The Philosophy of Diver Training

[JeffG]

It's a fine point, but he never calls him a liar. However, I can see how it could be inferred by his use of the word "lie" in reference to DCBC's claims. I avoid the word since it can cause such ill feelings and can often be mistakenly inferred in such a manner. There are better ways to label something as "false".

replace the word lie with opinion...he would be good to go

 

[DCBC]

This is a misrepresentation, as I don't believe that Rob has called you, or anyone else, a liar. Please quote him to prove your statement true.

That has already been done.

...you have a DISTORTED view of reality and don't want to be disturbed by mere facts that render your POV as such.

You say that I have a distorted view of reality, although you have no way of knowing what that reality is.

• Fact: PADI does not allow buddy breathing as a tested skill.
• Conclusion: PADI is all about reducing skills.
• Inference: PADI is all about reducing skills to make more money and to sell more regulators, even if it causes more diver deaths.

While the actual fact is not bashing, the conclusion is and the following inference you would have us believe is even more so.

The conclusion is not. I have related (in a post that you have "under review") what I was told. In my opinion a less prepared diver heightens the rate of diver risk, but that is my own opinion.

Again, if he called you a "liar", I must have missed it.

Yes it would appear so, wouldn't it.

Now, misrepresenting Rob by insisting that he is calling you a liar when he has not, violates a number of principles on which we base a courteous and engaging discussion.

Now you are accusing me of misrepresentation when that's clearly not the case! Why am I not surprised by this statement? You often say things that you don't know about and twist things to suit yourself.

 

[The Chairman]

Regardless of what NetDoc may elude to, instructors with an agency (other than PADI) do teach their own way.

There are no allusions or illusions here, although it seems that the point eludes you: PADI, as well as all of the other agencies, regulate HOW we must teach our students. Neither NAUI nor SDI allow me to turn off a student's air at any time. They don't allow me to let my students buddy breathe and ascend. Heck, they don't even allow me to conduct OW training in a cavern or cave environment. What's up with that? Those are simply out of the scope of OW classes and rightfully so! Most of these "rules" have arisen out of student deaths and injuries which have caused all agencies to prescribe what and what not may be taught. At issue here, is an instructor who feels the need to teach in what his agency considers an unsafe manner. Hence the censure by PADI. DCBC can put all the spin on it he wants, but that's the bottom line.

Here are some other silly restrictions put on me by the respective agencies:

I can have only 8 students at a time IF the conditions allow it.
I can only have them do a maximum of three training dives a day.
I MUST keep them above 60 FSW for the duration of their class.
We MUST wear a snorkel during all training dives.
NAUI makes me teach tables to OW students.

I could go on, but suffice it to say, if I teach in a manner that violates these silly rules, there is no insurance company or agency that will cover my butt if I get sued. Unfortunately for DCBC, the same applies to him no matter WHAT agency he uses.

 

[Kingpatzer]

I have not taught through PADI for 18 years. I left the organization because of the reasons I've previously given. Anything that I've posted has been as a result of my direct experiences as a PADI Instructor, a PADI Training Facility owner and conversations with PADI HQ and it's Co-Founder.

Again, I would not presume to be knowledgeable about current military training, even with respect the courses for which I acted as a trainer, based on experiences 20 years old.

Any current knowledge that I have about PADI is through communication with PADI instructors that are currently active and active PADI instructors doing cross-overs in my capacity as an Instructor Trainer/Examiner.

Which makes it indirect knowledge at best. Given many (though certainly not all) people do cross-over training due to disatisfaction or disagreements, your source of information may not be presenting a balanced view.

If there is anything that I've said on this thread (or any other) about current PADI Standards that are misleading, please correct this by posting the specific PADI Standard that clearly indicates that my statement was incorrect. I will promptly retract any incorrect statement.

It's been done. I and others have quoted official publications and presented you with information on how that material is used and understood (or in several of my posts, how the question was answered when I posed it to my CD).

King, you are not a PADI Instructor, nor have you ever been.

Correct, I'm an AI coming to the end of a year long IDC and have been assisting instructors with classes in various capacities for more than 2 years. I ask plenty of questions about standards from others both here and in my real life, including my CD. A fellow who has more experience with PADI than you claim, as well as having been a military and commercial diver.

