Been to Koh Tao, should I go to PERHENTIANS?

Reef Fish wrote:
>
[SNIP]

Bob, if you must continue this tripe, please take it back to rec.scuba
where it belongs. We really don't need it here. It's not a matter of
reading or not reading, killfiles or no kill files. It's a matter of
scuba diving posting. Rec.scuba gave up that in favor of politics.
Please don't bring it here as well. It's much nicer to see only 5-8
posts and know that they relate ONLY to diving instead of having to
search the headers to find them. Please take you fight outside. Thank
you.

Now... about diving.
Dave, as far as taking a NITROX class is concerned, the cost is minimal
as is the time required. Think of it the same way as you think about a
Medic/First Aid class. Learn the material, use it if you wish/need to.
Otherwise, file it away along with your snorkel. It's a 'sometimes.'

Steve Kramer
"PhotoEnvisions" Freelance Photography
Chiang Mai, Thailand
http://www.photoenvisions.com
--
"The voyage of discovery lies not in seeking new horizons, but in seeing
with new eyes." - Marcel Proust

morgand@cix.compulink.co.uk wrote:
>
> Your previous comment was read and digested, the formulea's are hard for
> me to retain, maths was my weakest subject and algebra was kids in
> different schools to what i attended, my brain just wont wrap itself
> around math I'm afraid, it just wont.

Sorry 'bout that. Then don't worry too much about the formulas...it is
adequate for you to know that there **is** a logical formula and process
being used inside the dive computer, instead of black magic.


> My wife (my buddy) is very sharp with math, but she just wants to
> dive, she has dived with so many divers who have used nitrox and
> talked so much bullshit about it, it has put her off i guess
> so my idea is to learn what i can so that i can explain the
> benefits is a way that she thinks it would benefit the both of us.

The KISS is a longer bottom time before deco is required.


And the trade-off is that you'll generally have a stricter maximum depth
limit (because of all this 1.4 PPO2 stuff), and it will cost a bit more.



-hh

"H Huntzinger" wrote

> So you'll now find that the traditional "Macho Divers" all effectively
> compelled to get into Technical Diving so as to prove themselves worthy
> of impressing the chicks...and we now meet people who have only a couple
> of years of total lifetime diving under their belt taking on dives that
> a decade ago, wouldn't be touched by anyone with less than a decade of
> advanced diving. Its really amazing IMO that we haven't had more
> fatalities.

I credit specialization. I imagine most of us know people who do dives we,
even after decades of experience, would not care to attempt, that can't
navigate their way back to the boat when there's even a slight bit of
current. It's clearly possible to learn to do some very technical dives
safely as long as nothing goes wrong that was not anticipated and planned
for. It's when things don't go as planned and the thing that goes wrong is
not something that's been practiced until it can be handled almost
automatically, that experience shows and those that lack it, die.

> . . . in these oldest days, any breathing mix that wasn't plain
> old air was considered to be "not rec" and thus part of Technical diving.

I haven't changed my definition since. Technical need not be synonymous
with complex.

> Part of the resistance in this debate essentially centered around divers
> already using Nitrox, particularly since unlike most Tech diving of the
> day, its objective is *not* to go deep.

A very common misconception even these days. The most common response from
divers that first learn I prefer nitrox is "oh, I don't want to go deep."

> In any event, what happened was that the gear manufacturers discovered
> that Tech Divers statistically spend more money on dive gear than
> "normal" rec divers. A *lot* more.

You got that right.

> The next key step in this was the Rec Agencies shifting - - in some
> cases literally in a matter of a few months - - from publicly calling
> Nitrox the 'Voodoo Gas' to offering their own training classes for it.

Can we all say PADI?

> OTOH, I've seen a huge amount of IMO bad BC advice because it is
> effectively centered around the concept that all divers should buy a
> BP/W for their BC right away . . .

Yes, but this bit is true. 8^) Well, make it, all divers should give a BP
and wing combination a try before spending a lot of money on something they
are likely to like less.

> . . . because all divers that stick with diving
> for 5+ years are going to "graduate" to technical diving with doubles,
> and you need a BP/W for doubles.

I've not seen that argument much. As you note, it's false.

