DORSETBOY:
no sadly I feel you are. I fully respect everyone's right to be for or against solo diving, no prob with that. what i do have a problem with is if someone is qouting figures they have made up, people look on this site, see a set of figures and assume them to be true. If someone is using a set of figures they MUST be prepared to back them up by being able to qoute their source. As a moderator you are meant to be impartial.
Please read what I said about this. I never claimed research numbers. It's an illustration:
"A normal dive for you, and assign the risk a value (1-100 say). There IS risk."
So you ASSIGN a value, arbitrarily between 1-100 (or 1-10,000,000, doesn't matter).
"you've increased the risk by some factor (10%? 20%? 50%? you decide how much riskier)."
YOU decide what your situation and what you think. THIS IS KEY. It's as much riskier as YOU think it is.
"So, your extra precautions DECREASE the risk somewhat. Do they offset the lack of abuddy completely? Or is diving solo your way actually LESS risky than with a buddy (with your extra redundancy, more caution, shallower depth, whatever)?"
Again, your judgement.
"My point is you can't say "SOLO DIVING IS RISKY". ALL Diving is Risky".
The rest is just math.
The point (again) is that saying "Buddy Diving is not Risky" and "Solo Diving is Risky" is just not true. Not IS and ISN'T, but a matter of degree. No one but you can decide what the increased risk is, and whether you are willing to take it or not. For that matter, the increased risk of diving with an unknown buddy is also significant. So you have to decide that too. And what about diving a strange place, even with a known buddy? Caves? Wrecks?
The whole thing is about identifying, and reducing, risk.
=Steve=