n10sive
Well-known member
sheeesh. All you young people don't remember when a day at the beach in California meant bringing a 5 gal can of Methyl Ethyl Ketone with you to get all the tar balls of your feet before you got back into the family wagon 
-
There has been a recent cluster of spammers accessing BARFer accounts and posting spam. To safeguard your account, please consider changing your password. It would be even better to take the additional step of enabling 2 Factor Authentication (2FA) on your BARF account. Read more here.
another BP thread. Are we doomed?
- Thread starter Entoptic
- Start date
gogounited
HATERATOR
For the first part, it depends on what you expect a company to do. We've discussed this before, and my position is that it is EXPECTED for a private corporation facing legal and financial liabilities to behave as such.
As for the poisons...listen to what the guy said a couple minutes in. His line of logic was wrong, period. He started babbling about gas masks for hyrdogen sulfide gas, then expanded it to methane saying it was even more toxic in the same scenario. I understand the difference, and how methane could kill you...just sounded like he didn't.
I don't swallow everything I've heard, and am skeptical about MSM. However, I'm MORE skeptical what I hear from the fringes. The ONLY thing this guy had right was that BP downplayed (lie in your vocabulary) the severity and probably purposely concealed information from the public (BTW, since when is providing public news their responsibility). Doesn't take a genius to figure that out, and that's pretty much how EVERY company has ever handled this type of thing.
But hey, you should evacuate right now because theres a "wet methane" cloud (whatever the fuck "wet methane" is) headed your way.Remeber, never trust a fart.
I don't care to rationalize the REASON for their lies, in terms of liability. That's so obvious as to not even need pointing out. What's not so obvious is to what DEGREE they are lying, it may not JUST be an issue of public relations. But hey, I'm supposed to trust that these LIARS are not lying about the potential dangers of the toxic shit in the air and water. Since they're fucking LIARS, and we know they are LIARS, what is left to question? It's all sorted out now that we KNOW they are lying. Who gives a flying fuck about everything they could be lying ABOUT - those questions need not be asked, only by the fringe of course.
It doesn't take a genius to figure out that methane is what caused all of those disappearances in the Bermuda Triangle either.
And YET AGAIN, let me remind you that whether you're talking hydrogen sulfides or methane gas, the poison is always in the dosage. I provided a really simple example and yet you obfuscate. WATER can kill you if you drink enough of it.
Refusing to disclose information, misleading people, and outright LYING are three similar but distinctly different things, and I know the difference between them but apparently you do not. Either that, or you simply have not done the research and are talking out of your ass.
gogounited
HATERATOR
sheeesh. All you young people don't remember when a day at the beach in California meant bringing a 5 gal can of Methyl Ethyl Ketone with you to get all the tar balls of your feet before you got back into the family wagon
Oh right, because this is just natural seepage right?
gogounited
HATERATOR
Sounds to me like the issue isn't about taking pictures as much as it is about venturing into areas that have been closed.
That's a bit naive, but okay if that's what works for you. People who took film and pictures as the oil washed ashore in places where beaches and parks were not yet closed were threatened with arrest by the Coast Guard.
Huh
I'll simply suggest you apply the same level of skepicism to ALL sources, not just the ones coming from evil corporations.
I don't trust BP to reliably report what's going on. It isn't their job. However, I also question any large organization's ability to maintain a large scale coverup.
As for reasearch, the stuff you posted is lame. At most it asks a few interesting questions, but the conclusions are supported only by conspiracy.
BTW: What exactly is your point besides the fact that BP "lied". Are you saying we're doomed because of a giant methane bubble? If you'd tone down your "fuck the corporations" banter it might be easier to tell.
Last edited:
gixxerjoeca
New member
gogounited
HATERATOR
Huh
I'll simply suggest you apply the same level of skepicism to ALL sources, not just the ones coming from evil corporations.
I don't trust BP to reliably report what's going on. It isn't their job. However, I also question any large organization's ability to maintain a large scale coverup.
As for reasearch, the stuff you posted is lame. At most it asks a few interesting questions, but the conclusions are supported only by conspiracy.
You're the only one still talking liability and BP's "job" of lying to cover their ass. I find that to be very small-minded, since obviously, you have not bothered to research the issue from all possible angles, if at all. And of course you have not bothered to do so, afterall you've so brilliantly come to the conclusion that BP may be lying, it's no longer necessary to flush out what they are covering up because genius that you are, you EXPECTED them to lie. Oh yes, I find that duly impressive. Way to get to the heart of a matter!
Look at the NOAA report and it's findings about the plumes, and location of leaks. Notice the TWO wells and their respective locations. Notice the plume sites as observed by NOAA. Check out BP's public statements and make some comparisons to the "live feed" data being provided to the public. THEN pat yourself on the back because you were right - they LIED! After that, you just might wanna ask WHAT exactly they are lying about. Or, don't bother at all, I wish that were a viable option for those who just got royally (no pun intended) fucked on the Gulf Coast.
Oh, and lest I forget...
Last edited:
gogounited
HATERATOR
What constitutes "large"? Are "large" methane releases required to sink a ship or down a plane?
Wikipedia is for grade-schoolers.
Last edited:
n10sive
Well-known member
Oh right, because this is just natural seepage right?
Don't read in what is not there. It was due to extremely careless handling of oil. The pumps would often just leak onto the ground. Off shore drilling was sloppy. It was all man done. You all just think this is the first time man has spilled oil...it's not. They used to do it on purpose and didn't give a rats patoot. Being from Texas, I am sure you have seen pictures of guys just slogging there way through lakes of oil around drilling operations.
