The warm, white sand stretches for miles as clean and flat as a freshly laundered bed sheet.

The turquoise sea is so clear that I can see silvery fish playing around my toes as I take a cooling paddle.

If there is any more pristine resort in which to spend a summer holiday than Pensacola Beach, on the Gulf Coast of Florida, I would like to find it.

And yet, at a time of year when usually there is barely room to unfold a deckchair, the shore is eerily deserted.

Ask Pensacola’s fretfully quiet seafront traders why the tourists have all stayed away and they angrily recall one chaotic day back in late June.

Then, hungry for dramatic TV footage to support Barack Obama’s announcement, that the BP - or, as he preferred, ‘British Petroleum’ - oil spill was ‘the worst environmental disaster America has ever faced’, news networks descended on their town.

They quickly found what they were looking for: shocking images of Pensacola’s famously white beaches thickly-coated with sticky, black crude oil and apparently beyond salvation.

The apocalyptic message was reinforced in doom-laden interviews with locals. ‘It’s damn near biblical. This place is done for!’ lamented 36-year-old Kevin Reed, whose family have swum and sunbathed in the area for generations.

His anguish was understandable.

Yet, as I saw this week, nothing could be further from the truth. Strolling along the beach for an hour, I found just one, pea-sized tar-ball which crumbled to nothing between my fingers.

When, as a young boy, I played on Morecambe beach in Lancashire, worse things often washed up from the nearby ICI refinery.

Moreover, if the U.S. TV news crews had returned just three days after their original visit, they would have seen that the black morass had already been removed by some of the 20,000 clean-up workers hired by BP.

The workers are still there - only now they are using toothbrushes to sift out even the tiniest particles of oil.

But, of course, after a ‘catastrophic’ oil spill, a spotless beach doesn’t make dramatic viewing and who wants to know?

Certainly not the politicians, nor the green-lobby tub-thumpers, nor the compensation claimants and their mega-bucks lawyers.

Until this week, it didn’t fit with the White House’s British-bashing script, either. In recent days, though, we have witnessed an extraordinary U-turn in America’s attitude towards the great spill.

It began when a respected Time magazine environmental writer voiced the near-heretical proposition: that the effects of the Deepwater Horizon disaster on April 20 had been massively hyped.

His article was largely based on the opinions of Professor Ivan van Heerden, a brilliant but controversial marine scientist fired by Louisiana State University after publishing a book about Hurricane Katrina that said cataclysmic flooding was inevitable because the protection given to the coast was wholly inadequate.

He said: ‘There is just no data to suggest this is an environmental disaster - although BP lied about the size of the oil spill, we’re not seeing catastrophic impacts.’

Emboldened by the academic’s willingness to go against the accepted wisdom, other leading scientists have concurred, with similar views being expressed in influential U.S. newspapers such as the New York Times and Washington Post.

It was against this background that the Obama administration made its own dramatic U-turn this week.

In a humiliating climb-down, it conceded in an official report from the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) that the ‘vast majority’ of the spilled oil had already gone.

The rest, it said, had probably diluted and didn’t appear to pose much of a threat.

According to 25 leading U.S. government and independent scientists, the feared catastrophe to the coast’s fragile ecosystem had been averted.

The cynical spin from Washington suggested that Obama had successfully browbeaten BP into mopping up its mess - with Mother Nature lending a helping hand.
What more suitably upbeat message with which to mark the president’s 49th birthday?

So were the doom-mongers really so wrong, and if so, then why?

Why was one of Britain’s greatest companies so demonised? Why did America’s politicians and president so hysterically over-react?
In order to get to the bottom of one of the most shameful buck-passing operations in recent times, I spent this week with those involved at the sharp end

Pensacola just happened to be my first stop. Quite clearly, one clean beach doesn’t begin to tell the full story - particularly as it is relatively easy to remove oil from sand, whereas the sensitive wetlands further west are altogether more difficult to repair.
Journeying from Florida, through Alabama to the vast, swampy bays of southern Louisiana, however, what struck me most forcibly was that everything looked so normal.

What a contrast to the scenes I witnessed 21 years ago reporting on America’s previous worst oil disaster, when the Exxon Valdez supertanker spilled hundreds of thousands of barrels of crude oil into the Prince William Sound, Alaska.

