It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

FINALLY: The TRUTH About Chronic Oil Spillage DWARFS Deepwater Horizon

page: 1
7
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 26 2010 @ 01:30 AM
link   

Beyond the BP Spill, a Case of Chronic Oil Pollution


Beyond the BP Spill, a Case of Chronic Oil Pollution

According to government estimates, as of yesterday anywhere from 39 million to 111 million gallons of crude oil has gushed into the Gulf of Mexico [from the Deepwater Horizon leak]...

Yet, while this oil spill and others before it have dominated the news, according to a National Research Council (NRC) report, at least 375 million gallons of oil end up in the world's oceans virtually unnoticed every year from natural sources and from human activities associated with the extraction, transportation and use of oil. Should the current rate of uncaptured oil discharged from the BP well continue, the spill will equal the yearly amount of oil entering the world's oceans sometime in August. Which is just about the time relief wells will, supposedly, completely plug the Deepwater Horizon gusher.

Unfortunately, no such end is in sight for the apparently massive background level of oil pollution.

 

Ahem...

In May, I started the thread Gulf Oil Spill: Another Extinction Level Hoax?, which enjoyed a pretty good run. In that thread, I opened with an anecdotal background of my life on the Gulf Coast for some 30 years, and my observations that oil rigs in the Gulf have been leaking nonstop for over half a century.

I even supplied a little visual aid (this is a satellite view of the Gulf off the Texas/Louisiana coast)...



Each trail you see is a crude oil slick emanating from an offshore oil rig. Some of these individual slicks are up to 70 miles long EACH. The photo demonstrates that the Gulf is full of crude oil slicks all the time — this oil pollution simply IS NOT REPORTED and so GOES UNNOTICED by the public, because crude degrades naturally in seawater over time.

Of course, the flaming, foaming catastrophe fanatics out there jumped all over my claims, attempting to shoot them down. I was in a bit of a fix to back up my claims with documented info, because there's not a lot of published material that exposes the TRUTH of ongoing oil pollution the world over.

That's why I was fairly astonished to see this article hidden in the Washington Post yesterday, citing the FACT that some 375 MILLION GALLONS of oil enters the world's oceans every year. Check out the 2003 National Research Council (NRC) Report.

And this has been going on for as long as we've been drilling offshore oil rigs and transporting the stuff in tankers — that's over a half century.

The story goes on to say that there is no end in sight for this spillage. NEVERMIND the BP oil leak — when the Deepwater Horizon is finally capped (probably in August), there will still be 714 oil rigs in the Gulf of Mexico that go right on leaking. Unreported.

People, as I've said repeatedly, the oceans can handle crude oil — the stuff leaks into the water column naturally from the sea floor in some areas, in addition to leakage resulting from our drilling and transporting the stuff.

Hundreds of millions of gallons of oil end up in the Gulf and the world's oceans EVERY YEAR and have done so for as long as I've been alive. It degrades in seawater, is eaten by microbes, is passed through the food chain. You swim in it. You eat it. You live with it, and without any apparent harmful side effects.

And you can BET that BP and the Federal Government and the enviro-stooges in the MSM know all this. Yet, they're ramping up Deepwater Horizon as the be-all and end-all disaster that is going to change environmental policy worldwide and screw YOU to death with higher taxes, higher fuel and higher food prices.

Deepwater Horizon is simply a "crisis of opportunity" which TPTB are going to USE to leverage the Green Agenda, Cap & Trade, Carbon Taxes and every goddamn thing else. In other words, it's a HOAX.

Thanks to the Washington Post for FINALLY exposing the Truth. Come to think of it, it's possible the WP took a cue from my rants here on ATS over the last month. So, thanks to ME.


— Doc Velocity






[edit on 6/26/2010 by Doc Velocity]



+12 more 
posted on Jun, 26 2010 @ 01:56 AM
link   
Indeed...


