Lindaland
  Global Unity 2.0
  What We Are Facing in the Gulf (Page 1)

Post New Topic  Post A Reply
profile | register | preferences | faq

UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone!
This topic is 2 pages long:   1  2 
next newest topic | next oldest topic
Author Topic:   What We Are Facing in the Gulf
T
Knowflake

Posts: 2436
From:
Registered: Apr 2009

posted July 21, 2010 12:41 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for T     Edit/Delete Message
The BP Deepwater Horizon, Macondo Well Blowout,
and what we are facing in the Gulf

quote:
I have just read a report on the nature of the problem in the Gulf of Mexico that is so clear, graphic, intelligent, comprehensive and human that I've converted it into a PDF for ease of access and sharing. This is MUST READ information. Please click here.

If you didn't understand the problem before, you will if you read this through to the end. It confirms the uncomfortable information below [8, 9 and 11 June updates: please read these if you have not done so already].

It describes the magnitude of the problem in engineering detail, and states how scared a lot of the engineers are who understand what has happened. In my opinion, everyone needs to educate themselves rapidly on what we have to find a way of dealing with.

The document is in two parts. The first part, written on 11 May, explains how important it was for the 'top kill' operation to succeed. The author confessed that he prayed that it would.

We now know that it failed. The author wrote the second part today. We're now in a situation never before faced by our civilization, and no-one knows for certain what to do.



http://projectavalon.net/The_BP_Deepwater_Horizon_Macondo_Well_Blowout_and_what_we_are_facing_in_the_Gulf.pdf

IP: Logged

T
Knowflake

Posts: 2436
From:
Registered: Apr 2009

posted July 21, 2010 03:24 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for T     Edit/Delete Message
lots of alternative info on this at project avalon. http://projectavalon.net/

IP: Logged

T
Knowflake

Posts: 2436
From:
Registered: Apr 2009

posted July 21, 2010 03:31 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for T     Edit/Delete Message
quote:
As I explain in my audio interview, the alternative media have a tough job: because no-one's giving press conferences on what's really going on.

The energy and intention and drive of the alternative media comes from people just

KNOWING that something is badly wrong.

But they don't know exactly what that is. In their zeal, they sometimes pick on the wrong thing... they start running with the wrong ball.

Meanwhile, the controllers understand this mechanism perfectly.... and keep on giving the alternative media the wrong ball to run with. And run, they do. For me, this has been an important learning experience.

There are major unreported problems in the world (see my new video for the ongoing oil catastrophe in the Niger Delta, for instance, which up till now no-one has known or cared about). There is a secret space program. There is a colony on Mars. The world has for centuries been run by a superintelligent, self-serving, perverted extraterrestrial race who regard humans as only useful in certain situations and have only their own ends in mind. 9/11 was an inside job. Advanced technology - including real stargates - exists that would fit well in any science fiction movie. Serious attempts are made all the time to control our conscious and unconscious minds. And there's MUCH more, as any follow of Project Avalon or Camelot or will know.

But we have to get our facts right, or we become no better than the National Enquirer... and we will forever stay in our ghetto as our more conventional colleagues laugh at our absurdity. We have to sometimes run with speculation or what we believe is true - and then rescind and correct that if we find we've made a mistake. We have to be honest, and credibility and rationality are how we in the alternative media should be judged by the external world.


IP: Logged

T
Knowflake

Posts: 2436
From:
Registered: Apr 2009

posted July 21, 2010 03:50 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for T     Edit/Delete Message
This is an interesting interview...
http://projectavalon.net/forum4/

IP: Logged

AbsintheDragonfly
Moderator

Posts: 1081
From: Gaia
Registered: Apr 2010

posted July 21, 2010 11:27 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for AbsintheDragonfly     Edit/Delete Message
What to do?

Guess I need to get rid of the car...

Thanks for posting it T.

IP: Logged

katatonic
Knowflake

Posts: 4667
From:
Registered: Apr 2009

posted July 21, 2010 01:13 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for katatonic     Edit/Delete Message
and it is far from just the gulf that is at stake. there is nigeria, which has been pretty much wallowing in oil spills for 40 years...

and this huge spill in china which i had not heard about before...apparently 165 square miles' worth!

