Deep stops in your Suunto ?

[EFX]

As beaten to death on RBW and elsewhere,there is no credible evidence to suggest any deep stop is safer ....

Yes, there is credible evidence. Dr. Richard Pyle, an ichthyologist, incorporating deep stops in some of his dive profiles, provided empirical evidence to VPM put forth by David Yount, an early theorist of "bubble" models.

Extrapolating backwards from those studies isn't as accurate as empirically testing every decompression model on divers for quantifiable incidence of DCS but it's what we got available.

I don't know the context of this but usually the problem is extrapolating forward from incomplete or poorly understood theories. There isn't a need to extrapolate backwards as new evidence either bolsters or leads to modifications of the current theory.

It is after all Decompression Theory and not Decompression Science.

boulderjohn, take note. The above quote captures the idea which formed the basis of my argument regarding general ideas regarding science and why some readers reject, either dogmatically or skeptically, deep stops. As mentioned in earlier posts the conclusion is to add deep stops where none are called for to erroniously add safety, or to ignore them and their effectiveness in NDL dives when they are called for.

Theory, as defined by scientists is not opposed to science but is in every way part of it. For reasoned arguments, although in a different sphere, see talkorigins.org.

 

[boulderjohn]

Yes, there is credible evidence. Dr. Richard Pyle, an ichthyologist, incorporating deep stops in some of his dive profiles, provided empirical evidence to VPM put forth by David Yount, an early theorist of "bubble" models.

Pyle's work was done more than 20 years ago. A lot has happened since them, and he himself has repudiated some of his earlier thoughts. There has been a lot of research done in the last 2-3 years that you should look into.

boulderjohn, take note. The above quote captures the idea which formed the basis of my argument regarding general ideas regarding science and why some readers reject, either dogmatically or skeptically, deep stops. As mentioned in earlier posts the conclusion is to add deep stops where none are called for to erroniously add safety, or to ignore them and their effectiveness in NDL dives when they are called for.

Theory, as defined by scientists is not opposed to science but is in every way part of it. For reasoned arguments, although in a different sphere, see talkorigins.org.

I wrote a guideline on teaching science and science education. I know what the word theory means when it is used in scientific circles. That is not what we are talking about here. The concept of deep stops in diving does not constitute an accepted scientific theory. You are misapplying the term.

Because you have stepped into these current debates a little on the late side and have not taken the time to catch up, I'm afraid you don't realize how out of touch some of what you are saying is coming across. There have been several threads on deep stops that I think you might want to look into to catch up on things before you continue the discussion.

---------- Post added December 29th, 2014 at 10:00 PM ----------

Here are a couple current threads to check out:

http://www.scubaboard.com/forums/technical-diving-specialties/497187-deep-stops-increases-dcs.html
http://www.scubaboard.com/forums/technical-diving-specialties/496043-people-backing-away-vpm.html