PADI Training vs.. others

"Dan Bracuk" <NOTbracuk@pathcom.com> wrote in message
news:s3k322dk7n8uolvsghrs36tan0imv3vf24@4ax.com...
> hammond@not@peek.ssr.hp.com (Charlie Hammond) pounded away at his
> keyboard resulting in:
> :Well, if it is against the law you can always file charges <grin> but Lee
> :is not the only person who can do this. Several years ago I observed
> :a divermaster in St Luca who put NO air BC and maintaned full control
> :of his bouyancy solely by adjusting his breathing.
> :
> :It may be an unusual capabillity.
> :It may not be good practice.
> :But it IS POSSIBLE for some individuals.
>
> Considering that most of us breathe 4 or 5 lbs of air during a dive,
> that it indeed remarkable. I can do it for a bit, but not for an
> entire dive.

At what point during your dive do you stop doing it . . and I mean
specifically after you've done it for a bit?

"Reef Fish" <Large_Nassau_Grouper@Yahoo.com> wrote

> Lee >> I don't care how many slivers of lead you stick where, if you
> Lee >> have to use gas in your BCD to control your buoyancy,
> Lee >> you're not correctly weighted.
>
>> > Disagree.
>> >
> RF > For once, the gorilla was actually correct in pointing out your
> RF > BULLSHIT!

Dream on Ding-a-Ling. Yeah, I am correct, but it does not take any
credability from his statement if you consider context.

>> Sorry to disappoint you Ding-a-Ling, but Lee does know.
>
> Read Lee's statement AGAIN, and AGAIN, and AGAIN.

Like this one?

(Lee)

> There's more to Magilla's issue that that. I said that I can compensate
> for
> a couple lbs either side of the imaginary neutral that everyone keeps
> talking about. What I didn't bother to say, because it has no bearing on
> the single tank dive I started all of this talking about, is that the
> variance can be considerably more than that with other gear
> configurations.

Seems you're the only one who didn't understand his statement or my
response.

> Anyone who can make that utterly STUPID, ERRONEOUS
> statement does not know anything about buoyancy!

What, a generalization that you immediately jump on with a concept out of
context.

> Lee obviously have not heard of tanks that are more than 10 lbs
> negative, when empty! I recall this tank from my discussion
> with Bill Mayne (caver) back in 1993 (that's before Lee's time)
> and the spec of the 190 steel was:


> tank diam. ht wt Volume displace buoyancy
> vol (in) (in.) (lbs.) (cu.in.) wt. (lbs) empty
>
> 190 S 8.03 31.29 87.00 1,584.63 57.22 29.78

Heiser?

> The tank was 29.78 lbs NEGATIVE. Now match Lee's
> statement against this tank and you'll see what a complete
> idiot Lee is.

Why? I knew Lee was talking single AL80 or similar. Only an idiot would
think otherwise.

While getting desperate looking for the cracks, don't let the truth get
in the way of your fantasy.

Curtis

"Magilla" wrote:
> Bob Ling "Reef Fish" <Large_Nassau_Grouper@Yahoo.com> wrote
>
> > Anyone who can make that utterly STUPID, ERRONEOUS
> > statement does not know anything about buoyancy!
>
> What, a generalization that you immediately jump on with a concept
> out of context.

Feesh out of context = fish out of water.


> > Lee obviously have not heard of tanks that are more than 10 lbs
> > negative, when empty!

If that was true, then it is even more evidence that the statement
wasn't being made about them, which means that Bob should have made the
*opposite* claim. Whoopsie.


> > I recall this tank from my discussion
> > with Bill Mayne (caver) back in 1993 (that's before Lee's time)
> > and the spec of the 190 steel was:

My personal recollections are that Bill was interested in these 190 HP
steel Beuchats, but was rightly concerned that they may have been far
too negatively buoyant to be practical to dive with, specifically when
rigged as twins.


> > and the spec of the 190 steel was:
> > tank diam. ht wt Volume displace buoyancy
> > vol (in) (in.) (lbs.) (cu.in.) wt. (lbs) empty
> >
> > 190 S 8.03 31.29 87.00 1,584.63 57.22 29.78

Note: these aren't specifications...or even Bill's info: this were
some "calcuations" that Bob himself did.

> > The tank was 29.78 lbs NEGATIVE.

