Tom, forgetting for a moment the dichotomy of the standards ( 130 for mix, 180 for eanx), why do I need to come to you to dive deep on air? I can do that myself. Another question - why is this being called "technical diving", and since when do the students make the standards. Tom, we have some seriously flawed logic in all of this - you are the boss, you should be setting the pace. Tom Mount wrote: > > gmirvine@sa*.ne* wrote: > > > > > > > > ---Tom Mount <TOM.MOUNT@wo*.at*.ne*> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If this is so safe, then why are a disproportionate number of > > cave divng accidents amoung trained divers below 130 , and why are a > > disproportionate number of ocean diving accidents below 130? > > Most of these are deeper than 180 feet, again see our standards post > > > > > > The concept that there is such a thing as "ability to handle > > impairment" is fundamentallly flawed. Your "standards" need changing, in > > my opinion. - GGeorge, you are entitled to your opnions, and we are to ours > Internationally almost all countries have endorsed 50m, it has a proven > record. We have to fight to get the general population to settle for our > limits. Most divers on the US coast do dive deep and we are slowly > educating them away from 200+ on air. > Again, these are and will remain our standards > Tom -- Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to `techdiver@aquanaut.com'. Send list subscription requests to `techdiver-request@aquanaut.com'.
Navigate by Author:
[Previous]
[Next]
[Author Search Index]
Navigate by Subject:
[Previous]
[Next]
[Subject Search Index]
[Send Reply] [Send Message with New Topic]
[Search Selection] [Mailing List Home] [Home]