FACT: 90% of divers give up just before finding something really neat in an underwater cave
this post was submitted on 19 Dec 2023
9 points (100.0% liked)
internet funeral
7620 readers
6 users here now
ㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤart of the internet
What is this place?
• [email protected] with text and titles
• post obscure and surreal art with text
• nothing memetic, nothing boring
• unique textural art images
• Post only images or gifs (except for meta posts)
Guidlines
• no video posts are allowed
• No memes. Not even surreal ones. Post your memes on [email protected] instead
• If your submission can be posted to [email protected] (I.e. no text images), It should be posted there instead
This is a curated magazine. Post anything and everything. It will either stay up or be lost into the void.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Theres a good podcasts by stuff you should know on this. A scary thought to me is about kicking up sediment, causing zero visibility and they cant even see their hand in front of their goggles
I've done training dives in man made quarries under zero visibility conditions. There's no way in hell I'd go into an actual cave under those conditions.
It was bad enough when you'd almost run into a purposefully placed sculpture or bathtub in that flooded quarry.
You had to do a scavenger hunt to find stuff to pass your training and it was super disorienting.
I don't know if PADI still does that sort of thing or if it was unique to my training center conditions but it was wild.
I'll stick to open water, thank you very much.
New fear unlocked
Caves are also not uniformly shaped, the way you go in could look a lot different on the way out.
Here is a clip from Donald Cerrone on the Joe Rogan show where he tells a story like this. I really loathe Joe Rogan but this story is fantastic. Nightmare fuel.
https://youtu.be/or92IMcLoIc?si=0CemG6Qopl_-Bl8d
I dare you to watch this and not get absolutely freaked the fuck out, lol.
If this is the clip I think it is it’s been the joke of the cave diving community. Cerrone has almost reached meme status for this interview. Watch the Dive Talk video reacting to this clip if you’re curious.
Thanks for sharing, I'll look that up and check it out, as I'm really curious about things like this that I've not experienced. Regardless of whether he's an idiot or joke or whatever, I can totally see how a scenario like he describes could happen and how scary it could be. I definitely won't be trying to learn how to cave dive anytime soon.
Edit - here's the link to the dive talk video if anyone is curious like me
I’m curious about your thoughts now that you’ve watched it.
A couple takeaways for me after watching their breakdown -
- They seemed to generally agree with a lot of his points, although he clearly came across to them as an inexperienced amateur with how he described things and gaps in his story.
- Mofo should have NEVER let go of the line, or at minimum should have tied off on it when he went in to check on his buddy.
- It was never clear in his story why he lost the line and had to exit the way that he did. When he said he came out of the silt on the further inwards side of the cave, he should have been able to just grab the line and then follow it out. That's the biggest WTF to me after watching.
- Regardless of this dude's inexperience, and he's not a person I follow or anything, my original comment of that being a nightmareish scenario is definitely still valid. Feeling/becoming lost (even if it was due to your own stupidity) and knowing you're on a timer that's accelerating due to your panic would absolutely freak me out, and is enough where I don't think I'd ever want to cave dive. However, I'm usually a stickler for the rules, and I certainly wouldn't have let go I don't think. I'd want to ALWAYS be touching it or tied off against it. He was either a complete idiot or had an enormous amount of confidence in his abilities to free swim in an unfamiliar cave. Either way he was definitely showing his inexperience there.
- Fuck underwater caves! Although it's super fascinating to me, lol.
Farther is the correct word, and has been confused with further for so long (over a hundred years), that they both mean exactly the same thing nowadays, so not sure why people are taking issues with it.
Unless I'm missing something?
I don't see any comments of people taking issue with it. But words do mean things, and some people like to speak with precision.
Words apparently don't mean things anymore, Merriam Webster added a new definition for "literally" this year 
Merriam Webster is a descriptive dictionary. They don't tell you how words "should" be used, they say how words are used.
Using literally as an intensifier goes back literal centuries. The earliest written citation we've found of that usage goes back to 1769. It can be found everywhere from Dickens to Brontë.
It's also hardly the first word to go on a similar path towards becoming an intensifier. Very originally meant "genuine", really meant "in fact", absolutely meant "completely", etc.
But who complains about sentences like "I was really bored to death", or "I was absolutely rooted to the ground"? Does saying "it's very cold" just mean "it is a genuine fact that it is cold"?
Literally still means what it means. You can't use literally to mean "yellow", for example. People aren't generally confused when they come across the word.
Language is a complex and nuanced subject, but it often helps to remember that "all words are made up."
Idioms and hyperbole are both used extensively in language to imbue feeling to statements, most people would roll their eyes at someone who interjects with a "there's no actual evidence that boredom can be lethal" or a "I highly doubt that vendor would accept human limbs as payment," but somehow lots of people stan for "literal" snobbery.
If it makes you feel any better, you can think of it as a homophone from the same root: "in a manner related to literature," speaking to artistic yet inexact use of words in a sentence.
You took it further than I would. I'd listen to the sign these days, but there was absolutely a time that, that sign would have just been a challenge.
Edit: for you grammar nerds. Do I need that comma? It seems like it should be there, but it also seems superfluous at the same time.
With the "that, that" the comma helps, but you actually don't even need the second that for that sentence to make grammatical sense.
I feel like if they replaced the first "that" with "when" it would read smoother. "...a time when that sign"