Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Why do you want the oil spill to be maximum?

page: 1
1

log in

join

posted on May, 21 2010 @ 04:42 PM
link   
The feeling I get observing the rhetoric of the oil gusher alarmists is that they (or you) want the spill to be maximum worst case scenario. The sorts doing most of this screaming supposedly care about the environment, yet more and more it seems like they fantasize about total environmental destruction.

This pathology is remarkable, and perhaps even more frightening than the Gulf Gusher itself. In fact it is, considering all of the hype. Meanwhile this provides insight into the rationalizing of the would-be eco-terrorist, which could be a motive for the 'establishment' to cause the 'accident' on purpose.

For example, in one of my other threads, and in others, I've repeatedly pointed out that the Ixtoc I Gulf of Mexico oil gusher incident spewed about 30,000 bpd out of a 9-5/8" pipe (for nine months), therefore the current Horizon gusher with a 20" pipe could be spewing 60,000 bpd based on the historical parallel.

But that isn't good enough. The doomsayers want this mess to be supernova, for some strange reason, and 60,000 isn't quite as scary as say 100,000 bpd, or "3000 times worse", or whatever.

The thing about environmentalists is they always like to point out how much humans can harm the environment, which is true in many cases. But when you get fanatics who want to see their eco-disaster fantasies in the maximum meltdown, to prove the pretenses of their ideology, now we have a serious crisis.

Perhaps from this we can even find the motives behind a would-be intentional Gulf Gusher. I've seen several people say that they believe the gusher was done on purpose by the officials responsible for it, yet couldn't offer a reason for why. Could this be it?

We've seen just about every measure possible taken by the current administration to radicalize "the Right". We wouldn't want to leave out "the Left" in all of this radicalization now would we?

[edit on 21-5-2010 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss]




posted on May, 21 2010 @ 04:52 PM
link   
Some people loke caos and doom and gloom for some reason... They get off on it ... Some want to see the end of the world and stuff like the oil spill forfills the prophcies that have been written...



posted on May, 21 2010 @ 05:01 PM
link   
this oil 'spill' is going to completely destroy the US gulf coast economy.....and perhaps more. I dont think its possible to overestimate or overstate the issue......let those who champion environmental causes stand on their soap boxes and sound the bullhorn.....no one else seems to be doing it.



posted on May, 21 2010 @ 05:04 PM
link   


I've seen several people say that they believe the gusher was done on purpose by the officials responsible for it, yet couldn't offer a reason for why.


I've seen theories revolving around Halliburton, who suspiciously partnered itself with the Deepwater Horizon just before the ''accident'' and people who stood to gain financially from this. I've got to check up on some threads to see what has become of these theories.



posted on May, 21 2010 @ 05:05 PM
link   
Dont think any of us want it to be maximum, its just that we can see that this isnt something thats gonna be over any time soon... no one wants it to be 'maximum', it already IS at maximum.

Simple reality.

Those who think this will be over in the next week or so are blinkered... its been going on for 2+ weeks already and BP have lied repeatedly about the 'seriousness' of the situation and keep revising their figures. Its starting to cause real problems onshore now as other threads are indicating.

Yeah there are the 'lets hope this kills all us icky humans off' type people but they are a very small minority, dont lump those of us that think this is more serious than most think in with those wackos.

As for BP, I hope those at the top get hit hard, real hard... all signs point to pure neglect and incompetence in the cause of this disaster and justice needs to be served.

Edit:- oh and some of us who'd like to see a change in the world for the better (complete or proper start to uncoupling from fossil fuel dependency), hope that this disaster is big enough to effect change on mass... since that change isnt gonna come any other way given human nature to act only when at the extreme limit of a situation. Is the situation good... hell no, but there could be some good to come out of it if it is just serious enough to make people rethink a few things... tough love I guess you could call it.


[edit on 21-5-2010 by BigfootNZ]



posted on May, 21 2010 @ 06:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Gouzze
 


Right. But what about this pathology? Is there a psychological term for it? Any good books? Like Christians who rejoice whenever everything is screwed up. Like its a good omen or something. I have a couple issues I make a lot of noise about, but I dont hope and pray for it to happen.



