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.

 

75 percent oil from Gulf of Mexico spill is gone

page: 2
6
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 5 2010 @ 02:49 AM
link   
reply to post by baddmove
 


75% Of The Oil Has Vanished!


"We can't find oil at the surface and, as of this week, we cannot find it deep down either," says Terry Hazen, a microbial ecologist at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory in California, whose research has focused on the area within 100 kilometres of the wellhead.


Why? Because of natural bacterial action!


Oil-eating bacteria in the Gulf's deeper waters may have reacted so fast thanks in part to being primed by natural oil seeps along the sea floor. All things considered, and given that oil stopped flowing two weeks ago, says Hazen, it is not surprising that the plumes are now largely gone.




posted on Aug, 5 2010 @ 08:04 PM
link   
reply to post by plumranch
 


Well let's look at this..shall we..


Consider the "dissolved" oil. This crude didn't just vanish entirely—it's still mixed in with the water. A number of marine scientists have pointed out that dissolved oil can still poison the small organisms that underpin the Gulf's food chain. As The New York Times reported last week, "The effect on sea life of the large amounts of oil that dissolved below the surface is still a mystery. Two preliminary government reports on that issue have found concentrations of toxic compounds in the deep sea to be low, but the reports left many questions, especially regarding an apparent decline in oxygen levels in the water


And this....


Then there's the dispersed oil. The crude that's been naturally dispersed will biodegrade more rapidly, thanks to bacteria that thrive in the warm Gulf waters. But then there are the chemical dispersants that BP used to break up the oil and send it into deeper waters (rather than have it wash up onshore). These chemicals had never been used on such a broad scale before, and no one is quite sure what effect they'll have on the ocean ecosystem.


source



posted on Aug, 5 2010 @ 08:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by plumranch
reply to post by baddmove
 


75% Of The Oil Has Vanished!


no... from both BP & the gov't.... the 5 'million' gallons/barrels
of deepwater oil has been sequestered/boomed/skimmed/set-afire/sopped-up/picked up off the beachs & marshes/otherwise dissapated by the dispersants.... the BP engineerts & the lying gov't agencies loyal to the administration are putting out untruthful figures/propaganda (just as the BLS has been doing for 24 months now)


lets await the real truth from the WikiLeaks site.... (if even they can survive! the assaults from the regime )



posted on Aug, 5 2010 @ 08:30 PM
link   
reply to post by St Udio
 


You know, all you folks who desperately want this to be all about Obama (instead of years of a corrupted MMS, BP's failings, and Haliburton's involvement) just make me laugh. As if these problems all magically appeared with the newest administration, and arent symptoms of a far larger problem.

Nope, Just Obama. All his fault. Vote Republican and everything will change:-)

So thank you for that. It's important to laugh.

Bless you.



posted on Aug, 5 2010 @ 08:44 PM
link   
There was a TV news report out of a New Orleans today about 2 fishermen finding several full-sized crabs filled with some sort of black substance.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

So, the dispersant breaks up the oil, it sinks to the bottom and is consumed by crabs & the like.

But don't worry. Everything is OK! (sarcasm)

I just hope Mother Nature can finish up the job without too much more damage to the area.



posted on Aug, 5 2010 @ 09:43 PM
link   
reply to post by OneisOne
 


I hope you are right..

I still believe most of the oil is still in the GOM..

and it will show up sooner than later...



posted on Aug, 5 2010 @ 10:19 PM
link   
OUT of sight out of mind?

Not for these hermit crabs!

video.yahoo.com...



posted on Aug, 5 2010 @ 10:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by justadood
reply to post by St Udio
 


You know, all you folks who desperately want this to be all about Obama (instead of years of a corrupted MMS, BP's failings, and Haliburton's involvement) just make me laugh. As if these problems all magically appeared with the newest administration, and arent symptoms of a far larger problem.