Yes, it was negative...so people should note Bob's arithmatic sign
error in the above.

Insofar as its specific values (how much negative), as per current
sources (http://www.aquaexplorers.com/scuba_cylinders.htm), the Heiser
190 weighs 87lbs without valve, and goes from approx -62lbs to -47lbs
net buoyancy (full to empty), including a tank valve.


>
> Heiser?

Perhaps, but in those days, it was going under the Beuchat label.

FWIW, Bill's concern about twinning was that it would have meant that
the set's effective bouyancy would have been roughly -125lbs to -92lbs.


That would take a lot of PVC to offset...I'd swag it to around 18ft of
4".


> While getting desperate looking for the cracks, don't let the truth get
> in the way of your fantasy.


Bob stuck his nose into that particular rec.scuba conversation, and
proceeded to have each of his claims then be corrected by Bill:

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.s...334ba5ee5afcdd

The conclusion is that Bob still hasn't learned enough sense to keep
quiet during physics discussions: here, its a demonstration of 13
years spent with his cotton in his ears.


-hh

-hh wrote:
> Bob Ling Reef Fish wrote:
> > I had said in my post,
> >
> > RF> Sit around folks -- you'll be seeing some exciting mouth-
> > RF> dancing, wiggling, and weaseling by Lee Bell trying to back
> > RF> out his claim -- which as everyone worth a grain of salt would
> > RF> know is an IMPOSSIBLE feat, according to the LAWS of Physics
> > RF> and Physiology!
> >
> > ...
> >
> > As in classical music where a knowledgeable commentator is often
> > NECESSARY to explain to the non-expert audience what they hear
> > has much deeper meaning than it meets the eye.
>
>
> Just so I have this correct:

Hugh, you never had ANYTHING correct, and when I complimented
you for having something almost correct when you explained some
basics in tidal volume and physiology to Lee, which sent him
whimpering to reduce his claim from a FULL TANK (5-6 lbs) change
of weight to 2 lbs. What a joker.

Now you found yourself in the Gang, and are revoking whatever
little you knew, so as to establish your gang membership by playing
up to the uneducated, untrained, and unskilled: i.e., the rec.scuba
readership.

I had responded to this post when it first came out (but Google lost
it) and I didn't bother to re-type it. But since you're making a
Bob Crownfield of yourself by posting a new subject to draw attention
to your own idiocy, I'll reply to this original piece of impertinence
of
yours.


> Bob, you have of course dragged me into
> this dispute as your definitive authority that this is an "IMPOSSIBLE
> feat", correct?

I didn't drag anyone into this. Of all the rec.scuba participants in
the thread about Lee's STUPID claim that his breathing alone can
compensate the CHANGE in the weight during a dive, you were the
only one who actually had SOME information. So, I complimented
whatever you had said to Lee.

You are a "definitive authority"?

The authorities on the subject had spoken about Lee's STUPIDITY
years ago! We all know you have a hughly inflated head inspite
of your peon status in the army (in which military intelligence is
an oxymoron), you must have stuffed the Good year BLIMP in
your little head to think that you are an "authority" on anything, let
alone matters of physics and physiology -- you are not even a
QUALIFIED person on those subjects! You only happened to
know something about tidal volume and the principle of buoyancy
that any OW-I certified diver SHOULD know.

>
> > I volunteered my $10,000 bet against Lee's -- by setting ...
>
> Against Lee's what? Five dollars? You haven't yet defined the odds
> you're offering, Bob.

Why didn't you let Lee ask those questions? The offer was my
voluntary
acceptance to Lee's offer to Mika, by offering the AMOUNT I would risk
($10,000) against the same by Lee of course -- why should I give him
any
break? The offer was made on March 19, 2006, in scuba-SE
in which Hugh Huntzinger was most unwelcome because the list was
the original Scuba-SE which left Hugh and Nick Simicich holding the
empty bag when everyone left for their Fascist CENSORSHIP attempt,
which failed miserably.

The offer stood there since I posted it. Lee is welcome to suggest
modifications to the terms, but he could accept it ANY TIME, ANY DAY.

Lee Bell didn't even try his usual Mouth Dance there, because EVERYONE
would have laughed at him as I do; and I had already tipped the
readers
to watch for his patented mouth dance, wiggling, and weaseling --
so he is doing it in rec.scuba -- as quietly as he could, and he had
not
said a SINGLE WORD about accepting that offer or WHY he declined
the bet!!!

