- This topic has 685 replies, 28 voices, and was last updated 14 years, 6 months ago by
afx114.
-
AuthorPosts
-
May 26, 2010 at 12:59 PM #555336May 26, 2010 at 1:09 PM #554382
Arraya
ParticipantThe don’t seem to have the continuous ****PANIC! WARNING! EPIC OIL DISASTER***, thing going, but that is just catering to demographics. Fox reserves that for other things that MSNBC might not cover as intensely.
EDIT: Front page of Fox news is ***WARNING! PANIC! TERROR AT THE BORDER*** currently.
May 26, 2010 at 1:09 PM #554486ParticipantThe don’t seem to have the continuous ****PANIC! WARNING! EPIC OIL DISASTER***, thing going, but that is just catering to demographics. Fox reserves that for other things that MSNBC might not cover as intensely.
EDIT: Front page of Fox news is ***WARNING! PANIC! TERROR AT THE BORDER*** currently.
May 26, 2010 at 1:09 PM #554975ParticipantThe don’t seem to have the continuous ****PANIC! WARNING! EPIC OIL DISASTER***, thing going, but that is just catering to demographics. Fox reserves that for other things that MSNBC might not cover as intensely.
EDIT: Front page of Fox news is ***WARNING! PANIC! TERROR AT THE BORDER*** currently.
May 26, 2010 at 1:09 PM #555071ParticipantThe don’t seem to have the continuous ****PANIC! WARNING! EPIC OIL DISASTER***, thing going, but that is just catering to demographics. Fox reserves that for other things that MSNBC might not cover as intensely.
EDIT: Front page of Fox news is ***WARNING! PANIC! TERROR AT THE BORDER*** currently.
May 26, 2010 at 1:09 PM #555346ParticipantThe don’t seem to have the continuous ****PANIC! WARNING! EPIC OIL DISASTER***, thing going, but that is just catering to demographics. Fox reserves that for other things that MSNBC might not cover as intensely.
EDIT: Front page of Fox news is ***WARNING! PANIC! TERROR AT THE BORDER*** currently.
May 26, 2010 at 1:21 PM #554397Allan from Fallbrook
Participant[quote=briansd1]The oil gusher kills any argument in favor of the drill-baby-drill movement. That’s why Fox is only given scant coverage to the gusher.
Supporters of drilling have argued that technology now makes it safe to drill in sensitive, untouched natural areas.
The new drilling technology is not working and untested as evidenced by the oil gusher.
Drillers cannot guarantee that disaster won’t occur. And when a disaster does occur it takes months to plug a gushing well. Obviously, the technology is not there.
It’s now up to the public to decide whether they are willing to trust drillers with their own backyards, recreational areas and livelihoods.[/quote]
Brian: Ordinarily, I treat you as comic relief for your wrongheaded political observations and beliefs, as well as your various non-sequiturs, bon mots and other epistemological nuggets.
In this case, however, you are so completely offbase, it isn’t even funny. Everything about your post is wrong, but you’re going to advance it as settled science, aren’t you?
This has nothing to do with deep-drill technology, genius, it had everything to do with a process called “cementing”, which isn’t even handled by the driller, but by the oil-services company, in this case, Halliburton.
Do a little research before you open up your mouth again and say something unfounded, incorrect and just plain dumb.
Look into Transocean, Ltd (the rig owner), how cementing is done (and why it went wrong in this case) and also realize that BP was only leasing the rig.
May 26, 2010 at 1:21 PM #554501Participant[quote=briansd1]The oil gusher kills any argument in favor of the drill-baby-drill movement. That’s why Fox is only given scant coverage to the gusher.
Supporters of drilling have argued that technology now makes it safe to drill in sensitive, untouched natural areas.
The new drilling technology is not working and untested as evidenced by the oil gusher.
Drillers cannot guarantee that disaster won’t occur. And when a disaster does occur it takes months to plug a gushing well. Obviously, the technology is not there.
It’s now up to the public to decide whether they are willing to trust drillers with their own backyards, recreational areas and livelihoods.[/quote]
Brian: Ordinarily, I treat you as comic relief for your wrongheaded political observations and beliefs, as well as your various non-sequiturs, bon mots and other epistemological nuggets.
In this case, however, you are so completely offbase, it isn’t even funny. Everything about your post is wrong, but you’re going to advance it as settled science, aren’t you?
This has nothing to do with deep-drill technology, genius, it had everything to do with a process called “cementing”, which isn’t even handled by the driller, but by the oil-services company, in this case, Halliburton.
Do a little research before you open up your mouth again and say something unfounded, incorrect and just plain dumb.
Look into Transocean, Ltd (the rig owner), how cementing is done (and why it went wrong in this case) and also realize that BP was only leasing the rig.
May 26, 2010 at 1:21 PM #554990Participant[quote=briansd1]The oil gusher kills any argument in favor of the drill-baby-drill movement. That’s why Fox is only given scant coverage to the gusher.
Supporters of drilling have argued that technology now makes it safe to drill in sensitive, untouched natural areas.
The new drilling technology is not working and untested as evidenced by the oil gusher.
Drillers cannot guarantee that disaster won’t occur. And when a disaster does occur it takes months to plug a gushing well. Obviously, the technology is not there.
It’s now up to the public to decide whether they are willing to trust drillers with their own backyards, recreational areas and livelihoods.[/quote]
Brian: Ordinarily, I treat you as comic relief for your wrongheaded political observations and beliefs, as well as your various non-sequiturs, bon mots and other epistemological nuggets.
