Deep Stops Increases DCS

[victorzamora]

Did you know where VPM-B/E came from? It was David Shaw (RIP), who did a 270m dive on VPM-B, with some extra time added. We modeled his changes and that is what VPM-B/E is.

Wait....let me get this straight.

Gradient Factors: Mathematical addition of conservatism to a model based on percentage of acceptable tissue tensions....but it's complete bunk because it's "made up."

VPM-B/E: Some changes some guy made at random were implemented because it worked that one time.

 

[Shotmaster]

Igor, once someone makes a declarative statement, they must substantiate it with proof sufficient to convince others. This is immaterial to education, training, money, or public standing. The proof should be enough. In the course of a discussion, or debate when we reference a published work, we are pointing to a higher authority than ourselves or we use demonstration through verifiable experiments.

 

[UWSojourner]

With all due respect to all scientists on the thread, everyone is allowed to have his own opinion and right to defend it. Science is not apriori correct.

"A priori" means you're relying on theory and not observation to make your decisions. If anyone is guilty of an a priori belief it would be those promoting bubble models. As has been stated over and over on this thread and others, there never has been any experimental evidence backing the claims of bubble models. It's ALL been theory. On the other hand, the current scientific challenges to bubble models (e.g. NEDU study, etc.) are all a direct result of experimental observations.

 

[igor p]

"A priori" means you're relying on theory and not observation to make your decisions. If anyone is guilty of an a priori belief it would be those promoting bubble models. As has been stated over and over on this thread and others, there never has been any experimental evidence backing the claims of bubble models. It's ALL been theory. On the other hand, the current scientific challenges to bubble models (e.g. NEDU study, etc.) are all a direct result of experimental observations.

Kevin you are again turning words arround.

I wrote: Science is not apriori correct. And I know what that means. I wrote it as some think it is.
But it is not

And I think I wrote something about experiments and experimental evidence too.... when anecdotal evidence in big numbers it can be more reliable than experimental evidence...

 

[AlexL]

It's ALL been theory.

its not even a theory; its just a hypothesis. a theory is a hypothesis has been tested and confirmed via experimentation. no experimental confirmation, no theory.

now if someone would like to point out any peer reviewed research that experimentally confirms the hypothesis of bubble models reducing the risk of DCS, then we can get back to productive conversation.

ps: should also point out that the plural of anecdote is not data!

 

[dmaziuk]

And I think I wrote something about experiments and experimental evidence too.... when anecdotal data in big numbers it can be more reliable than experimental data...

Google for cognitive bias or overestimation of prevalence sometime.

 

[The Chairman]

I'd love to hear about some examples.

Check out Coral Restoration Foundation | Restoring & Protecting Reefs. Ken Nedimyer was told by many scientists that this couldn't be done. Yet, he did it and now they come to him for the various genomes. It's an amazing story on so many levels.

 

[Storker]

when anecdotal evidence in big numbers it can be more reliable than experimental evidence...

It can. It can also be completely misleading because often there is no way to check for confounding factors. And it's darned difficult to know where you are on that scale. That's why a bunch of random observations are a lot less reliable than the output from a well designed experiment.

The hierarchy of evidence: Is the study’s design robust?

 

[igor p]

Check out Coral Restoration Foundation | Restoring & Protecting Reefs. Ken Nedimyer was told by many scientists that this couldn't be done. Yet, he did it and now they come to him for the various genomes. It's an amazing story on so many levels.

and another one:
German teen solves 300-year-old mathematical riddle posed by Sir Isaac Newton | Fox News

 

[Storker]

and another one:
German teen solves 300-year-old mathematical riddle posed by Sir Isaac Newton | Fox News

Nope. This isn't an example of how "common sense" prevails over science. It's an example of a young genius solving a problem which scientists had struggled with. That some of those scientists had stated that the problem was unsolvable isn't the same as science being wrong.

And to repeat myself: If a - proper - scientist is presented with credible and solid evidence that their previous position was wrong, they will change their viewpoint according to existing evidence. That's what science is: adjusting one's models and worldview as the body of knowledge increases. Tim Minchin illustrated this rather well in his poem "Storm":

If you show me
That, say, homeopathy works,
Then I will change my mind
I will spin on a ******* dime
I'll be embarrassed as hell,
But I will run through the streets yelling
Its a miracle! Take physics and bin it!
Water has memory!
And while it's memory of a long lost drop of onion juice is Infinite
It somehow forgets all the poo its had in it!

You show me that it works and how it works
And when I've recovered from the shock
I will take a compass and carve 'Fancy That' on the side of my cock.