Lee Bell is an all around LOSER -- except to idiots like you, in
rec.scuba!


> Clarify these two items immediately, and nothing more, and you might be
> rewarded by further conversation with me.

WOW!!!!!!!!!! A GOODYEAR BLIMP head of an army peon!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
>
> -hh

You can STFU anytime. I couldn't care LESS to have any conversation
with a Supreme Hypocrite of rec.scuba.

I am post this only show your STUPIDITY and yet another supreme
hypocrisy -- on the buoyancy compensation by breathing for a 6-lb
change. You had the basic FACTS to know that it's impossible for
Lee or anyone to do it over an entire dive by breathing ONLY, and
yet you're too chicken shit to speak up against Lee, in this lunatic
group in which Lee is the Chief in charge of his patented

Bullshit Cannon

and there's NOBODY (thus far) who know enough to shoot down his
bullshit, as he had been shot down on the SAME bullshit on every
scuba discussion group outside of here! By diving EXPERTS.

As for you Hugh Huntzinger, don't bother to start another new
subject to highlight your own ignorance and incompetence. Just
keep in mind that your own LIMITED MENTAL CAPACITY and
lack of intelligence are sufficient to GUARANTEE that you are
incapable of earning a Ph.D. in any subject, in any university, in
the world.

Yes, you can buy one in Florida, for $20, I think. Frame it, and
then come back and claim yourself to be a "definitive authority"
because you have that Ph.D., purchase in Florida no less.

The idiots and incompetents in rec.scuba will be VERY impressed.

-- Bob.

VerBal DiaRrhea Fish wrote:


> Hugh, you never had ANYTHING correct, and when I complimented
> you for having something almost correct when you explained some
> basics in tidal volume and physiology to Lee, which sent him
> whimpering to reduce his claim from a FULL TANK (5-6 lbs) change
> of weight to 2 lbs. What a joker.
>
> Now you found yourself in the Gang, and are revoking whatever
> little you knew, so as to establish your gang membership by playing
> up to the uneducated, untrained, and unskilled: i.e., the rec.scuba
> readership.
>
> I had responded to this post when it first came out (but Google lost
> it) and I didn't bother to re-type it. But since you're making a
> Bob Crownfield of yourself by posting a new subject to draw attention
> to your own idiocy, I'll reply to this original piece of impertinence
> of yours.

you are such a pompous egotistical boring tedious windbag.
no wonder I am now getting email from strangers
reminding me what a self infatuated blowhard you are.

I hope that you impress yourself,
because all the rest of us are laughing at you.

go ahead.
call us names again,
and maybe you will feel better.

the gang of reason call the BlowHard onto the carpet.
(thats you Ling fish)

> The idiots and incompetents in rec.scuba will be VERY impressed.
>
> -- Bob.
>

"Dan Bracuk" wrote

> Considering that most of us breathe 4 or 5 lbs of air during a dive,
> that it indeed remarkable. I can do it for a bit, but not for an
> entire dive.

Start a couple lbs heavy, end a couple lbs light and you're there. It would
be difficult to compensate for 5 lbs positive or negative, but it's not hard
to do it for plus or minus two at all.

"Lee Bell" <pleebell2@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:rJHUf.2702$lM3.47@bignews3.bellsouth.net...
> "Dan Bracuk" wrote
>
>> Considering that most of us breathe 4 or 5 lbs of air during a dive,
>> that it indeed remarkable. I can do it for a bit, but not for an
>> entire dive.
>
> Start a couple lbs heavy, end a couple lbs light and you're there. It
> would be difficult to compensate for 5 lbs positive or negative, but it's
> not hard to do it for plus or minus two at all.


I can't see Dan Bracuk's posts, why is that?





>
>

"Reef Fish" <Large_Nassau_Grouper> wrote

> Nah. Not that one nor any of Lee's 100 firings from his Bullshit
> Cannon.
> What he said was the statement above! The context is AIR SCUBA
> DIVING and neutral buoyancy!

So you're hung up on an absolute that was not intended, and was later
clarified? Seems you're hung up on "winning", rather than meaning.

Problem is, you're losing, or you'd not be moving the goal posts.

>> Heiser?
>
> Dunno and duncare.

Then you obviously don't know jack shit about tanks.