Then, I flew over huge, multi-coloured ribbons of oil and waded into thigh-deep pools of the stuff - horrible proof that the Exxon chiefs were lying when they claimed no oil had reached the remote bays.

I spent another grim day helping animal rescuers to scrub matted seabirds and otters.

The area’s ecology was devastated, and an estimated 250,000 birds and 2,800 otters died, plus hundreds of seals and at least 22 killer whales.

But last Wednesday in the Gulf of Mexico, when I went out with one of the Shore Clean-up Assessment Teams (SCAT), whose job is to observe the coastline and chart the location and condition of oil pollution, I felt at times as though I was on an enjoyable sea-nature tour.

One British journalist, who was guided by a populist Louisiana politician whose agenda was obviously to exaggerate the problems, reported seeing extensive areas of oil and claimed ‘fresh waves’ were still swamping wetland areas - even though the BP rig was finally capped three weeks ago.

Of course, since an estimated 200 million gallons has gushed into the Gulf since April and around 50 million gallons remain in the water or on the shore (four times more than the entire Exxon Valdez spill), it is hardly surprising that some heavy pockets can be still found.

But what is truly remarkable is that they are so few and far between. Sailing from early morning to mid-afternoon in sweltering heat on Wednesday, the team I accompanied charted the coastline of two marshy islands off Louisiana’s southernmost tip, Casse-tete and Calumet, covering some 25 miles.

With fishermen still banned from returning to the waters until a final all-clear is given - and charging $2,000 (£1,250) a day to rent their flat-bottom boats to spill response workers, it is clear why BP has been forced to make available a staggering £12.5billion for the clean up, compensation and other legal obligations.

But as our team leader, 41-year-old scientist Stephane Grenon, told me as we skimmed across the shallows, using a craft able to reach the shore is the only sure way to tell whether oil is present.

This is because the wetland fringes in this region are always surrounded by a thick, dark-brown plant sediment known as ‘coffee ground’ for its resemblance to the dregs left at the bottom of the cup.

Even from a few feet away, this sediment can be very easily mistaken for oil, and often when passing boats or aircraft report spotting oil on the shore, this is what they have really seen.

This is one reason why the extent of the coastal oiling has been exaggerated. Indeed, Grenon, a veteran of 25 spills, says he is constantly amazed at how little pollution he finds.

He says: ‘I know it sounds ridiculous, but it’s probably the largest spill there has ever been and yet there’s hardly any oil.

‘The ecosystem around here is also used to oil. It’s been here forever, and there are more than 4,000 oil wells in the Gulf.

‘So there are spills and natural seepage all the time, and the fish and plants adapt to deal with them. I’m confident the area will make a full recovery.’

Grenon works for a BP-contracted spill clean-up company, but suspicions that he may have been painting an over-rosy picture were allayed by the three other scientists in the team who represented the federal and state governments.

‘I expected to see miles of oil, but I haven’t seen that,’ said one of the team, David Culpepper, a geologist with NOAA.

‘I’ve been out on the water about 25 days, and I’ve only seen one dead bird - and I’m not even sure if that had any oil on it. And I’ve probably seen ten dead fish.’

Our skipper, Gerrard Cheramie - no BP apologist, but a gnarled Creole fisherman who knows these waters so well that he can sniff the scent of speckled trout shoals - was equally realistic.

He said: ‘The waves here are like a washing machine and you can already see they’re rinsing the oil away. Because the fisheries have been closed down as a precaution, I think our catches will be bigger than ever when we are allowed back.’

His one nagging worry, though, is that the oil may have sunk to the bottom of the sea or that the 1.8 million gallons of chemical dispersant will cause some as-yet unrevealed damage to the fish and shrimp breeding grounds.

It is a fear that has been voiced by some scientists, including Professor Ian MacDonald, an eminent Florida State University oceanographer, who dismisses this week’s U.S. government’s report that 75 per cent of the oil has gone as an unsatisfactomixture of science and spin and warns that worrying unknowns remain.

However, our captain’s fleeting doubts evaporated when he spotted a plump shrimp jumping magically from the waves.

‘Look at that! Sure looks healthy enough, don’t it?’ he exclaimed.

On Bird Island, we passed hundreds of pelicans nestling unsullied in the mangrove thickets. Then later we spotted pods of dolphins at play, redfish and the fin of a blacktip shark.

Surely these species wouldn’t have been so plentiful in a sick or dying environment? Although parts of the shoreline were stained with what David Culpepper termed a ‘bathtub ring’ of oil residue, new green shoots were already sprouting through, indicating that their roots were undamaged.

And at the day’s end, the team concurred that almost all the area they surveyed had improved or at least remained in the same condition in which it was found when last inspected a few weeks ago.

According to Dr Ed Owens, the veteran British oil spill expert who runs the SCAT teams, there are several reasons why the Gulf appears to have escaped so incredibly lightly.

First, the type of light oil that leaked here dissipates far more quickly than the medium crude that pumped from the Exxon Valdez, particularly in these warm waters.

Second, powerful currents from the enormous Mississippi Delta swept much of the oil away from the shore. In addition, there is the undeniable success of the clean-up effort, which is far more sophisticated and effective than those used to tackle previous disasters.

The combined result of these factors is clear from the statistics. Although more than 9,000 miles of shoreline lies within reach of the Deepwater Horizon rig, just 369 miles have been oiled - and only 53 of them with what are classed as ‘heavy’ deposits.
Compare this with the Exxon when, though the spill was 20 times smaller, the oil was so persistent and spread so widely that more than 2,000 miles of coastline were hit - and even today lumps of tar are occasionally found trapped between the rocks.

So, in Barack Obama’s words, which of these two terrible spills was ‘the worst environmental disaster America has ever faced’?

Back in mid-June, with approval of his presidency at an all-time low in the opinion polls, and critics drawing parallels between his mishandling of the BP crisis and the Hurricane Katrina fiasco that forever tarnished George Bush’s reputation, the answer was obvious.

Not only was it important for him to be seen to recognise the worst-case scenario - and appear to be doing everything he could to avert it - but he needed to find a scapegoat.

Thus, he turned on BP - a nominally British company, though half of its top executives and the majority of its workers are Americans - with a vengeance.

The company’s response was a public relation’s horror show, with its now sacked chief executive Tony Hayward the chief culprit.

He stonewalled questions put to him by a U.S. congressional sub-committee and at the height of the crisis he went yachting at Cowes.

And though it now seems he was right to describe the spill as a ‘drop in the ocean’, his timing and choice of phrase were appallingly ill-judged, especially as 11 oil rig workers died in the Deepwater explosion.

As a result, a staggering £43 billion has been wiped off the value of BP, and the company’s share price has plunged from 655p before the will to 425p, hitting many ordinary British people whose pension portfolios include the company’s stock.

What a terrible mess. And now, far too late, Obama tells us, without any hint of apology, that it isn’t really so bad after all.

If he had heard the pathetic cries of dying otters and seabirds in Alaska two decades ago, perhaps he would have chosen his words more carefully.

Wishful thinking Hicks. Now for a dose of reality :(

http://truecostofchevron.com/


Quote:

Ecuador For over three decades, Chevron chose profit over people. While drilling in the Ecuadorian Amazon from 1964 to 1990, Texaco – which merged with Chevron in 2001 – deliberately dumped more than 18 billion gallons of toxic wastewater, spilled roughly 17 million gallons of crude oil, and left hazardous waste in hundreds of open pits dug out of the forest floor. To save money, Texaco chose to use environmental practices that were obsolete, did not meet industry standards, and were illegal in Ecuador and the United States. The result was, and continues to be, one of the worst environmental disasters on the planet. Contamination of soil, groundwater, and surface streams has caused local indigenous and campesino people to suffer a wave of mouth, stomach and uterine cancer, birth defects, and spontaneous miscarriages. Chevron has never cleaned up the mess it inherited, and its oil wastes continue to poison the rainforest ecosystem.

http://truecostofchevron.com/assets/images/ads/ecuador.jpg

Andrei,
Is that really you?

Where have you been?

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 9^th, 2010 at 2:30pm:

Andrei, Is that really you? Where have you been?

