I said that the chances of an unconscious diver being brought to the surface and living were close to zero. I got this from doctors participating on another thread on this topic.
You said it was not true, because you knew a toxing diver that had been brought to the surface.
No, I simply disagree. I didn't say that I knew a toxing diver, I said that the toxing diver was me. I also mentioned (now for the third time) that people are recovered underwater quite often and live. It's not always a body recovery, as you elluded to. You (as you normally do) ignore the points made and spin the conversation in another direction.
The line has to be drawn between basic rescue skills and advanced rescue skills. You and PADI disagree on where to draw that line.
Yes, what PADI calls "advanced," I call minimally required. PADI doesn't teach what I called advanced.
Where you draw the line includes surfacing an unconscious diver as a basic rescue skill. I said I did not mind it not being considered a basic skill for OW because the likelihood of an OW diver finding an unconscious diver, surfacing the diver, and having the diver survive was so very, very remote.
I don't believe it to be remote. I've recovered too many divers from depth because of narcosis to say that.
That was the entire point made. You responded with two straw man arguments. (A straw man is an argument that you feel you can win, even though it is not the one your opponent was actually arguing.)
John, why do you persist? The majority of the World's training agencies in there wisdom believe that "basic rescue skills" (what you and PADI call advanced) are minimally required skills for a basic diver. I agree with the world's training agencies, you side with PADI and a couple of physicians that gave comments on ScubaBoard. Ok. We are not going to change each others minds, so lets give it a rest.