Individual Rights, and other Myths

[Thalassamania]

Yes... USF Marine Science has been following the spill from the beginning and reported "an amazing expotential growth of this particular bacteria" They also noted a die off of the bacteria once oil levels subsided post capping.

good article on the subject... referencing Woods Hole group. The USF Marine Science Dept. was featured on newscasts here in the Bay Area..
Oil-eating bacteria have started to clean the Deepwater Horizon spill | Not Exactly Rocket Science | Discover Magazine

In other articles I have read the spill in the Gulf of Campeche had the waters near normal about 18-24 mos after capping of Ixtoc I

As far as "reckless" goes the word can be considered subjective on many levels. I sail solo a lot... was out yesterday in fact in the open Gulf of Mexico. I had to move a boat, my choices were limited to time constraints. I looked at my weather, charts and time and realized I had little choice but to run offshore in crappy weather.. truly crappy weather. My body is beat to heck and back, we took water over the bow the entire trip.. we as in the boat an me. At no time was I in danger of being tossed overboard, at no time was I not in cell/radio range and I made it clear to the boat owner my intentions and my course of action. As I tied of the boat behind HWH electronics where it was going.. the boys there told me I was a lunatic for going offshore and all that.. Factors in my decision were my level of experience, owners trust in me, and his boat. At no time was I reckless nor unsafe nor untethered to something. Reckless is a subjective term methinks.. it falls, sometimes, into one's comfort zone..then again there are those with a desire to win a Darwin Award. Far be it for me to disuade them from thier goal.. but I won't be anywhere near them when they do.. again ymmv

You seem to miss the summary statement in the paper, “The long-term ecological implications… remain uncertain and I don’t think anyone could rightly argue that dumping 4.1 million barrels of oil into the Gulf of Mexico was ecologically beneficial.”

 

[Magnolia3]

You seem to miss the summary statement in the paper, “The long-term ecological implications… remain uncertain and I don’t think anyone could rightly argue that dumping 4.1 million barrels of oil into the Gulf of Mexico was ecologically beneficial.”

Nope not at all..having spend a large portion of my life around academians..that is the standard disclaimer to keep themselves from having finites come back and bite them on the buttocks. We have however, had 30 + yrs to study the effects of the oil spill in the Gulf of Campeche caused by 360 days of free flowing oil from Ixtoc I before it was capped. Similar ecosystem, similar type of crude, similar disaster scenario. It mystifies me to this day why the news broadcasters kept trying to compare the exxon valdex and deepwater horizon. different animals all together..
I am only thankful that weather and currents being what they were at that time, we didn't end up with that stuff on the SW Fla and Keys beaches and ecosystems. Diving would have been messed up for a long time.

 

[DCBC]

As Bob correctly says, I didn't mention deep air in the OP. But some eminent people in those threads were quoted as saying things like "Well, I certainly would never argue with anyone's right to dive however they want, but ..." and then they would go on to warn against recklessness.

And those statements got me to thinking. The first thought was, do we really "have the right"? Yes, of course we are free to do it, we are able to do it, nobody is preventing us from doing it, but the word "right" has some important meanings.

And the second thought was, should a mentor say "you can do it because you have the right" or should he say "You can do it but you have a responsibility". It seems to me that the first statement establishes an ethic of entitlement, while the latter establishes an ethic of accountability.

Mike, you and I have a good idea why this thread was started and who the "eminent people" are to which you refer. Bob may be oblivious to the situation, but it's very clear to me. It would have been preferable for you to make your opinions known on the original thread before starting another one. Doing it the way you did allows for misunderstanding of what had actually been said and it failed to address the original issues under discussion.

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

Mike, you and I have a good idea why this thread was started and who the "eminent people" are to which you refer. Bob may be oblivious to the situation, but it's very clear to me. It would have been preferable for you to make your opinions known on the original thread before starting another one. Doing it the way you did allows for misunderstanding of what had actually been said and it failed to address the original issues under discussion.

... or perhaps he just thought a broader discussion would be more useful to the general readership. I can only go by what was created in the OP ... and there was no mention of anything specific like deep air there. Frankly, that subject's been beaten to death lately ... gotta be no fewer than a half-dozen threads created in various forums discussing it. I see this topic more about attitude than about a specific style of diving ...

If that makes me oblivious ... well it wouldn't be the first time someone's accused me of that ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[DaleC]

As Bob correctly says, I didn't mention deep air in the OP. But some eminent people in those threads were quoted as saying things like "Well, I certainly would never argue with anyone's right to dive however they want, but ..." and then they would go on to warn against recklessness. And those statements got me to thinking. The first thought was, do we really "have the right"? Yes, of course we are free to do it, we are able to do it, nobody is preventing us from doing it, but the word "right" has some important meanings. And the second thought was, should a mentor say "you can do it because you have the right" or should he say "You can do it but you have a responsibility". It seems to me that the first statement establishes an ethic of entitlement, while the latter establishes an ethic of accountability.

I think you would be pretty hard pressed to find a mentor who said "you can do it because you have the right" but I am sure you could find some isolated incident and then use it to try and paint a larger group as irresponsible, which is what has been going on in some of these other threads. I could name that individual and everybody would immediately acknowledge how his name has been used as a link (guilt by association) to denigrate the whole notion of non agency approved diving practices... but I won't.

