 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeArticlesDiving DestinationsLearning Scuba DivingMarine LifeMiscellaneousDiscussion GroupsGeneralScuba EquipmentScuba LocationsAustralian ScubaUK ScubaDirectoryScuba Clubs |
Scuba Forum / General / October 2005newbie questions
what's the rule of thumb for wetsuit thickness & water temp? how cold for gloves & hoods? i know it varies by each person, i am just trying to figure what my tolerances are.  SignatureThanks, Rob > what's the rule of thumb for wetsuit thickness & water temp? how cold for > gloves & hoods? i know it varies by each person, i am just trying to figure > what my tolerances are. Look it up on google... http://www.google.com/search?q=wetsuit+thickness+temperature&sourceid=mozilla-se arch&start=0&start=0&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:of ficial http://www.dickssportinggoods.com/sm-wetsuit-style-and-thickness-by-temperature- -bg-222804.html http://www.mcsports.com/info/index.jsp?categoryId=222802 Just remember that the deeper you go, the thinner your wetsuit becomes from compression due to the water pressure... > what's the rule of thumb for wetsuit thickness & water temp? how cold for > gloves & hoods? i know it varies by each person, i am just trying to figure > what my tolerances are. Where are you planning to dive? > what's the rule of thumb for wetsuit thickness & water temp? how cold for > gloves & hoods? Mid 70s and up are generally 3 mm suits. low 70s would be borderline for many people and that's when lots of divers would switch to 5 or 7 mm. Below 70 would generally be 7 mm with gloves and hood. Clint Free Spirit Activewear http://www.FreeSpiritActivewear.com Premium Scuba Dive Activewear > > what's the rule of thumb for wetsuit thickness & water temp? how cold for > > gloves & hoods? [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Clint thanks.. is it safe to say you dont see people in thinner suits wearing gloves & hoods? > is it safe to say you dont see people in thinner suits wearing > gloves & hoods? Not necisarily. The head is roughly about half of your heat loss. I'll routinely wear a hood on "tee-shirt" dives, although part is to keep shells out of my hair (from high flow springs). By the time I dig out my heavy (3 mil), almost always use a hood. Given the large surface area of many of the talking heads here lately, wouldn't surprise me if they're all a bunch of hoods. Curtis "Magilla" wrote: > Given the large surface area of many of the talking heads here lately, > wouldn't surprise me if they're all a bunch of hoods. ***** > "Magilla" wrote: >> Given the large surface area of many of the talking heads here >> lately, wouldn't surprise me if they're all a bunch of hoods. > > ***** Don't worry, Cliff. He wasn't aiming that at you, personally. >>> Given the large surface area of many of the talking heads here >>> lately, wouldn't surprise me if they're all a bunch of hoods. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > He wasn't aiming that at you, personally. Um, not aiming that at Cliff at all. Nor was it particularly meant to be malicious. However, I'm sure the shoe fits beyond my intented targets. :-) Curtis >>>> Given the large surface area of many of the talking heads here >>>> lately, wouldn't surprise me if they're all a bunch of hoods. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > However, I'm sure the shoe fits beyond my intented targets. :-) Then, who, exactly, would your intended targets be? > Curtis >> Um, not aiming that at Cliff at all. Nor was it particularly meant to >> be malicious. >> >> However, I'm sure the shoe fits beyond my intented targets. :-) > > Then, who, exactly, would your intended targets be? You do realize it's much more fun to be generic, makes more people think they're getting painted. Curtis >>> Um, not aiming that at Cliff at all. Nor was it particularly meant >>> to be malicious. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > You do realize it's much more fun to be generic, makes more people > think they're getting painted. I noticed for a guy who doesn't get into DIR threads, you sure had a lot to insinuate without any sort of substantiation. And as far as I could tell, everyone within range of your "paint" is a good friend of yours. I was curious out of Lee, Greg, Mike and I, who was the "empty ego", who was the wannabee (because that fit the other side of the argument much more succinctly) , who was the "50 dive AOW dude" with the "ego and status" issues; And who, exactly, was "unfairly bashed", since that was WKPP Rule Number 1A for years. I'm -really- interested in your "sliding scale". And who your "talking heads" and "intended targets" are. Inquiring minds and all that. 10/15 "Whistler" wrote > Oh sure, now you show up. Well, yeah, considering I spent last weekend up in cave country, came home briefly Sunday night, then spent the week down in West Palm Beach at "school". Read a bit while down there, but didn't post because was on a friends computer who doesn't hang out here. Home this weekend to spend some time with my sweetheart and get some honey-dos done. Besides, by choice I don't get into the DIR or advanced diving discussions. No up side to it for me. I hang out here because this is where I started, and have many friends here. This was my first contact with DIR divers, before most left out of sheer frustration. I really get tired of the "empty" egos, and hearing people I really admire and respect get bashed quite unfairly. And tired of the "wannabes" acting like they were true sources of info. Fortunately, friends don't have to totally agree to be friends, they just have to be compatible and have mutual respect. Same token, I like some people I'd NEVER enter the water with, most are on the "sliding scale", only a couple here I'd do my most "advanced" diving with. That's called reality. Have stated before, I'm not here for the info, I'm here for the fun, and I do not represent anyone else when here. 