WARNING: the following story about the huge spill in china includes some graphic pictures of a HUMAN coated in oil like the birds we have seen from the gulf.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38337393/ns/world_news-world_environment

IP: Logged

katatonic
Knowflake

Posts: 4667
From:
Registered: Apr 2009

posted July 21, 2010 03:11 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for katatonic     Edit/Delete Message
you do know, abs, don't you, that cars are not the worst offenders? the industrial complex uses far and away more oil than all the rest of us put together.

and that goes for light bulbs too...i hear incandescent bulbs are being eased out and we will all have to use fluorescents in future...now i know they save energy but the light bulb is one of the least offensive of all our energy devices. and from what i remember fluorescent light is NOT GOOD FOR HUMANS. so i am perplexed by this among all the other seemingly senseless ways this is being approached/attacked.

IP: Logged

T
Knowflake

Posts: 2436
From:
Registered: Apr 2009

posted July 21, 2010 03:19 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for T     Edit/Delete Message
I'm not sure Abs. This is so huge and most people don't realize the scope of it. Maybe it's the beginning of the end, the end that needs to come.

Thanks for the info kat. What an enourmous nightmare.

IP: Logged

AbsintheDragonfly
Moderator

Posts: 1081
From: Gaia
Registered: Apr 2010

posted July 21, 2010 04:10 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for AbsintheDragonfly     Edit/Delete Message
*sigh* I know, it's just I sometimes feel I have to do something. It makes me so frustrated knowing that the people who are the worst offenders, will NOT do anything different. I feel like if I do one thing different, at least that's some effort towards the positive end of the stick. Know what I'm saying?

We don't use florescents anymore, I'd switched, but I read that they have a ton of mercury in them and if they break open it's a danger to small ones. So we're back to incandecent.

IP: Logged

katatonic
Knowflake

Posts: 4667
From:
Registered: Apr 2009

posted July 21, 2010 05:53 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for katatonic     Edit/Delete Message
maybe it is just california but they are planning on phasing out the incandescents. so we will all have to trot to the recycling plant to dispose of our mercury laden spirals broken or not. they can't be dumped in the landfill the way regular bulbs can...but unless they've been seriously upgraded fluorescent light is not a healthy way to go, even before you get to the ingredients inside the blub.

i'm looking into it still.

IP: Logged

AbsintheDragonfly
Moderator

Posts: 1081
From: Gaia
Registered: Apr 2010

posted July 21, 2010 11:10 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for AbsintheDragonfly     Edit/Delete Message
Well as California goes, so goes the nation...

Guess it's time to switch back to candles

IP: Logged

Deux*Antares
Knowflake

Posts: 832
From: I am where I am and it's enough.
Registered: Apr 2009

posted July 22, 2010 04:23 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Deux*Antares     Edit/Delete Message
quote:
This is so huge and most people don't realize the scope of it.

I agree, T.

People at Godlikeproductions.com are talking about TWO separate BP wells that blew out, one in February and one in April.
http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message1139291/pg2

IP: Logged

iQ
Knowflake

Posts: 1939
From: Chennai, India
Registered: Apr 2009

posted July 26, 2010 07:59 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for iQ     Edit/Delete Message
Warning of news blackout about gulf residents suffering from chemical poisoning:
http://www.examiner.com/x-10438-Human-Rights-Examiner~y2010m7d24-Censored-Gulf-news-Impending-refugee-health-humanitarian-crisis-Day-100

