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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: i-node who wrote (573165)	6/22/2010 10:53:01 PM
From: Broken_Clock	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1585566

There is no evidence they had good numbers early on, and certainly, the federal government agreed with them. --- So NOAA is a joke to you?

To: i-node who wrote (573165)	6/25/2010 11:06:01 PM
From: combjelly	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1585566

"We don't know any such thing. " Again, granted that if you view it through the lens of epistemology, you are right. But, in the way that normal people use the word, you are wrong. "There is no evidence they had good numbers early on, and certainly, the federal government agreed with them. " There is plenty of evidence. The administration agreed with them based on the amount of oil coming to the surface. They neglected the effect of the dispersants being used in amounts so large that the majority of the oil never reached the surface. Since BP wouldn't release the video that was shot by the various cameras, including several high resolution ones, outsiders didn't have the information to judge. It wasn't until they released a short clip from one of the low resolution cameras, that it became obvious they were lying. "When you talk about a "lie" you have to have some proof that somethign was a lie versus a mistake or a conservative estimate." As I stated earlier, they either knew and deliberately told lies, or they deliberately decided not to quantify what was happening so they could make up figures based on nothing at all. Either way, they intended to mislead. Which we generally call a "lie". "Which is minimal." Projecting again, i-node. I pretty clearly know a lot about the time line and events than you do. You are sort of like BP, either you know and are distorting what happened, or you haven't bothered to educate yourself and are just blowing hot air and pretending you are knowledgeable.... Hmm. Maybe that is why you keep backing BP, you are doing the same stuff they are. If you admit they are lying, you'd have to admit you are too.