I don't presume to be an expert. I do believe that the information I have is more current than yours, and I have the advantage of having multiple editions of the Instructor Manual and related materials to reference when examining your claims.

 

[The Chairman]

That has already been done.

You aren't much for fine points, are you? Rob labeled your conclusions as lies, but he never called you a liar, did he? That's an inference drawn by YOU in order to play the martyr card. I call Shenanigans again. That's twice in the same thread.

The point stands: You often misrepresent people and agencies in a sludge of half truths in order (my opinion) to demonstrate how morally superior you are to us all.

 

[DCBC]

It's been done. I and others have quoted official publications and presented you with information on how that material is used and understood (or in several of my posts, how the question was answered when I posed it to my CD).

Quote my comment and post the current and specific standard from PADI which says I'm wrong.

I don't presume to be an expert. I do believe that the information I have is more current than yours, and I have the advantage of having multiple editions of the Instructor Manual and related materials to reference when examining your claims.

Great that should make it easy for you. You might want to look at Peter Guy's recent post first. http://www.scubaboard.com/forums/5092300-post487.html

 

[DCBC]

Rob labeled your conclusions as lies, but he never called you a liar, did he?

I thought you were much brighter than that NetDoc. I made a statement, Rod said that statement was a lie. He implied that I was a liar a number of times. That's unfortunate, as I had come to expect better from him.

The point stands: You often misrepresent people and agencies in a sludge of half truths in order (my opinion) to demonstrate how morally superior you are to us all.

Regardless of how I feel about your opinion; you are entitled to it.

 

[The Chairman]

I thought you were much brighter than that NetDoc. I made a statement, Rod said that statement was a lie. He implied that I was a liar a number of times. That's unfortunate, as I had come to expect better from him.

Apparently, I'm a lot brighter than you, since I can make the distinction. You are the victim of your own self deception. You utter/post untruths as truths simply because you know no better. You being a liar implies that you know these to be false: and you arguably have demonstrated the opposite to be true. That still makes the statements, for all intents and purposes, to be lies. Earlier you stated that I twist the truth, which would make me a what? A liar. One can take umbrage where one wants, but it's the coward's way to discuss issues.

:homealone: Oh no! Now you're gonna say I called you a coward! :homealone:
​

Regardless of how I feel about your opinion; you are entitled to it.

Thanks! I thought you were going to make me believe in a lie!

 

[Jax]

Here are some other silly restrictions put on me by the respective agencies:

I can have only 8 students at a time IF the conditions allow it.
I can only have them do a maximum of three training dives a day.
I MUST keep them above 60 FSW for the duration of their class.
We MUST wear a snorkel during all training dives.
NAUI makes me teach tables to OW students.

I could go on, but suffice it to say, if I teach in a manner that violates these silly rules, there is no insurance company or agency that will cover my butt if I get sued. Unfortunately for DCBC, the same applies to him no matter WHAT agency he uses.

Question - no doubt many of these restrictions we put in place due to lawsuits, etc. Do the agencies (generic, thank you) put new restrictions in place in knee-jerk reactions to law suits, or do they have an established process by which the standards and restrictions are changed?

In other words, is there a board that considers these changes, and is there a comment period (for example)? Or do a few "good idea hamsters" self-generate and establish new requirements?

 

[Diver0001]

I thought you were much brighter than that NetDoc. I made a statement, Rod said that statement was a lie. He implied that I was a liar a number of times. That's unfortunate, as I had come to expect better from him.

I seem to have struck a sensitive nerve there.

But you really shouldn't be surprised. If you're going to put yourself out on a limb with all kinds of 1/2 truths then don't be surprised if someone comments that 1/2 truths are also 1/2 lies. I'm surprised, actually, with the macho big-ego style you present how much trouble you're having sucking this up. I didn't think you were so sensitive and for that I apologize because I intended to confront you with your 1/2 truths, not to insult you.

I also agree with Netdoc. If you're not aware that they're 1/2 truths then you're right. It can't be lying. I think lying is a deliberate act.

But if you're telling 1/2 truths and not even aware that that's what they are, with your history, with your vast experience and your long and impressive resume, then that's even more shocking than lying to me.

At least if you were lying with a purpose we could cry foul and not agree with your methods.

But ok. I already promised to think of a better word for it so we can move on and I will come clean with that.

R..