IP: Logged

katatonic
Knowflake

Posts: 4667
From:
Registered: Apr 2009

posted July 27, 2010 02:01 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for katatonic     Edit/Delete Message
...Many times We have used this analogy, but it is simple and it cannot be
more simple so that everyone can understand. Imagine You are looking in
the mirror. You see a reflection of Your self in the mirror. The
reflection shows a pimple on Your face. Now, upon seeing this pimple,
do You reach to the mirror and try to pick at it? No. You address the
sore where it exists~~ on Your face! The reflection is simply showing
You what is coming from within You. The same is true for the world You
live in and see around You. Some things are completely personal to You,
because they are an animated expression or reflection of Your own mind,
or, there is something traumatic and catastrophic that is happening on
a global scale, such as the Gulf oil spill. You may say, “ I didn’t
create that! I didn’t have any such thoughts about the gulf or oil
spills before that happened.” The truth of the matter, is that the
collective mind is the “catch all” for all the negative thoughts and
emotions You send out… and if the mass mind is collectively negative
about being powerless to the oil tycoons, then Yes! You did help to
manifest this disaster! The first step to healing is taking
responsibility for what You have contributed, whether that is
constantly complaining every time You fill Your gas tank, or whether
You have had to sacrifice some recreation because gas prices have made
You poor. All of it expands in Your reality the more You focus on the
illusion. Energy flows where attention goes. This is a simple enough
law to understand and live by isn’t it? Yes, it requires discipline of
the mind and an earnest desire to live a life that You have co-created
with Source Energy… but, Dear Ones, this is Your Power. While You must
address the effect, You must not put all of Your attention and focus
there. Cleaning up the Gulf is much much different than focusing more
damaging amounts of negative energy back into the collective mind, by
hating BP and those focused on destroying the earth. You think You are
being pro-active for change by hating what is in front of You… but The
Law of Attraction is here to teach You that what You hate or send
energy to, no matter what the vibration, You are calling for in Your
experience. You are not helping Beloved Gaia by sending hateful
thoughts and emotions to the people You feel are the villains! You are
not victims, Dear Children, You are the co-creators!! As soon as You
realize this, You will have made a tremendous shift in Your
consciousness. You must control Your thoughts and emotions!

http://starseeds.net/profiles/blog/show?id=2312030%3ABlogPost%3A203553&xgs=1&xg_source=msg_share_post

IP: Logged

jwhop
Knowflake

Posts: 2046
From: Madeira Beach, FL USA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted July 27, 2010 11:37 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for jwhop     Edit/Delete Message
So, where's all that oil which was released into the Gulf of Mexico?

Cleanup crews and cleanup boats are having a hard time finding it.

BP Oil Spill: Clean-Up Crews Can't Find Crude in the Gulf
By JEFFREY KOFMAN
BURAS, La. July 26, 2010

For 86 days, oil spewed into the Gulf of Mexico from BP's damaged well, dumping some 200 million gallons of crude into sensitive ecosystems. BP and the federal government have amassed an army to clean the oil up, but there's one problem -- they're having trouble finding it.

The leak is capped and the spill appears to be shrinking, but where is it going?Watch 'World News' for the latest coverage on the Gulf oil spill.

At its peak last month, the oil slick was the size of Kansas, but it has been rapidly shrinking, now down to the size of New Hampshire.

Today, ABC News surveyed a marsh area and found none, and even on a flight out to the rig site Sunday with the Coast Guard, there was no oil to be seen. ....
http://abcnews.go.com/WN/bp-oil-spill-crude-mother-nature-breaks-slick/story?id=11254252

IP: Logged

katatonic
Knowflake

Posts: 4667
From:
Registered: Apr 2009

posted July 28, 2010 12:20 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for katatonic     Edit/Delete Message
WAG THE DOG

IP: Logged

jwhop
Knowflake

Posts: 2046
From: Madeira Beach, FL USA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted July 28, 2010 09:09 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for jwhop     Edit/Delete Message
On the Surface, Gulf Oil Spill Is Vanishing Fast; Concerns Stay
By JUSTIN GILLIS and CAMPBELL ROBERTSON
Published: July 27, 2010

The oil slick in the Gulf of Mexico appears to be dissolving far more rapidly than anyone expected, a piece of good news that raises tricky new questions about how fast the government should scale back its response to the Deepwater Horizon disaster.

The immense patches of surface oil that covered thousands of square miles of the gulf after the April 20 oil rig explosion are largely gone, though sightings of tar balls and emulsified oil continue here and there.

Reporters flying over the area Sunday spotted only a few patches of sheen and an occasional streak of thicker oil, and radar images taken since then suggest that these few remaining patches are quickly breaking down in the warm surface waters of the gulf.

John Amos, president of SkyTruth, an environmental advocacy group that sharply criticized the early, low estimates of the size of the BP leak, noted that no oil had gushed from the well for nearly two weeks.

