Shame on you BP!!!

[spot]

Macadamia;1314466 wrote: British Petroleum, who had rebranded themselves as Beyond Petroleum, in an effort to show they where concerned about the environment will forever be thought of as one of the dirtiest corporate polluters in the world.One of the dirtiest corporate polluters in the world? Top of the league, dear boy, top of the league.

The disaster has occurred in a region where millions live,
Shall we keep the Union Carbide comparison going for a bit, just for the fun of it? You can't seriously think that Louisiana is more densely populated than that comparable bit of India. 100 per square mile compared to 500. Sixty million people live in that Indian State.





billions of dollars are made in fishing and tourism,umm... "Bhopal is also known as the Lake City for its various natural as well as artificial lakes and is one of the greenest cities in India"? "Popular holiday spots around Bhopal include Delawadi, a picturesque picnic spot and Islamnagar which was the palace of Bhopal's Afghan rulers and was built by Dost Mohammed Khan. Located at around 40 km from Bhopal is Bhimbetka, a World Heritage Site which has one of the largest collections of pre-historic paintings and rocks, some of which date back more than 10,000 years [...] Anglers can head about 10 kilometres from the city to Hathaikheda, which is a popular fishing zone? Or do the "billions of dollars" count for more than the actual environment?



and where sensitive ecological wet lands are located.How about "The Bhoj Wetland consists of two lakes located in the city of Bhopal, the capital of the central Indian state of Madhya Pradesh? I'm picking the bits from Wikipedia rather than bothering to go to original sources but you'll get my drift.



The government witch hunt is on. BP's CEO says he wants his life back. It won't be long - maybe a few years from now. I'm guessing the demise of BP is not far away. Maybe, ironically, they will be bought out by Exxon.


I'm just waiting for someone to say well yes, when We do it to Them that's just business but when They do it to Us it's unforgivable. Preferably with "because we're special and they're not" to really make my day.

Union Carbide offered US$ 350 million, the insurance sum. The Government of India claimed US$ 3.3 billion from Union Carbide. In 1999, a settlement was reached under which Union Carbide agreed to pay US$470 million (the insurance sum, plus interest) in a full and final settlement of its civil and criminal liability.

In 1986, the MP government invested in the Special Industrial Area Bhopal. 152 of the planned 200 worksheds were built. In 2000, 16 were partially functioning.It is estimated that 50,000 persons need alternative jobs, and that less than 100 gas victims have found regular employment under the government's scheme.

Beginning in 1991, the local authorities from Bhopal charged Chairman and CEO of Union Carbide, Warren Anderson, who had retired in 1986, with manslaughter, a crime that carries a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison. Anderson has so far avoided an international arrest warrant and a US court summons. He was declared a fugitive from justice by the Chief Judicial Magistrate of Bhopal on February 1, 1992, for failing to appear at the court hearings in a culpable homicide case in which he was named the chief defendant. Orders were passed to the Government of India to press for an extradition from the United States, with whom India had an extradition treaty in place. The Bhopal Medical Appeal believe that "neither the American nor the Indian government seem interested in disturbing him with an extradition". A seemingly apathetic attitude from the US government, which has failed to pursue the case, has also led to strong protests in the past, most notably by Greenpeace.

If that's how a US corporation handles matters after killing ten thousand bystanders, why do you think BP is likely to be affected by eleven riggers and a few shrimp boats?

[Macadamia]

Spot, you can make all the comparisons to Union Carbide you desire. It does not take away from this particular incident, on what is happening today off American shores. My prediction is BP is not going to survive this incident. Union Carbide did not survive theirs. UC's reputation was destroyed by what occurred in Indian. And eventually Union Carbide was bought out by Dow Chemical. My prediction is the same fate awaits BP.