'nuf said, Curtis ====================================== 10/16 "Whistler" wrote >> More than I'll usually say to such a thread. :-) > > I wish I'd said less. Yep. Still, some egos have been set into the self stroking mode. Easy enough to ignore on concept. The "tough guy" martial artist is usually a red or first dan, most luxury cars are driven by those barely able to afford them, most aggressive driver is the nobody at home and work, most scuba advice is given by the 50 dive AOW dude. Same pattern, ego and status. Curtis ====================================== 10/18 "Longshot" wrote > is it safe to say you dont see people in thinner suits wearing > gloves & hoods? Not necisarily. The head is roughly about half of your heat loss. I'll routinely wear a hood on "tee-shirt" dives, although part is to keep shells out of my hair (from high flow springs). By the time I dig out my heavy (3 mil), almost always use a hood. Given the large surface area of many of the talking heads here lately, wouldn't surprise me if they're all a bunch of hoods. Curtis > Curtis > I noticed for a guy who doesn't get into DIR threads, you sure had a lot > to insinuate without any sort of substantiation. Insinuate hell. Cystal clear. Just not to everyone. > And as far as I could tell, everyone within range of your "paint" is a > good friend of yours. Not quite true, you're assuming WAY too much. > I was curious out of Lee, Greg, Mike and I, who was the "empty ego", who > was the wannabee (because that fit the other side of the argument much > more succinctly) , who was the "50 dive AOW dude" with the "ego and > status" issues; Well, 50 dive AOW dude doesn't fit any of the four, nor does "wannabe" since that would be the third faction, empty doesn't fit my opinions of any except maybe Greg's politics. Ego, status, well, that might get a drop or two around, evidently you think you've got some paint on you. In the interest of not making it personal, I'll stop at that. > And who, exactly, was "unfairly bashed", since that was WKPP Rule Number > 1A for years. Clauses one and two are not linked. Nor does that need an answer, beyond perspective, ours are different. > I'm -really- interested in your "sliding scale". Why so? Refers to a simple fact that an acceptable buddy for some dives is not acceptable for others. Not unique to scuba, it is not a point for you to argue with me on. Should be obvious I do not consider you "unworthy", not my mentality. Same line of thought, I'm not a good choice (as in terrible) for a buddy for, say, Al Wells to scooter The Nest with. > And who your "talking heads" Guess I mean the ones who oughtta go over to a list with a real opposition and make the same claims. Or, maybe someone was baiting.......either way, rec scuba regulars should have thicker skin. Curtis > evidently you think you've got some paint on you. I don't think you missed anyone, actually. More how you were slinging it than what I thought hit me. > Guess I mean the ones who oughtta go over to a list with a real > opposition and make the same claims. He's been run out of here, and every other list except Techdiver, which he bullied to death. Jack Farmer was the best we could get. He had to buy his own, so he can kick off everyone that disagrees with him. All this rhetoric, and, still, the simple question goes unanswered. > In the interest of not making it personal, I'll stop at that. I'll re-read the thread for the same reason, and address the rest. Right now I have to drive to Bert's place. >>evidently you think you've got some paint on you. > [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > > Right now I have to drive to Bert's place. ??? Signature“The darkest places in hell are reserved for those who maintain their neutrality in times of moral crisis.” >> Right now I have to drive to Bert's place. >> > ??? Thanks!!! Bert! >>> Right now I have to drive to Bert's place. >> >>??? > > Thanks!!! Bert! A good time was had by all. Thanks for dinner. Signature“The darkest places in hell are reserved for those who maintain their neutrality in times of moral crisis.” > evidently you think you've got some paint on you. Having re-read the thread, it seems rather you chucked a rather large pail at the crowd. > In the interest of not making it personal, I'll stop at that. You sure do have a funny way of staying out of DIR threads. > > evidently you think you've got some paint on you. > > Having re-read the thread, it seems rather you chucked a rather large pail > at the crowd. Maybe so, but most of us are capable of laughing at ourselves. Some others are just too sensitive for usenet. (or paranoid). (snip) > Maybe so, but most of us are capable of laughing at ourselves. Some others > are just too sensitive for usenet. (or paranoid). Hilarious. >> > evidently you think you've got some paint on you. >> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > others > are just too sensitive for usenet. (or paranoid). Hoist! > (snip) > >> > evidently you think you've got some paint on you. > >> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Hoist! Poor Peanut. >>>>> evidently you think you've got some paint on you. >>>> [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Poor Peanut. now don't start the peanut thing again.... Signature“The darkest places in hell are reserved for those who maintain their neutrality in times of moral crisis.” > > Poor Peanut. > > > now don't start the peanut thing again.... but, but, but . . .there's still so little material left to work with. >> > Poor Peanut. >> > >> now don't start the peanut thing again.... > > but, but, but . . .there's still so little material left to work with. Never a problem I have with you. An absolutely -cavernous- amount of material >> >> > evidently you think you've got some paint on you. >> >> [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Poor Peanut. Just what the cast iron uterus ordered. How's your mom? > How's your mom? Still dead, the poor young thing. > Still dead, the poor young thing. Kind of a drastic measure just to stop the aging process... Damn, you women sure are vain... > > Still dead, the poor young thing. > > Kind of a drastic measure just to stop the aging process... Damn, you women > sure are vain... Sure wish it had been something more along those lines. Sadly, she really suffered for many, many years. >> How's your mom? > > Still dead, the poor young thing. DTPS (delayed traumatic post-parum syndrome), no doubt. >> Having re-read the thread, it seems rather you chucked a rather large > pail [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > others > are just too sensitive for usenet. (or paranoid). BTW, Chilly's never been anything but nice to me, my friend..... Curtis > BTW, Chilly's never been anything but nice to me, my friend..... Doug and I used to say that too. >> BTW, Chilly's never been anything but nice to me, my friend..... > > Doug and I used to say that too. sh.t happens. People clash. Chilly and I have never clashed. Curtis >>> Having re-read the thread, it seems rather you chucked a rather large >> pail [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > BTW, Chilly's