Originally posted by ikonspyre
this oil 'spill' is going to completely destroy the US gulf coast economy.....and perhaps more.


See the thing is, I assumed the same to be true. Just a week ago in fact. Until I started looking at the issue in depth. Where did I go to research? Fox News? NO! Instead I started by looking to see about older spills in the Gulf. I hadn't even known there was anything even remotely on par with the current crisis.

So I checked out wikipedia to see lists of oil spills. Turned out there was one just like the Horizon, the Ixtoc. It happened in the Gulf of Mexico. Yet somehow I had never heard of it and apparently most others either forgot about it or didn't know anything about it either. That's amazing considering it was damn near identical to the Horizon, and it went on for nine months.


Spill conditions: It is estimated that more than 500,000 tons of crude oil was spilled into the Gulf of Mexico from blowout of the Ixtoc I well offshore in the Bay of Campeche. It occurred in early 1979, and several months later impacted the Texas shoreline, primarily along Padre Island. An early storm in September, reversed the currents and self-cleansed most of the shoreline, leaving only (relatively unusual) tarmats. LINK

en.wikipedia.org...



www.gomr.mms.gov...
Economic Impact of Oil Spills on the Texas Coast, FY 1980
An exploratory oil well, the IXTOC I, blew out on June 3, 1979 in the Bay of Campeche, Gulf of Mexico. The IXTOC I was the world's largest and probably most expensive oil spill. The oil released by the IXTOC I was carried by Gulf currents into American waters by August 1979. In addition to the oil from the IXTOC I, the Texas coast was affected by fresh unweathered oil from the sinking of the oil tanker BURMAH AGATE in November 1979. These events had multiple effects on local, State, Federal, and international economies. As a result, an economic assessment of the spills on the Texas coastal region was initiated.
...
Nineteen counties along the Texas coast were selected for the three-
year (1979-1981) study. These counties were grouped into five subregions. The Texas coastal industries selected for study included: tourism, recreation, and commercial fishing.
...
SIGNIFICANT CONCLUSIONS: The results of the economic impact analyses
conducted following the IXTOC I and BURMAH AGATE oil spills indicated that: (1) the only significant decline in tourism within the 19-county region of the Texas coast was noted in the South Padre Island area; (2) there was no negative impact upon tourism from the BURMAH AGATE spill at the subregional level, while the IXTOC I spill was estimated to have decreased tourist activity by approximately four million dollars; this difference was attributed to the seasons during which the spills occurred; and (3) the estimated costs of the IXTOC I spill to industry and government made it one of the world's most expensive oil spills.
...
There was no negative impact upon tourism from the BURMAH AGATE spill identified at the subregional level. The overall indirect economic impacts of the spills related to tourism were quite small.
...
There were no significant direct or indirect economic effects of either oil spill on the commercial fishing industry measurable on either the regional or subregional levels.
...
Estimated costs of the IXTOC I oil spill to private industry and government bodies placed it as probably the world's most expensive oil spill. Costs of the estimated five million barrels of oil, the SEDCO-135 semi-submersible drilling platform, and the PEMEX capping and cleanup operations totaled approximately 498 million dollars. Damage claim suits that were pending in U.S. Courts total in excess of 400 million dollars. Expenses to the U.S. Government and the State of Texas were estimated at over 15.3 million dollars. Extensive media coverage devoted to the oil spills may have influenced the public's viewpoint of the Texas coastal region and economic loss to the tourism and recreational industries along the coastline may have resulted.
www.gomr.mms.gov...


So I started a huge thread showing historical data like that, and I get shouted down as a big oil shill.

I said several times it's probably 60,000 bpd, but that isn't even good enough. It has to be maximum damage, extinction level even, and if anyone disagrees then they're engaging in propaganda.

But the thing is propaganda is about persuading people, and 'black propaganda' uses lies and distortions in pushing the agenda(s).

====


I dont think its possible to overestimate or overstate the issue......let those who champion environmental causes stand on their soap boxes and sound the bullhorn.....no one else seems to be doing it.