“Oil has a finite life span at the surface,” Mr. Amos said Tuesday, after examining fresh radar images of the slick. “At this point, that oil slick is really starting to dissipate pretty rapidly.”......
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/28/us/28spill.html?_r=1&hp

IP: Logged

T
Knowflake

Posts: 2436
From:
Registered: Apr 2009

posted July 28, 2010 11:41 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for T     Edit/Delete Message
Thanks for the info and links everyone. I'm going to check them out when i have more time.

IP: Logged

jwhop
Knowflake

Posts: 2046
From: Madeira Beach, FL USA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted August 07, 2010 11:52 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for jwhop     Edit/Delete Message
Disaster that never was: Why claims that BP created history's worst oil spill may be the most cynical spin campaign ever
By David Jones
Last updated at 10:31 PM on 6th August 2010

The warm, white sand stretches for miles as clean and flat as a freshly laundered bed sheet.

The turquoise sea is so clear that I can see silvery fish playing around my toes as I take a cooling paddle.

If there is any more pristine resort in which to spend a summer holiday than Pensacola Beach, on the Gulf Coast of Florida, I would like to find it.

And yet, at a time of year when usually there is barely room to unfold a deckchair, the shore is eerily deserted.

Ask Pensacola’s fretfully quiet seafront traders why the tourists have all stayed away and they angrily recall one chaotic day back in late June.

Then, hungry for dramatic TV footage to support Barack Obama’s announcement, that the BP - or, as he preferred, ‘British Petroleum’ - oil spill was ‘the worst environmental disaster America has ever faced’, news networks descended on their town.

They quickly found what they were looking for: shocking images of Pensacola’s famously white beaches thickly-coated with sticky, black crude oil and apparently beyond salvation.

The apocalyptic message was reinforced in doom-laden interviews with locals. ‘It’s damn near biblical. This place is done for!’ lamented 36-year-old Kevin Reed, whose family have swum and sunbathed in the area for generations.

His anguish was understandable.

Yet, as I saw this week, nothing could be further from the truth. Strolling along the beach for an hour, I found just one, pea-sized tar-ball which crumbled to nothing between my fingers.

When, as a young boy, I played on Morecambe beach in Lancashire, worse things often washed up from the nearby ICI refinery.

Moreover, if the U.S. TV news crews had returned just three days after their original visit, they would have seen that the black morass had already been removed by some of the 20,000 clean-up workers hired by BP.

The workers are still there - only now they are using toothbrushes to sift out even the tiniest particles of oil.

But, of course, after a ‘catastrophic’ oil spill, a spotless beach doesn’t make dramatic viewing and who wants to know?

Certainly not the politicians, nor the green-lobby tub-thumpers, nor the compensation claimants and their mega-bucks lawyers.

Until this week, it didn’t fit with the White House’s British-bashing script, either. In recent days, though, we have witnessed an extraordinary U-turn in America’s attitude towards the great spill.

It began when a respected Time magazine environmental writer voiced the near-heretical proposition: that the effects of the Deepwater Horizon disaster on April 20 had been massively hyped.

His article was largely based on the opinions of Professor Ivan van Heerden, a brilliant but controversial marine scientist fired by Louisiana State University after publishing a book about Hurricane Katrina that said cataclysmic flooding was inevitable because the protection given to the coast was wholly inadequate.

He said: ‘There is just no data to suggest this is an environmental disaster - although BP lied about the size of the oil spill, we’re not seeing catastrophic impacts.’

Emboldened by the academic’s willingness to go against the accepted wisdom, other leading scientists have concurred, with similar views being expressed in influential U.S. newspapers such as the New York Times and Washington Post.

It was against this background that the Obama administration made its own dramatic U-turn this week.

In a humiliating climb-down, it conceded in an official report from the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) that the ‘vast majority’ of the spilled oil had already gone.

The rest, it said, had probably diluted and didn’t appear to pose much of a threat.

According to 25 leading U.S. government and independent scientists, the feared catastrophe to the coast’s fragile ecosystem had been averted.

The cynical spin from Washington suggested that Obama had successfully browbeaten BP into mopping up its mess - with Mother Nature lending a helping hand.
What more suitably upbeat message with which to mark the president’s 49th birthday?

So were the doom-mongers really so wrong, and if so, then why?

