5000 barrels a day of oil (210,000 gallons) leak off the coast of Louisiana

[hoosierdaddy]

This was a very rare event.
And as such, I have to wonder first about the actual root of this thing. And from what I see it was the explosion. Do we all fully understand what happened? Why has the media not dissected what actually happened as well as they have forecasting impending doom?

I don't know how many rigs are out there, but I think I have heard like 2400. If that is the case, shouldn't we be knowing all we can about the explosion and exactly why this rare event occurred? I know that Obama sent out swat teams to the rigs, (what like 9 days after the explosion) and that must have meant they thought some sort of threat could exist that has nothing to do with the rig itself. (shrug) I do know if the former admin would have made such a move, it would be dissected and spun without end.

For you to think this thing hasn't been politicized is naive at best.

 

[mean mr.mustard]

the pressures involved make in almost impossible to plug the leak. this is all for show so they dont have to say it will leak till like august

Yeah like the pressure to keep that oil reachable.

 

[MrBomDiggitty]

why not just lower some waterproof sticks of dynamite and blow the hole closed

 

[Strainhunter]

why not just lower some waterproof sticks of dynamite and blow the hole closed

'cos that only works in the movies but not in 5,000'

Unless Hoosier knows better!

 

[genkisan]

As far as the relevance of the statistics about timber, in the US logging companies are experts at planting and replenishing land with forest. They put in far more than they take out. It is what they do. You can call that sort of statistic irrelevant if you want, but that doesn't make it so. What it does is show that you may not understand the issue past your talking point.

I have addressed this point before, and will do so again for you, because you seem to have a hard time understanding the concept.

The monoculture tree farms planted as "replacement" for all the multispecies, vibrant forests are worth jackshit in terms of biodiversity, wildlife habitat and wilderness conservation.

They serve two purposes...to provide the companies that destroyed the forests with more timber/pulp to sell and to make naive donkeyhonkers like you believe there is no problem.....truely and properly replacing what they destroyed has NOTHING to do with it.

But of course, all you can manage in this part of our debate is "THERE ARE MORE TREES PLANTED THAN CUT"....even if that has zero value in the long term, due to the way it is being done, and the reasons for same.

The same philosophy and business practices apply to the oil industry and every other sector of life touched by the Corpo-Nazis as I like to call them.

And your unwavering defense and support of said Corpo-Nazis and the paradigm they perpetuate tells most of the intelligent folks here on ICmag everything they need to know about you.

 

[slyman]

http://gizmodo.com/5547548/the-gulf-disaster-video-that-bp-doesnt-want-you-to-see

 

[genkisan]

An oil slick you can see from fucking space....but hoosier sez there is no problem folks...










so it's OK now........





go back to sleep.....




enjoy that Mcd's burger....






watch some more TV......

 

[Stoner Chick]

Some things transcend politics...

No. They do not.

 

[MarquisBlack]

Environmental terrorism. BP won't be punished for this, the average citizen will be.

Problem reaction solution.

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

This was a very rare event.
And as such, I have to wonder first about the actual root of this thing. And from what I see it was the explosion. Do we all fully understand what happened? Why has the media not dissected what actually happened as well as they have forecasting impending doom?

I don't know how many rigs are out there, but I think I have heard like 2400. If that is the case, shouldn't we be knowing all we can about the explosion and exactly why this rare event occurred? I know that Obama sent out swat teams to the rigs, (what like 9 days after the explosion) and that must have meant they thought some sort of threat could exist that has nothing to do with the rig itself. (shrug) I do know if the former admin would have made such a move, it would be dissected and spun without end.

For you to think this thing hasn't been politicized is naive at best.

Read the article I posted about crappy cement work and the tendency to blow. For you to think that choosing a side of this politicization makes you right or wrong is naive. Looking at the news as if it lines up on one side of the aisle or the other is naive.

 

[hoosierdaddy]

An oil slick you can see from fucking space....but hoosier sez there is no problem folks...

