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.

 

Gulf Oil Spill Hoax Argument VINDICATED

page: 2
16
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 03:53 PM
link   
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler
 


You know these to be facts because you're a chemist and a medical doctor? Or are you just parroting what you hear on the news?




posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 03:58 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 03:58 PM
link   
Doc, Star & Flag - I've stood with you by saying the same things and getting flamed for them as well.

It doesn't matter to these envirotards (love that term, btw, I am going to start using it). They just need something to further their cause. Too bad mother nature doesn't cooperate with them - how ironic.

Just look at the flaming still going on in this thread - they don't give it up. I said a year from now there wouldn't be any evidence of a huge oil spill. It might even be less than that.

Doc, myself, and many others told ya so. Now go take a shower and scrape the Obama stickers off your Subaru.



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 03:59 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 04:04 PM
link   
I don't agree with the tone of the OP, but I do at least consider the notion that this disaster is being orchestrated and hyped up.

Sofar, I haven't really seen the impact you'd expect form such a huge disaster, after 4 months or so, but maybe that's premature.

One thing is for sure, "they" don't wan't us to see the true extent of this disaster, meaning it could be worse or it could be less bad.



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 04:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Point of No Return
So is this thread about spreading truth, or about attacking people that have a different opinion? I though you said you past 50, why not act like it?

I'm past 50, and I'm sick of hysterical environmental whackos prophesying doomsday every time the Green Agenda pushes the button and sends up a false flag.

What, do you think it's a REQUIREMENT of being mature and educated that I stand aside as the uninformed and uneducated spread their unsubstantiated rumors and false suspicions? I'm sorry to disappoint you, but my knowledge and my disdain for IGNORANCE dictate that I speak out and, yes, knock down the whackos every chance I get.

Which I do. Proudly.

If they want to be taken seriously as "environmentalists," people need to assimilate and consider the TRUTH on occasion, rather than leaping on those with more wisdom and insight — as you can see from my previous threads on the matter, for every post of mine there are at least a dozen intolerant and, frankly, IGNORANT flames from those who simply won't HEAR or CONSIDER anything except the suspicions and rumor-milling.

If anyone needs to grow up, it's the flaming enviro-trolls.

— Doc Velocity.



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 04:12 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 04:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Doc Velocity
 


You are drawing an analogy that does not apply in the situation of the BP oil spill. It IS TRUE that the ocean can absorb natural oil seeps, because the rate of seepage is low enough for microbial breakdown to take place.
HOWEVER, in the case of the BP oil spill, it is IMPOSSIBLE for the ocean to absorb such a high rate and volume of oil.
However, don't take my word for it.



(Reuters) - Some marine life thrives on oil bubbling up naturally from the seabed even though it cannot cope with giant single leaks like from BP's ruptured well in the Gulf of Mexico, experts say.

"But a large concentrated spill is a totally different thing...Nature cannot adapt," he said of BP's 85-day spill. Apart from being eaten by bacteria, oil can evaporate and is broken down by sunlight.

www.reuters.com...

I have left out some of the text to conform to the request that only snippets be quoted. Please read the entire link. It is very clear that your argument doesn't hold "oil".


[edit on 29-7-2010 by ProfEmeritus]

[edit on 29-7-2010 by ProfEmeritus]



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 04:17 PM
link   
reply to post by AwakeinNM
 

Lets not start a "tard" war, shall we? Seriously, what are you even doing on ATS if you want to perpetuate this kind of ignorance?
 

As for Doc's credibility on this topic, while he may have a few points right, let's just say that my first two particular threads on this topic of his, one with libelous allegations about faked photography from the GoM, and the other intentionally misinterpreting a MSM article referencing a government report on the amount of oil spilled into our oceans daily (neglecting to point out most of that was processed oil and oil by-products from onshore) left enough of a bad taste in my mouth that I wonder why I even wandered in here to begin with. Other than to say this, of course. Sort of like a train wreck, I guess.

Sorry.



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 04:20 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 04:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zot Twady
Doc, the claim that the entire event was staged seems pretty implausible at this point, and the burden of proof is on YOU to provide evidence to support your claims if you intend to present a credible argument.

If you knew what you were talking about — which you apparently DON'T — then you'd know that I never said this whole event was staged.