Why was one of Britain’s greatest companies so demonised? Why did America’s politicians and president so hysterically over-react?
In order to get to the bottom of one of the most shameful buck-passing operations in recent times, I spent this week with those involved at the sharp end.

Pensacola just happened to be my first stop. Quite clearly, one clean beach doesn’t begin to tell the full story - particularly as it is relatively easy to remove oil from sand, whereas the sensitive wetlands further west are altogether more difficult to repair.
Journeying from Florida, through Alabama to the vast, swampy bays of southern Louisiana, however, what struck me most forcibly was that everything looked so normal.

What a contrast to the scenes I witnessed 21 years ago reporting on America’s previous worst oil disaster, when the Exxon Valdez supertanker spilled hundreds of thousands of barrels of crude oil into the Prince William Sound, Alaska.

Then, I flew over huge, multi-coloured ribbons of oil and waded into thigh-deep pools of the stuff - horrible proof that the Exxon chiefs were lying when they claimed no oil had reached the remote bays.

I spent another grim day helping animal rescuers to scrub matted seabirds and otters.

The area’s ecology was devastated, and an estimated 250,000 birds and 2,800 otters died, plus hundreds of seals and at least 22 killer whales.

But last Wednesday in the Gulf of Mexico, when I went out with one of the Shore Clean-up Assessment Teams (SCAT), whose job is to observe the coastline and chart the location and condition of oil pollution, I felt at times as though I was on an enjoyable sea-nature tour.

One British journalist, who was guided by a populist Louisiana politician whose agenda was obviously to exaggerate the problems, reported seeing extensive areas of oil and claimed ‘fresh waves’ were still swamping wetland areas - even though the BP rig was finally capped three weeks ago.

Of course, since an estimated 200 million gallons has gushed into the Gulf since April and around 50 million gallons remain in the water or on the shore (four times more than the entire Exxon Valdez spill), it is hardly surprising that some heavy pockets can be still found.

But what is truly remarkable is that they are so few and far between. Sailing from early morning to mid-afternoon in sweltering heat on Wednesday, the team I accompanied charted the coastline of two marshy islands off Louisiana’s southernmost tip, Casse-tete and Calumet, covering some 25 miles.

With fishermen still banned from returning to the waters until a final all-clear is given - and charging $2,000 (£1,250) a day to rent their flat-bottom boats to spill response workers, it is clear why BP has been forced to make available a staggering £12.5billion for the clean up, compensation and other legal obligations.

But as our team leader, 41-year-old scientist Stephane Grenon, told me as we skimmed across the shallows, using a craft able to reach the shore is the only sure way to tell whether oil is present.

This is because the wetland fringes in this region are always surrounded by a thick, dark-brown plant sediment known as ‘coffee ground’ for its resemblance to the dregs left at the bottom of the cup.

Even from a few feet away, this sediment can be very easily mistaken for oil, and often when passing boats or aircraft report spotting oil on the shore, this is what they have really seen.

This is one reason why the extent of the coastal oiling has been exaggerated. Indeed, Grenon, a veteran of 25 spills, says he is constantly amazed at how little pollution he finds.

He says: ‘I know it sounds ridiculous, but it’s probably the largest spill there has ever been and yet there’s hardly any oil.

‘The ecosystem around here is also used to oil. It’s been here forever, and there are more than 4,000 oil wells in the Gulf.

‘So there are spills and natural seepage all the time, and the fish and plants adapt to deal with them. I’m confident the area will make a full recovery.’

Grenon works for a BP-contracted spill clean-up company, but suspicions that he may have been painting an over-rosy picture were allayed by the three other scientists in the team who represented the federal and state governments.

‘I expected to see miles of oil, but I haven’t seen that,’ said one of the team, David Culpepper, a geologist with NOAA.

‘I’ve been out on the water about 25 days, and I’ve only seen one dead bird - and I’m not even sure if that had any oil on it. And I’ve probably seen ten dead fish.’

Our skipper, Gerrard Cheramie - no BP apologist, but a gnarled Creole fisherman who knows these waters so well that he can sniff the scent of speckled trout shoals - was equally realistic.

He said: ‘The waves here are like a washing machine and you can already see they’re rinsing the oil away. Because the fisheries have been closed down as a precaution, I think our catches will be bigger than ever when we are allowed back.’

His one nagging worry, though, is that the oil may have sunk to the bottom of the sea or that the 1.8 million gallons of chemical dispersant will cause some as-yet unrevealed damage to the fish and shrimp breeding grounds.

It is a fear that has been voiced by some scientists, including Professor Ian MacDonald, an eminent Florida State University oceanographer, who dismisses this week’s U.S. government’s report that 75 per cent of the oil has gone as an unsatisfactory mixture of science and spin and warns that worrying unknowns remain.

'I know it sounds ridiculous, but it’s probably the largest spill there has ever been... and yet there’s hardly any oil. The ecosystem around here is also used to oil. It’s been here forever, and there are more than 4,000 oil wells in the Gulf. So there are spills and natural seepage all the time, and the fish and plants adapt to deal with them. I’m confident the area will make a full recovery.'However, our captain’s fleeting doubts evaporated when he spotted a plump shrimp jumping magically from the waves.

‘Look at that! Sure looks healthy enough, don’t it?’ he exclaimed.

On Bird Island, we passed hundreds of pelicans nestling unsullied in the mangrove thickets. Then later we spotted pods of dolphins at play, redfish and the fin of a blacktip shark.

Surely these species wouldn’t have been so plentiful in a sick or dying environment? Although parts of the shoreline were stained with what David Culpepper termed a ‘bathtub ring’ of oil residue, new green shoots were already sprouting through, indicating that their roots were undamaged.

And at the day’s end, the team concurred that almost all the area they surveyed had improved or at least remained in the same condition in which it was found when last inspected a few weeks ago.

According to Dr Ed Owens, the veteran British oil spill expert who runs the SCAT teams, there are several reasons why the Gulf appears to have escaped so incredibly lightly.

First, the type of light oil that leaked here dissipates far more quickly than the medium crude that pumped from the Exxon Valdez, particularly in these warm waters.

Second, powerful currents from the enormous Mississippi Delta swept much of the oil away from the shore. In addition, there is the undeniable success of the clean-up effort, which is far more sophisticated and effective than those used to tackle previous disasters.

The combined result of these factors is clear from the statistics. Although more than 9,000 miles of shoreline lies within reach of the Deepwater Horizon rig, just 369 miles have been oiled - and only 53 of them with what are classed as ‘heavy’ deposits.
Compare this with the Exxon when, though the spill was 20 times smaller, the oil was so persistent and spread so widely that more than 2,000 miles of coastline were hit - and even today lumps of tar are occasionally found trapped between the rocks.

So, in Barack Obama’s words, which of these two terrible spills was ‘the worst environmental disaster America has ever faced’?

Back in mid-June, with approval of his presidency at an all-time low in the opinion polls, and critics drawing parallels between his mishandling of the BP crisis and the Hurricane Katrina fiasco that forever tarnished George Bush’s reputation, the answer was obvious.

Not only was it important for him to be seen to recognise the worst-case scenario - and appear to be doing everything he could to avert it - but he needed to find a scapegoat.

Thus, he turned on BP - a nominally British company, though half of its top executives and the majority of its workers are Americans - with a vengeance.

The company’s response was a public relation’s horror show, with its now sacked chief executive Tony Hayward the chief culprit.

He stonewalled questions put to him by a U.S. congressional sub-committee and at the height of the crisis he went yachting at Cowes.

And though it now seems he was right to describe the spill as a ‘drop in the ocean’, his timing and choice of phrase were appallingly ill-judged, especially as 11 oil rig workers died in the Deepwater explosion.

As a result, a staggering £43 billion has been wiped off the value of BP, and the company’s share price has plunged from 655p before the will to 425p, hitting many ordinary British people whose pension portfolios include the company’s stock.

What a terrible mess. And now, far too late, Obama tells us, without any hint of apology, that it isn’t really so bad after all.

If he had heard the pathetic cries of dying otters and seabirds in Alaska two decades ago, perhaps he would have chosen his words more carefully.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1301002/BP-oil-spill-Why-claims-Gulf-Mexico-historys-worst-oil-spill-cynical-spin-campaign-ever.html


IP: Logged

Randall
Webmaster

Posts: 1223
From: Columbus, GA USA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted August 08, 2010 09:58 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Randall     Edit/Delete Message
Oil has seeped from the ocean floor for billions of years, so bacteria have evolved that devour the oil and make it harmless. Mother nature always finds a way. Not that I'm underplaying the catastrophe, because it was huge, but the bacteria went on a feeding frenzy and did an amazing job restoring things.

------------------
"I have found a desire within myself that no experience in this world can satisfy; the most probable explanation is that I was made for another world." -C.S. Lewis

IP: Logged

katatonic
Knowflake

Posts: 4667
From:
Registered: Apr 2009

posted August 08, 2010 10:14 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for katatonic     Edit/Delete Message
as i recall sarah palin and most obama debunkers were shrieking their heads off that he OUGHT to be doing this that the other....as i said at the time he may have been privy to information they weren't? it does seem AT THE MOMENT that he did what was necessary - procured a settlement for those who were hurt - and let BP take care of the rest.

now, of COURSE, those same debunkers are calling him a ham for acting as if the gusher mattered. never mind that 11 men died and thousands were put out of work and worse for months. never mind that said debunkers also thought this was the big deal he said it was and that he was a wimp and a half for not "taking charge" of the situation.

but we don't know yet whether the oil is devoured by bacteria or travelling via the gulf stream to - morecambe, lancs perhaps?

i'm still thinking wag the dog and wondering what happened behind the scenes we were watching

but if this incident proved one thing it's that the sore losers trying to pull obama down will find fault with ANYTHING he does and are therefore cartoon caricatures of the conscientious critics they make themselves out to be.

IP: Logged

katatonic
Knowflake

Posts: 4667
From:
Registered: Apr 2009

posted August 08, 2010 10:27 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for katatonic     Edit/Delete Message
but yes i suppose it COULD have been a nasty plot to destroy the british middle class...why didn't i think of that??

but i thought britain was a socialist gulag that didn't have a middle class anymore and certainly no freedom to play the market like that?

ps: the stuff that washed up on the lancs beach when the reporter was a kid? nuclear waste i believe. does wonders for the intellect of those exposed...

IP: Logged

jwhop
Knowflake

Posts: 2046
From: Madeira Beach, FL USA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted August 08, 2010 10:54 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for jwhop     Edit/Delete Message
The O'Bomber response to the oil well blowout in the Gulf only put O'Bomber's incompetence on display for everyone to see. If anything at all, the O'Bomber administration's response to the oil in the water hindered cleanup efforts and those efforts to keep oil off the Gulf beaches and out of estuaries. Just ask the Governors along the Gulf Coast.

So now, it's hilarious to see some suggest O'Bomber knew all along that it wasn't as bad as it seemed, as bad as he said it was...and that he knew Mother Nature would take care of whatever oil remained in the water.

Any competent manager would have been all over the problem of getting the oil out of the water and keeping it off the beaches...in a flash....including Sarah Palin.

So sure, Palin among others, commented on O'Bomber's dithering for almost 60 days while millions of gallons of crude floated on the waves and headed for shore.

I agree Randall. There's as much...or almost as much crude oil seepage in the Gulf each year as was released by the well blowout.

All those oil eating microbes had a real feast.


IP: Logged

Randall
Webmaster

Posts: 1223
From: Columbus, GA USA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted August 08, 2010 11:36 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Randall     Edit/Delete Message
Yep, they had a veritable buffet and proved Obama's incompetence at the same time. That's what I call win/win.

------------------
"I have found a desire within myself that no experience in this world can satisfy; the most probable explanation is that I was made for another world." -C.S. Lewis

IP: Logged

jwhop
Knowflake

Posts: 2046
From: Madeira Beach, FL USA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted August 08, 2010 12:07 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for jwhop     Edit/Delete Message
for win/win

IP: Logged


This topic is 2 pages long:   1  2 

All times are Eastern Standard Time

next newest topic | next oldest topic

Administrative Options: Close Topic | Archive/Move | Delete Topic
Post New Topic  Post A Reply
Hop to:

Contact Us | Linda-Goodman.com

Copyright © 2010

Powered by Infopop www.infopop.com © 2000
Ultimate Bulletin Board 5.46a