[spot]

Macadamia;1314475 wrote: Spot, you can make all the comparisons to Union Carbide you desire. It does not take away from this particular incident, on what is happening today off American shores. My prediction is BP is not going to survive this incident. Union Carbide did not survive theirs. UC's reputation was destroyed by what occurred in Indian. And eventually Union Carbide was bought out by Dow Chemical. My prediction is the same fate awaits BP.


BP has approximately 50 times the revenue of Union Carbide, they're not really comparable beasts. It thrives on mergers, I'm just wondering which company you think is big enough to buy it by takeover. Would you like to name one?

[Clodhopper]

My prediction is BP is not going to survive this incident. Union Carbide did not survive theirs. UC's reputation was destroyed by what occurred in Indian. And eventually Union Carbide was bought out by Dow Chemical. My prediction is the same fate awaits BP.


I saw something on the BBC about this. Seems BP is sooooo huge that the cost of any cleanup will barely make a blip on their profit margin. If that is correct, it is unlikely they will be vulnerable to a takeover.

Do like the idea of sending all the suits responsible for the incident to physically clear it up with their hands (ok, I'll allow them a shovel). Might make them a bit more responsible in future.

And of course if BP does go down, the people who will suffer will be all the old folk whose pension schemes are tied in with BP shares. The execs responsible will all get highly paid jobs with the competition or compensation schemes that leave them comfortable for the rest of their lives.

[Macadamia]

As mentioned earlier, the name thrown around has been Exxon. They are larger than BP and maybe they will pick her up on the cheap after the mountain of the law suites and people stop buying her goods.

[Clodhopper]

As mentioned earlier, the name thrown around has been Exxon. They are larger than BP and maybe they will pick her up on the cheap after the mountain of the law suites and people stop buying her goods.


How ironic that a company which trashed a part of the US coastline would be bought out by a company best known over here for trashing the Canadian coastline!

[Macadamia]

Ironic indeed!

[hoppy]

Obama's gonna do some a$$ kickin.:wah:

Oil Spill: Obama drops borderline curse word, saying "whose ass to kick" while promising oil spill action | Tampa Bay, St. Petersburg, Clearwater, Sarasota | WTSP.com 10 Connects

[spot]

Macadamia;1314479 wrote: As mentioned earlier, the name thrown around has been Exxon. They are larger than BP and maybe they will pick her up on the cheap after the mountain of the law suites and people stop buying her goods.


BP: Total assets: US $236.0 billion (2009)

Total equity: US $101.6 billion (2009)

Employees: 92,000 (March 2009)

Exxon Mobil: Total assets US$233.32 billion (2009)

Total equity: US$110.56 billion (2009)

Employees: 79,900 - March 2009

Larger? That's debatable.

I still haven't heard the fat lady sing yet - when We do it to Them that's just business but when They do it to Us it's unforgivable? Because We're special and They're not? Go on, say it just to please me.

[theia]

spot;1314460 wrote: You know, the Iranians had decades of Western oil companies pumping spew like that into their living space, until they refused to take it any longer. In the Middle East in general it's fine to pollute but not when it's in home waters? Arabs don't matter but if it's going to reduce the seafood supply to New Orleans it's an outrage and oh, don't forget the god-given right of Capitalism to consume everything plus ten percent?

This trivial event - this utterly minor environmental event which just happens to be costing a few fisherman their livelihoods - is sharing the news this week with the Bhopal disaster in which a US corporation, Union Carbide, accidentally spilled so much toxin that around ten thousand Indian townspeople died of it in the days that followed and another hundred thousand had their health screwed for the rest of their lives. One's an environmental incident, the other's an environmental disaster. One's got Americans screaming for compensation (and, not surprisingly, vengeance) and the other ain't nothing to do with us folks, no sirree and hell they'd prob'ly have died anyway, it's almost as filthy and backward a country as Afghanistan.

Strive for a little perspective, eh?


