TSandM: Missing Diver in Clallam County, WA

[Ken Kurtis]

FOR ALL THE SPECULATORS:

Here's a novel concept: Instead of pulling wild theories out of your butts and then vigorously defending these not-supported-by-any-known-facts statements, especially in light of the fact that Lynne's husband has stated that at least one of these has upset him greatly and he's trying to be respectful of the others, maybe everyone take a step back, share stories of Lynne, grieve publicly or privately, offer support to Peter, understand that sometimes "we don't know" is the best we're going to be able to do, and stop trying to be the Sherlock Holmes of dive accident investigation shouting "Eurkea!!!" (And yes, I know that was Socrates but I'm mixing metaphors to make a point.)

- Ken

 

[BDSC]

FOR ALL THE SPECULATORS:

Here's a novel concept: Instead of pulling wild theories out of your butts and then vigorously defending these not-supported-by-any-known-facts statements, especially in light of the fact that Lynne's husband has stated that at least one of these has upset him greatly and he's trying to be respectful of the others, maybe everyone take a step back, share stories of Lynne, grieve publicly or privately, offer support to Peter, understand that sometimes "we don't know" is the best we're going to be able to do, and stop trying to be the Sherlock Holmes of dive accident investigation shouting "Eurkea!!!" (And yes, I know that was Socrates but I'm mixing metaphors to make a point.)

- Ken

I have always been under the impression that this very forum was to talk about, discuss, and even speculate what may have caused an accident or diving tragedy. That's how we learn. It's incredibly sad that we are talking about a fellow SB member but it doesn't change what this forum is for.

 

[EFX]

Speculation is all well and good ... if it leads to some useable takeaway lessons that can help someone else avoid such an incident.

That said, I'm going to take exception to the bolded statement above ... you have no way of knowing what occurred, and therefore no legitimate way of making that claim. Furthermore, some of your premises are wrong ... and I'll base that on my knowledge as someone who spent lots of time diving with her. I think I know both her skills and mindset way better than you do. Lynne had no obsession with horizontal trim. She had superb control of both her position and her buoyancy state ... I've watched her, literally, dance underwater. Furthermore, several of the stressors you list were unlikely in her case ... this wasn't her first rodeo riding out an unexpected current ... down or otherwise ... and she'd be thinking and acting every second of the way. Lynne was practiced to the point that she'd be doing so almost on automatic pilot, while using her mental bandwidth to be responding to questions such as "where's my buddy", "what's my depth", "which way are my bubbles going", and knowing Lynne probably a few questions I wouldn't even think to ask in such a circumstance (and I've faced a few of those rides too ... they're not particularly uncommon where we dive).

I don't know what happened. I'm the one who brought up the vertigo, because it's something I've seen her experience before ... although it's not a given that it happened in this particular circumstance. ...Bob (Grateful Diver)

Well, thank you Bob. I wish you would take your own advice and not speculate. You know Lynne so well you even know what she was (or wasn't) thinking on this dive although you weren't there. You also confuse the reception of stressors which can't be controlled with as you say "practiced" skills. Having the skills to deal effectively with stressors doesn't prevent them from occuring but reduces their impact and leads to their elimination (assuming the correct action is taken).

We all would like to understand how something like this could happen to such a skilled, conscientious diver ... but let's please not let our imaginations run wild and ascribe to her traits she didn't have or motives that live only on the internet. That will help no one ...

Yes, we shouldn't ascribe to her traits she may have or not have as you have done above on that fateful dive..... that is speculation. The fact she was observed with those traits only supports the fact (which I wholeheartly agree) that she was an experienced highly skilled diver ON THOSE DIVES YOU OBSERVED HER.

 

[Basking Ridge Diver]

Or just pull this section down - I can not recall the last time an Accidents and Incidents topic was valuable without a survivor to tell part of the story.

I used to disagree with the be nice, courteous and respectful aspect of this section - this is Scubaboard - Dang it... However this incident has made me pause and wonder what the real benefit of this section truly is... When we don't personally know the person(s) involved it may feel like this is a closed discussion but apparently it is not and never will be.

Perhaps now is the time to shutter this section. Just musing...