So each rig is averaging about a half a million spilled gallons per year vs a single rupture which, carrying it out over the year would be somewhere between 250 and 700 million gallons by itself. Clearly you are unfamilliar with the principle of osmosis. A small quantity of any substance, say oil, for instance, may not pose much of a threat... However, once you have a large dump of it in the ocean in a single place, it will negatively affect a far larger section of water.

I'm still trying to figure out whether you really believe that this oil is no big deal or whether you're sitting with a lockbox full of BP stock and trying to convince yourself that as long as you say everything's OK, everything will stay hunky dory, Doc.



posted on Jun, 26 2010 @ 02:02 AM
link   
That is 375 million gallons in a year, distributed widely over the whole gulf from each rig.

NOT 375 million gallons in three months, distributed from a single source, and pumped full of dispersants.

The oil you describe isn't sent into our largest currents in the manner that is happening now. It doesn't hit every major beach on the gulf coast the way it is now. It isn't coupled with massive amounts of methane the way it is now.

There aren't millions of gallons hitting the marshes at the same time, choking off the O2 supplies to the grasses and plants.

What you are describing and what is CURRENTLY happening are not the same thing in even the smallest way. To trivialize it as such is rather irresponsible, IMO, from someone who is a large presence on this board, and who I often agree with . I cannot agree with you this time, and I am a 25 year (former) resident of the Gulf Coast who does agree with the fact that oil is always on the move in the Gulf.

[edit on 26-6-2010 by Ceriddwen]



posted on Jun, 26 2010 @ 02:15 AM
link   
The title in itself is false. It is not a spill. It is a rupture.



posted on Jun, 26 2010 @ 02:40 AM
link   
Then I supposed all the marsh lands being destroyed by this oil spill were happening every year anyway?

[edit on 26-6-2010 by taccj9903]

[edit on 26-6-2010 by taccj9903]



posted on Jun, 26 2010 @ 02:43 AM
link   
reply to post by Doc Velocity
 


[Just noticed, Ceriddwen essentially said the same thing in his post]

While what you're saying is, of course, true, it completely ignores some simple facts:

- the amount of oil being gushed as a result of the Deepwater Horizon is all at once, not over time, and not over the world's oceans. In a very concentrated manner. So ONE THIRD of the TOTAL amount in the WORLD's oceans (per your reported figures), has been released in a TINY area in a matter of 2 months. Rethink what you are saying.

NOW, nevermind the fact that THIS particular situation offers up some completely different challenges:
- Lethal levels of gas being released: methane, hydrogen sulfide, benzyne, plus others
- The fact that we have penetrated this oil deposit (the 3rd largest on the planet) like we have never done before - down to the abiotic oil, where unimaginable pressures provide new challenges not seen before, and that certainly aren't "normal"
- we're talking possible tsunami and volcanic eruption problems
- the impact on wildlife, already, should tell you this is not 'acceptible leakage'

This whole argument that 'we've been leaking oil into our oceans for 50 years so everyone needs to just relax' is #ing stupid. Period.

This is a SERIOUS situation. No two ways about it.

Again - per your own references: in just two months we've 'leaked' one third of the annual total (for ALL of the world's oceans) into one tiny area. And, in another 2 months, the amount will exceed you precious 375Million gallon figure the way this thing is INcreasing.

NOW... couple that information with the supposition that this tragedy was perhaps allowed to happen so that other agendas could be advanced (green, carbon-tax, etc), nd you've really got a situation on your hands.



[edit on 6/26/2010 by SquirrelNutz]



posted on Jun, 26 2010 @ 02:45 AM
link   
Tell this to the fishermen out of work, tell this to the families affected by this slow motion catastrophe.

Tell this to the countless numbers of birds and aquatic plants and animals that are going to die in the coming weeks and month. [including the ones already dead]

So should we just reopen the beaches and take a dip? Would you Doc?

*edit to add*
375 million gallons of oil dumps into the world oceans every year and now this spill will dump that equivalent into the Gulf of Mexico in less than 4 months. And you say there is nothing to be concerned with?

You can't be serious?!!

[edit on 26-6-2010 by LDragonFire]



posted on Jun, 26 2010 @ 02:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ceriddwen
To trivialize it as such is rather irresponsible...