Nope, Just Obama. All his fault. Vote Republican and everything will change:-)


We have had our disagreements on some things but not on this one!!



posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 07:32 PM
link   
If 4.9 million barrels of oil spilled into the Gulf in total up to the time the cap was placed and 75% of that has disappeared, that means 3,675,000 barrels somehow vanished. Like the tooth the tooth fairy picked up. Gone with only the simplest of scenerios given. Strangely, some folk seem to have lost faith in that fairy. Or maybe figured out her tricks.
Floridaoilspill.com, in its issue of Aug. 7, says in part:
"Florida Oil Spill. Com put out a call for the missing or disappearing oil. Today we found some of it buried on the beaches of the Florida panhandle." Source

floridaoilspill.com

A well documented article detailing how many forms of the toxic mess was found below the surface of the sand.



posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 07:53 PM
link   
reply to post by SimplyGord
 


while i do think the msm is trying to imply it has 'vanished', i'm not sure any of them have said so, exactly. just that it has 'dispersed', which it may very well have.

of course, as we know, this 'dispersment (process of dispersing??)' is just another problem waiting to occur.

but i do agree that most of the large slicks and whatnot are probably already on the beaches. That was probably from the very beginning of the spill, before they began using corexit at the course in such large amounts.



posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 08:15 PM
link   
I am confused by the replies in this thread. Many believed them when they said that millions of barrels of oil have spilled into the Gulf. Now they say 75% is gone and many don’t believe them. Why not believe them now if you believed them before? And if you don’t believe what they say now why do you still believe what they said before? Perhaps you folks have had your natural abilities of discernment permanently disabled by all the disinfo you been ingesting from BP and friends over the last few months? This could even be considered a form of permanent brain damaged induced by thousands of hours of exposure to false imagery and sound bites. In that case you could sue BP for damages…. brain damages.




[edit on 8-8-2010 by soleprobe]



posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 08:40 PM
link   
reply to post by soleprobe
 


well, you seem to think that all of ATS has a collective mind?

some say one thing. Some say another. We dont speak for each other. This isnt a political party platform. Your generalizations are general.



posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 08:44 PM
link   
reply to post by soleprobe
 


It is not just people on ATS who question numbers. It was the US Gov. who questioned BP and had their estimate changed. Then even that was bumped up when independant scientists questioned the official estimate.
If we had believed the first news, it was 5000 barrels a day.
Don't jump on ATS followers for being sceptic. Frankly, on the subject of this disaster, I think ATS is very much on top of what is going on. As much as average people can be.
The live watching of the ROVs is a fine example. These folk have been following this thread since June. The average north american attention span is measured in seconds. I bet BP wished all these watchers would quit. They could shut down all display for lack of interest.
The whole subject is totally gone out of MSM in Canada.



posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 11:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by SimplyGord
It is not just people on ATS who question numbers. It was the US Gov. who questioned BP and had their estimate changed.


The US government and BP are the same entity. See how they have you confused?


Originally posted by SimplyGord
Then even that was bumped up when independant scientists questioned the official estimate.


Independent? Says who? BP?, the government?, mainstream media experts? They are all the same entity… now you’re even more confused.


Originally posted by SimplyGord
If we had believed the first news, it was 5000 barrels a day.


Why not believe the “first news”? One lie is as bad as another.


Originally posted by SimplyGord
Don't jump on ATS followers for being sceptic.


I don’t think ATS followers have the monopoly on skepticism regarding this event… everyone including mainstream sources are displaying skepticism… or more accurately acting like skeptics.


Originally posted by SimplyGord
Frankly, on the subject of this disaster, I think ATS is very much on top of what is going on. As much as average people can be.


On top of what…. a pile of lies?
Lies = Dung: So a pile of dung.


Originally posted by SimplyGord
The live watching of the ROVs is a fine example. These folk have been following this thread since June.


A fine example of the planned future society of virtual online worlds created for the plebes to play in. Like the virtual worlds created on facebook (Millionaire City, Restaurant City, Café World etc…) … this is the “BP Underwater World” where everyone knows it’s not real but they play along anyway because it simulates reality and gives them the same sense of accomplishment. They just have to empty their minds and play along.




Originally posted by SimplyGord
I bet BP wished all these watchers would quit. They could shut down all display for lack of interest.


That’s not what they want…. they enjoy creating and controlling the virtual reality in which the plebes live. It gives them a godlike sensation.


Originally posted by SimplyGord
The whole subject is totally gone out of MSM in Canada.


