Oil leaks into the ocean!!!! stop all the drilling.

[john]

Once again you are right Havakasha. That was very scary when the two oil men were in the White House and having secret meetings about oil. And it wasn't long after those meetings that the price of crude started climbing. Before it was over, oil had gotten to nearly 150 bucks a barrel. And gas was over 4 bucks a gallon. Those were the good old days when the oil companies owned the Presidency.....LMAO

Hey, Obama made big mistakes too. It was his guys who let the ball drop. He has taken the blame and has stopped any new drilling off shore until things get fixed up a bit.

Wouldn't it have been nice if Bush and Cheney had the ability to admit mistakes. If they had, I don't think Obama would be President right now. America must have wanted a change from the days when our country was run by two big oil boys.

Yes, and you say your honest. I bet you also think Bush was responsible for the terror attacks dont you.

I got news for you you dumb twit Obama NEVER said he would let new drilling start he said they would start the research of it (basically let surveys be done of how much oil was there) Buit never said he would let it happen.

You also forget it was not until the democrats took control of congress that oil went up to 4 dollars a gallon. It was well below that for the first 6 years of Bush wasn't it.

[Havakasha]

The AP is not liberal.. Remember how during the 2008 election the head of the political division was a Bush supporter. I bet you forgot that now didnt you?

But am happy that some of the oil is evaporating and that some of it is more gaseous than oil. Thats good news. Huge quantities are still washing ashore and hanging out underwater. Once again john i know it not something you are very good at but admit you were wrong and that there is more than one way the oil spill is damaging the fishing ecosystem.

Scientists find evidence of large underwater oil underwater plume.
By David A. Fahrenthold and Juliet Eilperin
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, May 27, 2010; 2:49 PM
Scientists have found evidence of a large underwater "plume" of oil in the Gulf of Mexico, adding to fears that much of the BP oil spill's impact is hidden beneath the surface.

The scientists, aboard a University of South Florida research vessel, were testing the water in sites east and northeast of the leak's source. The university said they detected traces of dissolved oil as deep as 1,300 feet below the surface.

That test seemed to confirm the fears of some scientists that -- because of the depth of the leak and the heavy use of chemical "dispersants" -- this spill was behaving differently than others. Instead of floating on top of the water, it may be moving beneath it.

That would be troubling because it could mean the oil would slip past coastal defenses such as "containment booms" designed to stop it on the surface. Already, scientists and officials in Lousiana have reported finding thick oil washing ashore despite the presence of floating booms.

It would also be a problem for hidden ecosystems deep under the gulf. There, scientists say, the oil could be absorbed by tiny animals and enter a food chain that builds to large, beloved sport-fish like red snapper. It might also glom on to deep-water coral formations, and cover the small animals that make up each piece of coral.

"It kills them because it prevents them from feeding," said Professor James H. Cowan Jr., of Louisiana State University. "It could essentially starve them to death."

The University of South Florida vessel, the Weatherbird II, used sonar and other devices to sample the water below it. Other scientists have said they have little of the equipment necessary to find oil under the water -- leading to debates about whether the underwater plumes were even there.



This week, Mike Utsler, who helps oversee the spill response off the entire Louisiana coast as BP Houma incident commander, said he's only focused on taking oil off the surface. "We don't know there's oil underwater," he said.

But others had seen worrisome evidence.

Owen Morgan of Amira, a group that specializes in breaking apart spills with oil-eating microbes, found evidence of the oil plume off Venice when his team sampled water 75 feet beneath the service. Morgan -- who said his company is pulling out of Louisiana because of insufficient cooperation from state and federal authorities -- showed a thick, gooey sample consisting of 60 percent crude oil.

"People don't realize how bad it is," Morgan said, dipping a fork in the sample to show the goo that hung in midair without sliding off. "This went on for three miles, of that consistency."

[Havakasha]

Yes, and you say your honest. I bet you also think Bush was responsible for the terror attacks dont you.

I got news for you you dumb twit Obama NEVER said he would let new drilling start he said they would start the research of it (basically let surveys be done of how much oil was there) Buit never said he would let it happen.

You also forget it was not until the democrats took control of congress that oil went up to 4 dollars a gallon. It was well below that for the first 6 years of Bush wasn't it.

no i dont think Bush was responsible for the terrorist attacks. Why do you ask? Nor do i think Obama is a dumb twit. Actually i think he is quite a bit smarter than you. LOL.

There you go again equating the price of oil with the political party in power.
Very foolish John. kind of like when you did that with the stock market.
Boy did that come back to haunt you. Sometimes you leave yourself WIDE OPEN for that uppercut. Boy are you easy.

[john]

Such a silly boy you are John. I didn't say we have to do without oil. I said we need to conserve our oil by not using so much of it for transportation, drinking water bottles, and heating and cooling our homes and businesses. Being conservative could go a long ways towards not having to drill for oil in the water. It would also help us to not be so dependant on oil from overseas.

You really need to stop putting words in other people's mouths.

I am a silly boy, really did you look at what you just said. Almost none of those things I put up are made from any part of oil that is used to make most of the fuels, they are almost all byproducts when extracting the fuels.

I am not putting words in your mouth. Did you are did you not say we should stop any off shore drilling.

Once again you dont have a clue as to how much oil comes from OFF SHORE DRILLING.

[Havakasha]

The AP is right wing. Remember how during the 2008 election the head of the political division was a Bush supporter. I bet you forgot that now didnt you?

But am happy that some of the oil is evaporating and that some of it is more gaseous than oil. Thats good news. Huge quantities are still washing ashore and hanging out underwater. Once again john i know it not something you are very good at but admit you were wrong and that there is more than one way the oil spill is damaging the fishing ecosystem.

