Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] Karl Stanley article

["SIMON WALKDEN" <mrsym0r@gmail.com>]

While I've always admired Karl's creation and motivation, it's been an
unsettling thought that:
1. his submarine was never hydrostatically tested prior to commencing operation.
2. his submarine has never recieved any form of international maritime
certification.
3. His submarine Idabel was never 'designed', rather he acquired some
steel boilers, and effectively 'made it up' as he went along.
4. the fact that three portholes have cracked (i'm assuming this
occured whilst submerged) would suggest he is operating the submarine
outside of its operational limits.

Karl most definitely is a creative and talented individual, but in my
opinion taking other people to those depths in a vessel you haven't
specifically ensured is capable of sustaining habitability and safety
at those depths is somewhat wreckless..

- Simon

On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 4:29 PM, Brian Cox
<ojaivalleybeefarm@dslextreme.com> wrote:
> Personally I find it hilarious,  I doubt the story will find much publicity
> with all that's going on right now.  Jon, you are right about the PR aspect
> of it.  People now days are getting so far removed from reality that they
> now have a initiative on the ballot, here in California, to make it so
> chickens have more room to turn around in their cages,  and it will probably
> pass!  I hope we don't all get inspected by PETA now !
>
> Brian
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-personal_submersibles@psubs.org
> [mailto:owner-personal_submersibles@psubs.org]On Behalf Of jonw@psubs.org
> Sent: Thursday, October 23, 2008 7:34 PM
> To: personal_submersibles@psubs.org
> Subject: RE: [PSUBS-MAILIST] Karl Stanley article
>
>
> Hi Frank,
>
> I give you points for trying, but I don't think a large part of the
> population is going to agree with you.  Animal lovers come in large
> numbers and this is what I would call a public relations nightmare.  It's
> not clear to me how the reporter got the details of the horses demise, but
> whether Karl invited the reporter on board for the experience or simply
> relayed the details verbally it was a huge mistake and more than likely will
> affect him, and reflect upon him, negatively.  In the US at least, a horse
> is more often observed as an intelligent domesticated "pet" or "work
> partner" than a beast of burden as it was 150 years ago.  Things may be
> different in Roatan, but the article was published by a large US media
> outlet with (I suspect) a large US based readership.  Compounding the
> problem is the intent behind the action.  I think most urban-based folks
> will find the concept of shooting a horse (regardless of age) and dumping it
> in the ocean to attract large fish so that you can make money taking people
> on a dive trip to watch those fish eat the horse, insensitive.  I think you
> raised an interesting (and debatable) point when you compared the horse to
> other animals and said, "where do you draw the line".  However, I also think
> most people would place horses way above that line if one where ever
> officially defined.  Had the horse already been dead (which is what Karl
> should have told the press even if reality was different), it would have
> been a much different story since it could have been spun more positively.
> Call me crazy, but somehow the vision of bringing a horse out on a boat,
> shooting it in the head, tying cinder blocks to its hoofs and sending it
> overboard to attract "big beasts" from the ocean depths kind of takes the
> romance out of a 1,000 foot dive to the bottom of the ocean to see big fish
> eating in their natural environment.  I've met Karl and he's an intelligent,
> respectful, nice guy.  But I think he made a mistake with what he did, and
> most assuredly advertising the process to the press.  If he continues the
> procedure in the future, he may find PETA or GreenPEACE surrounding him as
> he surfaces from the deep with orange spray paint cans at the ready.
>
> my two cents,
> Jon
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-personal_submersibles@psubs.org
> [mailto:owner-personal_submersibles@psubs.org]On Behalf Of
> ShellyDalg@aol.com
> Sent: Thursday, October 23, 2008 5:51 PM
> To: personal_submersibles@psubs.org
> Subject: Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] Karl Stanley article
>
> The horse thing may sound a little cruel, but would we feel the same if it
> was a goat? or a sheep? how about a catfish? Maybe some chopped up squid? An
> earth worm? Where do you draw the line?
> I love horses as much or more as anyone, but I still like a nice big steak
> and egg breakfast.
> Karl is following his dream, and by the sound of it, doing well. I wouldn't
> have chosen to shoot the horse while on the boat ( for obvious reasons ) but
> baiting in the ocean in the search for knowledge is a long and accepted
> practice. I wonder if Karl does video of his travels to share with school
> children and others who can't go down with him.
> Frank D.



-- 
"Catapultam habeo. Nisi pecuniam omnem mihi dabis, ad caput tuum saxum
immane mittam."



************************************************************************
************************************************************************
************************************************************************
The personal submersibles mailing list complies with the US Federal
CAN-SPAM Act of 2003.  Your email address appears in our database
because either you, or someone you know, requested you receive messages
from our organization.

If you want to be removed from this mailing list simply click on the
link below or send a blank email message to:
	removeme-personal_submersibles@psubs.org

Removal of your email address from this mailing list occurs by an
automated process and should be complete within five minutes of
our server receiving your request.

PSUBS.ORG
PO Box 53
Weare, NH  03281
603-529-1100
************************************************************************
************************************************************************
************************************************************************