This is too much fun to miss.
Originally posted by roakey
The anti-DIR folks believe in nothing. You stand for nothing; you only stand AGANST something.
That's true. They stand against arrogance, poor explanations, and downright *unsafe* attitudes towards decompression. They also stand against the belief that the *safest* way to dive is to dive DIR rigged.
When one part of the system is flawed, it places doubt on the rest of the system.
(More on the above later.)
Background. My diving in the last 7 months has been *radically* transformed. Until I took a DIR-F course last November (which was done to check out a BP/wings setup, and for no other reason), my wife and I used standard equipment.
We both had fairly traditional jacket BCs, hoseless air-integrated dive computers, and regulators. My wife was using a Air-II and no pressure guage (relied on computer), and I had an octo I stuffed into one pocket of my BC, and my pressure guage hung at my side tangling in stuff all the time.
Today, our setups are nearly identical, and are completely DIR (except for the air-integrated hoseless computers).
- Halcyon 36# Pioneer BP/wings
- Wife has Apeks TX100/ATX50 regulators
- I have Apeks TX100/T20 regulator
- Long-hose/necklaced backup
- pressure guages.
- Backup lights
- Appropriately placed SS snaps
This was a *very* expensive change for us, and we just recently (2 weeks ago) completed our last DIR acquisition. and my wife's old BC went up for sale on Ebay last night to help offset the costs. (Luckily, Lost Yooper put me in contact with a guy who got me great deals on regulators.)
Not only has our equipment changed, but our attitude has changed. Since November, we've dove at least once/week in the pool, practicing OAA drills, buoyancy and trim, and getting a lot more comfortable in the water. This was because of the DIR-F class, and because of some very helpful advice I've gotten from members of this board (primarily Lost Yooper and Uncle Pug, both DIR advocates).
So, on that matter, *I* believe that the safest way for me to dive is DIR rigged, but I also believe it's not necessarily the safest way to dive. It's just the safest way I know about to dive. ;-)
So instead of building up your position, you tear down the opposition with snipes like ?these other folks don?t have egos? and ?why does GUE [excuse me, it was spelled GOOEY to get in a dig] do this??
What I find ironic is when the shoe is on the other foot it's a completely different story.
Note, this isn't about just *YOU*, but about DIR in general. I see you've stated that you've never called bungied wings 'death wings'. However, the coiner of the term and the person who gets to claim what 'DIR' is (GI3) has. He is DIR, and like it or not, everyone who is DIR is in some form or another linked to him.
His style of continuing his agenda (which is recreated by many, if not most of his acolytes) is to criticize and snipe at everyone else.
DIR targets of opposition and sniping
* Bungied wings
* Dive manufacturers (especially OMS, which seems to be particulary targeted for anything they make)
* All training agencies except for GUE
* Every diver who has heard of DIR but has not accepted it and implemented it 100%
* Every person who is not in Olympic athelete shape
* Every person who disagrees with George
* Many people who ask for clarification of his ideas
* Anyone naive enough to do technical diving differently than a DIR trained/rigged diver
You can lead a horse to water, but you can?t make him think.
That pretty much sums up what I think of *many* of the DIR acolytes. (Not all, but many, if not most that I've run into.)
Many don't know *why* things are done a certain way, and when pressed hard to give an answer, the discussion turns into a lots of hand-waving and pointing to specific examples that have little relevance to the issue at hand. (See the recent bungied wing discussion.)
Reminds me a lot of the naysayers around seatbelts in the 60s. I wonder how many people got injured, crippled and killed because folks that stood FOR nothing, but stood AGAINST seatbelts were able to sway impressionable minds?
Using your logic, we should never be against anything. Drill ANWAR! Clearcut entire forests! Pollute water! Nuke Iran! Airbags that explode out are good! You're stopping progress!
(FWIW, I'm actually a conservative Republican, but I happen to disagree with many of the parties attitudes towards the environment).
Until you have an alternative, leave DIR alone.
(Note, this is directed at the DIR movement, and not you in particular. However, you've painted a big DIR target on yourself by your outspoken attitudes and defense of both the good and (my opinion) bad ideas that have come out of DIR-land.)
Until DIR is proven to be
better than by anything else other than antecdotal evidence, stop shoving it down people's throats as the
safest way to dive. There are alternatives, but when they are brought up, they are labeled as unsafe and/or practiced by farm animals. DIR claims to be an 'all or nothing' deal. Either you take it all, or you aren't 'Doing It Right'. (I can quote chapter/verse from the DIR-F book that states essentially this.)
Not that I expect anyone to actually heed this request. When you have nothing to loose, it's gratifying to snipe at a philosophy when you have none yourself.
Why change if I have nothing to gain by changing? Change for the sake of change, or change where no understandable positive gain can be obtained is not a good reason to change.
My philosophy is the same as everyone else. I change when it had a direct benefit to me.
