Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : President Barack Obama -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: stockman_scott who wrote (76784)	5/31/2010 11:53:14 AM
From: Wharf Rat	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 149317

"BP has proven that it doesn't really know what it's doing either" No; you have just proven again you really don't know WTF you are talking about. Stick a sock in it . You know who Brazil uses for their deepwater? Transocean. Quit babbling. "Why did BP use well over 800,000 gallons of the very toxic dispersant Corexit in the Gulf ?? " To piss you off? Well, that too, but, With regards to the underwater dispersant use being thought as just a means to hide the oil, that is not true. You are just one of many who have said this so I'm not implying you started the rumor ;-) Here are the facts. 1. Using dispersants underwater is more effective than using them on the top, allowing for less dispersant to be used. 2. The use of dispersants is the lesser of two evils. Oil kept out at sea and out of the marshes is much less damaging to the ecosystems of the Gulf overall. 3. Dispersants are less toxic than the oil they are helping to breakup so the bacteria can eat it. = We are experimenting, but we have no choice. Not using dispersants is considered by the EPA and NOAA to be the lesser of two evils. War is hell :-( For an overview of their use go to this link: The Use of Chemical Dispersants to Treat Oil Spills itopf.com PriorityX on May 30, 2010 - 8:19pm ==

To: stockman_scott who wrote (76784)	5/31/2010 12:32:52 PM
From: Wharf Rat	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 149317

You, and everybody you paste, seem to think that THE ROOM has 10 guys from BP and one fed trying to keep an ear on all, so as to regulate conspiracies. Please provide factual evidence that only BP, Transocean, HAL, Cummings (BOP), and a few other involved players, plus da Chu group, are in THE ROOM. Be as specific as possible. In other words, link or lie. Don't babble. You can either prove, with evidence, that nobody else is there, or you can prove, with evidence, that only those few are there. If you can't prove your case with facts, give us a break, and try a new line. Real proof, not blogger crap; not how you would like it to be so you can bitch, but how it is right now. Pictures will do.