That some people are hesitant to argue against limiting someone else's rights probably reflects the value that some people place on the preservation of "rights" and not their agreement with irresponsible behavior. The hard truth is that democracy is often times more messy and inconvenient than totalitarianism. Very few [-]dictators[/-] agencies have ever been able erode the right to personal expression by claiming a lust for power as their motivation - it has always been either to advance the cause of [-]the state[/-] diving or to protect the safety of [-]the citizenry[/-] divers.

 

[Mike Boswell]

Mike, you and I have a good idea why this thread was started and who the "eminent people" are to which you refer. Bob may be oblivious to the situation, but it's very clear to me. It would have been preferable for you to make your opinions known on the original thread before starting another one. Doing it the way you did allows for misunderstanding of what had actually been said and it failed to address the original issues under discussion.

Wayne - You are correct, but I don't have a position on deep air or any other risky practice. It's fine with me if people want to do these things, and if asked, my message to them is "You have a responsibility to consider the consequences of your actions, so that you don't hurt other people."

As to SB threads, I try not to discuss deep air, etc. in cyberspace because an impressionable diver somewhere might try it and get killed.

... or perhaps he just thought a broader discussion would be more useful to the general readership. I can only go by what was created in the OP ... and there was no mention of anything specific like deep air there. Frankly, that subject's been beaten to death lately ... gotta be no fewer than a half-dozen threads created in various forums discussing it. I see this topic more about attitude than about a specific style of diving ...

If that makes me oblivious ... well it wouldn't be the first time someone's accused me of that ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

Bob - Yes, I was aiming for a broader discussion, one that applies more generally, and one that tries to address some of the underlying conflicts over subjects like that on SB.

 

[Mike Boswell]

I think you would be pretty hard pressed to find a mentor who said "you can do it because you have the right" but I am sure you could find some isolated incident and then use it to try and paint a larger group as irresponsible, which is what has been going on in some of these other threads. I could name that individual and everybody would immediately acknowledge how his name has been used as a link (guilt by association) to denigrate the whole notion of non agency approved diving practices... but I won't.

That some people are hesitant to argue against limiting someone else's rights probably reflects the value that some people place on the preservation of "rights" and not their agreement with irresponsible behavior. The hard truth is that democracy is often times more messy and inconvenient than totalitarianism. Very few [-]dictators[/-] agencies have ever been able erode the right to personal expression by claiming a lust for power as their motivation - it has always been either to advance the cause of [-]the state[/-] diving or to protect the safety of [-]the citizenry[/-] divers.

DaleC - I am wondering if you have been criticised for your own diving preferences, such as your double-hose regulator, and think this thread has something to do with them? I assure you it does not.

 

[DaleC]

No, not really. I have had the quite pleasant experience of being well liked and accepted (for the most part) by my real life peers - I consider this probably my greatest accomplishment as a recreational diver considering some of the things I do and use.

On the board I do find there is an element that repetitively tries to force all diving discussion into agency approved boxes; and yet another element that tries to force even those discussions into one or two agency only boxes. While I respect a lot of what those boxes offer I don't believe that all of diving fits into them. Until Pete says differently I assume this board is big enough for the whole of diving to be expressed in discussion. What you may not have realized is how much of an issue "agency vs individual" is on the board for some and how your wording in the OP could be perceived as fuel for the fire by others.

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

I don't think it's an agency issue so much as one of "best management practices" ... a topic that encompasses pretty much what all the agencies teach and why they teach it. Perhaps it's due to my work for a public utility that exposes its workers to hazardous conditions every day ... and the importance of best management practices to help keep them from injury or death ... but I see some basic safety practices as transcendent to agency or certification level ... something we all have (or should have) in common. It's what I think of when I use the term "responsible" in the context of diving.

However we dive, we all need to breathe ... we all need to have the ability to reach the surface ... we all have an obligation to not endanger or impose costs on those we dive with. In any diving endeavor, there are fundamental expectations we have ... or should have ... of each other. The scope of those expectations still leaves vast amounts of room for choices in how we dive, the equipment we use, or the manner in which we choose to use it. But we are ... or should be ... willing to dive within the limits of those expectations ... because what we do ultimately can have an impact on others. In a society, we live by rules for exactly that reason. Diving ... even if we choose to dive independent of others ... has similar effects.

In cave diving there are many different philosophies, approaches, agencies, and attitudes. Common among them, however, is a structure of basic rules that all divers are expected to follow. Granted, some divers do not ... but you will find very few of their peers ... regardless of how they were trained or dive ... who will agree that what they are doing is responsible.

I think the same applies ... although in a different context ... to recreational diving ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[DaleC]

Bob, I wish our discussions could be about best practices, as they apply to the topics but too often the topics get hijacked by those who want to dismiss it in favor of their own interpretation of best practices. Deep air being an excellent example.
A discussion cannot occur here without the usual suspects jumping to derail the thread, even though there are some who discuss the topic quite intelligently. Again, as I said in post #295, never with the expressed motivation of tyranny but always with the excuse of advancing diving and diver safety.
Another example, because I often participate in them, are threads about using independent doubles. A discussion cannot go long before someone says one should instead dive an isolation manifold or side mount.
And yet another example is the current debate about formal education vs mentoring.
Lastly, in a recent discussion someone even suggested it would be nice to have solo diving in the advanced forum because then all discussion would have to conform to agency approved doctrine (I paraphrase because I need to go to work). Their interpretation of safe practices.

So, I agree that discussion should try to envelop best practices but I think that those best practices should apply to the subject at hand.