never been anything but nice to me, my friend..... And? > Curtis > >> Having re-read the thread, it seems rather you chucked a rather large > > pail [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > BTW, Chilly's never been anything but nice to me, my friend..... Well, I did lie to you once. Remember? When I introduced myself as Greg? (wg). >> evidently you think you've got some paint on you. > > Having re-read the thread, it seems rather you chucked a rather large > pail at the crowd. Yep, I did, but not everyone took offense. >> In the interest of not making it personal, I'll stop at that. > > You sure do have a funny way of staying out of DIR threads. Not really. I don't teach, preach, or discuss my views here, beyond yep, I dive as DIR as I can, my cave buddies MUST be DIR, and my open water buddies must be safe divers. End of that story. Nor do I just go around calling your friends or associates a bunch of strokes. Lots of paint being tossed around, some teasing, some trolling, some dead serious. You should realize by now I am not malicious, not very often insulting, have a sense of humor, somewhat playful. We only allowed one sided potshots here? Do you now wish to run me out of the group I've been part of for over 7 years now because I wanna chide a few people for their potshots? Lee's not insulted, doubt Mike is. Doug, friends don't have to agree about everything. Hell, my wife and I are light years apart on some issues, and we are soulmates and lovers. I like you, respect you, think you have a heart of gold, but you can be boisterous.......not that there's anything wrong with that. Just cut me some slack, as a friend, I'll cut you some.......if you wanna take something personal, make it my friendship. Curtis > >> evidently you think you've got some paint on you. > > [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > some slack, as a friend, I'll cut you some.......if you wanna take something > personal, make it my friendship. BARKEEP! A round for the house. >>> evidently you think you've got some paint on you. >> [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > Nor do I just go around calling your friends or associates a bunch of > strokes. Just egotistical 50 dive AOW divers, ect. >Lots of paint being tossed around, some teasing, some trolling, some dead >serious. You should realize by now I am not malicious, not very often >insulting, have a sense of humor, somewhat playful. Ya, this was a real hoot: "This was my first contact with DIR divers, before most left out of sheer frustration. I really get tired of the "empty" egos, and hearing people I really admire and respect get bashed quite unfairly. And tired of the "wannabes" acting like they were true sources of info." Especially when it coincides with accusations and insults that Cliff and George are making at the same time. I don't get mad, I just respond. I can do this agument blindfolded. For instance, I am kinda curious about all these DIR divers that left out of frustration, a bogus statement. > We only allowed one sided potshots here? No, you can potshot all you want. But when I'm in an intense argument, and you potshot from their side, the potshots come back. Brace yourself. And pot shotting is -not- staying out of DIR threads. You put -yourself- knee deep in it, and instead of giving some clarification as one of two DIR divers here, you said "I don't do DIR threads", Then chucked your bucket. I waited through 4 derisive "I don't do DIR thread" posts, then used Cliff to reel you in. >Do you now wish to run me out of the group I've been part of for over 7 >years now because I wanna chide a few people for their potshots? Lee's not >insulted, doubt Mike is. I'm not insulted, nor do I take this personal, nor -could- I run you out of here, if I ever chose to. Nor did I signal any intention to try. You been hangin out with Francis too much. Although mercy killing threads seem to do the trick. But like being DIR or not, you're either -in- this DIR thread or not. > Doug, friends don't have to agree about everything. Hell, my wife and > I are light years apart on some issues, and we are soulmates and lovers. > I like you, respect you, think you have a heart of gold, but you can be > boisterous.......not that there's anything wrong with that. Just cut me > some slack, as a friend, I'll cut you some.......if you wanna take > something personal, make it my friendship. I always thought we were close friends. You trust me enough to bring your children to my house. > Curtis (snip)> > > > Nor do I just go around calling your friends or associates a bunch of > > strokes. > > Just egotistical 50 dive AOW divers, ect. Par a noid . . . (snip)> > Especially when it coincides with accusations and insults that Cliff and > George are making at the same time. Par a noid. > I don't get mad, I just respond. You get mad alright. Yer mad as a hatter. > I can do this agument blindfolded. > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > But when I'm in an intense argument, That's another problem ya got. Yer such a drama queen. The arguments are always "intense" for you. >and you potshot from their side, the > potshots come back. That's another problem ya got. You believe that someone isn't firmly representing for Team Peanut, they can only be on the "other" team. > Brace yourself. > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > I waited through 4 derisive "I don't do DIR thread" posts, then used Cliff > to reel you in. Ah . . . sneaky and . . . par a noid. > >Do you now wish to run me out of the group I've been part of for over 7 > >years now because I wanna chide a few people for their potshots? Lee's not > >insulted, doubt Mike is. > > I'm not insulted, nor do I take this personal, What complete and utter BS. > nor -could- I run you out > of here, if I ever chose to. You got that right. But makes ya wonder why he would have said such a thing . . .don't it? > Nor did I signal any intention to try. > > You been hangin out with Francis too much. How do ya figure that? I haven't noticed that you've run John outta here. > Although mercy killing threads seem to do the trick. > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > I always thought we were close friends. Then why don't you cut him some slack and quit taking everything that anyone says like a personal and/or malicious attack on you. Yer paranoid, Peanut. > (snip)> > >> > Nor do I just go around calling your friends or associates a bunch [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Par a noid . . . Hump hump