Seriously guys, i totally gree on the fact of the human side of things... father & son died on this wreck. This is tragic, very sad and i would also like to remind that 1500 people survived too, which is something we can salute on such a rescue... even if it happened in a so we hear on the news "far from perfect" methods
Some of us like spyro or others are wondering and having talks with our wife or so about the wreck. It's a normal thought about a wreck dive or about a dive when we are divers... i don't see the wrong about it, and i feel that it's also simply part of our feelings coming out that way.
Others like chaz were on the wreck and have feelings about it too, and i thank him for taking the time to write a little thing about it.
A friend of mine was in thailand during the Tsunami on phi-phi... he wrote a long text after having been followed and it helped a lot to clear off the tragedy he was keeping in. He posted it on a board and i must admit it did move quite a few people around, it was a great way to understand a little more about the inside view of what happened...
Back to the subject now. Now We do have that ethical concern about people getting down and taking some stuff or not, just diving the wreck or not diving it at all. we are now 3 days from the sinkage and many would argue the idea of going down now.
If we considered the sinkage another way (with no human casualities) woudl that change the way some of you think ? (which would actually in a way shock me more).
Why does the human casuality (which is always sad and tragic, wherever it happens) change the fact of diving for things on the ship or not... It's either ethical or unethical to dive a ship wreck just after it sunk to recover stuff full stop in my view... some might not have anything against it... others might do ... but this should not change anything on the ethics.
I know it's a little bit of a "troll" to ask this ethical, unethical question... but i'm sure it will be interesting to have some ideas about it.