So are you basically saying that you want it to be maximum crisis to push forward your agenda?

It's pretty obvious that if the goal of causing the crisis was to radicalize a waning 'left', it worked...


[edit on 21-5-2010 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss]



posted on May, 21 2010 @ 06:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by GouzzeSome want to see the end of the world and stuff like the oil spill forfills the prophcies that have been written...


This is why.



posted on May, 21 2010 @ 06:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisssWhy do you want the oil spill to be at maximum?

Because of this (ignore the song part):



posted on May, 21 2010 @ 06:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by BigfootNZ
Edit:- oh and some of us who'd like to see a change in the world for the better (complete or proper start to uncoupling from fossil fuel dependency), hope that this disaster is big enough to effect change on mass... since that change isnt gonna come any other way given human nature to act only when at the extreme limit of a situation. Is the situation good... hell no, but there could be some good to come out of it if it is just serious enough to make people rethink a few things... tough love I guess you could call it.


'Never let a good crisis go to waste' -Rahm Emanuel

This is what I was talking about.

And if this one isn't big enough to teach everyone a lesson lets hope and pray for an even bigger one to stick it to the man.



posted on May, 21 2010 @ 06:36 PM
link   
Not me i do not care, but i want the main stream media to accept its not a fossil fuel, and there is no peak oil.



posted on May, 21 2010 @ 07:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by ikonspyre
this oil 'spill' is going to completely destroy the US gulf coast economy.....and perhaps more. I dont think its possible to overestimate or overstate the issue......let those who champion environmental causes stand on their soap boxes and sound the bullhorn.....no one else seems to be doing it.


For a while, perhaps. Nothing good can come out of it for sure, but still, the local economy and the environment will eventually rebound. I'm sure the USGovt is readying some generous handouts to the local fisherman.

But let's not allow the environmantal nazis to use this to further their agenda. I'm all for doing the right thing by the environment, but these whackos have ulterior motives that have nothing to do with the environment.



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 08:35 AM
link   
reply to post by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
 


I can only speak for myself, but imagine that many on here will feel the same. I don't necessarily want the oil spill specifically to be the worst case scenario, but I am ready to get the collapse of civilization over with. In my mind, the sooner the better. I see the oil/info tech age as coming to an end, and the longer we take to realize this, the worse off we'll be in the following immediate future. The sooner everything collapses, the sooner we can begin to rebuild. I await for the collapse of this age because the insanity of this one has worn my soul thin.

I imagine many people here are waiting for EOTWAWKI because they're tired of this age as well. People are desperately in need of getting back to their roots, living off the land, and having that deep sense of accomplishment after contributing to a functional & healthy community. You just don't get that from working a crap day job that puts a large chunk of their wages into an insanely sick system.



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 09:16 AM
link   
the oil spill is no differnt other then scale to taht car wrek you rubber neck as you drive by or that guy on the tall building who everyone yells jump jump untill he does.
mystic's aside civilizations follow a pattern from a small country it grows to a healthy adult but like a old mans noise doesnt stop growing expanding untill all the resources are used up people at this point are a resource.
rome greek Egyptians spain Europe pick one then the inevitable collapse starts a country earth grows or collapse there is no utopia .
captiolasim is based on this very principled most of you know a company considers a year without growth lets say they made a million this year and teh same next they consider this a LOSE .
so we are in the collapse phased of a civilizations life span people may not understand why or what but they can feel this like the first cold winters wind .
and seeing there loses not being mental equipped to deal with this rasionaly they revival in it .
man this stuff is all through the falls of governments in the bible sod-ea and Gomorrah Egypt and Moses Rome Greeks its happened before its happing again. so people will make there golden calf dance and be drunkin preform all typs of vial acts untill the curtain comes down .
then a long peace ensues and quite and the ones left will start over only to come once again to this point in another 1000 years .
thing is there is no god who will save you your just not that important in gods grand scam of things. if you want to pray pray death comes quickly and you dont have to live through the coming madness that has already started



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 09:21 AM
link   
Please don't throw environmentalist and conservationist in with the doomsdayers..

