skirtcafe.org

Thanks Carl,

I asked largely because I have a fascination for coelacanths and have long wanted to see one while scuba diving. to me the way they have been rediscovered after being thought to be extinct just amplifies how little we know about the seven tenths of the earth covered by the oceans.

Have fun,


Ian.

They live at depth - you won't see one when scuba diving.

deleted

ChristopherJ wrote:They live at depth - you won't see one when scuba diving.

They range very deep but come up as "shallow" as 50 or 60m at night, comfortably in the depth range that I'm happy with (using appropriate gas mixes). having said that, most encounters with them have been around the 100m to 110m mark, somewhat closer to my limits but still just about accessible with the right equipment, techniques and support.

There is a website here produced by the team in South Africa that has dived with and videoed coelacanths; so it's not impossible, just beyond my budget at present. (I also have some reservations about the diving practices of the team involved but that is a separate issue and we are so far off topic now that I think we should probably drop this one).

Have fun,


Ian.

Other websites which discuss diving with these fascinating fossils:
African Coelacanth Ecosystem
Triton Diving

Hello friends just stop to say after reading your posts that as of the last two months I now carry a purse with long straps like a "haversack a bag, usually carried by a single shoulder strap" my self as some of you have stated I hat things in my pockets and I find that I can hold a hell of a lot of things that I like to have with me like pantyhose if I find I have run in mine that I'm wearing plus I can carry my ipad and new phone. Men have had the haversacks for three 300 years or more so if some one asks you why do you carry a purse you can tell them it a "haversack" and men have used them many years.They had them in the revolutionary war at the birth of the United States. later in the civil war both Union and Confederate infantrymen used them for every thing even to carry food, later they turned in to backpacks.

In 1910 the U.S. Army adopted the M-1910 Haversack as the standard back pack for all infantrymen. The pack is essentially a sheet of rugged khaki-colored canvas that folds around its contents (bedroll, clothing, daily rations, and assorted personal items), and is held together by flaps and adjustable buckle-straps. The two shoulder straps are designed to attach to a web belt or suspender configuration. The exterior of the pack has loops, rings, and grommet tabs for attaching a bayonet sheath, a "meat can" (mess kit) pouch, and a canvas carrier for a short-handled shovel (aka. entrenchment tool).

This pack remained in service, most notably during World War I, until 1928 when it was superseded by the modifed M-1928 pack. However, thousands of surplus M10s were issued during World War II to compensate for shortages in war-time textile production.

The M-1928 haversack continued to be the standard-issue army back pack until the last year of World War II. The only exceptions being officers, engineers, paratroops and other soldiers who were issued the more compact M-1936 Musette bag. The M28 was gradually phased out in 1944 with the introduction of the M-1944 and M-1945 Canvas Combat Field Pack configuration. This new two-part design, based on the Marine M-1941 system, used a much smaller back pack (for rations, clothes, and mess kit), and a separate Cargo Bag that attached to the bottom for extra clothes and shoes. The top pack had the same type of grommet tabs and loops as the M-1928 for attaching a bayonet and entrenchment tool plus straps for securing a "horseshoe" bedroll.

The Marines carried the M10 and M28 haversack in both world wars, but they also developed their own exclusive pack system in 1941. The M28 was considered cumbersome and unsuitable for jungle fighting in the Pacific theater. A more versatile two-part system called the M-1941 Haversack was devised. This comprised an upper "marching pack" for rations, poncho and clothes, and a lower knapsack for extra shoes and utilities. The exterior of the upper pack had loops and grommet tabs for attaching a bayonet, shovel, bedroll, extra canteen, and first-aid pouch. Originally issued in tan or khaki canvas, a slightly modified olive drab version was introduced in 1943.
Take care and happy freestyle fashions

Off topic but I have to pick up on this diving molarkey. I got my PADI last year in Dosthill quarry on a freezing (well 4c water temp) Feb day. Luckily my advanced quali was in Tanzania in March - 30c water! That was better....

What an awesome activity. Floating, 8 inches above amazing coral, moving 1 inch up and down max, or drift diving - it's a serene activity. I am off to Bora Bora next year on honeymoon. With a respirator!

Yes I carry a Tumi man's purse. very expensive but it was that or buy a women's purse. and the wife would have flipped out. lol

To me, this conversation is very odd. What you call "man-bags" we simply call "bags" here in Sweden. It is *very* commonplace for most people (men) under 40 to carry a different variety of bags.

Of course, they differ from your womens handbags in design and, particularly, in how they are worn. I'd say that in 90% of the cases, the strap is always a cross-should strap. The rest 10 percent is worn either regular should strap or simply carried. I'm yet to come across any guy wearing a bag with a short shoulder strap under his arm/should.

I think I have about 6-7 different bags myself.

What do we need to call these things "man bags"? They are really purses. It is absurd and ridiculuous. Another crazy label is "mandals". Men have been wearing sandals since long before Jesus walked the Earth. They are "sandals", not mandals!

If a woman wears a backpack does she call it a womanpack? Do you see the absurdity? If you carry a purse, please just call it a purse and correct ignorant folks when they call it a manbag.

Regards,

Jamie

Jamie,

You hit it perfectly correct. I usually buy womens over the sholder purses and they come in all looks and feels, so I an get em butch or femme to match my mood. Oh and also cheaper because they are not marked up to be sold in the "ManBag" market even though they look very close.

Dawn

The woman who makes my purses calls them purses and so do I. When the door guard at the museum wanted to look inside, they called it a bag. Who cares, it carries what I need to have with me.

I call mine a purse. Currently I'm carrying a fairly big one, because I have small computer inside. Without the computer I carry one of my smaller purses, just large enough for credit cards / currency / cell phone.

Chris

PS: Purse in English appears to come from the same root as "Bourse" in French. In modern French "Bourse" means 'Stock Market', i.e. 'the place where the money is.'

My 'Man Bag' is old Merc. Estate car shaped. It can hold all manner of things, is self propelled and has room for me inside it as well!.
If I need to step more than a dozen paces from it carrying anything, I make use of a store holdall, essentially for putting groceries in. My wallet I put in a pocket, otherwise I HATE all manner of external accoutrements, except when I'm trying to catch a 'plane. Then I'll stick my passport and ticket/boarding card in another pocket, and drag a little compact wheelie behind me.

Tom K.

Kirbstone wrote:My wallet I put in a pocket, otherwise I HATE all manner of external accoutrements, except when I'm trying to catch a 'plane. Then I'll stick my passport and ticket/boarding card in another pocket, and drag a little compact wheelie behind me.

Does wearing something which might draw attention to yourself ever cause any problems at airport security?

skirtyscot wrote:Does wearing something which might draw attention to yourself ever cause any problems at airport security?

In the case of something like a bag, I can only surmise that it'd make life easier because one would not need to empty his pockets and possibly miss something; one merely takes it off his shoulder and puts it on the belt. Of course that won't do diddly in the face of the rest of the "security theatre" that's going on now, but it might speed up one aspect of the ordeal.

As I've mentioned before, I find that I've taken quite happily to carrying a bag when the amount of stuff I have to carry exceeds available pocket space, or the number of gadgets I have to lug around if worn on a belt would make me look like Batman. Throw it all in the bag, grab the bag, and go. I don't even get odd looks, which, given the bag, is rather surprising. It's another non-issue.