No, hoosier did NOT say anything of the sort. Get it straight and don't try to put words out that I say when I didn't say them.
That is part of your problem, you don't really know what the fuck you are talking about. And when you make such a stupid statement, it is blatantly apparent you have no fucking clue.
The only thing that is obvious to all, is that you are a liar. Or, maybe you aren't and you can post up the quotes of me saying...or even hinting that there is no problem?
What, no sack? You mean you can't actually find me saying anything like that?
See, a fucking liar. Plain and simple.
Another failure.

 

[hoosierdaddy]

Read the article I posted about crappy cement work and the tendency to blow.

Crappy work and the tendency to blow....???
And how many times has this happened to qualify it with "tendency to blow"?
And do you think if we ask on the street we would hear folks saying the reason the thing blew was because of faulty concrete?
I don't think you understand the point I am making.
Concrete doesn't blow anyway. Something else besides concrete is to blame here.

 

[ureapwhatusow]

As far as the relevance of the statistics about timber, in the US logging companies are experts at planting and replenishing land with forest. They put in far more than they take out. It is what they do. You can call that sort of statistic irrelevant if you want, but that doesn't make it so. What it does is show that you may not understand the issue past your talking point.

And I am not expert on natural seeps, all I can do is look at what is available and form my opinions on the issue, like everyone else here. And from what I can gather, there is no debate among those who actually are learned in this field about the validity of natural seeps being the largest contributor of crude oil into all of the oceans.
The process is apparently a complex one, and not completely understood by anyone to my knowledge, but it for sure involves the oil being more and more oxygenated as it heads for surface, and at some point it reaches a state that allows it to actually be lighter than it's carrier (the open sea). Apparently there is more transformations that take place, and the oil is "absorbed" so to speak. The earth has ways of taking care of things like this.

And sure, this thing is more than what we know about spills...but then again, we may not know about some that may have been just as massive and immediate. It just may be that there are seeps that have produced far more seepage into the ocean, yet at a slower rate of this pipe leak. These would not be really seen, as the ocean, according to the experts, heals has a way of dealing with it's own leaks.

Granted, the potential for bad things is great...but is it as bleak as the media or radical ecological groups want us to believe?
I suggest you show me before you throw more darts...

please show me the tens of thousands of birds, turtles and other wildlife killed by oil from natural seeps......please show me the last time a natural seep caused tens of thousands of lost jobs and killed an entire industry overnight.........betcha can't, right?



Show me where the devastation overnight is. Show me the tens of thousands of ducks and turtles. SHow me the business' that have...wait...I can show you LOTS of revenues that are being lost, and because of the knee jerk reactionary media, and those like you that also want to throw your hateful darts, rather than discuss the issue like sane people.

got a good idea for a contest

when they do qualify the payload of this disaster and when it proves to be devastation to the local ecosystems like the wet lands in Louisiana will you delete your account and go away ? ill be fair and if it does not ill go right away and delete mine

really any of the value you offer IC mag is easily undermined by the type of content you look to create. Outrageous, cynical, anti-social and most of all non-productive.

yeah fighting that a 20 million oil underwater oil plume isnt going to have a negative biological payload makes you beyond stupid, its a a purposely negligent on the chance that some impressionable mind might read what you right and think it has some weight

the Valdez dropped 1.20 th the oil and had excelent recovery plans and toxicity was still present almost a decade later



Oil Remains: The Persistence, Toxicity, and Impact of Exxon Valdez Oil

Visitors today experience the spectacular scenery and wildlife of Prince William Sound and the North Gulf of Alaska. However, one of the most stunning revelations of Trustee Council-funded monitoring over the last ten years is that Exxon Valdez [B]oil persists in the environment and in places, is nearly as toxic as it was the first few weeks after the spill.
[/B]
This was not expected at the time of the spill or even ten years later. In 1999, beaches in the sound appeared clean on the surface. Some subsurface oil had been reported in a few places, but it was expected to decrease over time and most importantly, to have lost its toxicity due to weathering. A few species were not recovering at the expected rate in some areas, but continuing exposure to oil was not suspected as the primary cause.