> True, a BP/W is good for doubles, but
> the assumption that 'everyone' is going to eventually go tech and want
> to dive doubles is fatally flawed.

Lee

chilly wrote:
> "Greg Mossman" <mossman@qnet.com> wrote in message
> news:11eokbkema38072@corp.supernews.com...
> > "Reef Fish" <Large_Nassau_Grouper@Yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > news:1122767049.844547.292840@z14g2000cwz.googlegr oups.com...
> >
> > > Greg's right about you, Lee. I COULDN'T CARE LESS, whether
> > > you, chilly, or anyone else puts me on their killfiles.
>
>
> Too funny. Of course Bob cares. He cares very much. He *must* have an
> audience.

I ALWAYS read follow-ups to MY posts.

I am not childish posters like you and Lee, having to post about
putting me on killfile, then post about whether you want to read
my post, and then follow-up another half a dozen posts of frivol
and drivil!

You can put YOUR experience in DIVE LOCATIONS and your knowledge
in scuba technique, physics, physiology, and the rest into a
flea's naval, and STILL have plenty of room for Lee's brain, and
YOURS, if only you can find a brain surgeon to move it from your
head which is stuck in where the sun don't shine to that flea's
navel.


> That said, my bad. I shall desist from further comment

Then you should have desisted in making THIS post of yours! You are
such a Mental Midget of self-contradiction and childish posters of
no self-control!


> because for the most
> part, I agree with Kramer. I prefer rec.scuba.locations remain as pure as
> possible.

Kramer is such a hypocrite! As for YOU, rec.scuba.locations and
rec.scuba were BOTH scuba discussion newsgroups, until land-locked
clueless ones descended into rec.scuba to talk about politics and
guns; and SOME of them spilled over to rec.scuba.locations as
members of the Dysfunctional Gang -- to post plenty of NOISE, about
scuba and non-scuba posts -- and both Lee and chilly are prominent
members of the Dysfunctional Gang of rec.scuba.*.


Just stick you head back to where the Sun DOn't Shine, and STAY THERE.

-- Bob.

"Lee Bell" <leebell@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:jE2He.7665$6f.6749@newsread3.news.atl.earthli nk.net...
>>> "He" ???
>>>
>>> Oh shit.
>>>
>>> Can't anyone tell those damn Brits that Stef is a girl's name on this
>>> side
>>> of the pond? I believe I've made a terrible mistake. Flirtin' with a
>>> bloody poofter.
>>
>> Maybe Stef has a twin sister, Greg
>
> Maybe Greg has decided to come out of the closet.

Does that mean you won't prance around in your speedos in front of me
anymore?

Reef Fish wrote:
>
> Steve Kramer wrote:
> > Reef Fish wrote:
> > >
> > [SNIP]
> >
> > Bob, if you must continue this tripe, please take it back to rec.scuba
> > where it belongs.
>
> This IS rec.scuba(.locations).

That is correct. It is rec.scuba.locations, NOT rec.scuba.

> You're a good one to talk.

You're correct again, Bob. That's why I STOPPED talking in rec.scuba,
came here and discussed diving only until you brought your war here. Now
please take it BACK to rec.scuba (no, not rec.scuba locations,) and
leave us in peace. Thank you.

Steve Kramer
"PhotoEnvisions" Freelance Photography
Chiang Mai, Thailand
http://www.photoenvisions.com
--
"The voyage of discovery lies not in seeking new horizons, but in seeing
with new eyes." - Marcel Proust

"Lee Bell" <leebell@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:GJcHe.8117$6f.1627@newsread3.news.atl.earthli nk.net...
> "Greg Mossman" wrote
>
>>> Maybe Greg has decided to come out of the closet.
>>
>> Does that mean you won't prance around in your speedos in front of me
>> anymore?
>
> I didn't prance, but if you'd really like, I suppose I could. Just
> remember, look, but don't touch.

No thanks, but can I buy a lap dance for Curtis?

Steve Kramer wrote:
> Reef Fish wrote:
> >
> > Steve Kramer wrote:
> > > Reef Fish wrote:
> > > >
> > > [SNIP]
> > >
> > > Bob, if you must continue this tripe, please take it back to rec.scuba
> > > where it belongs.
> >
> > This IS rec.scuba(.locations).
>
> That is correct. It is rec.scuba.locations, NOT rec.scuba.

Which is a part or hierarchy of rec.scuba. So?
>
> > You're a good one to talk.
>
> You're correct again, Bob. That's why I STOPPED talking in rec.scuba,
> came here and discussed diving only until you brought your war here.

I brought WHAT here?

You're more clueless than I had thought. I knew you had been around
rec.scuba for at least a few years, but didn't realize you are so ...
NAIVE and clueless about what goes on where!


Learn how to use GOOGLE advanced groups search!

This is your SECOND thread in rec.scuba.locations since Jan 1, 2005.
Your first was in June 2005.

For the same period, since Jan 1, 2005, google quickly returned
115 threads in rec.scuba.locations in which I posted, and a total
of 123 threads in the two groups put together.


Steve Kramer was in THREE threads in rec.scuba, since Jan 1, 2005:

"Remember Kramer?" which was not exactly a tribute to Kramer.

"Sorry folks", a short thread initiated by Kramer, presumably
apologizing to the group.

"O.T. One year ago", a lengthy thread of 716 posts -- I don't have ANY
idea what it is, other than it's O.T. and whatever Kramer posted had
NOTHING to do with scuba!


> Now
> please take it BACK to rec.scuba (no, not rec.scuba locations,) and
> leave us in peace. Thank you.

Leave "us" in peace? You've been here only TWICE this year and
you've posted NOTHING but your officiously gratuitous ocmplaint,
and your AD:

> Steve Kramer
> "PhotoEnvisions" Freelance Photography
> Chiang Mai, Thailand
> http://www.photoenvisions.com

You USED to have some sense. I was even impressed by your
retirement post in 2001, in which you used a passage from Henry
David Thoreau as your "sig", as if it was your original! I was
less impressed, though still like the idea, when I learned later
that you were just plagiarizing Thoreau.

You've obviously lost all your marbles, Steve, since 2001. All
that cigarette denial must have gotten to you:


SK> Steve Kramer
SK> Osaka, Japan
SK> Two years, five months, one week, four days, 4 hours, 52 minutes
SK> and 50 seconds.
SK> 26856 cigarettes not smoked, saving $4,699.81. Life used for
SK> a better purpose: 13 weeks, 2 days, 6 hours, 0 minutes.

That was in 2001.

I even posted in rec.scuba in 1999 to tell YOU to work on your MIND,
as in "MIND over MATTER" because I never missed smoking since I quit
cold turkey in 1992!

http://tinyurl.com/bzlqm

Now, behave yourself or go back to your "social culture" in Asia
and Thailand groups and play with the clueless kind like yourself.

-- Bob.

"Greg Mossman" wrote

>>>> Maybe Greg has decided to come out of the closet.
>>>
>>> Does that mean you won't prance around in your speedos in front of me
>>> anymore?
>>
>> I didn't prance, but if you'd really like, I suppose I could. Just
>> remember, look, but don't touch.
>
> No thanks, but can I buy a lap dance for Curtis?

Unless I miss my guess, Curtis is about as married as I am, very married.
Otherwise, you might be able to buy him one, but not from me.

Lee

In article <42EC40AB.79F6BC67@seatraveler.com>, steve@seatraveler.com
(Steve Kramer) wrote:

> Dave, as far as taking a NITROX class is concerned, the cost is minimal
> as is the time required. Think of it the same way as you think about a
> Medic/First Aid class. Learn the material, use it if you wish/need to.
> Otherwise, file it away along with your snorkel. It's a 'sometimes.'

Thank you Steve.........i appreciate what you say and at the end of the
day we will probably do just that.
I'm hoping that my continual asking of questions is not to banal for you
more technically orientated divers, i know the thread "nitrox or not"
could be seen as going on long enough but i allways say "if you dont
ask....you dont get" and this is a perfect medium for asking those
questions, as long as you guys dont get bored answering what could be
considered as "simple" questions.

Thanks......

Dave Morgan @ Work in the UK
Take out the "goes diving" bit....
Trip photos on line at www.morg.co.uk