Yes, nice to see you've made it over Andrei ;)

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 9^th, 2010 at 2:30pm:

Andrei, Is that really you? Where have you been?

he had to go back on the dole when yahoo was closed down because the liberal party wouldn't pay him any more whilst yahoo was closed down ;)

Looks like hes back on the liberal party payroll again ;) LOL

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 9^th, 2010 at 2:30pm:

Andrei, Is that really you? Where have you been?

PN Nice to see you sir.

I have been well and am on annual leave for a few weeks now visiting the relations in England.
Naturally the summer turns a bit crap when I arrive, as always.

Hey Andrei .. good to see you here!

We've all missed you .. you know lol :P

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 9^th, 2010 at 9:11pm:

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 9th, 2010 at 2:30pm: Andrei, Is that really you? Where have you been? PN Nice to see you sir. I have been well and am on annual leave for a few weeks now visiting the relations in England. Naturally the summer turns a bit crap when I arrive, as always.

When was the last time you visited Sydney Andrei?

And how is California treating you?


:)

OH FFS sod off stalker!l! How many times have I told you to cease following me into topics you disgusting vile excuse for a human being. Idiot!

Lisa Jones wrote on Aug 9^th, 2010 at 9:40pm:

OH FFS sod off stalker!l! How many times have I told you to cease following me into topics you disgusting vile excuse for a human being. Idiot!

And there you have it folks, Lisa is worried she'll be exposed for the lying nutter she is.

And i was asking 'Andrei' the question, NOT you nutter.

FYI, it's a public forum, people enter threads as they please, it's NOT all about YOU, so get f_cked you dopey tart.

::)

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 9^th, 2010 at 9:11pm:

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 9th, 2010 at 2:30pm: Andrei, Is that really you? Where have you been? PN Nice to see you sir. I have been well and am on annual leave for a few weeks now visiting the relations in England. Naturally the summer turns a bit crap when I arrive, as always.

So, you are now back in the US?

Actually, you may be able to offer me some advice?

I am contemplating a holiday to Europe, including the the UK and I would appreciate any tips on places to visit & things to do!

Not sure on timelines yet, but around 4-6 weeks and I am told May & early June are good.

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 9^th, 2010 at 9:43pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 9th, 2010 at 9:11pm: perceptions_now wrote on Aug 9th, 2010 at 2:30pm: Andrei, Is that really you? Where have you been? PN Nice to see you sir. I have been well and am on annual leave for a few weeks now visiting the relations in England. Naturally the summer turns a bit crap when I arrive, as always. So, you are now back in the US? Actually, you may be able to offer me some advice? I am contemplating a holiday to Europe, including the the UK and I would appreciate any tips on places to visit & things to do! Not sure on timelines yet, but around 4-6 weeks and I am told May & early June are good.

Terrific idea - 4 - 6 weeks is recommended as well if there is no rush to make it back?
I'd love that time off but my annual leave is 4 weeks in total so that's the kind of time out my parents enjoy these days.

There is a lot for the tourist as you know.

From a UK perspective, I am always biased down towards the West Country, not necessarily my hometown of Bristol (though a lot has been done since I left in and around the centre) but there is Bath, Devon, Cornwall - all really nice and varied.

The Cotswolds, Stratford upon Avon etc all within easy reach too.

If I were you I would get a bit of a mix, I don't think you need any more than 3 days max in London - Buckingham Palace, Marble Arch, London Dungeons, Tower Bridge etc etc etc, you could go to a show on Shaftesbury Avenue and get in the way of people going to work at Piccadilly Tube too - that always seems a favourite of tourists in my experience  >:(

You should head up to Edinburgh - that is a very pleasant city.
They say Edinburgh has the class, Glasgow has the colour!  ;D

The Lakes District is another option as well.

I don't think there is much in Birmingham or Manchester for the tourist to be honest so I'd stay more away from them.

If you think of the continent, I'd go Amsterdam, Berlin, Oslo, Paris.
I've spent little time in Italy so can't comment.

Timewise - I'd say late June - July.

May is always a funny old month, sometimes it can be really nice. Other times it will piss down with rain the whole month and be about 8 degrees.

Hope this of help.

