Seepage is 3 km from well: WHouse

reply to post by DragonFire1024


That is a very compelling video, and definitely needs to be scrutinized!

Yet again there is no way to know that that is 100% oil coming from that weird impression in the ground. We can't reach into the video and extract some of that ominous looking black fluid to run tests on it to determine it's make up.

I'm no expert, but it still looks too thin in my eyes to maybe be oil? Wouldn't oil come out in thick spherical blobs? I don't know. I can't imagine it being sediment churned around, it's definitely coming out of that impression in puffs

Originally posted by Nomad451
reply to post by DragonFire1024

 

That is a very compelling video, and definitely needs to be scrutinized!

Yet again there is no way to know that that is 100% oil coming from that weird impression in the ground. We can't reach into the video and extract some of that ominous looking black fluid to run tests on it to determine it's make up.

I'm no expert, but it still looks too thin in my eyes to maybe be oil? Wouldn't oil come out in thick spherical blobs? I don't know. I can't imagine it being sediment churned around, it's definitely coming out of that impression in puffs

When bubling from the ground, unless the crack/fissure is large, it would just come up as little bubbles like that. The ROV moved soil around and that's when the oil exploded. Since it decided not to stick around, we cannot say how bad or big it was. That's what BP has been doing...see a seep run away.

There seems to be some serious BS going on here.

The seepage isn't "related" to the well, or the seepage isn't "significant."

See BP is saying that the government agrees it isn't related. When in reality they are saying it isn't "significant."

I wonder if it ever occurs to these guys to ever just take responsibility without the spin....EVER.

Ever dollar being spent by the tax payer to pay to have to check on all the horse# coming from BP should be billed back to BP. Every tax dollar spent to try and confirm because they lie all the freaking time and cannot be trust to do anything without oversight for every single thing should be billed right back to them.


Credibility is lacking.


[edit on 2010/7/19 by Aeons]

www.nytimes.com...

I like how this one starts off claiming the "seep" isn't from the well and this information comes from "officials."

Those "officials" are BP.

This cap to me seems more and more to be a cap that is cappin the leak in the most important crisis BP has....

The leak in their stock price.

Particularly since the government didn't "give" them the 24 hour extension. BP REFUSED to do what they were told and the regulator caved to it.

Cap over ruptured BP well leaking, but tests continue

[edit on 2010/7/19 by Aeons]

Interesting article from James Howard Kunstler talking about BP shares drop and "What if Simmons is right?"

kunstler.com...

have people like us watching the feeds hours on end, taking screen shots and video, emailing officials and BP for statements. I don't think they could keep a lid on the situation any longer.

Can you post those screenshots and video of the leaks in this thread for those of us who havent seen them yet, or are still incredulous about the reliability of the evidence?

thanks.

[edit on 19-7-2010 by justadood]

Slowly but surely this story is reaching Australia,

www.news.com.au...< br />
Unfortunately I was correct in a post yesterday after saying our ABC had reported on other leaks. I feared our commercial stations would continue with their tabloid rubbish. Yes, Kylie Minogue is cute, but I fail to see how her arrival in her own country to see her sisters baby is news at all, let alone the 2nd story after our election.

I could have sworn all those womens gossip magazines were here to cover all the irrelevant issues, & the nightly news was for news.

It will be interesting in 8 hours to see if these leaks that ATS & C2C followers have known about for weeks will finally be mentioned on our tabloid news, but surely theres some out of date celebrity with a new style thats more important.

Oh how I long for the day we get real news down here. Is it too much to ask for just a little bit of journalistic integrity ? Is it so vitally important to make our news a 'feel good' experience ? Thats why the Simpsons follow the news, to make us feel better after seeing how much we've screwed the planet & ourselves.

Oh how I long for the day we get real news down here. Is it too much to ask for just a little bit of journalistic integrity ? Is it so vitally important to make our news a 'feel good' experience ? Thats why the Simpsons follow the news, to make us feel better after seeing how much we've screwed the planet & ourselves.

"Real" news exists. You just gotta seek it out. Most 'news' broadcasts today (like your countryman Rupert Murdoch's) dont even claim to be real news, they are entertainment.