hump... > (snip)> >> Especially when it coincides with accusations and insults that Cliff >> and >> George are making at the same time. > > Par a noid. Hump hump... >> I don't get mad, I just respond. > > You get mad alright. Yer mad as a hatter. Compliments, compliments... >> I can do this agument blindfolded. >> [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > That's another problem ya got. Yer such a drama queen. The arguments are > always "intense" for you. Reflects the depths of our perspective psyches, I guess. I'm sure all the arguments are light and gaily entertaining for you... >>and you potshot from their side, the >> potshots come back. > > That's another problem ya got. You believe that someone isn't firmly > representing for Team Peanut, they can only > be on the "other" team. Team Cast-iron Uterus Nonsensical Twats? Trust, but verify, babe. >> Brace yourself. >> [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Ah . . . sneaky and . . . par a noid. Click click click.... Never hard to see whos' on what side... >> >Do you now wish to run me out of the group I've been part of for over 7 >> >years now because I wanna chide a few people for their potshots? Lee's [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > What complete and utter BS. Hump hump hump.... Ask the 78 Rec.scubans who've met me, -Greg- comes immediatly to mind, if we -ever- argue when we hang out. But don't let me stop your -projecting-... >> nor -could- I run you out >> of here, if I ever chose to. > > You got that right. But makes ya wonder why he would have said such a > thing > . . .don't it? Probably feels sorry for John? >> Nor did I signal any intention to try. >> >> You been hangin out with Francis too much. > > How do ya figure that? I haven't noticed that you've run John outta here. Hump hump hump... The only person -I- ran out of here is dead. >> Although mercy killing threads seem to do the trick. >> [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > anyone > says like a personal and/or malicious attack on you. I cut him -nothing- -but- slack, waiting several posts, asking calm and factual questions, re-reading the entire thread, and the passing on one of my entertaining line-by-line scrutinies. What he said was...all in black and white. So was the finite number of people in the thread that he was addressing. But keep humping... Now that you're fixating on my penis again, time for a hoist! > Yer paranoid, Peanut. Better than your cheap and easy... > Just egotistical 50 dive AOW divers, ect. Guess they're anti-gun zealots too, according to me? > Ya, this was a real hoot: > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > bashed quite unfairly. And tired of the "wannabes" acting like they were > true sources of info." It should be, it's accurate. > Especially when it coincides with accusations and insults that Cliff and > George are making at the same time. Of course it coincided timing-wise to the thread. You were only one ring for the three ringed circus. Whatever actual disagreement you had going on wasn't in my focus. > I don't get mad, I just respond. > > I can do this agument blindfolded. Now that's the first accurate statement you've made. Add earplugs. > For instance, I am kinda curious about all these DIR divers that left out > of frustration, a bogus statement. So call me a liar? Screw the "cite" arguement, it's not necisary even to this crowd. > No, you can potshot all you want. Evidently not. > But when I'm in an intense argument, and you potshot from their side, the > potshots come back. Their side? Really? I defended Cliff and George? I don't think so. Try just responding to Cliff it's a waste of time in this forum, and you've done well to support my point. > Brace yourself. For a blind side? > And pot shotting is -not- staying out of DIR threads. I only comment to the general attitude found here. -You- stepped into it on your own. > You put -yourself- knee deep in it, and instead of giving some > clarification as one of two DIR divers here, you said "I don't do DIR > threads", If only knee deep in a forum neck deep with bullshit at times, I did well. "instead of giving some clarification" means I did avoid entering that arena, thanks for supporting my claim. > I waited through 4 derisive "I don't do DIR thread" posts, then used > Cliff to reel you in. So you admit to targeting me specifically. That -is- paranoid and over-defensive, and an attempt to use me as some kind of pawn for your apparent crusade. > I'm not insulted, nor do I take this personal, nor -could- I run you out > of here, if I ever chose to. Yes, evidently you are, since when the fun to bullshit ratio gets low enough, I'll loose interest. Something must be firing you up, since you've decided to defend the newsgroup as its hero. Don't become a "Mickey". > Nor did I signal any intention to try. > > You been hangin out with Francis too much. Not hardly. Too spineless, as opposed to reserved. And while he has the "right" to voice his beliefs, his condecending harping is quite irritating, he's been in my killfile for quite a while now. > Although mercy killing threads seem to do the trick. f.ck you. > But like being DIR or not, you're either -in- this DIR thread or not. In the thread, my involvement is not with discussing DIR, whether or not anyone is DIR, nor y'alls specific squabbles, but with the joke of this forum being any place to discuss it, and now with the apparent squabble you have with me. Degrades way too fast to personalities and foolish pride. Ask Cliff if he interpreted my comments any differently. Even my friends here expect me to just bite my tongue and laugh with them if they get "mildly offensive" in their humour. That can lead to the thinking it's acceptable. If I loose friends for saying "that's enough" in my presence, then they weren't friends worth having, and had no respect for me. > I always thought we were close friends. > You trust me enough to bring your children to my house. None of that has changed. Not from my or my family's perspective anyways. Curtis >> Just egotistical 50 dive AOW divers, ect. > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > It should be, it's accurate. And timed with Cliff and Georege making similar accusations of me, not to mention Chilly with the occaisional hoist. >> Especially when it coincides with accusations and insults that Cliff and >> George are making at the same time. [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > So call me a liar? Screw the "cite" arguement, it's not necisary even > to this crowd. No, I didn't