In 2001, researchers at the Auke Bay Laboratories, NOAA Fisheries, conducted a survey of the mid-to-upper intertidal in areas of the sound that were heavily or moderately oiled in 1989. Researchers dug over 9,000 pits, at 91 sites, over a 95-day field season. Over half the sites were contaminated with Exxon Valdez oil. Oil was found at different levels of intensity from light sheening; to oil droplets; to heavy oil where the pit would literally fill with oil. They estimated that approximately 16,000 gallons (60,000 liters), of oil remained. The survey also showed a trend of an increasing number of oiled pits as they surveyed lower into the intertidal zone, indicating that there was more oil to be found lower down the beach. In 2003, additional surveys determined that while the majority of subsurface oil was in the mid-intertidal, a significant amount was also in the lower intertidal. The revised estimate of oil was now more than 21,000 gallons (80,000 liters). Additional surveys outside Prince William Sound have documented lingering oil also on the Kenai Peninsula and the Katmai coast, over 450 miles away.

The amount of Exxon Valdez oil remaining substantially exceeds the sum total of all previous oil pollution on beaches in Prince William Sound, including oil spilled during the 1964 earthquake. This Exxon Valdez oil is decreasing at a rate of 0-4% per year, with only a 5% chance that the rate is as high as 4%. At this rate, the remaining oil will take decades and possibly centuries to disappear entirely.

 

[hoosierdaddy]

yeah fighting that a 20 million oil underwater oil plume isnt going to have a negative biological payload makes you beyond stupid

First off, I never said or implied such. And secondly, for you to suggest what a person may be thinking (I see a pattern of this sort of behavior from certain types of people) when they didn't actually say or imply anything of the sort, is what makes the rest of your drivel moot. It also shows that you are in fact stupid, unless of course you are a swami?

Do you have trouble with comprehending what you read? Apparently so.

 

[ureapwhatusow]

First off, I never said or implied such. And secondly, for you to suggest what a person may be thinking (I see a pattern of this sort of behavior from certain types of people) when they didn't actually say or imply anything of the sort, is what makes the rest of your drivel moot. It also shows that you are in fact stupid, unless of course you are a swami?

Do you have trouble with comprehending what you read? Apparently so.

put up or shut the fuck up

any other topic of taste I woudlnt argue wiht you


Muscle cars vs Imports, Souther BBQ x Texas BBq

WHATEVER

matters of taste I WOULD NEVER look to insult or offend

BUT you push the anti authoritarian agenda, which in its pure HEY OPEN YOU FUCKING EYES PEOPLE, YES hooseir I AGREE

but when you use it to argue every fucking world event

then tell me in every nature thread that mother earth just shrugs shit off

Listen you really think im dumb

I can argue any topic and side too and quiet deftly

BUT when its about something that really is critical and the ramifications are so devestating its not in good taste to play

that sthe fucking problem

I dont hae a nut for you

I dont think you really believe half the shit oyu say I think you like finding other angles to argue and granted it sgood mental exercise

but it should not happen over shit that effects too many lives in too many ways

its no different than those war protests at the soldiers funerals

fuck man if you dont like the war fine but dont disrespect the dead

thats whats happening here and i think you know that too

you reap what you sow

what sowing by this?? really??

 

[ureapwhatusow]

all this political nature debate shit should be squashed

we really should start a best band thread

GD vs PHISH vs Biscuits vs MOE vs <inevitable omission that ill get hated for>

and then there would be plenty of fire and fuel for it

:: waits for the >> thread would fail everyone knows the XXXX are the best >> post

 

[hoosierdaddy]

Listen you really think im dumb

All I have to go by is what you post up, and to tell you the truth, it aint lookin too good for you right now.

You, on the other hand, have a bad habit of putting words and thoughts in the mouths and minds of others. Even when they didn't say such. That isn't very smart. In fact, that is the move of a dipshit dumbass...but like I said, all I have to judge you by is what you post up. I can take it for face value, and if I disagree or want to make a point, I can simply paste into quotes and use it in my post.
You apparently would just rather say it as you think it is, rather than what it really is.