Who's trivializing?

I'm saying and have said for many weeks that the ocean knows how to handle crude oil spills. The mechanisms are in place to naturally decompose and degrade the stuff.

In the natural history of the Earth, do you not think that seismic forces have, at one time or another, opened up a fissure directly into a giant crude oil reservoir? On a planet as seismically active as Earth, you know it's happened in the past, at some point over the last several hundred million years.

So, where's the evidence of a far-reaching, extinction-level event as the result of a crude oil leak? Anywhere?

There IS NO evidence.

We dump at least whole Deepwater Horizon incident into our oceans every year. The oceans suck it up, resorb the stuff, and life goes on. The oceans are already accustomed to processing our spillage, after more than a half century of heavy manmade pollution.

Deepwater Horizon is NOT going to "destroy whole environments" — if crude oil spillage COULD destroy whole environments, don't you think the Gulf of Mexico would already be a toxic wasteland, after 50 or 60 years of nonstop oil pollution?

It's not.

Which tells me that natural mechanisms are in place to handle the spillage. The oceans are capable of cleansing themselves without our assistance.

And TPTB know it... Which is why I think the Deepwater Horizon incident is being allowed to continue without resolution. TPTB need a few oil-stained beaches to push their Green Agenda, Cap & Trade, et cetera.

So they're LETTING it leak.

They know it's not going to destroy the marine environment, but it sure makes a hell of a spectacle to drive the enviro-tards into hysterics.

Why do you think neither BP nor the Obama Administration seem particularly hysterical about this incident? It's because, like me, they have the thing in proper perspective.

Unlike me, they are going to ream out the collective rectum of the world with Cap & Trade, Carbon Taxes and draconian environmental mandates.

— Doc Velocity



posted on Jun, 26 2010 @ 03:00 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jun, 26 2010 @ 03:06 AM
link   
Quick question Doc Velocity: If a major hurricane hits the Gulf area soon and completely destroys the Gulf Coast by covering it in oil and Corexit 9500, will you take back your statements on this being an "extinction level event"? I mean technically, humans, fish, birds, etc., will still exist around the world, but all of the Gulf Coast's heritage, livelihood, etc., will be extinct.

reply to post by soleprobe
 


We don't need statements like this that attack a user's avatar and try to connect it with his comments. Everybody here can respond to the argument made without resorting to such a petty tactic.

[edit on 6/26/2010 by SonicInfinity]



posted on Jun, 26 2010 @ 03:17 AM
link   
it has been said that as soon as an evac is talked about seriously or initiated, then the collapsing property values will cause an instant collapse in the derivatives based on those southern properties.

that will be catastrophic all by itself.

if Obama uses the situation to pass cap and trade or to get Carbon taxes passed-that too would be catastrophic

I just mention these aspects of the situation to show that there is more to this situation then just oil

[edit on 26-6-2010 by Danbones]



posted on Jun, 26 2010 @ 03:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by LDragonFire
Tell this to the fishermen out of work, tell this to the families affected by this slow motion catastrophe.

The oil isn't stopping anyone from fishing. The government is issuing fishing bans. That's part of the scheme. If I was a commercial fisherman, I'd be out there fishing in defiance of the government bans. The fish aren't affected by this "catastrophe," they're still out there, they're not washing up dead on beaches by the millions. By God, I'd run a Jolly Roger up the mast and go fishing, if my living was on the line.


Originally posted by LDragonFire
Tell this to the countless numbers of birds and aquatic plants and animals that are going to die in the coming weeks and month. [including the ones already dead]

Yet, you can't SHOW ME any precedent for that statement. Point me to an instance of a crude oil spill killing "countless numbers of birds and aquatic plants and animals"... You've seen a few photos and videos depicting a couple of dozen dead fish, a handful of oil-stained Pelicans (who walked away just fine), and you've read these anecdotal stories of threatened marshes — "Tonight, everything in that marsh is dead."

Except that there's no proof to back it up.