To that end, I could be confused as a DIR diver at this point. And, in the 'spirit' of DIR, I am. (I'm attempting to dive safer, I'm using both equipment and a configuration that I believe is safer, and I'm trying to be a better dive buddy.) However, I'm not an olympic athelete (nor do I have the desire to be one), and I'm using equipment that is deemed to be unsafe. Therefore, I'm not DIR.
Also, I don't expect anyone to switch to my setup, and I don't start calling people names if they don't chose to replace their BC with a BP/wings. I changed my setup because I had both the ability (resources) and opportunity to change out all my gear.
Really, the only thing I don't like about DIR is the attitude. 75% of DIR I can understand and agree with, and even apply to my diving. Another 10-15% doesn't really apply to my specific diving, but I can't see where they are coming from. However, it's the last 10% that people spend the most time arguing about, and what makes DIR hard for people to swallow. Rather than agreeing that something may be 'non-optimal' but 'acceptable', many DIR acolytes follow their leader and fight a holy Jihad against things that "really don't matter".
Case in point
- I'm right, you're wrong. All but one of my DIR-F instructors were the 'in your face' type. The explanation of one instructor was 'to be the best diver ever'. Not a better dive, mind you. Last I checked, diving wasn't a competitive sport. They laughed at my AI dive computer and tried to explain how it was unsafe. Excuse me, but it's no more unsafe than the plug I'd have put into the HP port (both have a single static O-ring). Yeah, it could get whacked in an overhead environment and blow the ring or ruin my 1st stage, but no easier than my HP hose, which sticks out even further. Why are some risks considered acceptable (blown wing) and others aren't?
- I don't *have* to explain it to you, because if you were smart enough and paying attention, you'd already understand. This defines GI3's posts to tech-diver. I've seen some very clued and knowledgable folks ask for clarification (including our very own LostYooper), and get back a response that was not helpful, and what I would consider insulting. I don't even think *George* understands some of what he does, but then he makes things up to try and explain it. When the messanger can't explain his reasoning, then the message is suspect. (That's not to say it's incorrect, but I'll need something other than the evidence that it didn't hurt him as to why it's safe for me.)
- The equipment I choose is the *ONLY* equipment that can be used safely during technical diving. You may not die using the other equipment, but the risk of dieing is significantly greater than by using *MY* equipment.
- Mixed messages w/regard to DIR's application to recreation vs. technical diving. The line is very fuzzily drawn as to what is necessary to be a rec diver (and DIR), and what is *necessary* to be a tek diver. They want it applicable to both rec and tek, but there is certainly a lot of confusion as to what a rec diver should have in terms of equipment and physical ability.
The last issue is the one that probably causes the most arguments. The fact is that most people are rec divers, and they may want to either learn something from tek divers, or at least consider the requirements of moving into the realm of technical diving.
Plus, many tek divers dive recreational in situations that are common to rec divers. George claims that he's fully deco'd after *every* dive, when in fact *all* known data would claim otherwise. Also, he admits that his physiology (genes and/or physical conditioning, who knows) puts him a different class than most people, including his own support divers. So, if he doesn't get bent, therefore his theories must be right, correct? I place a *LOT* more stock in both the theories and results when they are done in general practice in situations *outside* of WKPP diving. (And, it turns out that some of the stuff they're doing is turning the deco theories on their heads, but it doesn't mean that *everything* they are doing is safe and correct.)
The one that gets me is the 'Diving after flying is safe'. There isn't a single doctor that would claim this, yet at least one of my DIR-F instructors now would jump right on a commercial airliner 'with wet hair' after diving. This is downright *stupid*, and has a huge risk, IMO.
Why is this risk 'acceptable' (death and/or permanent impairment), yet the risk of having your bungied wings 'forcibly deflate' is *way* more onerous?
Anyways, I could go on and on, but this is way longer than I had originally hoped.
My attitude is probably the same as everyone elses. Decide for yourself what your risk tolerance is, as well as the resources you have to minimize the risk. If the risk is small enough and you don't have the resources to change it, keep diving the same way. However, if you have the resources to fix it, by all means make your diving safer and more fun.
If that means buying a BP/wings, go for it. If it means going to long-hose/necklaced backup, go for it. (However, don't do either without at least a little bit of training, either on your own or in a course.)
Finally, as my old boss used to say, don't believe anything you hear, and half of what you say. Be suspicious of *everything*, and be convinced on your own of *why* something is better than what you are doing. Just because GI3, Uncle Pug, Lost Yooper, Roakey, or even Nate says something is better, don't believe them unless you can try it out or work it out for yourself.
On the other hand, don't discount what other say either, since the only way progress happens is when change occurs. This means that a BP/wings *may* be a better way to dive. It may even mean that bungied wings *are* death wings, but be convinced of that based on an argument you can wrap you head around, not on what someone else will think of you.
Nate
