I am threatening nothing, I merely think more of you than the other 2 that is all. At 07:29 PM 4/8/03 -0400, you wrote: >At 07:12 PM 4/8/2003 -0400, you wrote: > > >The problem is he knew that the possibility existed that this wreck was > protected and chose to still remove artifacts first and check the LAW later. > >JT, > >The "law" as you call it also told us for quite some time after those >dives that the Vitric was too deep to be considered inside the >boundary. It was only after we pressed the issue and did additional >research that the "law" agreed with *us* that the Vitric was inside >the protected boundary. > >None of us, Mike Barnette included, knew the wreck was protected. >Even the "law" and the captain of the boat, whose word we counted on, >insisted the Vitric was not protected and continued to so insist for >some time after those dives took place. > >It was due in no small part to Mike Barnette's diligence that the >wreck was finally established to be protected. > > >Now I have answered this as fast I can, if you do not approve your post > I will not this one......Mike R. stay out of this, if I see yours gets > posted I will post this one. > >Geez, JT, you're a piece of work. What exactly are you threatening >here? > > >-Mike Rodriguez ><mikey@mi*.ne*> >http://www.mikey.net/scuba.html >Pn(x) = (1/(2^n)n!)[d/dx]^n(x^2 - 1)^n "You can't learn to dive on the net, sooner or later you have to get in the water" Your Guide to Great Wreck Diving along the East Coast & more Web Site http://www.capt-jt.com/ Email captjt@mi*.co* -- 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]