Thanks, spot, your post has certainly forced me to rethink my perspective

[Bill Sikes]

Clodhopper;1314462 wrote: I'd forgotten about Union Carbide. An interesting contrast...


http://www.forumgarden.com/forums/curre ... hopal.html

It's been in the news. Slaps on wrists all around.

[Clodhopper]

It's been in the news. Slaps on wrists all around.


chuckle. The News has been so depressing I've deliberately stopped watching recently. Been very patchy since the election. Being back on here will probably get me checking the news again. If only so I can play the game of trying to guess which items will set spot off! :p

[spot]

Clodhopper;1314501 wrote: If only so I can play the game of trying to guess which items will set spot off! :p


I'm steely dispassionate intellect, you viper, and I'll have your nads between anvils if you ever forget it.

[Clodhopper]

I'm steely dispassionate intellect, you viper, and I'll have your nads between anvils if you ever forget it.


:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl

More Steely Dan than steely intellect, I reckon. (darkly) I know about you and Festivals...

[yaaarrrgg]

spot;1314460 wrote: You know, the Iranians had decades of Western oil companies pumping spew like that into their living space, until they refused to take it any longer. In the Middle East in general it's fine to pollute but not when it's in home waters? Arabs don't matter but if it's going to reduce the seafood supply to New Orleans it's an outrage and oh, don't forget the god-given right of Capitalism to consume everything plus ten percent?

This trivial event - this utterly minor environmental event which just happens to be costing a few fisherman their livelihoods - is sharing the news this week with the Bhopal disaster in which a US corporation, Union Carbide, accidentally spilled so much toxin that around ten thousand Indian townspeople died of it in the days that followed and another hundred thousand had their health screwed for the rest of their lives. One's an environmental incident, the other's an environmental disaster. One's got Americans screaming for compensation (and, not surprisingly, vengeance) and the other ain't nothing to do with us folks, no sirree and hell they'd prob'ly have died anyway, it's almost as filthy and backward a country as Afghanistan.

Strive for a little perspective, eh?


I think both events are horrific. UC executives need to be charged with 10,000 counts of manslaughter, and sued for all damages. Personally sued.

If I killed 10,000 people, I'd probably be executed. Unfortunately I'm getting the feeling all a company has to do is change it's name, and it escapes a lot of legal problems.

[panzermk2]

BTS;1312292 wrote:







Your graph is off,



The top recipient of BP-related donations during the 2008 cycle was President Barack Obama himself, who collected $71,000.





BP Enjoys Lobbying Strength, Close Ties to Lawmakers as Federal Investigation Looms - OpenSecrets Blog | OpenSecrets

[yaaarrrgg]

panzermk2;1314688 wrote: Your graph is off,



The top recipient of BP-related donations during the 2008 cycle was President Barack Obama himself, who collected $71,000.





BP Enjoys Lobbying Strength, Close Ties to Lawmakers as Federal Investigation Looms - OpenSecrets Blog | OpenSecrets






Assuming your number is correct, divide that number by 750,000,000 (total raised), multiply by 100.

BP contributed 0.009466667% of his total donations.

That's not much sway is it?

[flopstock]

We had local teens picketing the local BP station last week. They were shocked at how many people had no idea what they were talking about.:rolleyes:

[panzermk2]

yaaarrrgg;1314689 wrote: Assuming your number is correct, divide that number by 750,000,000 (total raised), multiply by 100.

BP contributed 0.009466667% of his total donations.

That's not much sway is it?




Cut and dry He got the most money from BP. End of story.

Typical liberal when a democrat gets bought off its GOOD money but when a Republican gets money it's BAD money.

I also included a link the the website sighting my source. All this group does is compile public campaign donation information.

OpenSecrets.org: Money in Politics -- See Who's Giving & Who's Getting



Democrats are bigger whores for oil money then the Republicans.

Everyones SELECTIVE memory seems to forget Al Gores family got all their money from big oil. They are big oil. When the strategic oil reserves were in CA where sold off under the Clinton administration it was sold to Al gores Uncle.