They’ve just moved on to other virtual subjects… maybe a forecast of what will happen in the MSM in the US.



posted on Aug, 9 2010 @ 12:05 PM
link   
Here is a little something for you to read. It sums up to an extent about the oil in the gulf. Go to link for the whole article.

tamunews.tamu.edu...

Gulf Oil Spill Gone? Not So Fast.

COLLEGE STATION, Aug. 5, 2010 – Reports saying that 75 percent of the gulf oil spill has either been cleaned up or broken down by natural forces are likely incorrect, and there are still big problems lurking beneath the surface of the Gulf of Mexico, says a Texas A&M scientist who conducted one of the first on-site studies of the spill.

John Kessler, assistant professor of oceanography in the College of Geosciences, says reports that most of the gulf oil has disappeared and appears no longer to be a problem are misleading, if not totally inaccurate. Bottom line, he explains: there are still large amounts of oil and gas in the gulf and they still pose big problems.

“Recent reports seem to say that about 75 percent of the spill has been taken care of, and that is just not true,” Kessler says.

So it seems that there are a few different stories out there about the oil in the gulf and what has happened to it. This professor has been studying the oil and the spill from the beginning so I think he is a very credible source to listen to. You can make up your own conclusions to the article. Just thought this was an interesting bit of info to post.



posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 05:15 PM
link   
reply to post by sodakota
 


I really wish people would stop saying it sank, how do you know it sank? Did you see it? That's right you didn't see nothing, and how far down can you see with an airplane? That's right not very deep, maybe 100 feet, so that only leaves a few miles down that you can neither see, and those with rov's are all liars so you can't count on them.

Look when you do your dishes and the oil isn't floating on the surface, does it sink to the bottom? No it is dissolved and in this case if you don't know where the oil is, then don't say it's on the bottom. It is dissolved and/or submerged but it did not go anywhere, it is still there and there are huge gushers still spewing on the sea floor as I have lots of videos to prove it.



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 02:33 AM
link   
reply to post by sizzlean
 





I really wish people would stop saying it sank, how do you know it sank?


Good point!

Since oil is much less dense than water, therefore, the oil will readily float, go to the surface, appear in surface camera analysis and be otherwise apparent to the world.

I was wondering why the media was assuming that in this case the oil sank or did not rise to the surface even though the laws of physics says oil will rise!

Perhaps journalists do not study science!?



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 06:29 PM
link   
That remind me of Hiroshima. The US official and "Scientist" back then said, 4 days after the bomb have been dropped that the radiation were all gone...?? Yeah right!! 60yrs after there are still radiation.




Times reporters, such as the celebrated W.H. Lawrence, who helped cover up the true effects of the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima in August, 1945. “No Radioactivity in Hiroshima Ruin,” was the headline on his report, and it was false.

Link


Same thing over and over again. Everything is covered up. You cannot trust anything the media tells you.



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 07:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by sizzlean
reply to post by sodakota
 


I really wish people would stop saying it sank, how do you know it sank? Did you see it? That's right you didn't see nothing, and how far down can you see with an airplane? That's right not very deep, maybe 100 feet, so that only leaves a few miles down that you can neither see, and those with rov's are all liars so you can't count on them.

Look when you do your dishes and the oil isn't floating on the surface, does it sink to the bottom? No it is dissolved and in this case if you don't know where the oil is, then don't say it's on the bottom. It is dissolved and/or submerged but it did not go anywhere, it is still there and there are huge gushers still spewing on the sea floor as I have lots of videos to prove it.


Are you trying to contradict yourself?

If it is still in the water, and it is not on the surface, then it sank.



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 07:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by plumranch
reply to post by sizzlean
 





I really wish people would stop saying it sank, how do you know it sank?


Good point!

Since oil is much less dense than water, therefore, the oil will readily float, go to the surface, appear in surface camera analysis and be otherwise apparent to the world.

I was wondering why the media was assuming that in this case the oil sank or did not rise to the surface even though the laws of physics says oil will rise!

Perhaps journalists do not study science!?


Well, because that is what the Corexit is designed to do; Cause the oil to 'disperse' below the surface instead of collecting on the surface.




top topics



 
6
<< 1   >>

log in

join