Originally posted by LDragonFire
So should we just reopen the beaches and take a dip? Would you Doc?

Well, if you read the OP of my other thread, Extinction-Level Hoax, you'd know that I grew up swimming in the stuff. I swam in it, fished in it, crabbed in it, and watched the crabs breathing out blobs of crude oil.

Never saw a crab die from crude oil inhalation. They seem to process the stuff with surprising ease.

To directly answer your question: Hell yes I'd go out in the surf and meet the tar balls head-on. I've done it before. The thought doesn't give me pause in the least.

People, crude oil is organic. In its natural state, it poses little or no threat to the environment. It's when we humans gather the stuff up and process it and distill it and refine it into synthetic petroleum products that the stuff becomes very toxic.

But, people, you can put natural crude oil in your mouth without any consequence. I mean, I wouldn't recommend it — it has a very rich, nasty taste that you'd probably find disagreeable.

But it aint gonna kill you.

— Doc Velocity



posted on Jun, 26 2010 @ 03:35 AM
link   
the guy is comparing 375 million distributed over the ocean and in 1 year timespan to

375 million distributed over the golf region in 3 months

can you please explain your "alien" math to get to the conclusion that both phases represent the same to earth??

- this is going to destroy golf economy, species, maybe even destroy the entire US economy

yeah, its the same, keep telling u that, you are a denier ... go open the bible for the answers



posted on Jun, 26 2010 @ 03:39 AM
link   
"It is not a surprise. Some fisherman who are working to clean up the oil spill along the Gulf Coast are becoming ill:"

"... Some Louisiana fishermen affected by the massive oil spill in the Gulf — including some hired by BP to help in the cleanup — are reporting cases of debilitating headaches, burning eyes and nausea, and some industry and public officials are pointing the finger at chemical dispersants as the cause."
link: Louisiana Fishermen Helping in Spill Cleanup Report Getting Sick

"They told us we could eat that stuff on our pancakes," said Ron Smith of Soldotna, who blames his headaches, nausea and memory loss on work he did that summer. He just had a pre-cancerous tumor removed from his lower intestine.
When Exxon was pressed by lawsuits to be responsible for the health of the workers on the Alaskan oil spill, their response was clear. ""There is nothing in these claims to suggest that the cleanup systematically produced any illnesses or injuries," the company said."

open.salon.com...



posted on Jun, 26 2010 @ 03:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by Doc Velocity

Yet, you can't SHOW ME any precedent for that statement. Point me to an instance of a crude oil spill killing "countless numbers of birds and aquatic plants and animals"... You've seen a few photos and videos depicting a couple of dozen dead fish, a handful of oil-stained Pelicans (who walked away just fine), and you've read these anecdotal stories of threatened marshes — "Tonight, everything in that marsh is dead."

Except that there's no proof to back it up.


I thought the same thing last time you posted your little tale of watching crabs inhale crude oil... only about your theory, Doc. Those who say crude is harmfull have a world of evidence demonstrating just that... photos, videos, carcasses, genetic tests, fish caught in long contaminated water with open cancers on their lips and heads from the oil... I could go on. Exxon Valdez, 1989. Well over 100,000 seabirds: DEAD, An entire year's worth (IR: BILLIONS) of salmon and herring spawned eggs along with the previous season's fry: DEAD, 3,000 otters: DEAD, Nearly 300 Eagles: DEAD... 21 years later the populations of the local eagles and mammals STILL haven't fully recovered due to a generation of animals with effected birth rates and high mortallity caused by ingenstion of oil. The Chugach Native Corporation: BANRUPTCY thanks to the destruction of the clam beds, salmon, and herring fisheries in Prince William Sound which accounted for much of their finances. www.scientificamerican.com...