[yaaarrrgg]

panzermk2;1314822 wrote: Cut and dry He got the most money from BP. End of story.

Typical liberal when a democrat gets bought off its GOOD money but when a Republican gets money it's BAD money.

I also included a link the the website sighting my source. All this group does is compile public campaign donation information.

OpenSecrets.org: Money in Politics -- See Who's Giving & Who's Getting



Democrats are bigger whores for oil money then the Republicans.

Everyones SELECTIVE memory seems to forget Al Gores family got all their money from big oil. They are big oil. When the strategic oil reserves were in CA where sold off under the Clinton administration it was sold to Al gores Uncle.


If you look at the open secrets site, it shows that Republicans have consistently gotten about twice as much money from big oil than Democrats.

Oil & Gas | OpenSecrets

Not only that, but Bush and Cheney were both from the oil industry. Bush's whole family is rich from oil money, and Cheney was still on the payroll of Haliburton while in office. They now find themselves at the center of the disaster. Possibly a lot of this could have been avoided, if in the closed door energy meetings the Bush admin had with the industry, they didn't decide that the blowout safety device was too expensive at $500,000.

As for Al Gore, his family farmed tobacco.

ETA: Did you even read open secrets? It shows McCain received $2,402,937 from the oil/gas industry in 2008. Making him the biggest recipient. Typical conservative. Too emotional and blinded by prejudice to actually understand the source they are pointing to.

http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/indus ... =N00006424

[panzermk2]

I was talking about the total amount Bama got from BP. He got a whole lot more from the complete industry. But I will take on your straw argument of changing the subject of Bama getting bought by BP.

Obama still received $884,000 from the oil and gas industry during the 2008 campaign

Though former oilmen George W. Bush and Dick Cheney occupied the White House for eight years, the oil and gas industry could not win support for repealing bans on drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.





Occidental Petroleum Corporation is the fourth largest U.S. oil and gas company, based on market capitalization. The company was run for decades by Soviet sympathiser Armand Hammer. Hammer was an early day George Soros - he was a capitalist but had close ties with the Soviet Union. It has been alleged that due to early business failures he was forced to start working for the Soviets He backed Republican candidates but had a very close relationship with one Al Gore Senior, who served as a legal representative for Occidental's coal interests.

When Al Gore Senior died in 1998, he held shares in Occidental. Those shares passed to Al Gore Junior as executor of the family trust. According to a USA Today article in 2006,

Gore has held these apocalyptic views about the environment for some time. So why, then, didn't Gore dump his family's large stock holdings in Occidental (Oxy) Petroleum? As executor of his family's trust, over the years Gore has controlled hundreds of thousands of dollars in Oxy stock. Oxy has been mired in controversy over oil drilling in ecologically sensitive areas.



Occidental Petroleum Corp. has found what may end up being the largest oil and gas field discovery in California in the past 35 years. Now this may not equal finds in Brazil or Ghana, but the field is still substantial and could hold up to 250 million barrels of oil reserves.

Occidental Hits Big Oil in California's Kern County | BNET Energy Blog | BNET

[yaaarrrgg]

panzermk2;1314968 wrote: I was talking about the total amount Bama got from BP. He got a whole lot more from the complete industry. But I will take on your straw argument of changing the subject of Bama getting bought by BP.

Obama still received $884,000 from the oil and gas industry during the 2008 campaign

Though former oilmen George W. Bush and Dick Cheney occupied the White House for eight years, the oil and gas industry could not win support for repealing bans on drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.






Straw man? You claimed that:

"Democrats are bigger whores for oil money then the Republicans."

Which number is larger?

(a) $2,402,937 (McCain)

(b) $884,000 (Obama)

If you want to just focus on BP, that doesn't really help your case either, since the problems are systemic to the entire industry. BP just happened to be the first to run afoul the lack of safety regulation/enforcement.