call you a liar, but feel free to list the "DIR" divers that left here in left here in "sheer frustration". >> No, you can potshot all you want. > > Evidently not. > >> But when I'm in an intense argument, and you potshot from their side, >> the potshots come back. Evidently I'm the one who can't. > Their side? Really? I defended Cliff and George? I don't think so. Re-read the thread. I did. It's pretty clear, even if it wasn't intentional. > Try just responding to Cliff it's a waste of time in this forum, and > you've done well to support my point. > >> Brace yourself. > > For a blind side? I'm sure you can get as good as you give. >> And pot shotting is -not- staying out of DIR threads. > > I only comment to the general attitude found here. -You- stepped into > it on your own. I was already in it when -you- stepped in. >> You put -yourself- knee deep in it, and instead of giving some >> clarification as one of two DIR divers here, you said "I don't do DIR [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > "instead of giving some clarification" means I did avoid entering that > arena, thanks for supporting my claim. Looked and sounded like you were in the arena to me. >> I waited through 4 derisive "I don't do DIR thread" posts, then used >> Cliff to reel you in. > > So you admit to targeting me specifically. No, I held fire on you specifically. Obviously. > That -is- paranoid and over-defensive, and an attempt to use me as some > kind of pawn for your apparent crusade. "Apparent crusade"? -Just- like Cliff. It was a simple, little question, not meant to be anything more. It was an extrapolation to a remark to a drive by poster who will never be here again. It was nothing, till you guys made it into the wall of Jerico, attaching all this angst, chafing, agendas amd crusades. >> I'm not insulted, nor do I take this personal, nor -could- I run you out >> of here, if I ever chose to. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Something must be firing you up, since you've decided to defend the > newsgroup as its hero. Don't become a "Mickey". I've defended this newsgroup as it's hero since the day after I got here. I love this place, you think it's neck deep in sh.t, with no redeeming scuba value. Just different views, I guess. >> Nor did I signal any intention to try. >> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > the "right" to voice his beliefs, his condecending harping is quite > irritating, he's been in my killfile for quite a while now. Thank you. Since he can't hear that when I say it, maybe he'll hear it if you do. >> Although mercy killing threads seem to do the trick. > > f.ck you. Sorry. >> But like being DIR or not, you're either -in- this DIR thread or not. > > In the thread, my involvement is not with discussing DIR, whether or > not anyone is DIR, Then you missed big. >nor y'alls specific squabbles, but with the joke of this forum being any >place to discuss it, and now with the apparent squabble you have with me. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > in my presence, then they weren't friends worth having, and had no respect > for me. I argree with you 100%, but Sheryl and John don't. That's why I say what I think. >> I always thought we were close friends. >> You trust me enough to bring your children to my house. > > None of that has changed. Not from my or my family's perspective > anyways. Me, too. I tried to call last night at 21:30, but we got cut off. I'll try again tonight. > Curtis Maybe you just stepped into the fight to say hello to everyone, and caught a left hook. Sorry, I was swinging pretty fast at the moment. But your timing, and content, were sure peculiar. > And timed with Cliff and Georege making similar accusations of me, not to > mention Chilly with the occaisional hoist. Except not a similiar accusation. > No, I didn't call you a liar, but feel free to list the "DIR" divers that > left here in left here in "sheer frustration". I am not at liberty to list anyone, that permission is not yours or mine to give. > Evidently I'm the one who can't. Perspective, and potshot vs specificly named and targeted. > It's pretty clear, even if it wasn't intentional. Not clear, and definitely not intentional. My first post was a response to "mud", to which Cliff responded. > I was already in it when -you- stepped in. Around y'all's spat, or so I thought. Guess the puddle was getting bigger. > No, I held fire on you specifically. > > Obviously. Then we both have a problem with clarity. > It was nothing, till you guys made it into the wall of Jerico, attaching > all this angst, chafing, agendas amd crusades. I read the comments by Lee, Mike, Scott and Vandit, as well as past ones from others. Not personally offensive -overall-, but indicative of the atmosphere here. > I've defended this newsgroup as it's hero since the day after I got here. > > I love this place, you think it's neck deep in sh.t, with no redeeming > scuba value. Wait a minute, redeeming value, it must have that, I'm here. Scuba value, some, can be a meeting place. Source of info, guess I might be able to find a better source, although local information is welcomed and appreciated. > Thank you. > > Since he can't hear that when I say it, maybe he'll hear it if you do. Not that he'll listen, which is why he's in my killfile. > Sorry. Then I am too, let's shelve that one. >> In the thread, my involvement is not with discussing DIR, whether or >> not anyone is DIR, > > Then you missed big. Not my fault there. I did not violate my boundries. > I tried to call last night at 21:30, but we got cut off. > > I'll try again tonight. That would be very cool. Was gone most of the weekend, cave country, came home to last minute preperations. But, keep in mind FP&L is no longer powering my home, my new generator is. We're still in deteriating conditions due to Wilma, behind South Florida in the schedule. Transformers in the neighborhood blew out hours ago, relatively early, giving a light & sound show like the Fourth of July, and my phones could follow. We're relatively safe, but expect to lose a few more creature comforts before the day is over. Tornado strikes have been within a couple of miles of my home, and the humidity is definiyely over 100% :-), we're in a flash flood warning zone. That to my home usually means the septics are gonna get slower and driving around not an option for a few more hours. Expect the storm to be over by dark. Curtis > Expect the storm to be over by dark. Looks like it's about over here already, Doppler shows it gone, winds are gusty but settling down. Power is the only thing we lost, unlike Lee, I got to try out my generator within 3 days of purchase. Phone and cell service seem fully up and running. Curtis ""Magilla"" wrote in message news:nta7f.493514$5N3.204416@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net... > Power is the only thing we lost, unlike Lee, I got to try out my > generator within 3 days of purchase. What size generator did you go with? Gas, diesel, natural gas, or LPG powered? > What size generator did you go with? Gas, diesel, natural gas, or LPG > powered? 