Users Online Now:
1,192
(
Who's On?
)
Visitors Today:
289,180
Pageviews Today:
462,274
Threads Today:
153
Posts Today:
2,736
06:04 AM
Directory
Adv. Search
Topics
Forum
Back to Forum
Back to Thread
REPLY TO THREAD
Subject
BREAKING >>> Blowout in Gulf of Mexico: Wellhead releasing ‘unknown product’ into water off LA coast
User Name
Font color:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Indigo
Violet
Black
Font:
Default
Verdana
Tahoma
Ms Sans Serif
In accordance with industry accepted best practices we ask that users limit their copy / paste of copyrighted material to the relevant portions of the article you wish to discuss and no more than 50% of the source material, provide a link back to the original article and provide your original comments / criticism in your post with the article.
[quote:AKObserver:MV8yMDM5NDA5XzM0MjgzMzc0XzY2QjhBQzJB] :hi: posted this on ELQ thread Re: LIVE "ELF/ULF" MONITORING OF EARTHQUAKE PRECURSOR SIGNALS ON GLP. QUAKE FORECAST UP TO 5HRS IN ADVANCE...(((Updated Daily))) By ELQ. [link to www.godlikeproductions.com] UH OH. Not a good sign. The above thread is no longer in the database. I found a better source for the information. Dated today, too. [link to enenews.com] Blowout in Gulf of Mexico: Wellhead releasing ‘unknown product’ into water off Louisiana coast (MAP) Quoting: Earth Cries [color=red][b]Betcha this is what it is as the key word was 'unlikely' [/b][/color]fueled by the current ocean weather events and water temps rising it's a toxic death bloom that wasn't supposed to ever surface. [b]ELE? of the day-Why did the EPA allow BP to disperse Corexit in such vast amounts without ever examining it's effects on marine life? [/b] The containment and absorbent boom that BP is deploying around beaches and marshes—largely ineffectively—is designed to do just that: contain and absorb oil. But the Corexit dispersant BP has flooded onto the leaking wellhead 5,000 feet down, and sprayed from the air onto the surface—some 2 million gallons in total—is designed to break up the oil. "Which one is it?" asks Safina. "Do you want to contain it or disperse it? It makes absolutely no sense to be doing both. Let's face it, with pollution, you count your lucky stars if you have what's called point-source pollution, that is, a single identifiable localized source of pollution, like the Deepwater Horizon. So what's BP doing with that? They're turning it into the worst pollution nightmare of them all: non-point-source pollution." That's because untreated oil quickly rises to the surface, where it can be skimmed with relative ease.[b] But it becomes a submerged plume, unlikely to ever float to the surface, and destined to migrate through underwater currents to the entire Gulf basin and eventually the North Atlantic.[/b][color=red][b] "Oil is toxic to most life," says Steiner. "And Corexit is toxic to most life. But the most toxic of all is oil that's been treated with Corexit. Plus, dispersants may well kill the ocean's first line of defense against oil: the natural microbes that break oil down for other microbes to eat." The EPA has never seriously examined Corexit's effects on marine life [/b][/color](see "Bad Breakup"). Now it'll get the biggest and baddest field experiment of all time, as the flora and fauna of the shallows and the deep scattering layer collide with the dispersed plumes. [link to www.motherjones.com] [/quote]
Original Message
Not good, not good people.. Hopefully not sinkhole related but that's my guess..
Read it Here:
[
link to enenews.com
]
Pictures (click to insert)
General
Politics
Bananas
People
Potentially Offensive
Emotions
Big Round Smilies
Aliens and Space
Friendship & Love
Textual
Doom
Misc Small Smilies
Religion
Love
Random
View All Categories
|
Next Page >>