PS - Stay out of Wales. Utter shithole.

iamtheman012 wrote on Aug 9^th, 2010 at 9:34pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 9th, 2010 at 9:11pm: perceptions_now wrote on Aug 9th, 2010 at 2:30pm: Andrei, Is that really you? Where have you been? PN Nice to see you sir. I have been well and am on annual leave for a few weeks now visiting the relations in England. Naturally the summer turns a bit crap when I arrive, as always. When was the last time you visited Sydney Andrei? And how is California treating you? :)

Only been the once to Cali so far, I am not switching jobs until the midway through Jan at least because of role overhangs etc. So no big Arnie for me yet for a while.

Sydney - lovely place, I really do admit. Bit pricey for my liking on the housing front but always a big fan.
A while since I have been there now, 18 months maybe?

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 9^th, 2010 at 10:51pm:

iamtheman012 wrote on Aug 9th, 2010 at 9:34pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 9th, 2010 at 9:11pm: perceptions_now wrote on Aug 9th, 2010 at 2:30pm: Andrei, Is that really you? Where have you been? PN Nice to see you sir. I have been well and am on annual leave for a few weeks now visiting the relations in England. Naturally the summer turns a bit crap when I arrive, as always. When was the last time you visited Sydney Andrei? And how is California treating you? :) Only been the once to Cali so far, I am not switching jobs until the midway through Jan at least because of role overhangs etc. So no big Arnie for me yet for a while. Sydney - lovely place, I really do admit. Bit pricey for my liking on the housing front but always a big fan. A while since I have been there now, 18 months maybe?

Really, THAT long ago? Lisa claimed that YOU and HER had lunch together at Double Bay in late July THIS YEAR. Here's her statement:


Quote:

Lisa wrote on Jul 28th, 2010, 1:57pm: Hey all You will probably find that some of us are now logging off and meeting up with fellow Yahooligans in real time thanks to the Board's shutdown. Case in point  .. I met up with Andrei a few day's back for lunch .. and my oh my .. what a classy and suave good looking professional gentleman is our Andrei! He organised everything in true Andrei like perfection .. by picking me up from my office in this new BMW X5 (and that 4 wheel drive is an experience in itself I might just add) .. and took me to Double Bay for a spectacular lunch overlooking the Harbour. What a pity he jets around so much these days .. he's probably in California right now .. or at least heading there tonight (it's hard keeping up with him lol). So .. as far as I am concerned ... when one cyber door closes .. another REAL door opens Smiley Regards Lisa

Now EVERYONE can see just how much of a two-faced LIAR Lisa is.

LOL.

:) :D ;D ::) :'(

ROFLMAO! Poor medulla aka iamtheman .. little does the mad moron who closed down Yahoo know ..

Lisa Jones wrote on Aug 9^th, 2010 at 11:22pm:

ROFLMAO! Poor medulla aka iamtheman .. little does the mad moron who closed down Yahoo know ..

That's the best you can come up with after getting caught?

LOL, you really are a PATHETIC stalker Lisa, and now everyone knows it.

::)

Excuse me medulla/iamtheman mad moron of Yahoo's demise .. but Andrei is chatting to me about why I revealed our get together on this forum.

You will have to wait and refresh for the next 12 hrs or so .. for your next troll/flame session .. coz right now .. Andrei is more impt than you!

Lisa Jones wrote on Aug 9^th, 2010 at 11:29pm:

Excuse me medulla/iamtheman mad moron of Yahoo's demise .. but Andrei is chatting to me about why I revealed our get together on this forum. You will have to wait and refresh for the next 12 hrs or so .. for your next troll/flame session .. coz right now .. Andrei is more impt than you!

Keep digging love, i expect to see you under a different ID tomorrow.

LOL.

;D

You poor sod .. just because you dig yourself into blacklisted cyber holes of irrelevance .. and hide under thousands of ids and just as many IP's .. you think the rest of us do.

Hey while Ive got you here .. obsessing over my social life once more .. how is your new "forum going" .. bloody ripper .. looks like a grave yard there. Here's a free tip .. how about you DIG there more often .. who knows .. you may dig up some of the thousand ids you've buried over the past 12 months in cyberspace lmao :)

Lisa Jones wrote on Aug 9^th, 2010 at 11:35pm:

You poor sod .. just because you dig yourself into blacklised cyber holes of irrelevance .. and hide under thousands of ids and just as many IP's .. you think the rest of us do. Hey while Ive got you here .. obsessing over my social life once more .. how is your new "forum going" .. bloody ripper .. looks like a grave yard there. Here's a free tip .. how about you DIG there more often .. who knows .. you may dig up some of the thousand ids you've buried over the past 12 months in cyberspace lmao :)

Ignornace really is bliss for you Lisa.

