PADI vs NAUI

[endurodog]

Brendon I went back through your last several post and can find no questions with the exception of "then to waste others time trying to prove a point you have no real knowledge of. Why? You bring little to the table," and you answer it for yourself so it really wasn't a question just a slam that I bring nothing to the table. Nice

 

[Brendon]

To say that all men are created equal is true, however they do not stay equal. There will always be a Totem pole, a Chain, or Pyramid and you will always have a place in it, above or below the next guy. Who decides you say, not I. No I only illustrated what has already been written. This is where I get of this train, as to not follow it down the rabbit hole you wish to dig. I must relocate myself to a thread were I dont have to be concerned with hurting someones feelings. Although this would work to I will just use this ignore button.

 

[daniel1948]

... I have a major problem with the word "safe" as in "diving is a safe activity." Safe means, "without risk." ...

With all due respect, and I do respect your knowledge and experience highly, "safe" does not mean "without risk." "Safe" is a relative term and has meaning only as it relates to some implicit or explicit comparison. I am highly skeptical of your claim that car racing is safer than diving, though with the proviso that there are many different kinds of diving. Reading Alert Diver, I come away with the distinct belief that tech diving poses far greater risks than recreational diving.

Nothing meets your definition of "safe" since nothing is absolutely without risk. A plane could crash into my house while I stay home because I don't feel I could pass the kind of diving course that was once described to me as the NAUI course of yore.

I wholeheartedly agree that more training, by a competent instructor, is always better, and will reduce risk. I am probably far less competent than most of the members of ScubaBoard. But knowing this, and given my interests, I limit myself to moderate depths, in warm, clear, relatively calm water.

I have never observed another training class than my own. Based on what I've read here, some instructors are overly lax. My instructor only taught me the PADI curriculum as far as I know, but he was patient, and took all the time I needed to learn and demonstrate the skills, and when I had trouble with any, he had me do them over until I got them.

I believe that the most dangerous part of any of my diving trips is driving to and from the airport. Compared to that risk, I believe my training, combined with the quality of my equipment (middle-range modern gear) makes the kind of diving I do quite safe.

I respect the underwater environment and its risks, and I dive within my limits. But if (as I suspect) I'm 100 times more likely to die driving to the airport than in the water, I'm comfortable continuing to dive at my level of training. Though if it were practical, I'd love to take a course with you to further improve my skills. More skill is always a good thing. (Though I'd still limit my diving to moderate depths in clear, warm, calm water, because that's what I enjoy.)

 

[The Chairman]

I agree with Eurodog a lot. Training should be simple and fun. Training a person to have good buoyancy and trim is not hard to do if you set the proper example from the onset. In fact, it makes the rest of the class far more fun and shortens it to boot.

Could you imagine a ski class without a bunny slope? How about a beginner's computer class where you are expected to write code before they allow you to surf the internet? Most things in life get better with experience and Scuba is no exception. Teach the basics, make sure they know that they only have a "learner's permit" and let them pursue the sport to their comfort level. No need to be a trimix diver before you get your cert card. I don't see any evidence that diving has gotten worse over the years. In fact, watching the dive scene from Jaws II (1978) was incredibly enlightening. They had roto-tillers back then too! :O Are there differences in training agencies? Yes, but most of them are political in nature and have little to do with the skills they teach.

 

[Blackwood]

To say that all men are created equal is true,

Nonsense.

 

[endurodog]

Guys I really think this thread has a lot of good info from both sides as long as it can be kept civil. Some have and some have not. I'm a big boy and my feelings don't get hurt by people on the net so no worries there. To all of those that contributed positve meaningful stuff. Thanks, Thal thanks for your input. If any one has some legit questions about my positions I would be more than happy to discuss them and answer any legit question.

Good diving to you all!!!!

 

[Thalassamania]

With all due respect, and I do respect your knowledge and experience highly, "safe" does not mean "without risk." "Safe" is a relative term and has meaning only as it relates to some implicit or explicit comparison.

If you want to write your own dictionary, go right ahead, PADI did so, so why not you? If you want to communicate with the rest of the English speaking world, pay some attention:
safe (sf)
adj. saf·er, saf·est
1. Secure from danger, harm, or evil.
2. Free from danger or injury; unhurt: safe and sound.
3. Free from risk; sure: a safe bet.
4. Affording protection: a safe place.
5. Baseball Having reached a base without being put out, as a batter or base runner.

I am highly skeptical of your claim that car racing is safer than diving, though with the proviso that there are many different kinds of diving. Reading Alert Diver, I come away with the distinct belief that tech diving poses far greater risks than recreational diving.

In terms of numbers of fatalities, car racing appears to have less risk than all sorts of recreational (including tech combined in) diving. Be as skeptical as you wish, those are the facts. You may question my conclusions, you may question my opinions, you may not (without expressed reason and documentation) question my data ... that is akin to calling me a liar.

