They cite these reasons why things may not be as bad as we have been led to believe:
"...four basic reasons the initial eco-fears seem overblown.
First, the Deepwater oil, unlike the black glop from the Valdez, is unusually light and degradable, which is why the slick in the Gulf is dissolving surprisingly rapidly now that the gusher has been capped.
Second, the Gulf of Mexico, unlike Alaska's Prince William Sound, is very warm, which has helped bacteria break down the oil.
Third, heavy flows of Mississippi River water have helped keep the oil away from the coast, where it can do much more damage.
And finally, Mother Nature can be incredibly resilient."
7 comments:
Or, they may in time prove to be much worse.
The liberal media will never report it if that becomes the case. It doesn't fit in with their plans to kill the US oil industry and perpetuate the frauds of solar and wind power.
If the impact of the oil spill had turned out to be worse you would be criticizing Obama for not doing enough and underestimating the problem.
I have never blamed Obama for his handling of the Gulf oil mess. In fact, at the end of May I posted this:
'Federalizing the effort' would be a huge mistake. Moreover, Obama should not be held responsible for something the government cannot fix."
The complete post is here:
http://davidusher.blogspot.com/2010/05/bp-says-top-kill-failed-to-stop-gulf.html
The feds were not and are not equipped to stop the Gulf gusher. The technology and the resources rest with BP and other private sector companies. Blaming Obama at the time for not 'fixing' this,as some in the media and various politicians were doing, is nonsensical and a symptom of the dependency syndrome and all-too-pervasive expectation that government can fix everything in our country.
So why are you blaming him now for exaggerating the impact as if he was intentionally misleading people while knowing better?
I think for political reasons TeamObama climbed aboard the catastrophe bandwagon generated by the 24x7 video and the 'woe is us' mentality created by the media.
I have no idea what information the Administration had that may have been different than the media hype.
We must have been viewing different media - Obama seemed his usual considered self to me, rather dispassionate if anything. I seem to recall the media dissing him for not expressing enough anger. Maybe he was on that bandwagon for five minutes but even if your claim is true - give me a break - a politician doing something for poliitcal reasons? What is your standard - the driven snow?
Anyway, changing subjects - by any chance have you used the the IPad? It is pretty interesting and fun.
Post a Comment