Replies

I'm so glad that you mentioned this (the Draeger).

I've been muttering about an earlier comment by somebody. Muttering because, I'm not so old yet, that I have forgotten diving and being comfortable in the water.

The earlier comment by somebody, attempted to intimidate butterdezillion under a guise of ostensibly attempting to come to her assistance; and that comment tried to convey that anything other than accepting, that, with a tank but no "flotation device," a person would quickly sink.

That's when I began to mutter; as I was certain, that I have seen a tank, plus minimal tank-mount-shoulder-and-waist attaching-points, plus mask-and-snorkel, and a body's native flotation capacity, plus the few bubbles that might have inhabited minimal-apparel ... all getting along just fine. Indeed, so well, that a weight belt would be required to control descent.

It would be no surprise to me, to find, that the aircraft crash-landing at sea, site, which was within swimming distance *for some of the aircraft's survivors,* would also be an area where any number of divers could be present. (It is, after all, Hawaii, where that probability is higher, than along the shores of the Missouri River or Red River, in December.)

I do not equate, diver and assassin, regarding the aircraft accident. I figure that the odds of a diver in the area, are pretty good. I figure that the odds of foul play, might be good, and evidence might be in the video and pic's related ... but insufficient evidence, for now, for me at least.

I figure that *everybody* in the water, could have not recorded in their minds, "Hey, there's a diver!" I also figure, that somebody could have noticed, something.

I also figure that the person taking the video (GoPro), might have been who "noticed something" and then pondered what butterdezillion observed, for some time, and then submitted his video to the news media, with the same notion, "What do you see?"