According to this article, the riser pipe that was bent and crimped after the oil rig sank is restricting some of the flow from the tapped oil pocket, but as the leaking oil rushes into the well's riser, it is forcing sand with it at very high speeds and "sand blasting" the pipe (which is quickly eroding its structural integrity).
Due to the sand gushing with the crude oil the remaining pipe is compromised and could lead to over 2 Million gallons per day. Some say nothing short of a nuclear blast can stop the gushing oil.
WHY has there not been an immediate investigation by our Federal Govt.? After all, we've had a congressional hearing on the couple who "crashed" a White House state dinner
Becoming a world catastrophe is NOT out of the question. Are you prepared?
Â
**********
Is Gulf oil rig disaster far worse than we're being told? (click here)
(NaturalNews) Reports about the massive Gulf of Mexico oil spill have been largely underestimated, according to commentators, including Paul Noel, a Software Engineer for the U.S. Army at Redstone Arsenal in Alabama. He believes that the pocket of oil that's been hit is so powerful and under so much pressure that it may be virtually impossible to contain it. And Noel is not the only person questioning the scope of this disaster.
A recent story from the Christian Science Monitor (CSM) reports that many independent scientists believe the leak is spewing far more than the 5,000 barrels, or 210,000 gallons, per day being reported by most media sources. They believe the leak could be discharging up to 25,000 barrels (more than one million gallons) of crude oil a day right now.
The riser pipe that was bent and crimped after the oil rig sank is restricting some of the flow from the tapped oil pocket, but as the leaking oil rushes into the well's riser, it is forcing sand with it at very high speeds and "sand blasting" the pipe (which is quickly eroding its structural integrity).
According to a leaked National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration memo obtained by an Alabama newspaper, if the riser erodes any further and creates more leaks, up to 50,000 barrels, or 2.1 million gallons, per day of crude oil could begin flooding Gulf waters every day.
When this disaster first occurred, the media downplayed it. BP spokespersons were quick to claim that the leakage was minimal and that crews would eventually be able to contain it. But as time went on, it became clear that things were not under control and that the spill was far more serious than we were originally told. (Gee, sound familiar? Remember Katrina?)
Yet some of the media reports still seem more like press releases than actual reporting because they continue to repeat what the public relations cleanup crews (pun intended) would like the public to believe rather than what's actually happening. Reality, it seems, has a nasty habit of interfering with corporate spin.
Cap and trade becomes "cap and pray"
The New York Times yesterday reported that BP is working on a large containment dome that is intended to cap the leak and catch the escaping oil so that it can be safely pumped to the surface. Meanwhile, crews are said to be working on fixing the broken blow-out preventer valve that should have stopped the leak from happening in the first place, but they have been unsuccessful thus far.
Almost every report says that BP is doing everything it can to contain the spill and stop the leak, even though the company claims it is not technically at fault. According to an article from the U.K. Daily Mail, BP's CEO Tony Hayward recently responded to the cleanup efforts by explaining, "This is not our accident but it is our responsibility to deal with it."
Swiss-based Transocean is the company that actually owned and operated the sunken rig. It manned the rig with its own crew and BP just leased it from Transocean (which makes you wonder why BP is so willing to take full responsibility for everything).
BP says that it's working on a relief well, but that it could take up to three months to complete. Until then, the company is trying several different approaches to at least slow the leak and hopefully stop it altogether.
Mind you, almost all of the information about the spill from day one has come directly from BP which obviously has every incentive to downplay the true environmental destruction that could be caused by this oil spill.
Even the word "spill" is incorrect. This isn't some ship of oil that spilled into the ocean -- it's a "volcano" of oil spewing from the belly of Mother Earth herself. It's under extremely high pressure, it's spewing a huge volume of oil directly into the ocean, and there so far seems to be no human-engineered way of stopping it (short of setting off an underground nuclear bomb near the well site).
Addressing the unanswered questions
According to the CSM article, environmental risk models are normally performed for pollutants like crude oil, yet not one model has yet been released for this incident by BP or the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Many are wondering why this crucial information has not been made public. Could it be because the results of the model might seem too catastrophic?
Neither has there been an adequate explanation given for exactly why the oil rig exploded... twice! Some reports indicate that the crews responsible for properly cementing the well casing didn't do it right. Others suggest that the oil deposit was just too large and under too much pressure for the equipment to handle it. (Be careful where you poke around the planet if you can't handle what comes out, right?)