The polarization of America has worked out just like they want when things like protecting the environment label you as a leftist.

Edit to say: by the way, I gave you a S&F because I do agree with you for the most part, at least about the doom card players..

[edit on 24-5-2010 by broahes]



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 09:34 AM
link   
I have looked into this mindset.

My best guess is that people are so sick of their daily routine that they want everyone to get killed, so that they don't have to go to work anymore.

I can understand better the out of human control doom, like an enormous asteroid impact, or Yellowstone eruption, that doesn't make me feel so bad as it just wouldn't be our fault.

This oil spill doom is so horrendous I can't even believe the situation that continues to develop. I makes me feel sick to my stomach. I wish they would nuke it. Because if it doesn't stop, we are all going to die a very slow, very horrible death. I really can't understand whay anyone would cheer it on. Dying slow of suffocation in a stinking tar ball is not the way I want to die. Being nuked would be way better. Instantly fried by a cometary impact, would be fine.

Watching all the sea life die, and no longer be able to function as an oxygen producing generator for us over a period of years, and then finally running out of oxygen is just absolutely horrible.

We need to stop this fricking leak, any way possible, including nuclear weapons.



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 09:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by downtown436
I have looked into this mindset.

My best guess is that people are so sick of their daily routine that they want everyone to get killed, so that they don't have to go to work anymore.


I don't think this is logical at all. If everyone is killed, the person standing must still come up with a means to provide food and shelter. Depending on the situation, he may be able to survive for a while without doing much work, but the chances are he will have to work very hard without globalization running.



I can understand better the out of human control doom, like an enormous asteroid impact, or Yellowstone eruption, that doesn't make me feel so bad as it just wouldn't be our fault.

This oil spill doom is so horrendous I can't even believe the situation that continues to develop. I makes me feel sick to my stomach. I wish they would nuke it. Because if it doesn't stop, we are all going to die a very slow, very horrible death. I really can't understand whay anyone would cheer it on. Dying slow of suffocation in a stinking tar ball is not the way I want to die. Being nuked would be way better. Instantly fried by a cometary impact, would be fine.

Watching all the sea life die, and no longer be able to function as an oxygen producing generator for us over a period of years, and then finally running out of oxygen is just absolutely horrible.

We need to stop this fricking leak, any way possible, including nuclear weapons.


Where are you getting all of this from? There's a lot of oil and a lot of gas being spewed, but any thoughts of seas/oceans dying, and us dying out due to drops in atmospheric oxygen levels is pure speculation. I honestly don't think this site has enough methane to cause such an event. The extinction event which caused 90% of life to die off was thought to come from 10 gigatons of methane being released at once. That's 10 billion tons, or 10 trillion pounds. I highly doubt this event will reach that scale.



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 09:46 AM
link   
reply to post by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
 


Can you provide quotes from members that - "want the spill to be maximum"?

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to observe that this is already "maximum" enough to be devastating.



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 10:05 AM
link   
reply to post by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
 



Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
The feeling I get observing the rhetoric of the oil gusher alarmists is that they (or you) want the spill to be maximum worst case scenario.

...The doomsayers want this mess to be supernova, for some strange reason, and 60,000 isn't quite as scary as say 100,000 bpd, or "3000 times worse", or whatever.


I do not agree with this premise.

It's not as though there aren't ample reasons to expect the worse:




Independent experts have estimated that the flow from the two leaks could be as high as 120,000 barrels per day.

Link.





Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
...the rhetoric of the oil gusher alarmists...


I don't understand the point of this phrase under the current circumstances. Sure there are those who erroneously assert the world's oceans will die, but those assertions are clearly from a very, very small minority of ill informed people.

Up until recently, I think the biggest problem we have had during this crisis is that no one takes this leak seriously enough.



Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
...Ixtoc...

...




SIGNIFICANT CONCLUSIONS: The results of the economic impact analyses conducted following the IXTOC I and BURMAH AGATE oil spills indicated that:

...

There was no negative impact upon tourism...

...

There were no significant direct or indirect economic effects of either oil spill on the commercial fishing industry measurable on either the regional or subregional levels.