LOL.

::)

I just think it's laughable that you dont know what is going on AT ALL here .. YET you're here still obsessing over my social life .. and going on about ignorance??

Anyways .. you'll just have to wait and wait and wait .. like the obsessed cyber freak troll you are to see if and where Andrei and I post next .. lmao :)

Lisa Jones wrote on Aug 9^th, 2010 at 11:59pm:

I just think it's laughable that you dont know what is going on AT ALL here .. YET you're here still obsessing over my social life .. and going on about ignorance?? Anyways .. you'll just have to wait and wait and wait .. like the obsessed cyber freak troll you are to see if and where Andrei and I post next .. lmao :)

Oh of course, you and Andrei are having an affair.

LOL, you get more pathetic by the post looney.

::)

But I am Andrei .. or is that Macca??

You're not sure .. am I both?? Am I a man?? You're ever so ignorant and confused right now .. aren't you?

Perhaps I am just Lisa .. the woman who constantly tells you to sod off coz she isnt interested in unemployed short stocky obese losers like you who troll the internet looking for cyber sex behind their wife's back??

Ok .. thanks for the laughs Medulla/iamtheman. I really mean that .. thanks :)

Lisa Jones wrote on Aug 10^th, 2010 at 12:09am:

But I am Andrei .. or is that Macca?? You're not sure .. am I both?? Am I a man?? You're ever so ignorant and confused right now .. aren't you? Perhaps I am just Lisa .. the woman who constantly tells you to sod off coz she isnt interested in unemployed short stocky obese losers like you who troll the internet looking for cyber sex behind their wife's back?? Ok .. thanks for the laughs Medulla/iamtheman. I really mean that .. thanks :)

Well love i think you've just answered your own questions. Schizophrenia will do that to the mind.

LOL

::)

Given your confessions in cyberspace of having that illness .. you would know all about what that involves.

Now I hope you don't mind .. but I am busy laughing at you in another topic .. coz you're presently being pwned something severe there lmao :)

I am quite speechless and this has tracked a tad off-topic.

Though I did track it off myself with the tourist advice I admit.

And so it begins on this forum as it always degenerated on the yahoo boards.


Who gives a stuff who ANYONE is meeting in real life and what they get up to , real or imagined.


Keep it in your head and leave it off messageboards PLEASE.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 10^th, 2010 at 4:48pm:

I am quite speechless and this has tracked a tad off-topic. Though I did track it off myself with the tourist advice I admit.

Things seldom move in straight lines.

Btw, thanks for the travel advice, I appreciate it!

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 10^th, 2010 at 7:24pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 10th, 2010 at 4:48pm: I am quite speechless and this has tracked a tad off-topic. Though I did track it off myself with the tourist advice I admit. Things seldom move in straight lines. Btw, thanks for the travel advice, I appreciate it!

Pleasure, hope it is of some use.
Forgot to add that if you go late June, it's always worthwhile to spend a day or half a day at Wimbledon.

Even if you don't like tennis, it's a pretty good day.

Nearly 80pc of Gulf spill oil still in water: experts
Wednesday, 18 August 2010

Nearly 80 per cent of the oil spilled from a BP well in the Gulf of Mexico is still in the gulf, US scientists have estimated, challenging a more optimistic assessment by the US government earlier in the month.

In its August 4 report, the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration found that half the 4.9 million barrels of oil spilled by the April 20 blowout had been evaporated, burned, skimmed or dispersed.

A team of five scientists from the University of Georgia did their own analysis of the government data and came to a different conclusion.

"We just re-analysed this report... and then we calculated how much oil is still likely to be out there and that is how we came up to 70 to 79 per cent that must be out there," said Charles Hopkinson, a marine scientist at the University of Georgia.

"One major misconception is that oil that has dissolved into water is gone and therefore, harmless.

