds with two very different sets of rules.
R.. [/B]
The difference is that if you listen to JJ you will have more fun, you will dive more, and you will have less fear in the water. It's not about forcing everyone to become a cave diver. It's about common sense.
For example, being horizontal in the water makes more sense than being vertical. Why? Well, when you are diving you want to minimze up and down movement, while encouraging forward movement. When you are vertical in the water, it's really easy to go up and down, there is no resistance. Going forward, however, offers lots of surface area for the water to push against. Being horizontal in the water isn't just about silting out a cave or not....it's EASIER!
Using a long hose on your primary, and dontating it in case of trouble, is the same thing again. Yes, it's very useful in a cave, when you have a restriction and have to go single file, blah blah blah. But guess what, when you're out of air it's much nicer to have a nice long 7 ft hose that you KNOW has got a working reg on it offered to you, as opposed to a 30" hose with a piece of &$^$ at the end that is probably full of sand. It doesn't matter if you're in a cave or not.
Knowing how to clear your mask is very important in a cave, but next time you buddy up with a moron and he kicks the mask right off your face, you'll be glad you learned that skill.
Etc. etc. etc.
PS No offense, everyone can dive the way they want to, I really don't care. But the arguments for diving the way JJ outlines are solid. Ignore them if you like.