You've got your little crab anecdotes... whoppity doo! I work with at least 2 people who worked the Valdez cleanup up here. One of them has a photo collage of 2 dozen photos of dead shorebirds... no, not "a handfull of oil stained pelicans (who walked away fine)", I'm talking about 5, 10, 20 oil soaked, dead birds in each photo. It doesn't pain me in the least to tell you that, when placed on a balance scale, the anecdotes, science, and facts of the toxic property of oil to wildlife and people is resting comfortably upon the floor while the weight of your oil breathing crabs fable hasn't even budged your side of the scale from it's precarious heights.



posted on Jun, 26 2010 @ 03:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by SonicInfinity
Quick question Doc Velocity: If a major hurricane hits the Gulf area soon and completely destroys the Gulf Coast by covering it in oil and Corexit 9500, will you take back your statements on this being an "extinction level event"? I mean technically, humans, fish, birds, etc., will still exist around the world, but all of the Gulf Coast's heritage, livelihood, etc., will be extinct.

Well, here's the deal... The total amount of oil spilled into the Gulf so far wouldn't fill up a domed stadium, okay? The vast majority of it is about 5000 feet down and is never coming to the surface because it's the same density as the seawater — so it's emulsifying into the seawater, right, blending in.

Now, throw a hurricane into the mix:

A hurricane's overall density relative to seawater is pretty thin. So, the hurricane isn't going to reach down 5000 feet into the water column and bring the Deepwater Horizon crude oil to the surface.

What you are going to see is that hurricane activity will CLEANSE the beaches, the marshes and everything else.

I mean, c'mon, people... I've seen extensive oil pollution on the upper Texas coast, on the beaches and marshes in Galveston Bay and Trinity Bay, off the Houston Ship Channel. I've seen crabs and frogs and alligators and ibises and seagulls with oil on 'em, glowering at me... And a hurricane or tropical storm comes in and scrubs everything spotless. Beaches clean, marshes clean, crabs and frogs and alligators all smiling knowingly.

Such is the cycle of oil and hurricanes in the Gulf of Mexico. C'mon, I know there are some people down there in Galveston who can back me up on this.

— Doc Velocity



posted on Jun, 26 2010 @ 03:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by Doc Velocity
C'mon, I know there are some people down there in Galveston who can back me up on this.


Don't sing it, bring it, my man! Find these folks, get them to support your claims. Right now I'm not seeing a whole lot except for one man voicing something which flies in the face of logic, common knowledge, expert opinions, the truth... I'm gonna need more than just "I've seen" stories on this, because it idn't holding water right now.



posted on Jun, 26 2010 @ 04:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by burdman30ott6
II'm still trying to figure out whether you really believe that this oil is no big deal or whether you're sitting with a lockbox full of BP stock and trying to convince yourself that as long as you say everything's OK, everything will stay hunky dory, Doc.

Hm. No, I own no petroleum stock, although I did work for the president of Marathon Oil back in the 1980s. He also happened to be a retired Senator, and we talked about the oil industry and politics at length — which is probably what shaped my mind so perfectly for conspiracy theory.

— Doc Velocity



posted on Jun, 26 2010 @ 04:07 AM
link   

People, crude oil is organic. In its natural state, it poses little or no threat to the environment. It's when we humans gather the stuff up and process it and distill it and refine it into synthetic petroleum products that the stuff becomes very toxic.

But, people, you can put natural crude oil in your mouth without any consequence. I mean, I wouldn't recommend it — it has a very rich, nasty taste that you'd probably find disagreeable.


You are right that crude oil is not toxic and will be cleansed by the oceans itself... but... al the oil that comes ashore has been sprayed with coreexit wich is very toxic, so we aren't talking about crude oil anymore.

People are complaining about the smell at the coast and getting headaches and so on. I can not imagine you try to ignore this.



posted on Jun, 26 2010 @ 04:13 AM
link   
Why are you guys having a oil spill VS oil spill fight? I would just take it for what it is, apart from what is happening with BP, we're having another problem in our waters.

If you want to fight out which is the worst spill, go right ahead. But I don't think there is a point in comparing spills... this has been brought to our attention and should be given the same respect as the BP spill.

Or will those bitching about the BP spill just ignore the other spills and prove to be hypocrites?

Let's take things for what they are. A problem is a problem, it might not be yours or mine, but it's still a problem!



new topics

top topics



 
7
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join