It's also important to note that, according to a recent New York Times article, Halliburton was actually the company responsible for all the cementing work on the rig, which brings a third party into the picture.
BP's federal permits allowed the company to drill up to 20,000 feet deep, but according to one of the workers who was onboard the rig during the explosion, drilling in excess of 22,000 feet had been taking place. This same worker is said to handle company records for BP, but BP has denied these allegations.
BP has declined to comment, however, on other allegations that the spill happened because it chose not to install necessary deep-water valves which would have acted as a last resort seal of protection in the event of an emergency.
Several other allegations include suspicions that the crews allowed gas to build up in the well bore and that the rig operator tried to detach too quickly from the well, causing a disruption.
BP, Halliburton and Transocean have all indicated that they are continuing to investigate the situation. When companies investigate themselves, however, the truth rarely comes out.
The possibility of an extinction event?
It's hard to say exactly what's going on in the Gulf right now, especially because there are so many conflicting reports and unanswered questions. But one thing's for sure: if the situation is actually much worse than we're being led to believe, there could be worldwide catastrophic consequences.
Â
PLEASE CLICK HERE FOR THE REST OF THE STORY!
Â
recommend
Facebook
Twitter
bookmark 
print
Comments: 38
Things are rather like this gushing oil, much more beneath the surface than being reported.
Unless you are doing something about changing the nature of our money you are not dealing with reality. You are bailing but not plugging the hole in the bottom of the boat. You complain frequently about your feet getting wet but you do nothing about the hole in the bottom of the boat. You advocate having a different captain and other ship's officers but you do nothing about the hole in the bottom of the boat.
1) In each post which complains about a problem, point out the role that our kind of money plays in causing, helping create, making worse, or allowing the problem.
2) Explain to people what it is about our money that makes it a source of evil in the world.
3) Come up with your own improvement to money which eliminates the harm done by our current money's physical object nature. ( I am happy to support any real solution. )
4) Learn what my solution is and understand it.
5) Find some flaw in my system which makes it unworkable so that I can return to the drawing board and try to come up with some other solution.
6) Tell other people there is a solution for our problems (the one I propose) which will cost nothing, assure our freedoms, and raise our standard of living.
If you do any one or two of these things it will please me greatly because it will be helping fix that hole in the bottom of the boat.
The most important thing to me is to have people understand the real situation and what we are able, as a people/nation, to do about it.
I feel that if you do understand the problem and my proposed solution that you will support them and spread the word because you really are a good person doing what you think is right.
If you haven't read the novel, how can you set yourself up as a judge of the ideas in that novel?
I have said and written that my solution will probably never even be considered for adoption. I have never said my solution would not work if adopted. Since most people are unwilling to do anything to solve their problems and since an even greater proportion are unwilling to read even a few pages let alone an entire novel, I think it will be very difficult for me to educate enough people to get my idea considered, let alone adopted.
But was Christianity any less true when is was a tiny sect and few in the world had ever heard of it? Was it any less true for saying that a dead man arose three days after being crucified? Just because it isn't commonly known or understood or just because it sounds too good to be true does not make it false.
Who's saying that Christianity was worth any more or less depending on how many practice it? What does that last paragraph have to do with anything to this point?
If I wrote the book as a treatise (and I did write that book back in the mid 1970s) who would read it? More to the point, who would publish it? There's no existing market for books that describe a fundamentally new kind of money. I have had far more people read and understand this novel than ever would consider reading the treatise.
The last paragraph of that comment shows that truth and value is not to be judged by popularity. So don't scoff at my ideas because they are not popular. If they were popular I would not need to educate people about them.
What realistic solutions? Hasn't it become clear enough by now that "solutions" which involve our current kind of money don't work?
I find your contempt for something you neither understand nor have even investigated very disappointing. Your kind of attitude prevents solutions.
When we discuss any economic problem, you reduce it to the fact that the only reason we're facing it is because of the way we look at money. That may be so, but it is a reality you need to deal with right now because there is no representative for whom we can vote who knows Larry's system.
I've sad this before, and I'll say it again. If I were as jazzed about any idea as you are about this one, I'd be out finding the people who matter who can make it work. Day after day, telling the same people over and over and over again about the same idea is not going to propagate it.
I just don't understand why you have not brought this to a company that specializes in unique ideas if you are serious about it. The only thing I can think of is that you're afraid it will be rejected. I think the idea gives you hope and you don't want to take the chance that your hopes might be dashed.