> The context was Lee's claim that for years
> divers had dived without any BCD, and then made the flying leap
> to his bullshit conclusion that he therefore could dive without any
> air in any bcd and his characteristic bullshit:

Make up your mind. You just narrowed down the parameters, and admitted
you knew what Lee was addressing.

>> > The tank was 29.78 lbs NEGATIVE. Now match Lee's
>> > statement against this tank and you'll see what a complete
>> > idiot Lee is.

I doubt he's thinking about using a tank not intended for anything close
to his usage. Since you are, makes you the idiot.

>> Why? I knew Lee was talking single AL80 or similar. Only an idiot
>> would
>> think otherwise.
>
> Lee's statement is BULLSHIT even for AL80 for anyone who knows
> anything about diving! Only an IDIOT would make Lee's statement
> and only an ass-kissing ape would try to defend the indefensible.

From the MASTER ass kisser who just got done sucking out Popeye's colon,
then licking his ass clean?

While you're at it, show where I'm defending his statement in context.

As an absolute, I disagreed, he knew why.

As a statement within assumed context, later clarified, I am not giving
any opinion, for reasons having nothing to do with Lee.

As a witness to Lee's and Mike's bouyancy control, I have not "studied"
it, but have seen enough to know they're skilled divers.

As a regular, I'd love to see you put up or shut up.......then again,
shutting up will suffice.

Curtis

Reef Fish wrote:
> That is your FAULTY observation -- the same FALLACIOUS argument
> Lee gave that he could do it. *I* and several other divers I know
> can do it, by compensating the + or - 3 lbs by constant MOTION, but not
> motionless (as in Neutrally Buoyant) throughout a dive, by adjusting
> breathing SOLELY.

No, I've seen your picture on your website, and for you, what Lee is
talking about is inconceivable, without skipping your next 100 meals.

"Magilla" wrote:
> "Reef Fish" <Large_Nassau_Grouper> wrote
>
> > Nah. Not that one nor any of Lee's 100 firings from his Bullshit
> > Cannon. What he said was the statement above!

Wonder why you snipped what Lee said? THIS was it:

> > Lee >> I don't care how many slivers of lead you stick where, if you
> > Lee >> have to use gas in your BCD to control your buoyancy,
> > Lee >> you're not correctly weighted.

Even YOU knew enough to say,

> >> > Disagree.

> > RF > For once, the gorilla was actually correct in pointing out your
> > RF > BULLSHIT!

Now you turned around when you saw Lee's ass in front of your face,
ready to be kissed, and you tried to mouth dance for him! What a
loser!


> >> Heiser?
> >
> > Dunno and duncare.

I didn't want to go into that tangent, and I was merely toying with
YOUR ignorance about tanks.
>
> Then you obviously don't know jack shit about tanks.

That's YOU. I gave the spec of that tank and I was discussing it
with Bill Mayne. I had all the details from the ARCHIVES, idiot!
LOL.

> >> > The tank was 29.78 lbs NEGATIVE. Now match Lee's
> >> > statement against this tank and you'll see what a complete
> >> > idiot Lee is.

Heiser! Why did you have to ask? Of course it's NOT Heiser, Dummy!



> >> Why? I knew Lee was talking single AL80 or similar.
> >
> > Lee's statement is BULLSHIT even for AL80 for anyone who knows
> > anything about diving! Only an IDIOT would make Lee's statement
> > and only an ass-kissing ape would try to defend the indefensible.

No wonder you snipped Lee's idiotic statement:

> > Lee >> I don't care how many slivers of lead you stick where, if you
> > Lee >> have to use gas in your BCD to control your buoyancy,
> > Lee >> you're not correctly weighted.

That's pure, unadulterated BULLSHIT for tanks of ANY SIZE, Aluminum
or Steel. The MASS of air inside the tank does not remain constant.

It's too much to expect a gorilla to read anything, let alone facts in
physiology, but that's where the action is. Not in what comes out of
a BULLSHIT CANNON.

Only idiots ignorant of physics and overly inflated in his fat head
could
make a statement as stupid as the one Lee made.

You were correct, when you said about Lee's three-line BS:

> >> > Disagree.

Lee's ass must taste too good for you to want to keep kissing, to the
extent of retracting something you said that was actually CORRECT!

Keep smacking it, Magilla.

-- Bob.