RE: Clean-Up Crews Can't Find Crude in the Gulf

RE: Clean-Up Crews Can't Find Crude in the Gulf (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Sanity -> RE: Clean-Up Crews Can't Find Crude in the Gulf (7/28/2010 1:02:38 PM)
I recall the day XI booted your drunken ass, and why. And heres my reply to that bitter partisan woman in that thread, too: http://www.collarchat.com/fb.asp?m=2866730 She didn't reply to me, either.

Sanity -> RE: Clean-Up Crews Can't Find Crude in the Gulf (7/28/2010 1:16:10 PM)
According to the article the 100 degree heat at the surface and the 80 degree water are aiding in the microbial destruction of the oil, making the Gulf Of Mexico a far different situation for an oil spill than the much chillier Prince William Sound. quote: ORIGINAL: BoiJen They say Prince William Sound is still recovering from the Exxon Valdez...I don't see why this spill wouldn't have long term impact as well.

mnottertail -> RE: Clean-Up Crews Can't Find Crude in the Gulf (7/28/2010 1:23:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity I recall the day XI booted your drunken ass, and why. And heres my reply to that bitter partisan woman in that thread, too: http://www.collarchat.com/fb.asp?m=2866730 Seems to me your drunken ass has been booted more times than mine. And the point being that your answer was as it always is, What me quoting and posting decietfully? When indeed you admitted that you had earlier in that same thread. We have no need to walk down memory lane. It is happening right here.

Sanity -> RE: Clean-Up Crews Can't Find Crude in the Gulf (7/28/2010 1:25:07 PM)
Attack the topic. not your fellow posters mnot and you won't seem quite so small. The topic is the gulf oil spill. quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail Seems to me your drunken ass has been booted more times than mine. And the point being that your answer was as it always is, What me quoting and posting decietfully? When indeed you admitted that you had earlier in that same thread. We have no need to walk down memory lane. It is happening right here.

mnottertail -> RE: Clean-Up Crews Can't Find Crude in the Gulf (7/28/2010 1:32:13 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity Attack the topic. not your fellow posters mnot and you won't seem quite so small. The topic is the gulf oil spill. quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail Seems to me your drunken ass has been booted more times than mine. And the point being that your answer was as it always is, What me quoting and posting decietfully? When indeed you admitted that you had earlier in that same thread. We have no need to walk down memory lane. It is happening right here. I am not attacking you, I am responding to your attacks, you started with the drunk shit, when it was pointed out to you that deceitful post clippings and in fact imputing arguments that the articles do not intend to convey is deplorable as well as impudent and disingenuous. I am attacking the idea, and the fact that you happen to be the perpetrator is not coincidental, but not the point either. If you find you are tightly bound to the argument and its dishonesty and its somehow ad hominem feel free to point it out. Because attack ad hominem is not always a logical fallacy, nor is it illegal or reprehensible argumentation. I will point out the acceptable ad hominem exceptions, if you like.

Sanity -> RE: Clean-Up Crews Can't Find Crude in the Gulf (7/28/2010 1:42:42 PM)
Your ass was drunken the day XI booted you, its not an attack its the way it happened. Least, I hope you were drunk. Do you have any on topic contributions mnot, or just these weird rants.

mnottertail -> RE: Clean-Up Crews Can't Find Crude in the Gulf (7/28/2010 1:47:59 PM)
well, it is difficult to speak as a contributor to these threads when you have to overcome inane assumptions, lack of breadth of knowledge, and endemic dishonesty on the other side. However: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/07/16/97702/despite-gulf-cleanup-efforts-nature.html http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/07/26/bp.gulf.cleanup/index.html and picture you saw as of monday say that the slant you took on the OP by cherry picking a couple sentences in an otherwise disheatening article.......

Jeffff -> RE: Clean-Up Crews Can't Find Crude in the Gulf (7/28/2010 2:10:18 PM)
He is a centrist. He only wants the truth.

