Oil spill conspiracy

I think the point is that what is 'obvious' to the layman, is not necessarily actually true and that it could indeed be worse than proper fucking booming. (the strong language is a warm up - very strong language in the video). I won't be able to since I will probably be asleep and will not be in the USA while doing so. However, I will note that using pre-tested and tweaked toys to demonstrate something isn't the same as running analysis to ensure no unintended consequences would result. A whacko with an agenda?

quote:

---

The structure that I see that they're planning to build is going to erode as soon as it's constructed, and it's going to have a tough time making it through a hurricane season that's predicted to be a fairly active one...I just don't have a very high level of confidence that a project that's going to require a lot of energy and a lot of sand and mobilize a lot of people is going to do what they promise it will do...

​

We don't know how that structure will impact storm surge or waves or currents. And whether there are possibilities that it might in fact draw more wet oil through some inlets than in other areas...

​

We need a better way to involve scientists and engineers in formulating these ideas and doing very, very rapid review of them once they've been proposed...The oil spill is going to be with us for years, not days. So it seems like spending a little time right now to put together a process for better but more rapid scientific review would be worth the trouble

​

I hate being viewed as someone who might be attempting to obstruct the action to project and save that coast. I'm just heartbroken and furious about the impacts of this particular spill. I mean, every morning when I wake up, I'm not sure whether to call somebody in anger or to cry or to throw up. But doing something just to be looking like you're doing something is not the right thing to do.

---

From here.A more detailed explanation of his is here.

quote:

---

In the end, we have a project that is incredibly expensive. There has been little scientific review. It is questionable if the proposed berm will prevent oil from entering the wetlands it is designed to protect. The structure will be very short-lived. And there are many potential negative impacts of this structure on the coastal environment that have not been evaluated. Coastal dredging and filling can cause significant damage to marine organisms and local ecosystems as massive amounts of sand are dug up in one location and then deposited on the sea floor in another spot. In addition, building a 45-mile sand berm could alter tidal currents and lead to the erosion of natural barrier islands that protect the Louisiana coast from hurricanes.

​

Yes, we need to do something, but we need a better process for deciding what that best something is. I hope I’m wrong, but I fear that this permitted berm is not a viable solution.

---

I'm not sure dismissing him as a whacko is entirely justified. I'm not sure why you think you prefer the opinion of a politician, Jindal, over the opinion of a man who has studied that particular coastline for decades.

It was a sarcastic remark, making fun of people who make up conspiracy theories. I think I mentioned that a few times. Are we not being attacked by oil right now? I listen to a lot of news, and did not hear that one, until my brother gave me a link before I read this post. At least that makes sense. Thad Allen seems like a pretty smart guy.Edited by riVeRraT, : No reason given.

Um no, that's not what I think. I stated our governments purpose is to serve and protect us, which is a highly subjective statement, but right now I see us being attacked by oil.I know I have mentioned this to you before, but you are a prejudice person, and you are blinded by it. It has kept you from ever being friendly to me, and for misunderstanding about 99.9% of what I write. Your wrong. Again because of your prejudice, you think I have an agenda. Like I said, our environment is priority #1 for me.I just want to see more done about it, doesn't matter who. But I feel, and so does the majority of the population that Obama is not doing enough. Which is surprising to me. I would have thought the opposite from him. There is plenty of ships, and we could be doing everything possible to give them the tools they need. Better start now before it's too late. Besides, even if we didn't use them, cause the spill got stopped, we would eventually need them in the future. You act as if you are some expert on the subject.Watch how as this goes on, the sense of urgency will increase, and more will be done. That "more" should have been done since the get-go. It's not just Obama, it's the whole dam government. IT really doesn't matter who is in office. I am not picking on him, cause it's him. I am calling him a hypocrite though.

[qs"Taz]You're taking the news out of context. When they say bp may go under, they mean bp may stop being the 5th largest oil coorporation in the world. Again, their stock fell by a thousand points in 20 minutes, a new world record.[/qs]I heard them say chapter 11. You believe that? I don't. Sounds like someone I know. I have not put blame on him for the rigs, I put blame on him for not responding. This is present problem. Those facts were staring you in the face, yet you chose to ignore them. I agree with you 100%. But that doesn't mean they are the end all to the problem, or that a little help, even from Kevin Costner wouldn't help. They just seem to be dragging their asses, along with our government about the problem.And why isn't the news making more of a big deal about this. I can guarantee you if Bush was in office, the news reporting would have been totally different, as well as your attitude towards it all. That doesn't sound good to me at all. If it doesn't work, then we could wind up with a bigger mess on our hands.I've seen and read a lot of good suggestions. I feel as though we should pursuing all these suggestions, and an attempt at capping should be carried out almost daily.