I don't think I have ever once said to you in any discussion about religion that you should read the Bible and/or learn of the saving grace of Jesus Christ, yet every time anything to do with the economy comes up, you proseletyze about your money system. I see all the problems of the world solved if al of us heeded the words of the Bible just as you see the money problems solved with your book. If I proseletyzed about Jesus Christ like you do about ths book, you'd probably have nothing to do with me.
Get it out to people who can accept it or reject it, once and for all, Larry. If it is accepted, the idea will be marketed and you will see your dream come true. If not, it's not the end of the world.
The whole idea fits on half a typewritten page easily. But like E = M C **2
it isn't that easy to understand without some background.
You still ignored the crux of what I said which is what you usually do anyway.
I have been approaching everyone I can get to with the idea but how many people (like Congressmen) have the time to take to read a novel? When a solution is unorthodox, especially when it requires a complete reconceptualization of basic ideas, it takes time and thought on the part of the learner to get the idea. Important people don't have time for that. They must be compelled (or lured) into doing so. I don't have that leverage. But I have tried. Congressmen, college presidents, economists, public figures, everybody I can send messages to.
Companies that specialize in unique ideas want ideas that make money, that can be sold. No company can make money on educating the public this way.
All sorts of people read Gather who never comment nor post. I never know when they will see one of my comments so I feel compelled to mention the novel often.
You have lots of help telling others about Jesus. I have only a few people helping me. When millions of people understand my idea I can rest. And I have never rejected people who want to talk to me about religion. I have had 7th Day Adventists, LDS folks and others visit frequently in my home to attempt to convert me. I never turn them away.
If my idea is not accepted, it will be the end of the world as far as people go. We will become extinct. I have a huge obligation.
Okay, there we go...now you're starting to get it. You also said, "The whole idea fits on half a typewritten page easily." If it's that easy to understand the concept on a half page of paper, why make them read the novel?
Anything can be sold, Larry. You need to find the market for it, and the market for your idea is the politician. You concept is not something any politician is talking about, but if it were marketed that a new idea of how to utilize money in society is a viable concept that could win them an election, (which would be the job of the idea company to figure a way to do) you might indeed be able to sell the idea for money (kind of antithetical to your theory, but nonetheless effective for your purposes until it gets out there) and get it out to the public.
I am not selling my idea. I will not restrict access to it.
I have presented the ten principles of the solution to people in the past and they cannot grasp the idea in that form. The novel provides the necessary background for easy understanding. Almost everyone who does read the whole novel understand it quite well.
The idea is not a "new idea of how to utilize money in society" at all. It is a fundamental change in the nature of money.
It is a viable concept that could be used to win an election. (That's a part of the novel, by the way.) I have tried to get several campaigns interested but they don't have time for some crazy solutions. (After all, the claims I make for the solution do sound insane. You have to admin that. :-)
"I am not selling my idea. I will not restrict access to it."
Until you realize that by not selling it to someone who can propagate it, you are restricting access to it because you alone are not able to di that effectively, at least you haven't been in the three years I've seen you try.
"I have presented the ten principles of the solution to people in the past and they cannot grasp the idea in that form." If that is the case, then the whole idea might fit on half a typewritten page easily, but you are obviously not being clear as to what it is you want to convey. I am sorry, Larry, but I do not see any concept regarding what you call "a fundamental change in the nature of money" to be accepted by anyone unless you can provide a clear explanation of what that fundamental change is, how it can be assimilated into an entirely different economy, and the steps needed to be taken to do so. If you cannot do that, I am afraid that it will forever remain a fantasy system that only exists in the fictional world you created in your novel.
I cannot perform miracles. Perhaps you know someone who produced a fundamental change in the conceptualization of some common belief and had it accepted without any problem but I know of none. (Darwin is much more typical.)
Once again, you have created a fictional world in which to implement your idea. The world is a real place, though.
I'm not saying this to be cruel, Larry, but to be very honest with you, if someone gave me the choice of reading The Origin of the Species, or the Invisible Hand, I would choose the former. I did not find the book engaging on any level, and never got past the first chapter which I found to be very tedious. It's just not the kind of writing that excites me, so it's probably just personal taste in literature, but the very person who might be interested in your theory might also have my taste. :)
We are better with our money in food and everyday necessities than money in the bank.
LDS have prepared them for years for food storage for a year. Many of their websites tell what is needed - not the least of these being Heirloom Seeds.
Please keep posting to our group and ask others to join.