Sanity -> RE: Clean-Up Crews Can't Find Crude in the Gulf (7/28/2010 3:33:54 PM)
You Googled and came up with a few links. Nice. Now we're making progress... First, did you read the articles? If so, what were the key points you gleaned from them.

mnottertail -> RE: Clean-Up Crews Can't Find Crude in the Gulf (7/28/2010 3:50:16 PM)
The key points. Most of the heavy layer of surface oil has been swept up on the open gulf. microbes, wind, rain, wave action, evaporation and several other natural forces are further cleaning that up on the open gulf. it is still a wreck out there, nobody is sure of the long term damage. The water column is pretty well fucked at present however. The best possible happening would be for it to hit the sandy beaches because that is easiest to clean. The marshes are going to be dismal for a long time to come, since they are near impossible to set right, and there is alot of marshland still under threat. This is not going to just self heal in a month or two or even a year or two. Probably not even in a couple three four decades.

Louve00 -> RE: Clean-Up Crews Can't Find Crude in the Gulf (7/28/2010 5:22:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity Theres some oil in the picture but the thing is, a few weeks ago domken posted a photo that supposedly showed that the oil in the Gulf was so abundant that you could hardly see the water in the gulf from space. And a lot of gullible people were buying into it. No....to straighten this twist out a bit, DomKen posted a picture from a blog, and you instantly accused his post and source coming from some left wing blog, when the picture he posted was a NASA picture, and it was posted from a science blog. You put the political in the post. In the very post he posted, and in the very words of the post he posted you highlighted the parts that were the oil. That means to say that nowhere in the picture did it say the entire gulf was filled with oil. If you interpretted it that way, after yourself, highlighting the parts showing the surface oil, thats you. Thats not a whole bunch of people buying into any schemes. Thats simply Sanity's conclusion. God Sanity, there was a spill in the Gulf. It has already killed wildlife and marine life. It has messed up the eco-system. Why you're trying to play this disaster down is beyond me. No....on second thought, its not beyond me. You live your life by right vs left...them vs us...and you don't allow yourself to understand anything else but that. Not the livelihood of all the people making a living off the water down there, not the dead birds, the dead fish, dead whales, dolphins, not the toxins in the water now that'll screw with the eco-system...just right and left.....only. Get over it. BP fucked up. There's oil in the gulf. They made the bad decisions and the Coast Guard had to make an instant life-saving decision to counter-act something BP did. Had BP took heed and the precautions and installed the safety mechanisms that would have made deep water drilling safer, instead of using some of the billions in profit they make each year to research how to control what they do, the Coast Guard would have never had to make an off-the-cuff decision. Orrr...keeping living from only two perspectives you seem to be obsessed with. The left (them), and the right (us...or you, in your mind, because I know you consider me "them"). That BP would like you to believe the oil is disappearing and going away "all by itself", is as crazy as you believing it!!! No lie!!

Lucylastic -> RE: Clean-Up Crews Can't Find Crude in the Gulf (7/28/2010 5:25:02 PM)
We even gave him the link to the NASA site to prove it wasnt photoshopped

Louve00 -> RE: Clean-Up Crews Can't Find Crude in the Gulf (7/28/2010 5:32:08 PM)
Yes we did Lucy. I can't remember the outcome of that insane argument. No doubt as incredible as this one. The sad thing is though (and its not sad to him, so the question is how sad is it?) Sanity will never believe anything more than Obama staged this to give himself better ratings...and BP is ok with letting all their profits spew out to pollute waters we are working so hard to ensure they pay for.

Sanity -> RE: Clean-Up Crews Can't Find Crude in the Gulf (7/28/2010 5:35:06 PM)
domkens pic was spun by the blog he got it from in such a way that allowed domken to suggest that the entire gulf was covered in oil, save for one tiny spot. Do you deny that?