 

[Nuribromanski]

maybe everyone take a step back, share stories of Lynne, grieve publicly or privately, offer support to Peter, understand that sometimes "we don't know" is the best we're going to be able to do, and stop trying to be the Sherlock Holmes of dive accident investigation shouting "Eurkea!!!"

There is a thread for that over here. http://www.scubaboard.com/forums/passings/513219-tsandm-lynne-flaherty.html

 

[Jack Hammer]

Caused what? Her eventual demise? No, and I said that. It was a contributor. Her horizontal trim caused her to descend faster and deeper than if she were vertical.

You are barking up the wrong tree... Read the first hand account of the dive... she was vertical not horizontal.

Secondly, changing trim takes about a second, not long enough to be that big of an issue...

Got to love the internet[emoji2]

Sent via

---------- Post added September 1st, 2015 at 03:43 PM ----------

FOR ALL THE SPECULATORS:

Here's a novel concept: Instead of pulling wild theories out of your butts and then vigorously defending these not-supported-by-any-known-facts statements, especially in light of the fact that Lynne's husband has stated that at least one of these has upset him greatly and he's trying to be respectful of the others, maybe everyone take a step back, share stories of Lynne, grieve publicly or privately, offer support to Peter, understand that sometimes "we don't know" is the best we're going to be able to do, and stop trying to be the Sherlock Holmes of dive accident investigation shouting "Eurkea!!!" (And yes, I know that was Socrates but I'm mixing metaphors to make a point.)

- Ken

Dont know how to break it to you Ken...

This is the A&I forum[emoji6]

Sent via

 

[wetb4igetinthewater]

I think that people need to keep in perspective is this is Lynn Flaherty. Most deaths that are discussed here on A&I are people who while loved by their family and friends, are essentially faceless to scubaboard members. But not Lynn. She was truly an exceptional person in many aspects of life. She touched many lives over the years. And she was deeply loved. She is not just a loss to her husband and friends, but to the scuba community like nothing else I've ever seen. She really cared about people and she went out of her way to help others.

So while Peter was quite clear that in the event of her death in a diving accident, Lynn would want the truth to be shared so that lessons could be taken for the benefit of everyone else.

But that does not give people carte blanche to make up wild assumptions. Peter was with her. No one else. Please show respect to Lynn and all those who loved her and don't speculate. Stick to facts.

Thank you.

 

[Adobo]

I have always been under the impression that this very forum was to talk about, discuss, and even speculate what may have caused an accident or diving tragedy. That's how we learn. It's incredibly sad that we are talking about a fellow SB member but it doesn't change what this forum is for.

There has been plenty of speculation as to the cause. In fact, for as long as Lynne has not been recovered, all anybody can do is speculate.

No one has complained about the speculation, for as long as the speculation was grounded in facts and at least somewhat plausible. However, in this case, the poster suggests that Lynne's pursuit of perfect trim trumped her safety. Essentially, error in judgement. At least, that is how it came across to me. And the suggestion is based on getting not one but two facts wrong - that 1) GUE divers will assume horizontal trim irrespective of conditions and that 2) Lynne was horizontal throughout the dive, even through the down and up drafts.

Speculation is all fine and good. But if someone is going to call into question the victim's judgement, they should at least try to have their facts straight.

 

[Ken Kurtis]

I have always been under the impression that this very forum was to talk about, discuss, and even speculate what may have caused an accident or diving tragedy. That's how we learn.

I don't disagree with that. However, and it's certainly only a couple of folks posting here, when that specualtion is challenged and then the OS (Original Speculator) comes back and defends it and then it morphs into a certainty that this is what happened, that's where I think it becomes harmful or at least useless. Speculate away, clearly label it as such, let others challenge the premise, but when people post that they're certain that their specualtion represents the Real Story, I think it's lost any value as a learning tool. (But I'm just speculating.)



- Ken

 

[gypsyjim]

The fact that these A&I threads always seem to pull in a couple and , and even an a occasional or 2, does not mean we need to stoop to their level, or that there is no value to these dialogs.

Reading posts from those who knew the diver, those that have dived with that diver, and those who are familiar with the site, or the circumstances can offer some insight, and possible causes, as well as helpful safety information for their fellow divers.

That others can posts useless speculation, or wild a$$ed guesses, pulled from their,.... well, from thin air, does not negate the value of the truly useful observer.