gianaameri
Contributor
- Messages
- 793
- Reaction score
- 162
I see nothing that makes the having the wrong gas implausible.
The gas in the tank was the one which the tank was correctly marked for - O2 in a clearly O2 labeled tank.
Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.
Benefits of registering include
I see nothing that makes the having the wrong gas implausible.
The gas in the tank was the one which the tank was correctly marked for - O2 in a clearly O2 labeled tank.
Are you saying that it is implausible for a tank to have the exact gas that its label says it has?
Keep digging and something will eventually come out.
The story we have been fed while possible is implausible.
There must be a little more to it.
The gas in the tank was the one which the tank was correctly marked for - O2 in a clearly O2 labeled tank.
No, on the contrary.
That is the norm, and that is what was found to be in Carlos' incident.
He had an O2 bottle marked O2 and filled with O2.
Nothing wrong with that.
When forensic evaluation of a diver's gear is called for here in the Seattle area, the gear is sent to one of the local dive shops, where the gas is analyzed and the gear is tested. I wonder if there is ANYWHERE where there are enough diving accidents for a police department to employ diving specialists. My guess is that they always depend on outside experts, and I have no doubt at all that a respected cave instructor can analyze the contents of a tank.
OK, I give up. What is it about the story that is implausible?