Nothing meets your definition of "safe" since nothing is absolutely without risk. A plane could crash into my house while I stay home because I don't feel I could pass the kind of diving course that was once described to me as the NAUI course of yore.

That is true. there is no such thing as safe, according to every dictionary definition that I have ever read.

I wholeheartedly agree that more training, by a competent instructor, is always better, and will reduce risk. I am probably far less competent than most of the members of ScubaBoard. But knowing this, and given my interests, I limit myself to moderate depths, in warm, clear, relatively calm water.

Most people are killed by the top few meters of water, not by the great depths.

I have never observed another training class than my own. Based on what I've read here, some instructors are overly lax. My instructor only taught me the PADI curriculum as far as I know, but he was patient, and took all the time I needed to learn and demonstrate the skills, and when I had trouble with any, he had me do them over until I got them.

Then, in my opinion, you received training (even if you got all down cold) that left you with significantly more risk that students who received more complete training.

I believe that the most dangerous part of any of my diving trips is driving to and from the airport. Compared to that risk, I believe my training, combined with the quality of my equipment (middle-range modern gear) makes the kind of diving I do quite safe.

There's that "safe" word again.

I respect the underwater environment and its risks, and I dive within my limits. But if (as I suspect) I'm 100 times more likely to die driving to the airport than in the water, I'm comfortable continuing to dive at my level of training. Though if it were practical, I'd love to take a course with you to further improve my skills. More skill is always a good thing. (Though I'd still limit my diving to moderate depths in clear, warm, calm water, because that's what I enjoy.)

Indeed, you stand about a slightly better than 1 in 100 chance of being injured in a car accident in the next year and about a 1 in 10,000 chance of being injured diving; so your factor of 100 is about right. But you've learned to live with the traffic risks and you know that you can cut those odds by more than a quarter by wearing seat belts, etc. I suggest that with respect to diving many people undergoing the risk don't know that seat belts exist, so-to-speak; or what possible use they might be.

 

[The Chairman]

But you've learned to live with the traffic risks and you know that you can cut those odds by more than a quarter by wearing seat belts, etc. I suggest that with respect to diving many people undergoing the risk don't know that seat belts exist, so-to-speak; or what possible use they might be.

You want us to wear SEAT BELTS while diving? Does my crotch strap count? For the most part, safety in diving is not a gear or training issue: it's attitude. Not that gear and training don't factor in, but they are both negated by attitude. Of course you could have us looking like this OSHA Cowboy:

Or this "safe" bike rider...

Even with cars, its my belief that attitude is far more important than the seat belt. All agencies have methodologies to bar divers with bad attitudes from getting certified. It's up to the instructor to utilize them.

 

[daniel1948]

... You may question my conclusions, you may question my opinions, you may not (without expressed reason and documentation) question my data ... that is akin to calling me a liar.

There is a BIG difference between disagreeing with your analysis of data, and calling you a liar. I am not calling you a liar. I consider you an honest and honorable person. But I disagree with your characterization of the relative safety of various activities. For example, far more people engage in recreational diving than engage in race-car driving.

Really, our positions are not that far apart: I agree with you that more training is better. And if I read your post correctly, you agree with me that I'm about 100 times more likely to be killed in a car crash than diving.

Where I disagree is that (again if I'm reading you correctly) you seem to be saying that without a 100-hour instruction program, I should not be diving. I agree with NetDoc that given the quality of today's gear, a proper attitude contributes more to safety than additional training, and that with a proper attitude and the kind of diving I do, a dive vacation is as safe as staying home, or as near as makes insignificant difference.

The question for me is not whether more training is better. That goes without saying. Of course it is. The question for me is whether I should quit diving, since I don't have opportunity for the level of training you advocate. And the answer to that, for me, is no. Because diving is roughly as safe as staying home, and a lot more fun.

 

[The Chairman]

The question for me is not whether more training is better. That goes without saying. Of course it is. The question for me is whether I should quit diving, since I don't have opportunity for the level of training you advocate. And the answer to that, for me, is no. Because diving is roughly as safe as staying home, and a lot more fun.

Very well put. No one is against training... heck I'm an instructor. Every diver must make the decision to dive or not based on their experience and training. Elevating the bar so high that we stop people from even trying to dive does not seem like a good solution to me. Diving should be available to the masses and not just an elite few. What some call "dumbing down" I see as normal evolution. The more we teach diving, the more efficient we can make it. Or, we can succumb to unsupported fears and push dive instruction out of reach of mere mortals.

Diving isn't difficult. If it is, you're doing something wrong. Diving instruction should not be difficult either. It should be as fun as diving itself. These, are of course, my opinions. If you don't want a fun instructor, then don't choose me.