Moreover, by focusing exclusively on BP, you are looking at 0.009466667% of his donations. To make the case that Obama's a whore for oil, you need to make these numbers bigger, not even smaller.

[panzermk2]

For total amount yep. Oh and Bama came in SECOND after McCain for money from BP so don't try to pass off bama as sweetness and light.

Also using the percentage of total over all donations is pretty silly since that brings up a wopper.



The reason BP's such a small percentage of bama donations because of how much money was SPENT. Sorry I mean DONATED buying bama off.



John McCain (R)

Senator from Arizona

raised 368 M

spent 333 M

Barack Obama (D)

Senator from Illinois

raised 745 M

spent 730 M

Barack Obama

Top Contributors

This table lists the top donors to this candidate in the 2008 election cycle. The organizations themselves did not donate , rather the money came from the organization's PAC, its individual members or employees or owners, and those individuals' immediate families. Organization totals include subsidiaries and affiliates





University of California $1,591,395

Goldman Sachs $994,795 Can you say bailout bought and paid for ahead of time!!!!!!!!!

Harvard University $854,747

Microsoft Corp $833,617

Google Inc $803,436

Citigroup Inc $701,290

JPMorgan Chase & Co $695,132

Time Warner $590,084

Sidley Austin LLP $588,598

Stanford University $586,557

National Amusements Inc $551,683

UBS AG $543,219

Wilmerhale Llp $542,618

Skadden, Arps et al $530,839

IBM Corp $528,822

Columbia University $528,302

Morgan Stanley $514,881

General Electric $499,130

US Government $494,820

Latham & Watkins $493,835

[Bruv]

Exxon Nigeria anyone ?

[yaaarrrgg]

panzermk2;1315318 wrote:

Goldman Sachs $994,795 Can you say bailout bought and paid for ahead of time!!!!!!!!!




Ahead of time? The 700 billion TARP bailout was Bush's plan.

[hoppy]

Bruv;1315341 wrote: Exxon Nigeria anyone ?


Blame the press. The media seems to set the tone. Why are they ignoring the Nigeria spill? Maybe if enough people made a fuss over it?:(

[gmc]

hoppy;1315406 wrote:

Blame the press. The media seems to set the tone. Why are they ignoring the Nigeria spill? Maybe if enough people made a fuss over it?:(


Who owns the media?

[Clodhopper]

More than 600 oilfields infest the delta of the Niger River and, in the Observer story, environment editor John Vidal reveals that many of their tanks, pumps, pipelines, platforms and wellheads are rusty, corroded and decades old. They spill more oil — every year! — than has polluted the Gulf of Mexico since the explosion on April 20 of BP’s Deepwater Horizon rig.


From Bruv's Nova Scotian article.

Ouch.

But past history suggests once the immediate issue has been resolved, everyopne will ignore the wider problem. I really and truly applaud the young Americans picketing BP. But will they - or anyone else - look at the wider picture?

[gmc]

Clodhopper;1315539 wrote: From Bruv's Nova Scotian article.

Ouch.

But past history suggests once the immediate issue has been resolved, everyopne will ignore the wider problem. I really and truly applaud the young Americans picketing BP. But will they - or anyone else - look at the wider picture?


Maybe having it right on their doorstep will drive home that environmentalists aren't just tree hugging lunatics and might actually have a point.

Actually there are countless examples of industrial pollution and harm in the states that people are concerned about it's just the mainstream media tend to sideline the news and portray protesters as nutters. I think it's incorrect to suggest that people don't protest and make a fuss it's doesn't get publicity is all and there is a vested interest in keeping people quiet. If you can't win the argument ridicule the one putting it.

With the internet people are not so isolated from each other and you know what is happening to you is happening elsewhere and there are people in other countries that know and will help if they can. That makes resistance and protest stronger and more likely and governments and big corporations can't do things on the quiet as easily as they would like.