4500 Watt portable, electric start, 5 gallon gasoline tank for now. Runs the essentials well enough, for a very reasonable time on a tank, found that from using the 3800 from my work truck last year, except this one stays here, unlike the other that had to make the trip back and forth from work. Expect to get a natural gas conversion kit and tie it into my spa heater line in the near future, should be broken in nicely with gasoline by the time I can get my hands on a kit. Curtis > 4500 Watt portable, electric start, 5 gallon gasoline tank for now. > Runs the essentials well enough, for a very reasonable time on a tank, > found that from using the 3800 from my work truck last year, except this > one stays here, unlike the other that had to make the trip back and forth > from work. Should add that power outages here until Francis haven't been enough of a concern for me to worry about owning one, until recently always had one on my work vehicle. Curtis >> And timed with Cliff and Georege making similar accusations of me, not to >> mention Chilly with the occaisional hoist. > > Except not a similiar accusation. I'm preparing an HBO special as we speak, with all the relevent posts chronologically ordered. > I am not at liberty to list anyone, that permission is not yours or > mine to give. Well, I know the past and present cast of Rec.scuba intimately. Rich Lesperance went to medical school, sold all his dive gear. You're still here, Al's still here. That's it as far as I know. Maybe Mike Blitch, but he's been back a time or two, and I wasn't under the impression that he left in desperation. > I read the comments by Lee, Mike, Scott and Vandit, as well as past > ones from others. I guess that's a clarity thing there. George made his bed here, gave his opinion of Rec.scuba, as well as other lists that ran him off, many times. You're not gonna find much sympathy here for him. > Not my fault there. I did not violate my boundries. Nor have I come close to violating mine. > I'm preparing an HBO special as we speak, with all the relevent posts > chronologically ordered. Awful lot of assembly, and takes a chance of missing something. Hopefully, if you do, it will explain why that couldn't be considered a compulsive gesture. >> I am not at liberty to list anyone, that permission is not yours or >> mine to give. > > Well, I know the past and present cast of Rec.scuba intimately. If I didn't know better, sounds like you are still questioning me. Curtis >> I'm preparing an HBO special as we speak, with all the relevent posts >> chronologically ordered. > > Awful lot of assembly, and takes a chance of missing something. I posted a shortlink to the complete thread in chronological order, so anyone that wants can verify to their heart's content. But I don't miss things in these situations. It's all in black and white. > Hopefully, if you do, it will explain why that couldn't be considered a > compulsive gesture. 156 posts, it's a pain in the a.s. I don't know where complulsion comes into it. Boredom, maybe. >>> I am not at liberty to list anyone, that permission is not yours or >>> mine to give. >> >> Well, I know the past and present cast of Rec.scuba intimately. > > If I didn't know better, sounds like you are still questioning me. No, I'm questioning the statement that you made. :-) Like Cliff's previous comments, I don't understand what you mean. Like Cliff, asking for an explanation seems to tick you off. I dunno what to say. Shall we just ask the jury to disregard that statement, and have the court reporter strike it from the record?:-) > Curtis By the way, have you seen Chilly anywhere? She was hanging around all day and now I can't find her anywhere. (snip)> > By the way, have you seen Chilly anywhere? Sorry, I was out for dinner. Don't be jealous. > She was hanging around all day and now I can't find her anywhere. You must have meant, you'd been thinking about me all day. Not the same thing at all. > (snip)> >> By the way, have you seen Chilly anywhere? > > Sorry, I was out for dinner. Don't be jealous. I don't think anyone here's gonna make that leap with you, but, dare to dream... >> She was hanging around all day and now I can't find her anywhere. > > You must have meant, you'd been thinking about me all day. Not the same > thing at all. 9 e-mails, one after the other. Can't spin that, honey. Did you have any answers for me yet, or are you still dodging? > >> By the way, have you seen Chilly anywhere? > > > > Sorry, I was out for dinner. Don't be jealous. > > I don't think anyone here's gonna make that leap with you, but, dare to > dream... Poor Doug. > >> She was hanging around all day and now I can't find her anywhere. > > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Can't spin that, honey. I'm not trying to spin it at all. It is what it is. Please refer to my other post. Thanks for playing. > Did you have any answers for me yet, or are you still dodging? Answers to your trick question and your knock knock joke? Ya, I'll get right on that. > No, I'm questioning the statement that you made. :-) > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > I dunno what to say. Not ticket off, just curious. Not a "fact" but accurate enough, and I won't add names to the thread. > Shall we just ask the jury to disregard that statement, and have the > court reporter strike it from the record?:-) Since it's not "provable", that would be good. Hell, tossing the whole case out wouldn't get an arguement. Anyways, take care, starting to get busy at work again, post storm. Curtis "Magilla" wrote: >>>> Given the large surface area of many of the talking heads here >>>>lately, wouldn't surprise me if they're all a bunch of hoods. