Nitrox Class Without Tables or Math...OK?

[MikeFerrara]

So you just ignore them? Way to go!

It isn't a matter of ignoring alarms for some of us...it's a matter of not carrying a devise that beeps in the first place.[/QUOTE]

Let's face it. Below 80 fsw every diver is impaired. You need ALL of the help you can get. Anyone who teaches different has a fundamentally different approach to narsosis than I do. [/QUOTE]

I suppose that in theory every one is impaired as soon as they descend below the surface. In fact when my son was still in school I often wondered if I shouldn't supply him with trimix to breath during tests in the classroom. LOL

Still though, you're not trying to say that n one can do an 80 ft dive safely without a computer and beepers, are you? I think you'd have a hard time supporting a claim like that.

You are close to being farm animal stupid, only you just don't realise it. In that situation, I want EVERY student of mine to be AWARE of every alarm: ascent rate and depth are two important ones to be aware of.

Denial is not just another river in Egypt.

All of us that dive without computers and alarms are farm animal stupid? That's just beyond the pale. Do you really think that a diver needs a beeper to control their depth and ascent rate...or that there aren't other ways to know when it isn't right...or that you can't even have plenty of backup in your process without a computer and beepers? That's silly.

 

[H2Andy]

The clause which was seperated by a colon was an independent clause: it can stand by itself.

nice use of a colon to separate two full sentences (an informal, but often seen use)

here's the clause:


all of which are visible to the diver well before the alarm goes off.

"All" alas, is not a noun but, as used here, an adjective (all the signs are visible;
all the alarms are visible; all the warnings are visible).

since "all" is not a noun, it can't be a subject, and this clause has no subject.

it is therefore a depenent clause

(am i a geek or what?)

 

[The Chairman]

That, and I have them all turned off since I dive in gauge mode...

So the "Check Engine Light" never comes on because you removed the bulb? That's too funny. You have no clue if you have ever violated your PC then. Too funny!

If chosing a proactive response is farm animal stupid, then bring on the pigs.

Turning off alarms is not proactive. It's not even smart. You could have heard those pigs squealing by now if you hadn't cut out their larynx.

 

[Rick Murchison]

And you have NEVER, EVER gotten alarms?

Beats me... the alarms are set at just the frequency that too many years on the flight deck has wiped out. I'm sure my SUUNTO beeps when it's supposed to, and I'd expect it to do so when I go into deco or when I go below 750 psi... but these are planned events and the "alarms" are superflous and useless, even if I could hear 'em.
Rick

 

[Scuba_Steve]

Do I? All I know is what he has written. You are ASSUMING you think you know what he means. I only wish I could get that benefit of the doubt from a few of my critics. Such is life!

You are correct, I am assuming a whole lot because I "cyber-know" both of you.

You're allowing an arguement to purposely cloud your better judgement.

Happens all the time around here BTW.

Get over it and move on to something constructive.

Or do as I occassionally do, call the guy an F'n A-hole, get it deleted, get a PM on it, and THEN I'm over it.

Very quick and effective for me LOL

Right now you're swinging at everybody within arms distance.

Regards

 

[MikeFerrara]

Mike,

please feel free to go back and re-read your own words. They are within this thread.

It appears that you like to criticize but do you feel that you are above criticism?

How can you say that? You criticize me just about anytime I write something that disagrees with anything you say and you use some rather insulting methods to do it too. I don't have time to reread all my posts right now but my offter to further explain anything that I wrote that wasn't clear to you stands. I never said that I can make anyone imune to the effects of narcosis and if you thought something I wrote was saying that, I've since repeated it a couple of times.

It's great that you feel that you are more humble than anyone in this discussion, but not everyone shares this opinion.

Where do you get this bunk? I never said that I was more or less humle than any one else. Aside from that if my having a little different way of applying tables or models than you do leads you to the opinion that I have a humility problem then I guess that's your issue and it concerns me not.'It does seem like a bit of an elitist attitude on your part though and it seems far less than humble to think that if it's different than your way that it's wrong. Perhaps if you gave your own ego a break you'd be better able to read what I write for content in context.

 

[minnesota01r6]

Beats me... the alarms are set at just the frequency that too many years on the flight deck has wiped out. I'm sure my SUUNTO beeps when it's supposed to, and I'd expect it to do so when I go into deco or when I go below 750 psi... but these are planned events and the "alarms" are superflous and useless, even if I could hear 'em.
Rick

If your computer alarms in these situations, I would expect it would flash a warning light, blink, or do some other type of visual warning as well as beep. If you haven't ever seen the warnings, you are not paying attention to your guages. You also might do well to investigate what is causing the alarm and then decide to ignore it or pay attention to it. After all, even experienced divers can make mistakes. Why dive with a computer if you aren't going to pay attention to it?

 

[minnesota01r6]

it seems far less than humble to think that if it's different than your way that it's wrong.

Which brings us back to the topic of the thread. Computers or tables = safe rec nitrox diving.

 

[MikeFerrara]

So the "Check Engine Light" never comes on because you removed the bulb? That's too funny. You have no clue if you have ever violated your PC then. Too funny!

I don't think he was talking about automobiles but if he was the check engin light isn't the best example. Lets use the oil light. My truch doesn't have one. It has a guage. That enables me to see a pressure change that's not good before it gets to the point that an oil light (alarm) would ever come on. Still if I ignore the guage and the pressure gets too low there is no alarm.

the check engine light, however, warns me of things that I can't get a guage to monitor so I have to settle for the light.

I thought you were a mechanic? Shouldn't you know this stuff?

Turning off alarms is not proactive. It's not even smart. You could have heard those pigs squealing by now if you hadn't cut out their larynx.

I think he meant that they'd be singing rather than sqealing.

Still, I'm starting to think that your elitist attitude and lack of humility is falsly leading you to believe that everyone who doesn't do things just like you is stupid. A little more self examination may help you realize that the stupid one may not be who you think it is.

 

[TheRedHead]

nice use of a colon to separate two full sentences (an informal, but often seen use)

It was a favorite of Charles Dickens

here's the clause:


all of which are visible to the diver well before the alarm goes off.

"All" alas, is not a noun but, as used here, an adjective (all the signs are visible;
all the alarms are visible; all the warnings are visible).

since "all" is not a noun, it can't be a subject, and this clause has no subject.

it is therefore a depenent clause

(am i a geek or what?)

What about the implied subject, Andy? His use of "which" was merely a feint common to Elmers. He could have said, "all are visible to the diver well before the alarm goes off," and made a better independent clause. He could have made a good dependent clause with, "which are visible to the diver well before the alarm goes off." Instead he used a manifold clause instead of independents.