Daily Kos: FLASHBACK: Landrieu mocks offshore drilling safety concerns

Whistleblower: BP Risks More Massive Catastrophes in Gulf | Antemedius | VX50.com

Maybe next time people hear that too much regulation hinders business they will laugh at the notion.

[Clodhopper]

Maybe having it right on their doorstep will drive home that environmentalists aren't just tree hugging lunatics and might actually have a point.


Maybe. I wouldn't hold your breath.

... If you can't win the argument ridicule the one putting it.


chuckle. Say "Liberal" and many people are conditioned to see a scrawny goggle-eyed twerp in a jacket and bow tie speaking in a a style and accent they instinctively want to belt. It's a beautiful bit of work, in a horrible sort of way.

With the internet people are not so isolated from each other and you know what is happening to you is happening elsewhere and there are people in other countries that know and will help if they can. That makes resistance and protest stronger and more likely and governments and big corporations can't do things on the quiet as easily as they would like.


Possibly the most subversive invention since Marxism. Or Christianity...

Maybe next time people hear that too much regulation hinders business they will laugh at the notion.


See my point one. Seems the American political world is point scoring and playing to the gallery as hard as it can. Issue well and truly fogged.

[gmc]

posted by clodhopper

See my point one. Seems the American political world is point scoring and playing to the gallery as hard as it can. Issue well and truly fogged.


Ours is much the same. Maybe a coalition government will curb some of the excesses we get when one party has too much power but all we've had is politicians point scoring off each other and forgetting who elected them.

[Clodhopper]

I overdosed on news during the election. Barely watched it since. Domestically it's quiet (...before the storm...) so small noises seems louder, is my current impression.

[panzermk2]

gmc;1315577 wrote: posted by clodhopper



Ours is much the same. Maybe a coalition government will curb some of the excesses we get when one party has too much power but all we've had is politicians point scoring off each other and forgetting who elected them.


ALL politicians at the national are corrupt scum no matter what country. Does not matter who is in charge they either go to the highest bidder , are power hungry insane narcissists or a combination of the two .

[spot]

So, we're now four weeks on from the moment the oil flow was stopped. Could we have a review of the remaining damage to the Gulf and coast?

To remind people of where we're coming from, the thread started along the lines of "I feel life in the gulf coast will never be the same. IN OUR LIFE TIME. oR PERHAPS our childern, if ever" and "At this point, it's probably too late to reverse all the damage".

Are the coasts clean yet? Is there any sign of slicks any more? Has a fishing boat gone out to see what it can catch?

[Snowfire]

Nearly three-quarters of the oil — more than 152 million gallons — has been collected at the well by a temporary containment cap, been cleaned up or chemically dispersed, or naturally deteriorated, evaporated or dissolved.

“It was captured. It was skimmed. It was burned. It was contained. Mother Nature did her part,” White House energy adviser Carol Browner said on NBC's “Today” show.


Three-quarters of spilled Gulf oil gone, officials say - One News Page

Here's one source that suggests things are very much getting back to some sort of normality. Still a great deal to do with 53.5 million gallons left to clean up. This report was written on 4th August so maybe its even better now

[spot]

You say "left to clean up" as though that's an active intervention. I'd have thought it was a passive waiting for the stuff to dissipate. Aren't the only active measures those on the coastline?

[Snowfire]

I hope it is active. While much may evaporate and dissipate naturally, a little extra persuasion would quicken the process. There ar tons of tar balls on the bottom of the ocean that I am assuming will be removed mechanically. I dont know for sure

[yaaarrrgg]

Part of the "solution" was to let the toxic mess dissapate in the ocean. I'm not sure letting the mess dissapate into the ocean was a solution, as much as sweeping the dirt under a rug. If that is putting things back to normal, we should just dump all our toxic waste in the oceans and see what that gets us long term. Surely something will eat it and all will be well.

Also, the economies of these coastal states were already teetering on the brink of recession. Have they recovered from this hit either?