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Um, not aiming that at Cliff at all. Nor was it particularly meant to > be malicious. Exactly. I thought it was an excellent summary of rec.scuba as a whole, me included. > However, I'm sure the shoe fits beyond my intented targets. :-) Who's that a.shole I'm looking at in the mirror? ;-) > Who's that a.shole I'm looking at in the mirror? ;-) You dont know? Youre bent. >>Who's that a.shole I'm looking at in the mirror? ;-) > > You dont know? > > Youre bent. LOL That I am, that I am. > >>Who's that a.shole I'm looking at in the mirror? ;-) > > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > That I am, that I am. Seriously; a) I never represented myself as anything more than a hungover old jarhead. b) We discussed what we were going to do, and why. c) It worked. d) Period. As with most of this sh.t; what works, works. If we had ham, we could have ham and eggs, if we had eggs. Many may weigh more, but I bet you have way more miles of vascular structure... More pipes. >>>>Who's that a.shole I'm looking at in the mirror? ;-) >>> [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > > More pipes. I got zero argument with any of that. > I got zero argument with any of that. Maybe we should turn this into a gun thread... >>I got zero argument with any of that. > > Maybe we should turn this into a gun thread... LOL I trust you won't take it as a personal insult if I decline... > >>I got zero argument with any of that. > > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > I trust you won't take it as a personal insult if I decline... Not at all. But, since we are on the subject; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decompression_sickness and http://www.guncite.com/ Notice the similarities? > But, since we are on the subject; > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Notice the similarities? Yup. Those are definitely both URLs. >> Um, not aiming that at Cliff at all. Nor was it particularly meant >> to be malicious. > > Exactly. I thought it was an excellent summary of rec.scuba as a whole, > me included. You catch on quickly. Curtis "Magilla" wrote: >>> Um, not aiming that at Cliff at all. Nor was it particularly meant >>>to be malicious. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > You catch on quickly. Not really. I have a wee bit of experience with people telling me that I have more surface area on my talking head than is desirable. > Not really. I have a wee bit of experience with people telling me that I > have more surface area on my talking head than is desirable. LOL Humble pie is when 7 for 12 break, your elbow fractures, and the camera films you falling back on your a.s. Relief is the editing. Curtis "Magilla" wrote: > Humble pie is when 7 for 12 break, your elbow fractures, and the camera > films you falling back on your a.s. Ouch. >>"Magilla" wrote: >> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > He wasn't aiming that at you, personally. If he was leaving me out, I take back the five stars. Just wouldn't be funny without that. > If he was leaving me out, I take back the five stars. Just wouldn't be > funny without that. Naw, have to leave out those who figure out on their own it's a no-win situation. Curtis > thanks.. is it safe to say you dont see people in thinner suits wearing > gloves & hoods? There's a lot of heat loss from yer head. I wear a hood all the time, because (1) I'm a cold water wimp, and (2) they provide protection in wrecks/holes/etc and it's become a habit with me. I always wear gloves, but they provide no real thermal protection unless yer talking dive mittens. m >> thanks.. is it safe to say you dont see people in thinner suits wearing >> gloves & hoods? [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > I always wear gloves, but they provide no real thermal protection unless > yer talking dive mittens. Some guys, I ain't calling any names, could risk hypothermia from eating a sno-cone. > m > > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > Some guys, I ain't calling any names, could risk hypothermia from eating a > sno-cone. I represent that remark!!!! >>>>thanks.. is it safe to say you dont see people in thinner suits wearing >>>>gloves & hoods? [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > I represent that remark!!!! The way things are going around here lately, I'm glad you took it as a joke. Who are you diving with lately? E-mail if you want. >> > what's the rule of thumb for wetsuit thickness & water temp? how cold > for [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > thanks.. is it safe to say you dont see people in thinner suits wearing > gloves & hoods? Not quite. Gloves come in different thicknesses like wetsuits, from mild to sub-arctic. I wear gloves on every dive. Hoods, OTOH, are a 4 star pian in the a.s (YMMV), and I rarely wear one. >>> > what's the rule of thumb for wetsuit thickness & water temp? how cold >> for [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > >Hoods, OTOH, are a 4 star pian in the a.s (YMMV), and I rarely wear one. Also be prepared to leave the gloves on the boat. A large number of Carrib sites will not allow them. > Also be prepared to leave the gloves on the boat. A large number of > Carrib sites will not allow them. Except for shark and stingray dives, I've run into exactly none that won't let me wear gloves. I carry knives too. Lee >> Also be prepared to leave the gloves on the boat. A large number of >> Carrib sites will not allow them. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >Lee When I have been to Bonaire, Cozmel and Nassau they have told us to not wear gloves unless we have a medical reason. Seems folks feel ok with pulling themselves along over the coral if they have gloves > When I have been to Bonaire, Cozmel and Nassau they have told us to > not wear gloves unless we have a medical reason. Seems folks feel ok > with pulling themselves along over the coral if they have gloves When I dove in Cozumel, the Caymans, Nassau and other Bahamas islands, nobody even tried to tell me not to wear gloves. Gloves don't make you touch coral. Lee That's true that they don't make you touch the coral - lack of them makes you more careful NOT to touch it. (But I'm sure you knew that already.) > Gloves don't make you touch coral. > > Lee > That's true that they don't make you touch the coral - lack of them makes > you more careful NOT to touch it. (But I'm sure you knew that already.) Truth is, someone with Lee's diving abilities, if he touches coral, it's intentional with minimal impact. Curtis >> That's true that they don't make you touch the coral - lack of them makes >> you more careful NOT to touch it. (But I'm sure you knew that already.) > > Truth is, someone with Lee's diving abilities, if he touches coral, > it's intentional