"Real" news must be sought out. It will NEVER be delivered via a medium owned and controlled by the small circle of multi-national corporate interests like teevee or print.

Id say that most the 'news' iv gotten here and a few other sites thus far has been the most reliable. Sure, you gotta take it all with a lot fo salt, and disregard the ego-driven doomers who are mirror images of the MSM, but you can filter out something resembling reality much more so than the so-called 'MSM'.

That said, i can also see why the MSMisnt jumping on this story too quick. There are a lot of ifs and buts and maybes, and much of the information is likely to cause hysteria amongst the majority of stupid, ignorant and therefor fear-driven population.

IF the ATS population is any indication, then we should know by now that a story like this, with so many unknowns breeds paranoid and fear-driven theories. Perhaps its better the 'sheep' dont know.

reply to post by justadood


Valid points. I know I wont get any real news from the MSM, we are lucky enough to have 2 govt funded TV stations (I know, govt, but they are the most honest & actually cover things that arent feel good, they are let free to cover what they want) & a new 24hr news channel starts on Thu (Aus time).

As for the sheep, well like any living thing, plant or animal, it can be trained from an early age, & even if they are not 100% proven facts, getting them the info as it comes in means it wont be such a huge shock to the system when all hell breaks loose.

I was in the military, I fully appreciate the fact that theres issues that just dont need to be public knowledge, for their & our own good, I wont tell my girlfriend of 5 years anything & thats not due to a lack of trust. However, we here at ATS know this disaster (& it is an international disaster, not just a US one) could very well end in a big & spectacular way.

I'd say that if, for example, a huge methane bubble erupts, that will scare the hell out of people who have no idea that its a possibility considerably more than if they knew it could happen. A bit of warning, a bit of information, a bit of "what will happen, what to do & how will it effect you IF..." could make a big difference to how the sheep react. I know I prefer to be prepared for anything, even if it happens on the other side of the Pacific.

As I type, one of those tabloid news casts is covering it now, including Thad Allens firm letter, 8 minutes into the broadcast. Wow.

Originally posted by SNAFU38
reply to post by justadood

 

Valid points. I know I wont get any real news from the MSM, we are lucky enough to have 2 govt funded TV stations (I know, govt, but they are the most honest & actually cover things that arent feel good, they are let free to cover what they want) & a new 24hr news channel starts on Thu (Aus time).

As for the sheep, well like any living thing, plant or animal, it can be trained from an early age, & even if they are not 100% proven facts, getting them the info as it comes in means it wont be such a huge shock to the system when all hell breaks loose.

in just about every 'free' country on the planet, news stations that receive govt support (that is, subsidized by the PEOPLE) are far more worthwhile than for-profit ones.

Yes, in a totalitarian govt, the govt news is often nothing but fluff and propaganda, but in the 'free' market, the corporations are far more controlling than something like say NPR, the BBC, or the CBC.

You still have to filter, of course, but i get FAAAAR better news from the three news sources i just listed than most anything in the 'commercial' media.

for-profit news can never be expected to be truthful.

I'd say that if, for example, a huge methane bubble erupts, that will scare the hell out of people who have no idea that its a possibility considerably more than if they knew it could happen. A bit of warning, a bit of information, a bit of "what will happen, what to do & how will it effect you IF..." could make a big difference to how the sheep react. I know I prefer to be prepared for anything, even if it happens on the other side of the Pacific. As I type, one of those tabloid news casts is covering it now, including Thad Allens firm letter, 8 minutes into the broadcast. Wow.

I'm still not convinced, though. If people here are any judge, the common folk would likely react with serious panic and fear, not reasoned, thoughtful action. And if the Govt's 'job' is to keep the peace, then perhaps they are right in not telling the public that, 'oh, hey, a giant methane bubble might cause a giant tsunami' or whatever.

I'm not saying i ideologically agree with this approach. Just saying i can understand their rationale.

people are idiots. those who are smart seek out the truth. Those who need it fed to them maybe dont need to know?

just a thought



[edit on 19-7-2010 by justadood]