Never said it. You're either misinformed, unobservant, or you're trying to put words in my mouth. SHOW ME where I ever said Deepwater Horizon was "staged"... You can't.

What I have said, repeatedly, in this and other threads, is that Deepwater Horizon is business-as-usual for the offshore drilling industry. What I have said, repeatedly, in this thread and others, is that the envirotard contingent, with the willing assistance of the MSM, tried to turn a common occurrence into an "environmental catstrophe," which it is NOT.

My claim is that the story was inflated with LIES and false predictions that were never supported by Science or anything else.

How many times was I assailed here on ATS for ignoring all those dying dolphins and seabirds and the polluted marshlands...? How many times did I see posts on ATS about mass evacuations on the Gulf Coast...?

We saw PLENTY of those whack-job posts. Why aren't you, in your righteous indignation, hammering the LIARS on ATS who spread all these rumors of a nonexistent eco-disaster?

I have backed up my position with my personal observations AND with photos AND with documented reports on the ACTUAL annual amount of oil pollution in the Earth's oceans, which dwarfs the Deepwater Horizon incident.

All my detractors have provided are detraction and arrogant invective.

Today I provided a story from Time/CNN that vindicates my position — that the reports of environmental catastrophe and of damage to the ecosystem were grossly EXAGGERATED.

Exaggeration... That's a nice word for LYING. That's a nice word for HOAX.

Deal with it.

— Doc Velocity




[edit on 7/29/2010 by Doc Velocity]



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 04:27 PM
link   
I would like the names of the ATS staff that have backed and validated your dream of this being just another hoax in order to ring in the next wave of Governemnt sanctioned energy.

I realize that you have placed a few truths and spun it like the msm and the epic and oh so telling msm bought and paid for by BP and their minions of attorneys and Fedral scientists would have you believe.

Believe what you want but the proof is somewhat different than what you think it is.


Now the names please.



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 04:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Doc Velocity
 


Doc,I pray to God on my knees that this oil spill isn't as
bad as they are saying,I have family in florida!



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 04:30 PM
link   
Doc settle down it is as if you are basing your entire tyrade and subsequent validation on ONE report by the MSM.

You are wrong on this one.

But if you are right then when you become a big important MOD here from all your back U2U connections with the owners and staff, well then ban me for being an pro- environmentalist.

[edit on 29-7-2010 by antar]



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 04:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by AwakeinNM
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler
 


You know these to be facts because you're a chemist and a medical doctor? Or are you just parroting what you hear on the news?


Actually my father holds part of the patent on Mobil One Synthetic Motor Oil as the chief Chemist with the PHD and a listing in Who's who to go along with it.

I am not a chemist but having spent some time in his labs, I can tell you that science like justice tends to be a process where the wheels grind rather slowly but finely.

Once again no credible researcher would be rushing to make any conclusions at this point.



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 04:36 PM
link   
This information does not change the fact that others, myself included, think that the BP Oil spill is fiction/smoke and mirrors. Halliburtons hand in upkeep of rig, and purchasing an oil clean up company weeks before the explosion are just a few hints that this is a false flag operation.

Both BP and Coast Guard reported the spill had been contained the day after the rig accident.

A simple scanning of the BP Video thread here on ATS will tell you that all is not Kosher concerning the BP feed.

Now, oil is not appearing on shores or surface. Millions of gallons of oil do not simply disappear. I don't care how much disperssant you spray on it...

This whole Disaster is very Fishy...

Accusations of the colorful history of the thread OP, are irrelevant.

[edit on 29-7-2010 by jambatrumpet]



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 04:37 PM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 04:40 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 04:50 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 04:50 PM
link   
reply to post by Doc Velocity
 


Doc! I flamed you some, and I still disagree with you, but I did say from the start that if the leak was stopped by August, then the damage was reversible and we were only looking at about 2 bad years.

Lets not forget that this is not the Exxon Valdez. The vast majority of this oil is far, far below the surface. We won't know the extent of damage for decades. Fisheries and impacts on breeding populations in the marshes and at the bottom of the food chain cannot be estimated yet. The worst news is still yet to come.

BUT, I will give you props. The MSM was starting to swing to the "envirotards" and you stood your ground, and now the MSM is swinging back the other way and you have your "VINDICATION." Props for that, even though the results won't be in for years.




top topics



 
16
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join