No, Garret, I am sick and tired of dive intructors liek you ruining this
sport with your mindless crap. Period.

Garrett Weinberg wrote:
> 
> George:
> 
> My day is made when I am the subject/recipient of a George Irvine "take no
> prisoners" e-mail.
> 
> Only one tiny minor little problem. The subject of my e-mail had nothing to
> do with technical diving - it had to do with the "helium requirement" that
> Dan Volker wants to impose on recreational divers.
> 
> Do you remember those types of divers? They don't care at all about
> technical divers. They don't care about mix, they don't care about deco,
> they just want to put on a single tank and go diving and have fun. No dive
> plan, just pure enjoyment.
> 
> That's what I was talking about. Nothing to do with technical diving.
> Nothing to do with technical training. Nothing to do with using hot mixes.
> Nothing to do with decompression.
> 
> So ... as usual,  your e-mail had nothing to do with the subject. It was
> just another way of getting your point across independent of the subject at
> hand. Just another way of telling the world how good and smart you are.
> 
> Typical technical e-mail thread:
> 
> (1)  Sender:  It is a lovely day for diving
> 
> (2) G Irvine Response:You dive shop primate. What the hell do you know about
> lovely days. When you've gone as deep and as long as we have, only we can
> talk about lovely days. Try being part of the solution. We have our own
> training agency and our platform. So we can do everything right without
> regard for the Planet of the Apes mentality that has held diving hostage for
> the last five years. There is now a real alternative out there - we
> represent that in every way. "Do it right" or don't do it at all. Only we
> can tell if its a lovely day for diving .
> 
> Suggestion:
> 
> Why bother responding to e-mails. The chinese menu approach would work just
> as well. Have a series of paragraphs already created and have your computer
> determine - on a random basis - which paragraphs to include in "today's
> flame mail"
> 
> Have a good day George.
> 
> I'm going diving
> 
> P.S. Check your e-mail program. It seems to be generating "To" addresses
> that have nothing to do with the sender.
> 
> Katherine V. Irvine wrote:
> 
> > Garret, John, et al - this is too important a topic for me to waste
> > time dwelling on the fact that you dive shop primates remind me of the
> > movie "Planet of the Apes" when it comes to discussions of tech diving.
> >
> >   The real subject here is the identification and minimization of risk
> > in a dive plan. You two need to try learning that before you spout out
> > all of the situations where the 50 million flies argument appears to be
> > true. You two may enjoy a good  meal of feces like so many flies, but
> > the rest of us prefer the filet - learn to find the filet, and skip the
> > shit.
> >
> >   First, there is no dive situation where taking on the risk of oxygen
> > toxicity  either in the form of a seizure or in the form of lung damage
> > justifies using a hot mix. There is no dive situation where assuming the
> > risks associated with using a narcotic mix make any sense at all.
> >
> >   Second, there is no benefit to using a hot mix, and there is no
> > situation where the math of mix allows this. For instance, on a short
> > dive , the perceived shortening of deco is in no way worth the risks of
> > the hot mix, and in a situation where the depth can vary greatly below
> > the planned mix, this is an invitation to disaster. If you can minimize
> > this risk , then do so. If the dive were longer, then you really can not
> > use a hot mix as the accumulated lung damage and cumulative effect of
> > the high ppo2 for tox purposes prohibits this in any coherent dive plan.
> >
> >   Teaching situations should never include extreme exposures as they
> > become unmanageable for obvious reasons. Open ocean exposures should be
> > managed by splitting them into multiple dives, not one long dive for
> > obvious logistic and risk management reasons. Dive where the skill of
> > the players is in question should not be provocative at all, and they
> > should be screened for gear that functions effectively in an emergency (
> > in other words, no built in weight systems, or other crap).
> >
> >   Decompression has been labeled the big boogie man in most diving
> > circles - not the real risk. Lean deco and learn physiology, screen out
> > the obvious , manage the rest of the risk. Option Number One says,
> > "Don't Dive", and ONO should be used when there is any doubt as to the
> > outcome. ONO has a 100% track record of no bends, do accidents, no
> > death: learn when to apply it.
> >
> >   We all have now learned that helium is the preferred diving gas, as it
> > is not only non-narcotic, it is easier to breath and easier to
> > decompress from. Many of my team divers , like Jarrod Jablonski and
> > Brent Scarabin, true real life tough guys, use helium in all of their
> > deco gases other than the 100% oxygen, and there they break to
> > helium-based gases. I use helium up to 120 feet at deco, and below 60
> > feet for diving ( when decompressing at those depths I obviosuly have a
> > helium-based gas on my back).
> >
> >   People who are into diving are into learning about diving. Creating
> > bullshit myths and phonie phobias is counterproductive. NOAA is largely
> > resposible for the farm animal stupidity in nitrox information, and the
> > training agencies are responsible for the rest. The fact is that
> > identification of the true risks requires real knowledge and real
> > experience - citing examples of other people's long term ignorance is
> > not the answer, finding out the truth is. Give it a try.
> >
> >   What we are saying in response to Capt Jim is very simple : "tech"
> > means doing it right , whatever the situation, not making it more
> > complex, convoluted, or risky. Diving is a lot more fun when everyone
> > comes back. Given where I come back from every time, one would think
> > maybe some of you dive instructors would take notice and stop trying to
> > make a fun sport into a bungee jumping subsitute.
> >
> >    Try being part of the solution , rather than backing into a corner
> > with your bullshit agency standards and recommendations . Luckily , we
> > have our own training agency, Global Underwater Esxplorers, and our own
> > platform , The Woodville Karst Plain Project, so we can do everything
> > right without regard for the Planet of the Apes that has held diving
> > hostage for the last five years. Things are changing fast, and there is
> > now a real alternative out there - we represent that in every way.
> >
> >    "Do It Right", or don't do it at all.

--
Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to `techdiver@aquanaut.com'.
Send subscribe/unsubscribe 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]