Sanity -> RE: Clean-Up Crews Can't Find Crude in the Gulf (7/28/2010 5:37:43 PM)
And the OP article isn't from BP, its strange to see you try to suggest that it is Louve00.

thornhappy -> RE: Clean-Up Crews Can't Find Crude in the Gulf (7/28/2010 5:37:46 PM)
Are you saying NASA fabricated it? Cause, damn, I've seen you post some crazy shit before but to call that a fabrication is amazing. Go here for a slide show of photos starting 7/19, straight from the source: http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/oilspill/index.html BTW, it includes a whole bunch of other imagery data. quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity Theres some oil in the picture but the thing is, a few weeks ago domken posted a photo that supposedly showed that the oil in the Gulf was so abundant that you could hardly see the water in the gulf from space. And a lot of gullible people were buying into it. quote: ORIGINAL: Slavehandsome Maybe they should look somewhere near here: http://news.yahoo.com/nphotos/Gulf-Coast-Oil-Spill/ss/events/us/042110oilrigexplode;_ylt=AuG0LEUL3w1Lh1h4pWCMeMip_aF4;_ylu=X3oDMTEwaXZ2amJuBHBvcwMxNARzZWMDeW5fZmVhdHVyZWQEc2xrA2ltYWdl

Louve00 -> RE: Clean-Up Crews Can't Find Crude in the Gulf (7/28/2010 5:44:05 PM)
What I don't deny is, you pointed out immediately where the oil was. And you put the spin on a science blog, Sanity. Because they said something you choose to defend, they instantly became "them"...along with Ken for posting it...along with everyone else who believed it. IF there was a spin, you stomped it out by highlighted and enlarging the words to show everyone what was and what wasn't surface oil. Which, btw, is completely different than the situation we're talking about here. All the arial pictures in the world arent going to show you whats settling into the ocean's bed. To answer you outright, I have no clue if DomKen was putting a political spin on it. I know you insinuated it then, and choose to continue to insinuate it, despite where he said he got it from, and despite the fact that where he got it from was NASA. Is NASA "them" too?

Sanity -> RE: Clean-Up Crews Can't Find Crude in the Gulf (7/28/2010 5:44:14 PM)
Thats not domkens pic thornhappy, and you know that. What I pointed out at the time was that the Gulf water is muddy, and thats what the photo showed. NASA never tried to claim that the muddy water in the Gulf was really oil, that you couldn't see the water for the oil, which was the entire premise for domkens farce from the beginning. For you to try to claim now that the gulf water was hardly visible over the entire gulf at any time is whats odd, so far from the reality that its beyond laughable, its craziness. quote: ORIGINAL: thornhappy Are you saying NASA fabricated it? Cause, damn, I've seen you post some crazy shit before but to call that a fabrication is amazing. Go here for a slide show of photos starting 7/19, straight from the source: http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/oilspill/index.html BTW, it includes a whole bunch of other imagery data.

Sanity -> RE: Clean-Up Crews Can't Find Crude in the Gulf (7/28/2010 5:47:11 PM)
You're looking at this from an extremely slanted viewpoint, and seem completely unaware of how blatantly hateful and blindly partisan you are. Get a clue, its not about me - try to discuss the facts of the article, and focus on me a little less if thats possible. quote: ORIGINAL: Louve00 What I don't deny is, you pointed out immediately where the oil was. And you put the spin on a science blog, Sanity. Because they said something you choose to defend, they instantly became "them"...along with Ken for posting it...along with everyone else who believed it. IF there was a spin, you stomped it out by highlighted and enlarging the words to show everyone what was and what wasn't surface oil. Which, btw, is completely different than the situation we're talking about here. All the arial pictures in the world arent going to show you whats settling into the ocean's bed. To answer you outright, I have no clue if DomKen was putting a political spin on it. I know you insinuated it then, and choose to continue to insinuate it, despite where he said he got it from, and despite the fact that where he got it from was NASA. Is NASA "them" too?

Louve00 -> RE: Clean-Up Crews Can't Find Crude in the Gulf (7/28/2010 5:58:55 PM)
Thats just it Sanity. You think BP's fuck up is a political strategy. That this was only done to help aid Obama in god knows what. If you choose to call that blatantly hateful and blindly partisan then what do you want me to admit. Would you like me to admit I hate BP for not taking the precautions that it should have. And I'm blind to any partisanship they may have. It takes alot for me to hate...even BP, believe it or not. Boycott their products, yes. Hate them for loving money, no...just feel sorry for them there. Blindness to partisanship. Well, since this isn't a pollically motivated happening, the reactions, which may be political, I have nothing to do with. Take all that to BP, who enabled to president to gain off of them, if thats how you're looking at it.

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.09375