[spot]

Here we are, a summary of where things currently stand. BBC News - Gulf oil leak: Biggest ever, but how bad?

Just pulling some random bits, the total number of birds found dead along the Gulf of Mexico coast since the spill started is a little over 3,000, they've found 500 dead sea turtles and 64 dead dolphins.

There's a quote about longer-term damage: "It's going to be difficult to pick up the impacts of the oil spill and separate those from natural seasonal variability. Impacts we'll be looking for in the short term include the loss of wetland grasses and reductions in fish and other things that live in the water. In the longer term we could see reduced productivity in these populations, but we may not be able to detect it because the annual variations are quite large."

As for when fishing might recover: "Two weeks ago, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (Noaa) announced that so little oil was being seen in a zone covering more than 26,000 square miles (67,000 sq km) - a quarter of US territorial waters in the Gulf - that fishing could safely re-start."

Are Deepwater or BP still being mentioned on US news broadcasts?

[Clodhopper]

Found this on CBS: Blowout Preventer May Hold Clues to Oil Spill - CBS Evening News - CBS News

[Macadamia]

Guess there might still be issues with sea food caught in the gulf.



Gulf Oil Dispersants Now Being Found in Seafood

Vital Votes Health Blog - Natural Health Articles by Dr. Mercola

[Saint_]

Well... that's just great. I sometimes wonder, "Will we pollute ourselves out of existence before we can develop a clean-technology civilization?"

[spot]

Saint_;1331816 wrote: Well... that's just great. I sometimes wonder, "Will we pollute ourselves out of existence before we can develop a clean-technology civilization?"It's a matter of scale. We could have a BP-sized event at sea every other month from now until eternity and not "pollute ourselves out of existence", the world environment would scarcely register it. What's been missing from any of this discussion has been a grasp of how localized and ephemeral the BP spill has been. It hasn't had and won't have a noticeable effect on wildlife. If the families of each dead bird, turtle and dolphin were compensated at the rate of a million dollars a head it would still come to less than BP's public relations handouts to local claimants aboard the me-too bandwagon. It's all yet another aspect of the misguided theory that the USA is in some sense special.

[Saint_]

spot;1331866 wrote: It's a matter of scale. We could have a BP-sized event at sea every other month from now until eternity and not "pollute ourselves out of existence", the world environment would scarcely register it..


I disagree. Pollution has shown to be both cumulative and synergistic. The toxins build up in the environment over time in every part of the land, sea, air and food chain.

[spot]

Saint_;1331946 wrote: I disagree. Pollution has shown to be both cumulative and synergistic. The toxins build up in the environment over time in every part of the land, sea, air and food chain.You seem to ignore the rate at which those toxins disintegrate. Some, like heavy metals, don't, and if they get into the food chain they're destructive. Oil spills aren't like that.

There's a doomsday article at Why wartime wrecks are slicking time bombs - environment - 07 September 2010 - New Scientist which you might like to read, though. It's very much on your side of the fence. I think it's barking, though I agree there are a few wrecks near nature reserves which could do with emptying. You'll note that the article's conclusion is that the problem should be deferred rather than fixed, which is typically pointless.

[Clodhopper]

Dr Mercola... Isn't he a fraud? Not a doctor by most standards...?

[spot]

Clodhopper;1332043 wrote: Dr Mercola... Isn't he a fraud? Not a doctor by most standards...?


I missed the connection but no, I'm not aware that he's said to be.

Joseph Mercola - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia discusses the chap and Dr. Joseph Mercola looks at least arguably reputable.

[Clodhopper]

I'm not sure. The name rang a bell so I searched back through my posts and found this:

http://www.forumgarden.com/forums/healt ... appie.html

So if he is not in fact a real doctor but claims to be anything he says is dodgy imo.

[spot]

But where does he fit into the thread? I've missed the context in which you brought him up.

[Clodhopper]

Macademia's post (sorry. should have made that clear)