In this case, however, you are so completely offbase, it isn’t even funny. Everything about your post is wrong, but you’re going to advance it as settled science, aren’t you?
This has nothing to do with deep-drill technology, genius, it had everything to do with a process called “cementing”, which isn’t even handled by the driller, but by the oil-services company, in this case, Halliburton.
Do a little research before you open up your mouth again and say something unfounded, incorrect and just plain dumb.
Look into Transocean, Ltd (the rig owner), how cementing is done (and why it went wrong in this case) and also realize that BP was only leasing the rig.
May 26, 2010 at 1:21 PM #555086Participant[quote=briansd1]The oil gusher kills any argument in favor of the drill-baby-drill movement. That’s why Fox is only given scant coverage to the gusher.
Supporters of drilling have argued that technology now makes it safe to drill in sensitive, untouched natural areas.
The new drilling technology is not working and untested as evidenced by the oil gusher.
Drillers cannot guarantee that disaster won’t occur. And when a disaster does occur it takes months to plug a gushing well. Obviously, the technology is not there.
It’s now up to the public to decide whether they are willing to trust drillers with their own backyards, recreational areas and livelihoods.[/quote]
Brian: Ordinarily, I treat you as comic relief for your wrongheaded political observations and beliefs, as well as your various non-sequiturs, bon mots and other epistemological nuggets.
In this case, however, you are so completely offbase, it isn’t even funny. Everything about your post is wrong, but you’re going to advance it as settled science, aren’t you?
This has nothing to do with deep-drill technology, genius, it had everything to do with a process called “cementing”, which isn’t even handled by the driller, but by the oil-services company, in this case, Halliburton.
Do a little research before you open up your mouth again and say something unfounded, incorrect and just plain dumb.
Look into Transocean, Ltd (the rig owner), how cementing is done (and why it went wrong in this case) and also realize that BP was only leasing the rig.
May 26, 2010 at 1:21 PM #555361Participant[quote=briansd1]The oil gusher kills any argument in favor of the drill-baby-drill movement. That’s why Fox is only given scant coverage to the gusher.
Supporters of drilling have argued that technology now makes it safe to drill in sensitive, untouched natural areas.
The new drilling technology is not working and untested as evidenced by the oil gusher.
Drillers cannot guarantee that disaster won’t occur. And when a disaster does occur it takes months to plug a gushing well. Obviously, the technology is not there.
It’s now up to the public to decide whether they are willing to trust drillers with their own backyards, recreational areas and livelihoods.[/quote]
Brian: Ordinarily, I treat you as comic relief for your wrongheaded political observations and beliefs, as well as your various non-sequiturs, bon mots and other epistemological nuggets.
In this case, however, you are so completely offbase, it isn’t even funny. Everything about your post is wrong, but you’re going to advance it as settled science, aren’t you?
This has nothing to do with deep-drill technology, genius, it had everything to do with a process called “cementing”, which isn’t even handled by the driller, but by the oil-services company, in this case, Halliburton.
Do a little research before you open up your mouth again and say something unfounded, incorrect and just plain dumb.
Look into Transocean, Ltd (the rig owner), how cementing is done (and why it went wrong in this case) and also realize that BP was only leasing the rig.
May 26, 2010 at 1:32 PM #554404briansd1
Guest[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]
This has nothing to do with deep-drill technology, genius, it had everything to do with a process called “cementing”, which isn’t even handled by the driller, but by the oil-services company, in this case, Halliburton.[/quote]Allan, by drillers, I mean the oil extraction industry.
The way I see it, the fail-safe failed.
The drill-baby-drill crowd have argued that extraction is minimally invasive thanks to new technology… until the technology fails and we end up with a huge environmental disaster.
BP obviously didn’t have the technology at the ready to plug the oil gusher.
May 26, 2010 at 1:32 PM #554509Guest[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]
This has nothing to do with deep-drill technology, genius, it had everything to do with a process called “cementing”, which isn’t even handled by the driller, but by the oil-services company, in this case, Halliburton.[/quote]Allan, by drillers, I mean the oil extraction industry.
The way I see it, the fail-safe failed.
The drill-baby-drill crowd have argued that extraction is minimally invasive thanks to new technology… until the technology fails and we end up with a huge environmental disaster.
BP obviously didn’t have the technology at the ready to plug the oil gusher.
May 26, 2010 at 1:32 PM #554996Guest[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]
This has nothing to do with deep-drill technology, genius, it had everything to do with a process called “cementing”, which isn’t even handled by the driller, but by the oil-services company, in this case, Halliburton.[/quote]Allan, by drillers, I mean the oil extraction industry.
The way I see it, the fail-safe failed.
The drill-baby-drill crowd have argued that extraction is minimally invasive thanks to new technology… until the technology fails and we end up with a huge environmental disaster.
BP obviously didn’t have the technology at the ready to plug the oil gusher.
May 26, 2010 at 1:32 PM #555092Guest[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]
This has nothing to do with deep-drill technology, genius, it had everything to do with a process called “cementing”, which isn’t even handled by the driller, but by the oil-services company, in this case, Halliburton.[/quote]Allan, by drillers, I mean the oil extraction industry.
The way I see it, the fail-safe failed.
The drill-baby-drill crowd have argued that extraction is minimally invasive thanks to new technology… until the technology fails and we end up with a huge environmental disaster.
BP obviously didn’t have the technology at the ready to plug the oil gusher.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.