Not excusing anything BP has done, but we have come a LONG WAY from the way things were done as recently as the 70's and 80's.
gixxerjoeca
New member
You're the only one still talking liability and BP's "job" of lying to cover their ass. I find that to be very small-minded, since obviously, you have not bothered to research the issue from all possible angles, if at all. And of course you have not bothered to do so, afterall you've so brilliantly come to the conclusion that BP may be lying, it's no longer necessary to flush what they are covering up because genius that you are, you EXPECTED them to lie. Oh yes, I find that duly impressive. Way to get to the heart of a matter!
Look at the NOAA report and it's findings about the plumes, and location of leaks. Notice the TWO wells and their respective locations. Notice the plume sites as observed by NOAA. Check out BP's public statements and make some comparisons to the "live feed" data being provided to the public. THEN pat yourself on the back because you were right - they LIED! After that, you just might wanna ask WHAT exactly they are lying about. Or, don't bother at all, I wish that were a viable option for those who just got royally (no pun intended) fucked on the Gulf Coast.
Oh, and lest I forget...
Are you high? Because in order to defend a point, you have to make one. Beyond claiming you made one in a thread you'll send me, the ONLY thing I see from you is a bunch of ranting about how BP lied, and then popping up 30 days later with a post about some conspiracy theorist who died in a hot tub.
BTW, suppose BP had been and continues to be entirely truthful. Would that have made the oil disappear or the giant methand bubble go away? How is it that they hold the jedi mind trick power to blind the public to the ocean fart of doom? My point that you missed is that I don't care because I expect it, AND I don't think it matters beyond the lawyers.
gogounited
HATERATOR
n10sive
Well-known member
Right, Matt Simmons was just a conspiracy theorist.
Pure fucking genius.
And I disappeared on my Navy ship while sailing through the Bermuda Triangle when it was sunk by a giant fart. Now I am in purgatory stuck in yet another BARF conspiracy thread!
Right, Matt Simmons was just a conspiracy theorist.
Pure fucking genius.
Actually, he was an energy advisor under your beloved George W Bush. So while I'm sure he was evil then, he should be listened to now.
gogounited
HATERATOR
Actually, he was an energy advisor under your beloved George W Bush. So while I'm sure he was evil then, he should be listened to now.
Oh, but I thought he was on the fringe and didn't know what he was talking about? I thought he was just a conspiracy theorist? Damn, now we have to find out he was a fucking expert in his field! Why did I ever mention his death in the first place, silly me.
Oh, but I thought he was on the fringe and didn't know what he was talking about? I thought he was just a conspiracy theorist? Damn, now we have to find out he was a fucking expert in his field! Why did I ever mention his death in the first place, silly me.
So his field was in undersea geology? I thought it was finance.
The guy was famous for writing a book about peak oil...figuring out single handedly that oil was a finite resource. His subsequent track record wasn't so good, and he was an acknowledged doomsayer (above and beyond most) regarding the gulf. So yeah, his claims that we're all doomed because of an underwater methane volcano are a fringe view, and his statements that BP has (and presumedly is able to) cover it all up would be a conspiracy theory.
But again...WTF is your point?
tzrider
Write Only User
Right, Matt Simmons was just a conspiracy theorist.
Pure fucking genius.
You are discussing this with the same people with whom you also recently discussed an imminent catastrophic earthquake caused by solar CME activity. It appeared to many of us that you were buying into some silly conjecture. The time frame you were talking about has come and gone and nothing of consequence happened, which tends to reinforce that belief.
On this and other topics, you seem attracted to "alternative" explanations for things, with cover-ups and conspiracies being a recurring theme. You call for people to research issues more deeply, which is a worthwhile thing to do. That doesn't mean one will benefit by reading every nutcase with a blog.
Aluisious
Well-known member
Conspiracy theory is never theory anyway because they love to make claims that are immeasurable and not falsifiable. It lets them feel like they're "part of the debate" without all the hard work of actually doing something.
gogounited
HATERATOR
My point is Matt Simmons, as the only industry insider to question BP publicly as to where the leak is coming from, how much is leaking, what kind of pressure is coming through the BOP, etc., has died drowning in a hot tub after a heart attack. This shortly after the well is "capped" and the public should no longer concern themselves with the leak.
I bet you and your cheerleading group have not bothered to look at the NOAA report. I have been reseaching this since I saw Matt's first interview posing questions about BP's response no one else seemed to want to ask.
And your whole point is - they are liars and we should expect it. As I mentioned before, that's REALLY getting to the bottom of things. They are liars but don't bother to look into what they may be lying about. Pathetic.
And now, this dead guy who used to be a presidential energy advisor, is a fringe nutjob with little credibility simply BECAUSE of questioning BP like others would not.
And me, oh I'm a nutjob for throwing pearls before swine.
Have a lovely day within the confines of that box
Last edited:
Your point is that a guy died?
And you're right, I haven't looked at the unnamed NOAA report that you keep talking about but haven't bothered to provide a name for or link.
BTW, when I went to the NOAA web site they were reporting that no new oil is being found. Does this mean BP has found a new way to hide it?
And you're right, I haven't looked at the unnamed NOAA report that you keep talking about but haven't bothered to provide a name for or link.
BTW, when I went to the NOAA web site they were reporting that no new oil is being found. Does this mean BP has found a new way to hide it?
Last edited: