Near Drowning at Ginnie Springs

[Lead_carrier]

"My personal PO2 limits"???
Do we get to pick these ourselves now?
Like roulette numbers?

theskull

Actually you do, skull. The PO2 numbers that are taught in EANx are recommendations. You can dive with a PO2 of 1.2 or 1.6. It is your choice. Don't expect the scuba police to pull up behind you with his blue tank flashing for exceeding your PO2. :54:

 

[Walter]

I have a suggestion. This thread is going no where and accomplishing nothing. Why not let it die?

 

[MikeFerrara]

I have a suggestion. This thread is going no where and accomplishing nothing. Why not let it die?

I don't know that any threads go anywhere or accomplish anything. It's not a requirement.

Since the thread seems to be interesting people and keeps going, it could be argued that it has more value than the threads that aren't.

Like all the others it'ss die when it's ready.

 

[Walter]

Mike,

Often they do accomplish something. You've accomplished much with your posts. I've learned from you in the past and I expect to learn from you in the future.

I certainly support everyone's right to continue saying the same things over and over. OTOH, you aren't going to convince Genesis, he isn't going to convince you. Everyone else has read the discussion and decided. It's merely a suggestion that your efforts might be better served in other threads.

 

[H2Andy]

I don't know that any threads go anywhere or accomplish anything. It's not a requirement.

Since the thread seems to be interesting people and keeps going, it could be argued that it has more value than the threads that aren't.

Like all the others it'ss die when it's ready.

hey hey HEY!!!

that's not what you were saying about our thread
regarding using Nitrox to simulate deco mode on your dive
computer.

in fact you were downright insensitive to my inner child and hurt my feelings, and now i need serious therapy.

hope you're happy.

 

[MikeFerrara]

Point taken Walter but there's been a number of others posting in the thread. Oh, and I've stolen a few of your ideas also. Keep em comming.

 

[Walter]

"I don't think Mike and I disagree nearly as much as you think we do"

Actually, I don't think you and Pete disagree as much as the two of you think you do.

You both believe in high standards. You both believe people should get trained before attempting things that will kill you without the training. Pete believes you should get that training through established agencies. You believe that is one way to get the training, that you can also get training by reading, talking to those who have experience and by slowly gaining experience yourself. I don't think either of you believe all instructors are qualified to teach everything they have credentials to teach.

 

[Warren_L]

I'm a big fan of Darwin.

The dive operators, in truth, are talking out both sides of their mouths.

By checking credentials and "enforcing" some standard they are stating that such a standard insures safety to one degree or another.

I don't know that this would necessarily mean that they believe this ensures safety. I think anyone would be foolish to believe that it does. Rather, it might perhaps ensure (if anything) at least a base level of knowledge and skill.

 

[Warren_L]

It does not do that either.

Do you really think that an AOW diver with 10 logged dives (lifetime) is "safer and has more knowledge" than an OW diver with 500 logged dives, many deeper than 100', does?

Nobody can make that argument stick with any degree of conviction.

Ok, perhaps not necessarily knowledge then, but presumably to have the AOW card there would have had to have been a base level of training. Retained, perhaps might be another issue.

 

[Warren_L]

Actually, no, it simply means that they have one actual dive to greater than 60' while being chaperoned, they have had one navigation dive while being chaperoned, etc.

(Nav/Night/Deep/S&R/etc)

All an AOW card says is that you had five more chaperoned dives.

Maybe mine was different then. There was a degree of training involved, not just the "chaperoned" dives. But that in itself would be training of sorts (note I am not commenting on the quality of that training as it is impossible to do so using generalities).

This conversation has gotten quite convoluted, so I've forgotten what my original point was. I think it had to do with shifting the responsibility of verifying qualifications to the agencies. If I were a dive operator (which I am not) I would at the very least take this step (if not perhaps other measures as well).