Now, you want to post up a quote of mine and debate it fine...but to put words and thoughts out there just because it floats out of your small mind, is well...stupid.

 

[ureapwhatusow]

All I have to go by is what you post up, and to tell you the truth, it aint lookin too good for you right now.

You, on the other hand, have a bad habit of putting words and thoughts in the mouths and minds of others. Even when they didn't say such. That isn't very smart. In fact, that is the move of a dipshit dumbass...but like I said, all I have to judge you by is what you post up. I can take it for face value, and if I disagree or want to make a point, I can simply paste into quotes and use it in my post.
You apparently would just rather say it as you think it is, rather than what it really is.

Now, you want to post up a quote of mine and debate it fine...but to put words and thoughts out there just because it floats out of your small mind, is well...stupid.

put up or shut up if the oil does cause ecological damage you gonna put your money were your mouth is

you sure it wont happen

i am it will

put up or shut up

 

[hoosierdaddy]

Are you fucking retarded? Why would I accept such a stupid fucking challenge? I have never stated there would be no ecological damage from this thing...not once. Get a fucking grip.
You really are out there on a limb aren't you? I sure hope I am not dealing with someone who is in reality mentally challenged. Are you in a house with windows or are you in a room with soft stuff on the walls right now?

Actually, don't even address me anymore. I am sick of your ignorance.

 

[ureapwhatusow]

Are you fucking retarded? Why would I accept such a stupid fucking challenge? I have never stated there would be no ecological damage from this thing...not once. Get a fucking grip.
You really are out there on a limb aren't you? I sure hope I am not dealing with someone who is in reality mentally challenged. Are you in a house with windows or are you in a room with soft stuff on the walls right now?

Actually, don't even address me anymore. I am sick of your ignorance.

no I am not retarted

I quoted you as saying

Originally Posted by hoosierdaddy
As far as the relevance of the statistics about timber, in the US logging companies are experts at planting and replenishing land with forest. They put in far more than they take out. It is what they do. You can call that sort of statistic irrelevant if you want, but that doesn't make it so. What it does is show that you may not understand the issue past your talking point.

And I am not expert on natural seeps, all I can do is look at what is available and form my opinions on the issue, like everyone else here. And from what I can gather, there is no debate among those who actually are learned in this field about the validity of natural seeps being the largest contributor of crude oil into all of the oceans.
The process is apparently a complex one, and not completely understood by anyone to my knowledge, but it for sure involves the oil being more and more oxygenated as it heads for surface, and at some point it reaches a state that allows it to actually be lighter than it's carrier (the open sea). Apparently there is more transformations that take place, and the oil is "absorbed" so to speak. The earth has ways of taking care of things like this.

And sure, this thing is more than what we know about spills...but then again, we may not know about some that may have been just as massive and immediate. It just may be that there are seeps that have produced far more seepage into the ocean, yet at a slower rate of this pipe leak. These would not be really seen, as the ocean, according to the experts, heals has a way of dealing with it's own leaks.

Granted, the potential for bad things is great...but is it as bleak as the media or radical ecological groups want us to believe?
I suggest you show me before you throw more darts...

please show me the tens of thousands of birds, turtles and other wildlife killed by oil from natural seeps......please show me the last time a natural seep caused tens of thousands of lost jobs and killed an entire industry overnight.........betcha can't, right?



Show me where the devastation overnight is. Show me the tens of thousands of ducks and turtles. SHow me the business' that have...wait...I can show you LOTS of revenues that are being lost, and because of the knee jerk reactionary media, and those like you that also want to throw your hateful darts, rather than discuss the issue like sane people.

what are you arguing? that the fact it takes more than overnight to get to shore means we shouldn't sweat the cleanup

how about hte fact that once its embedded in wetlands we cant completely restore em

your a little mind who wants to dazzle some ppl into thinking youve got some witty insight but your a negative troll who spreads a doctrine of apathy at others experience

put up or shut up lil man

id ask you to man up or shut up but i ant seen you man up yet