Scientists find evidence of large underwater oil underwater plume.
By David A. Fahrenthold and Juliet Eilperin
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, May 27, 2010; 2:49 PM
Scientists have found evidence of a large underwater "plume" of oil in the Gulf of Mexico, adding to fears that much of the BP oil spill's impact is hidden beneath the surface.

The scientists, aboard a University of South Florida research vessel, were testing the water in sites east and northeast of the leak's source. The university said they detected traces of dissolved oil as deep as 1,300 feet below the surface.

That test seemed to confirm the fears of some scientists that -- because of the depth of the leak and the heavy use of chemical "dispersants" -- this spill was behaving differently than others. Instead of floating on top of the water, it may be moving beneath it.

That would be troubling because it could mean the oil would slip past coastal defenses such as "containment booms" designed to stop it on the surface. Already, scientists and officials in Lousiana have reported finding thick oil washing ashore despite the presence of floating booms.

It would also be a problem for hidden ecosystems deep under the gulf. There, scientists say, the oil could be absorbed by tiny animals and enter a food chain that builds to large, beloved sport-fish like red snapper. It might also glom on to deep-water coral formations, and cover the small animals that make up each piece of coral.

"It kills them because it prevents them from feeding," said Professor James H. Cowan Jr., of Louisiana State University. "It could essentially starve them to death."

The University of South Florida vessel, the Weatherbird II, used sonar and other devices to sample the water below it. Other scientists have said they have little of the equipment necessary to find oil under the water -- leading to debates about whether the underwater plumes were even there.



This week, Mike Utsler, who helps oversee the spill response off the entire Louisiana coast as BP Houma incident commander, said he's only focused on taking oil off the surface. "We don't know there's oil underwater," he said.

But others had seen worrisome evidence.

Owen Morgan of Amira, a group that specializes in breaking apart spills with oil-eating microbes, found evidence of the oil plume off Venice when his team sampled water 75 feet beneath the service. Morgan -- who said his company is pulling out of Louisiana because of insufficient cooperation from state and federal authorities -- showed a thick, gooey sample consisting of 60 percent crude oil.

"People don't realize how bad it is," Morgan said, dipping a fork in the sample to show the goo that hung in midair without sliding off. "This went on for three miles, of that consistency."

[john]

Havakasha, I think we've gotten his goat again. He's starting to use his favorite words...."dumb twits"....LMAO

I start to call you twits when I have to make things so clear that even a twit can understand. I should not have to be that simple but with you two it ends up happening everytime. Like I said ether you are that stupid or you are that dishonest, ether way you get called a twit.

[Havakasha]

john you're acting like a little kid who got his hand caught in the cookie jar but still denies he dit it. lol
There is water under the surface that is damaging the fishing ecosystem. You cant deny it anymore. Do you want to continue to hide in your cave and suck your thumb and not taking personal responsibility for your mistake?

[john]

Lol. So very funny.

S&L "john you're a nut.... so people dont think your an 8 year whose only purpose is to attack Lloyd." (i paraphrase).

You got to stop stealing S&L's lines. Las time you plagerized Reimor's. Tsk. Tsk. Please try being a little original next time. . You could have use 9 year old for example. lol.

Once again why you cant be believed you lie once again . I got news for you Havasucker just because you think it is true does not mean it is. What I said was different then what Siriusly Long said.

Then again you misrepresenting what was said is nothing new.

[Havakasha]

Candleman you are exactly right. When he gets caught in a distortion or outright lie he lashes out with the dumb twit language. Its like clockwork. Very childish but he cant help himself. When you dont have the truth on your side you just have insults left to use. What a shame.

[Havakasha]

John here is a little bit of information that maybe you dont get if you only watch Fox.



Gulf Oil Spill: Scientists Discover Massive New Sea Oil Plume
MATTHEW BROWN AND JASON DEAREN | 05/27/10 12:57 PM |

NEW ORLEANS — Marine scientists have discovered a massive new plume of what they believe to be oil deep beneath the Gulf of Mexico, stretching 22 miles from the leaking wellhead northeast toward Mobile Bay, Alabama.

The discovery by researchers on the University of South Florida College of Marine Science's Weatherbird II vessel is the second significant undersea plume recorded since the Deepwater Horizon exploded on April 20.

The thick plume was detected just beneath the surface down to about 3,300 feet, and is more than 6 miles wide, said David Hollander, associate professor of chemical oceanography at the school.

Hollander said the team detected the thickest amount of hydrocarbons, likely from the oil spewing from the blown out well, at about 1,300 feet in the same spot on two separate days this week.

The discovery was important, he said, because it confirmed that the substance found in the water was not naturally occurring and that the plume was at its highest concentration in deeper waters. The researchers will use further testing to determine whether the hydrocarbons they found are the result of dispersants or the emulsification of oil as it traveled away from the well.

The first such plume detected by scientists stretched from the well southwest toward the open sea, but this new undersea oil cloud is headed miles inland into shallower waters where many fish and other species reproduce.

The researchers say they are worried these undersea plumes may are the result of the unprecedented use of chemical dispersants to break up the oil a mile undersea at the site of the leak.

Hollander said the oil they detected has dissolved into the water, and is no longer visible, leading to fears from researchers that the toxicity from the oil and dispersants could pose a big danger to fish larvae and filter feeders such as sperm whales.

"There are two elements to it," Hollander said. "The plume reaching waters on the continental shelf could have a toxic effect on fish larvae, and we also may see a long term response as it cascades up the food web."


P.S. i have never used spell check in my ENTIRE life. Wouldnt even know where to find it. I just accept personal responsibility and look things up and try to make sure what i say is accurate even when it comes to spelling. Sorry but good try.

Still waiting for a response. You have had way too long to answer.Stop going back to the silly stuff and answer the challenge this article provides to your theory that only oil wasihing up on land is the problem.