No you dumb ass. This is why I don't miss this site anymore. That's not what I said at all, and I'm not explaining myself again.

You my friend could not be more wrong. If I spew out the word nigger, it's because all my nigger friends can't stop using the fucking word.You totally read into that wrong, and me thinks you are the one with the problem.I guess I call spanish ppl spics too?The President is a black man, get over it.Edited by riVeRraT, : No reason given.

It seems like every other day I hear on the news "the leak is spewing out more than first estimated"I think their estimate is up to 2.5million gallons a day.I think it's going to fill the whole ocean, then catch fire, then we are biblical.

Yeah - it looks like they upped their estimates yesterday up to 60,000 barrels a day. But the Mississippi is still beating it by three or four orders of magnitude, so I think we're safe from Biblical catastrophe at the moment Invest 92 (bottom right) might be looking to try storming into the Gulf, but may end up bending away as soon as it smells land. Hurricanes might actually help dispersal to be honest - so I'm not doom saying here, but on the other hand it doesn't take a genius to realize an active hurricane season is going to add even more unknowns into the situation.

The Wall Stree Journal details what caused the disaster. There's just too many significant reasons to list in this message. You need to read the entire report.Bottom line is that it was a combination of BP, who supported the whacko environmentalist greeny agend, who supported Obama's campaign above McCain and the MMS, (US Interior Dept of Mining and Minerals Servises) and other government agencies who allowed exceptions to safe proceedures.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

I'll do it for you

1. BP were under time and budgeting pressures.
2. BP skipped Quality Assurance on a cement buffer against gas, despite the contractors (Halliburton) advising they must.
3. BP ignored instructions they should use 21 centring devices to get the cement placed properly - and used only 6.
4. BPs well design gave dangerous gas an 'easy way' out.
5. BP was mistaken to conclude that mud removal was safe to proceed.
6. The BP overseer for final tests had little experience in deep water drilling and was learning on the job.
7. MMS occasionally approved some of these things but BP diverged from MMS approved plans on at least one occasion.
8. BP were trying to do lots of things, too many things, at once in an attempt to complete the well faster.
9. BP used a single pipe, rather than a pipe within a pipe as is the norm.
10. An important mud circulation procedure related to gas management, which should take 6 or more hours was completed by BP within 30 minutes.
11. BP removed mud before setting the cement plug.
12. BP ignored serious issues with their BOP.

It seems to basically point the finger at BP - with a finger wagging at the MMS for not noticing that BP were doing things dangerously. I don't see anything in the article about whacko environmentalist greeny agendas. Obama is only mentioned once - condemning the MMS.You have a unique way of reading Buz, at least that much can be said.Edited by Modulous, : No reason given.

But not nearly as badly as you need to. Yeah, big oil companies are noted for supporting whacko environmentalism, one of the key symptoms of which is ... er ... hatred of big oil companies.I guess it must somehow help their bottom line in some subtle way which you will now explain to us.* does not hold breath *

Well, it looks pretty darn like what you're saying. If you will not explain yourself, then the matter will have to rest there.

Perhaps someone should explain to the imaginary people who live in your head that their goals are mutually contradictory.

So, let's see. Obama gets BP to put $20 billion into escrow to clean up the mess they made.And the ranking Republican on the Energy Committee denounces this as "terrible" and "a tragedy of the first proportion", apologizes to BP, and announces that he doesn't want to live in a country like that.Well then, goodbye Congressman Barton.Oh wait, he hasn't emigrated. Well, at least the Republicans sacked him from his position as their main man on energy policy, right? ... oh, wait, no they didn't.

See, this response of yours is a prime example of what I am talking about. It is clear by your response that you do not fully read read and comprehend my posts. I did not say I wouldn't explain myself, I said I would not explain myself again. If you were truly adequate, you would have gone back and read my posts again, this time a little more carefully.