"The oil is still out there and it will likely take years to completely degrade. We are still far from a complete understanding of what its impacts are."


http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/08/18/2986328.htm?section=justin

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

In a humiliating climb-down, it conceded in an official report from the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) that the ‘vast majority’ of the spilled oil had already gone.

The rest, it said, had probably diluted and didn’t appear to pose much of a threat.

According to 25 leading U.S. government and independent scientists, the feared catastrophe to the coast’s fragile ecosystem had been averted.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 18^th, 2010 at 3:01pm:

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In a humiliating climb-down, it conceded in an official report from the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) that the ‘vast majority’ of the spilled oil had already gone. The rest, it said, had probably diluted and didn’t appear to pose much of a threat. According to 25 leading U.S. government and independent scientists, the feared catastrophe to the coast’s fragile ecosystem had been averted. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Where did it go Hicks ??

Did it just magically go back into the earth where it came from !!

Quote:

In his last two years at Chevron, retiring CEO David O'Reilly took in over $65 million in total compensation, making him one of the highest paid CEOs in America.

http://truecostofchevron.com/assets/images/ads/david-oreilly.jpg

Sir lastnail wrote on Aug 19^th, 2010 at 4:12pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 18th, 2010 at 3:01pm: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In a humiliating climb-down, it conceded in an official report from the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) that the ‘vast majority’ of the spilled oil had already gone. The rest, it said, had probably diluted and didn’t appear to pose much of a threat. According to 25 leading U.S. government and independent scientists, the feared catastrophe to the coast’s fragile ecosystem had been averted. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where did it go Hicks ?? Did it just magically go back into the earth where it came from !!

I heard a report yesterday. The oil is sitting on the bottom of the ocean, where it will most likely stay for millennium, causing catastrophe's never before experienced on planet earth.

Thanks BP for ruining the ecosystem that the following generations will need in order to have at least a half a chance of a sustainable lifestyle.

We are not all stupid enough to fall for your lies andre, or the oil corporations lies either.

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Aug 20^th, 2010 at 6:35am:

Sir lastnail wrote on Aug 19th, 2010 at 4:12pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 18th, 2010 at 3:01pm: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In a humiliating climb-down, it conceded in an official report from the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) that the ‘vast majority’ of the spilled oil had already gone. The rest, it said, had probably diluted and didn’t appear to pose much of a threat. According to 25 leading U.S. government and independent scientists, the feared catastrophe to the coast’s fragile ecosystem had been averted. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where did it go Hicks ?? Did it just magically go back into the earth where it came from !! I heard a report yesterday. The oil is sitting on the bottom of the ocean, where it will most likely stay for millennium, causing catastrophe's never before experienced on planet earth. Thanks BP for ruining the ecosystem that the following generations will need in order to have at least a half a chance of a sustainable lifestyle. We are not all stupid enough to fall for your lies andre, or the oil corporations lies either.

I've got an idea. Why don't we pump a whole lot of toxic crude oil into Hick's house and see where it goes. We'll see if it magically disappears and is an environmental hazard ;)

Sir lastnail wrote on Aug 20^th, 2010 at 12:20pm:

I've got an idea. Why don't we pump a whole lot of toxic crude oil into Hick's house and see where it goes. We'll see if it magically disappears and is an environmental hazard ;)

Nah, that probably wouldn't work - since 'our Android' is most likely an alien cyborg sci-fi product - of a very clever lefty's overactive imagination...

;)

Quote:

I heard a report yesterday. The oil is sitting on the bottom of the ocean, where it will most likely stay for millennium, causing catastrophe's never before experienced on planet earth.

What kind of catastrophes would it cause, sitting on the bottom of the ocean?


I'm not in any way defending BP, just genuinely curious.

... wrote on Aug 20^th, 2010 at 1:16pm:

Quote: I heard a report yesterday. The oil is sitting on the bottom of the ocean, where it will most likely stay for millennium, causing catastrophe's never before experienced on planet earth. What kind of catastrophes would it cause, sitting on the bottom of the ocean? I'm not in any way defending BP, just genuinely curious.

Oil is poisonous to marine life and human life. Even though it might have appeared to have dissipated, the oil would still be lurking on the sea-bed. Marine creatures are digesting the oil. That will have a carry-on effect on the whole food chain. People are still suffering the effects of previous serious oil spills.