with minimal impact. More likely he's dead. > Curtis >> Truth is, someone with Lee's diving abilities, if he touches coral, >> it's intentional with minimal impact. > > More likely he's dead. :-) Was thinking of delicate removal of foreign objects, like fishing line, anchor / anchor line, trash, Canadians....... Curtis > That's true that they don't make you touch the coral - lack of them makes > you more careful NOT to touch it. (But I'm sure you knew that already.) > >>Gloves don't make you touch coral. >> >>Lee So you adjust the conditions rather than the diver. You must be a liberal. Signature“The darkest places in hell are reserved for those who maintain their neutrality in times of moral crisis.” > > That's true that they don't make you touch the coral - lack of them makes > you more careful NOT to touch it. (But I'm sure you knew that already.) I always take my gloves off to touch the coral. And that's not a joke. >> When I have been to Bonaire, Cozmel and Nassau they have told us to >> not wear gloves unless we have a medical reason. Seems folks feel ok [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > >Lee Gloves don't touch coral, the idiots wearing gloves touch coral. (not you, the other way around) Gloves are an enabler. I've seen people grab coral who weren't wearing gloves. Of course, I've also watched a guy wearing a skin who put on 22 pounds. Kept skipping off the bottom in the current (CZM). Didn't know that a) he was overweight and b) he could put a little air in the BC to temporarily aleviate the problem. The DM suggested he lose a little weight, then took 8 pounds off the belt without asking. Much better, although he still seemed to have a magnetic attraction to coral with his hands. Signaturedillon Anyone who says grown men don't cry has never taken a differential equations final. > Gloves don't touch coral, the idiots wearing gloves touch coral. (not > you, the other way around) > Gloves are an enabler. Gloves are a layer between your hands and the world, nothing more. I collect trash, including broken bottles, sharp pieces of metal, hooks and sinkers, encrusted rope, you name it. Some of the trash I collect is sharp and some of it has collected stinging organisms over the years. Fishing line seems to attract bristle worms. I don't know if you've ever touched a bristle worm without gloves, but I have . . . once. Since I prefer to leave the work alive and in the water, while removing the line, etc., gloves are worth having. Rope is particularly good about catching bits and pieces of Portuguese Man O War tentacles. This is true not only of the rope I find on the bottom. It's also true of the lines used for mooring buoys. I dive in and around wrecks. Some of them have sharper edges than I want to grab without some kind of protection. I also spearfish. Fish don't always die on cue. Sometimes, it'snecessary to grab them quickly and sometimes it's necessary to stick one's hand in the gills. Ever stick your bare hand in a fish's gills? If not, don't. Just take my word for it, they're sharp. Goves are as much a part of my dive gear as my plate, wing, regulator, knives, tank, fins and mask. They all go with me on every dive. The same basic equipment, every time, for all diving, just like those DIR guys. The only time I can recall intentionally diving without gloves was during shark dives in the Bahamas and stingray dives in Grand Cayman. I was asked not to wear them (note asked, not told) because they might harm the sharks and rays. I put them in my pocket (I had a pocket back then. I don't now). I never did put them on during the stingray dive, but when the shark dive was over, I put them on. That's just how it is. Dillon, nothing in this was directed at your comment. Your words just happened to be available when I felt the need to vent. Lee Frankly, If I needed to grab a piece of coral, I'd grab it with or without gloves. That's the nature of "need." With gloves, I probably won't cut myself to ribbons and probably won't have to grab more than once. Without them, who knows. >> Gloves don't touch coral, the idiots wearing gloves touch coral. (not >> you, the other way around) [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] >myself to ribbons and probably won't have to grab more than once. Without >them, who knows. OK I'll break in at this level Lee Dylon, I really don't think gloves are bad, I have two pair. I am just saying that operators have asked us not to wear gloves. Also I have seen the 20 dive wonders use their gloves to pull themselves along on the bottom. At 20 dives I hadn't bought gloves so I wasn't one of them. I have been on dives where I came back to the boat to get my gloves so I could port up some crap from the bottom. But none the less dive operators are trying to supress the wearing of gloves. I apploigize if this seems pendantic, I went to the bar for lunch and didn't go back to work. > When I dove in Cozumel, the Caymans, Nassau and other Bahamas islands, > nobody even tried to tell me not to wear gloves. Smaller operators in Cozumel don't have a problem with gloves, but the bigger ones like Dive Paradise forbid them. Being Mexico, you can usually get away with wearing gloves by informing them that you have a "skin condition". Likewise, smaller ops in Grand Cayman don't seem to have a problem with gloves, but bigger ops like Ocean Frontiers will tell you that there's a law against wearing them. I had quite the argument with a DM on the subject, patiently informing him that it wasn't really a law, but rather a voluntary policy adopted by the association of dive ops there. Unfortunately he didn't give a sh.t and wouldn't let me wear mine. That is just one reason why I'll never dive with Ocean Frontiers again. Bonaire absolutely forbids them. That is an ironclad Marine Park rule. However, being mainly shore diving, I suppose one could always chance it outside the hotels. At Capt. Don's, however, I tried the "skin condition" excuse and they told me I could only wear latex gloves. Thanks, but no thanks. As a result, I got a nasty hit when I put my hand up to prevent getting smashed into a dock piling by big surge on the way back in. The piling happened to be covered with encrusting fire coral. > thanks.. is it safe to say you dont see people in thinner suits wearing > gloves & hoods? Nope. The head is one of the biggest sources of lost heat. It's not real common, but not real rare either, to see somebody with a hood and thin wetsuit, sometimes a very thin one. Lee |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts |