Anonymous wrote:I sincerely hope they are found and then charged every penny of taxpayers’ millions of dollars that are being spent on the recovery missions.

This is the one piece that doesn’t bother me very much. It’s a training exercise for those resources in the event we need to go rescue our own people. The military currently doesn’t have a lot of real world scenarios to provide practical experience. I have a nephew who went in just before Covid, and between those lockdowns and no real conflict zones, he hasn’t done much if any live deployment. It’s good for operational readiness to work on situations like these.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can’t believe the kids mom allowed it?! I mean if a husband wants to risk a life you can’t necessarily stop him but most moms wouldn’t let DH risk their kid’s life. Unless it was one of those you’re 18, I can’t stop you households. But usually Pakistani households aren’t like that - though I guess only 1/2 Pakistani here.

Your comment reveals your hindsight bias. They almost certainly didn’t know how risky this was. We only know now due to the intense investigations related to the incident.

DP: It doesn’t take “hindsight” or “bias” or “intense investigations related to the incident “ to get that being sealed into a small container to go exploring a wreck — inherently unpredictable— with a limited supply of air, and few if any specific plans in the event of an emergency is way beyond what most people would view as “risky” — on multiple levels.

It doesn’t take hindsight or bias to get that sky diving, bungee jumping or even flying is inherently risky either. Yet people do it all the time.

Flying lol. Flying on a commercial airplane is not risky. Driving is riskier. Anyway, no these things are not the same as doing the submarine gigantic thing because they have been done a lot, by many different companies. There are a lot of safety redundancies in place. And even with that I still wouldn’t let my kid or husband (I know, I’m a shrew) fly in a very small, non-commercial airplane. It’s not hindsight bias it’s just basic thinking skills and risks assessment abilities.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can’t believe the kids mom allowed it?! I mean if a husband wants to risk a life you can’t necessarily stop him but most moms wouldn’t let DH risk their kid’s life. Unless it was one of those you’re 18, I can’t stop you households. But usually Pakistani households aren’t like that - though I guess only 1/2 Pakistani here.

Your comment reveals your hindsight bias. They almost certainly didn’t know how risky this was. We only know now due to the intense investigations related to the incident.

DP: It doesn’t take “hindsight” or “bias” or “intense investigations related to the incident “ to get that being sealed into a small container to go exploring a wreck — inherently unpredictable— with a limited supply of air, and few if any specific plans in the event of an emergency is way beyond what most people would view as “risky” — on multiple levels.

Life is all about risk/rewards. That’s what makes us humans different than our closest cousins the chimps. Without it, we are no different. Want a banana PP?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My tween thinks that maybe someone wanted the billionaire dead. He has a point. How can they not know where they are when they have the exact coordinates of the wreck and of where they last were? The submersible sank like a stone in the ocean (literally) from a specific location. Obviously, it is on the ocean floor at or very near to that exact spot.

I say this as someone who teaches teenagers: their propensity to assigning EVERY SINGLE THING that happens in the world, even past documented incidents, an ulterior motive or conspiracy theory is incredibly annoying. These kids literally think Helen Keller didn’t exist and that the Titanic was sunk on purpose and other such nonsense. Why indulge this.

I teach teens and they don’t even know who Helen Keller was.

Anonymous wrote:My tween thinks that maybe someone wanted the billionaire dead. He has a point. How can they not know where they are when they have the exact coordinates of the wreck and of where they last were? The submersible sank like a stone in the ocean (literally) from a specific location. Obviously, it is on the ocean floor at or very near to that exact spot.

No, he doesn’t have a point. Has he never heard of ocean currents?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can’t believe the kids mom allowed it?! I mean if a husband wants to risk a life you can’t necessarily stop him but most moms wouldn’t let DH risk their kid’s life. Unless it was one of those you’re 18, I can’t stop you households. But usually Pakistani households aren’t like that - though I guess only 1/2 Pakistani here.

Your comment reveals your hindsight bias. They almost certainly didn’t know how risky this was. We only know now due to the intense investigations related to the incident.

DP: It doesn’t take “hindsight” or “bias” or “intense investigations related to the incident “ to get that being sealed into a small container to go exploring a wreck — inherently unpredictable— with a limited supply of air, and few if any specific plans in the event of an emergency is way beyond what most people would view as “risky” — on multiple levels.

It doesn’t take hindsight or bias to get that sky diving, bungee jumping or even flying is inherently risky either. Yet people do it all the time.

Anonymous wrote:My tween thinks that maybe someone wanted the billionaire dead. He has a point. How can they not know where they are when they have the exact coordinates of the wreck and of where they last were? The submersible sank like a stone in the ocean (literally) from a specific location. Obviously, it is on the ocean floor at or very near to that exact spot.

I say this as someone who teaches teenagers: their propensity to assigning EVERY SINGLE THING that happens in the world, even past documented incidents, an ulterior motive or conspiracy theory is incredibly annoying. These kids literally think Helen Keller didn’t exist and that the Titanic was sunk on purpose and other such nonsense. Why indulge this.

Anonymous wrote:My tween thinks that maybe someone wanted the billionaire dead. He has a point. How can they not know where they are when they have the exact coordinates of the wreck and of where they last were? The submersible sank like a stone in the ocean (literally) from a specific location. Obviously, it is on the ocean floor at or very near to that exact spot.

No, it enters the water from a point quite a distance from the boat.

Anonymous wrote:Can’t believe the kids mom allowed it?! I mean if a husband wants to risk a life you can’t necessarily stop him but most moms wouldn’t let DH risk their kid’s life. Unless it was one of those you’re 18, I can’t stop you households. But usually Pakistani households aren’t like that - though I guess only 1/2 Pakistani here.

They probably didn’t think it was that dangerous. Lots of trips to the titanic have been made and this is the first time something like this has happened.

Something I saw in an interview that I thought was interesting is that they actually drop the submersible into the water some distance from the Titanic to account for the water current which moves it horizontally as it travels vertically. Apparently there is quite a current in that area so that distance may be quite large. It's not as simple as them just dropping the thing in directly above the boat and this really complicates looking for it now.

My tween thinks that maybe someone wanted the billionaire dead. He has a point. How can they not know where they are when they have the exact coordinates of the wreck and of where they last were? The submersible sank like a stone in the ocean (literally) from a specific location. Obviously, it is on the ocean floor at or very near to that exact spot.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can’t believe the kids mom allowed it?! I mean if a husband wants to risk a life you can’t necessarily stop him but most moms wouldn’t let DH risk their kid’s life. Unless it was one of those you’re 18, I can’t stop you households. But usually Pakistani households aren’t like that - though I guess only 1/2 Pakistani here.

Your comment reveals your hindsight bias. They almost certainly didn’t know how risky this was. We only know now due to the intense investigations related to the incident.

Some light reading for you:


https://people.com/man-who-has-been-on-titanic-sub-calls-it-majestic-but-risky-7550564

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can’t believe the kids mom allowed it?! I mean if a husband wants to risk a life you can’t necessarily stop him but most moms wouldn’t let DH risk their kid’s life. Unless it was one of those you’re 18, I can’t stop you households. But usually Pakistani households aren’t like that - though I guess only 1/2 Pakistani here.

Your comment reveals your hindsight bias. They almost certainly didn’t know how risky this was. We only know now due to the intense investigations related to the incident.

DP: It doesn’t take “hindsight” or “bias” or “intense investigations related to the incident “ to get that being sealed into a small container to go exploring a wreck — inherently unpredictable— with a limited supply of air, and few if any specific plans in the event of an emergency is way beyond what most people would view as “risky” — on multiple levels.

Anonymous wrote:Coast Guard officials estimated the five passengers could run out of air just before 7:10 a.m.

Maybe then this circus can die down. There was never any hope of rescue so wall to wall coverage if this for 4 straight days was getting crazy. Once the official limits of oxygen capacity have been surpassed the story can die.

Coast Guard officials estimated the five passengers could run out of air just before 7:10 a.m.