Frankly, I don't understand how you find this very instructive on the issues of impact or consequence?

If you really want an adequate comparison of the two situations, then see:

Crisis By the Numbers: A Comparison of Ixtoc I, Deepwater and the Biggest Spill of All.

That thread really addresses the issues of size and what will likely be a tougher situation to resolve.

When considering impact, using IXTOC hardly seems the model one should fully use.

For starters, IXTOC was nearly 800 miles from Texas beaches, and the spill still managed to foul over 200 miles of US coastline. Deepwater is only roughly 80 miles from the US coast. I'd assume that will make a significant difference on the impact.

Moreover, relative to the issue of location, Deepwater will directly impact some of the world's most productive fisheries.

Finally, even on the issue of tourism dollars, I somehow doubt that the tourism income found in a handful of Texas counties even come close to the tourism dollars likely to be lost along the LA, MS, AL & FL coasts during Memorial Day weekend and the summer beyond.



Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
So are you basically saying that you want it to be maximum crisis to push forward your agenda?


I too think this crisis is probably being used to push forward an agenda...

But I think the scale of the crisis is the least of the distortions.



[edit on 24-5-2010 by loam]



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 11:00 AM
link   
reply to post by loam
 


Hey I'm glad to have your attention. I really want to understand the true impacts we should expect and I think you might be the one who can finally help me. I've started to 2 threads trying to hammer out some real numbers that are foggy all about, but they've been ignored:
True impact of Oil Spills?
Toxicitiy of crude oil, by percentage?

I get the feeling that people don't really want hard numbers, and instead prefer to keep it foggy and confusing wrapped up under the banner of it just being REAL BAD.

For instance, 75% of light crude oil evaporate, while medium crude is only 50%. But what kind of crude can we expect from this new wellhead? Generally speaking, only 6% of 'crude' is tar. But what about from a fresh well? Then there's the Natural Gas portions, in which some people are claiming 3000 times more NG is coming out (a 3000:1 NG-crude ratio), of course to try to scare people. Of course, NG totally evaporates when it finally bubbles to the top, being a gas. And I'm assuming that what separates light from medium crude is the content of liquid solvents such as xylene which evaporates, but much slower being a liquid.

I work with xylene and I know that will kill stuff if you go pouring it into water, but it will evaporate at some point and then the threat is gone leaving almost 0% traces of residue. I would also assume that light crude being majority solvents would spread and travel quicker, perhaps giving effects such as we're seeing? I've yet to see images of an open sea SLICK, but endless imagery of that foamy 'chocolate milk' as some politician put it.

Another question I just thought of, is what are the dynamics of the Mississippi River delta being right offshore from the wreck, and do we have any other historical examples of such? Meaning, what kinds of quantity of water are pushing back against the mess?


Independent experts have estimated that the flow from the two leaks could be as high as 120,000 barrels per day.

Link.


The thing about the "2 leaks" is they both come from the same 20" pipe, meaning you could put 200 leaks in it but are still limited by the source of the inner diameter of the pipe.

So I'm basing my guess of the best historical example I know about, the Ixtoc which spewed 30,000 bpd initially out of a 9-5/8" pipe.

And another thing about the Ixtoc I event that is worth considering is that during the Ixtoc crisis an oil tanker crashed in the Galveston harbor and dumped 2.6 million barrels of raw crude:
www.abovetopsecret.com...


Finally, even on the issue of tourism dollars, I somehow doubt that the tourism income found in a handful of Texas counties even come close to the tourism dollars likely to be lost along the LA, MS, AL & FL coasts during Memorial Day weekend and the summer beyond.


Especially not with all of the doomsaying going on...


[edit on 24-5-2010 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss]



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 12:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
Perhaps from this we can even find the motives behind a would-be intentional Gulf Gusher. I've seen several people say that they believe the gusher was done on purpose by the officials responsible for it, yet couldn't offer a reason for why. Could this be it?


I really doubt environmentalist want to maximize the damage or even be the cause.

Sarah Palin did try to use the mess in the Gulf as a means to drill ANWR.

Could we say: more drills, more mess to make?





new topics

top topics



 
1

log in

join