Discovery Earth Smacks NOAA for engaging in Gulf Oil Spill Coverup.
Posted by Alexander Higgins - May 20, 2010 at 7:44 am - Permalink - Source via Alexander Higgins Blog|
|
Share
|
||
|
Rate This Post
  Loading ... |
|||
Discovery Earth Smacks NOAA for engaging in Gulf Oil Spill Coverup. In an apparent escalation of the war between the US government and the scientific community over the Gulf Oil Spill Discovery Earth lashes at NOAA for engaging in a coverup
The Discovery News Blog handed a sharp blow to NOAA for engaging in the government coverup of the Gulf oil spill.
The report on the Discovery web site demanded that “all government (and private interests) efforts to withhold information or obstruct scientists from doing their jobs must end immediately” and the governments continuation of engaging in these efforts would be detrimental.
Discovery news says “The governments activity is preventing the release of information that is vital to make sure that those responsible “are properly held responsible for all damages and costs incurred during this mess.”
The discovery.com article seems to be the continuation of an escalating war between the Obama administration and the scientific community from on both sides of the Atlantic.
The Discovery Earth article is not coming from nowhere.
A growing number of scientists of a raising concerns about being attacked by the government for disagreeing with Government reports.
NOAA has also attacked European scientists who reported that Scientific evidence proves that Gulf oil spill has reached the Loop Current in the Gulf of Mexico, after NOAA made denials that the spill has reached the current and downplayed scientist warnings about the seriousness of the Oil spill entering the Gulf Stream.
It isn’t just the scientific community that Government is bumping heads with either.
Amidst widespread reports of camera and cell phone compensations, CBS news has been reported that it has been threatened with arrest by the USCG, under orders from BP, for trying to document the arrival of heavy oil on the coast of Louisiana.
The latest round of sparring between Government officials and the scientific community is centering around NOAA attacks on the credibility of reports by scientists who said they have found huge plumes of oil floating beneath the surface of the Gulf of Mexico
The Discovery Earth weighed in on the issue lashing out sharply at the Federal government and accusing the government agencies “deliberately and/or negligently” withholding “all sorts of information”
Geologists and reporter for discovery earth Michael Reilly gave his analysis in the report Why Don’t We Know How Big the Gulf Oil Spill is?” on Discovery.com web site.
That report concludes as follows:
With the weight of evidence that has so far been made public, Lubchenco’s statement smacks of hiding behind claims of incomplete data to obfuscate understanding of the true magnitude of this spill. This makes sense when oil companies hoping to salvage their image and prevent pesky scrutiny and regulations do it — their profit motive is clear. But what has NOAA have to gain from behaving this way?
At this point, though, motives are almost irrelevant. What needs to happen is that all government (and private interests) efforts to withhold information or obstruct scientists from doing their jobs must end immediately. The full force of our scientific capability to measure, understand, and contain this oil spill must be brought to bear. And keeping detailed records of the amount of oil in the water is vital to ensure that the parties involved — BP, Transocean, Halliburton, and/or the MMS — are properly held responsible for all damages and costs incurred during this mess.
The article starts like this:
The image above may look like just another cartoon representation of an oil spill. But it’s far more than that — it’s glaring proof that the Minerals Management Service knew exactly what it was getting into with the Deepwater Horizon disaster in the Gulf of Mexico years before there even was a spill. They knew, they know, and yet all sorts of information is being deliberately and/or negligently withheld.
For example, a research cruise operated under the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration last weekend found evidence that large plumes of oil are hovering beneath the waves, perhaps as large fields of droplets. Surprised by this, NOAA administrator Jane Lubchenco called the report “premature” and “inaccurate.” I’m not familiar with the ins and outs of mapping underwater oil plumes
But as the Discovery Earth blog post explains but there are several reasons to believe the report was neither premature nor inaccurate.
The greatest example says Micheal Riley list 3 of the many examples of NOAA continual engagement in covering up this mess for BP is the Image above.
Readers who viewed this page, also viewed:
Is Government Lying About Origin Of Florida Keys Tarballs?
BP Gulf Oil Spill Photos Show What BP Doesn’t Want You To See, The Real Reason Constitution Has Been Suspended
Gulf Oil Spill Sea Floor Collapse and Seabed Leaks May Prevent BP From Capping Well.- BP and Administration Lies, Deceit, and Coverup in the Gulf – by Stephen Lendman
- Goverment Ignores Reports of Huge Oil Plums – Attacking Scientists Who Disagree With Government Figures
Breaking News: Reports Say Huge Explosions Cause Seafloor Collapse Beneath Gulf Oil Spill (Update 9)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
[...] – Discovery Smacks NOAA For Spill Coverup-> on Thursday May 20, @08:05AM alexhiggins732 Submitted by alexhiggins732 on Thursday May 20, [...]
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Alex, I have some very frightening info . Please take 10 minutes to read the blog posts (all 3)on my yahoo profile. Maybe you can help me get the word out. I have been taking as many people to your blog as possible .Come read what I have been able to dig up in the past 2 days.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
You need to leave a link to your profile. Most people don’t know how to find you.
I replied to your posts. The dispersant research is scary. However, 1) links to the source of your research are needed and 2) the exact brand that WAS used by BP is needed.
Notice is said was. See http://blog.alexanderhiggins.com/2010/05/20/bp-siphon-capturing-5000-barrels-oil-day/ which explains that the EPA told BP it has 24 hours to choose an different chemical (which is probably an indication that your research is on point).
The nuke option does indeed become a very scary scenario. If that becomes and option your information needs to be vetted.
I would post that on sites that people are already banging war drums to nuke the well. It would be critical to raise awareness BEFORE the Government contemplates so people are informed before the fact and not after the fact.
You can see my comments on your last post about the location of the munition dumps and other things.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
[...] coverup accusations are not just being made by me, but by the scientific community and lawsuits being [...]
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
[...] have not been afraid to step and challenge BP and The Federal Government over the existence of underwater plumes, the dangers of the dispersants BP is using, or the safety of Gulf [...]
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
[...] Matt Simmons also revealed that NOAA ships discovered a huge underwater plume of oil at 1100 meters below the surface which could possibly cover up to 40% of the Gulf of Mexico at a time when NOAA and the federal government were publicly denying the existence of underwater plumes of oil. [...]
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
[...] have not been afraid to step and challenge BP and The Federal Government over the existence of underwater plumes, the dangers of the dispersants BP is using, or the safety of Gulf [...]
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
[...] Matt Simmons also revealed that NOAA ships discovered a huge underwater plume of oil at 1100 meters below the surface which could possibly cover up to 40% of the Gulf of Mexico at a time when NOAA and the federal government were publicly denying the existence of underwater plumes of oil. [...]
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
[...] Matt Simmons also revealed that NOAA ships discovered a huge underwater plume of oil at 1100 meters below the surface which could possibly cover up to 40% of the Gulf of Mexico at a time when NOAA and the federal government were publicly denying the existence of underwater plumes of oil. [...]