Independent Investigative Journalism and Commentary from New Orleans, LA
wow. just wow.
Man I wish I could get everyone to read your blog and then actually THINK for once. I have been labeled a conspiracy theorist, mainly because I have always questioned the official story on most things, JFK, RFK, King, 9/11 and now BP. We have a situation here, that I feel will in 15-20 years be similar to the Benzene contamination at Camp Lejeune Marine Base. Here is a link to one story on it. http://www.salem-news.com/articles/february212010/lejeune_tk.phpThe powers that be want us to move on and forget. We know that those in power don’t care about the little people. This is evident in so many cases. If the powers in charge screw up, they simply cover it up. If you need an example, look into the polio vaccine and how it was contaminated or read Ed Haslam’s, Dr. Mary’s Monkey, which shows how they took a virus and made a bioweapon with their lessons learned from the polio virus vaccine’s failures all right here in good’ol Nawlins. They spend billions to discredit, intimidate and whitewash the truth. They get to those who refuse to believe that their world is anything but perfect. These are the same sheep that will go on thinking everything is fine, the levees will hold even as they sit on their roof tops.
I'm baffled... What exactly did this person think an oil dispersant did? Don't get me wrong, I'm not short selling the horrible effects of this but to sit and watch a "scientist" amazed at how an oil dispersant seems to make the oil...ohhhh, what's the word I'm looking for..... DISBURSE is kinda comical.
The point is that this shit is still in the water column....it didn't magically disappear as BP would have us believe. The problem didn't go away, it simply sank.
So disturbing. They made it worse. Speechless.
But for sure the dispersant is bad for us?Also, please tell me that the BP skeptics are more serious than the 9/11 "truthers."
It's not so much a matter of the dispersant being bad for us as it is showing that by using the dispersant as a solution, BP made the problem worse by spreading the oil throughout the water column. It looks better from the surface but in reality they just compounded the problem.I don't know why you're bringing up 9/11 conspiracy and this issue in the same context...they are not even close.
Well, isn't the argument that the dispersant allowed the oil to deteriorate with the help of bacteria?The earlier commenter brought up 9/11. I just made a snarky retort. Agree that its irrelevant.
That's the pitch but it doesn't mean it's fo' true. This guy and a handful of scientists who aren't on the BP bandwagon are finding some very disturbing results from seafood testing. More to come.
Anonymous to Anonymous, In my reference to 9/11 AND JFK, RFK, AND KING, I was simply making a point about myself being labeled a conspiracy theorist since I choose not to believe everything that the authorities tell me. You will be labeled a CT if you keep believing that there is oil under the sand or oil at the bottom of the gulf. Remember just as this scientist showed that there is a problem there will be a hundred more scientists saying just the opposite so who do you believe. I believe as time goes on, people will get sick from the gulf seafood, it may be years but I feel it will happen.Sorry to take away from the main discussion, Dambala, keep up the great work.
Yes, the dispersant is dangerous. COREXIT® EC9500A has an LC50 (see below) of 25.20 p.p.m. and it is 14.57 p.p.m. for COREXIT® EC9527A (both at 96 hours on the species Menidia beryllina). LC50 is the concentration at which 50% of the species dies in a given time frame.
Post a Comment