[Coral-List] really ? RE: NY Times: Oil in Gulf Poses Only Slight Risk, New US Report Says
southern_caribbean at yahoo.com
Wed Aug 4 16:04:11 EDT 2010
Thank you Sarah, for putting it so succinctly.
Until the data are in and evaluated we cannot say that the Gulf of Mexico Large Marine Ecosystem has not sustained (catastrophic) damage.
Milton Ponson, President
Rainbow Warriors Core Foundation
(Rainbow Warriors International) Tel. +297 568 5908
PO Box 1154, Oranjestad
Aruba, Dutch Caribbean
Email: southern_caribbean at yahoo.com http://www.rainbowwarriors.net
To unite humanity in a global society dedicated to a sustainable way of life
--- On Wed, 8/4/10, Sarah Frias-Torres <sfrias_torres at hotmail.com> wrote:
From: Sarah Frias-Torres <sfrias_torres at hotmail.com>
Subject: really ? RE: [Coral-List] NY Times: Oil in Gulf Poses Only Slight Risk, New US Report Says
To: southern_caribbean at yahoo.com, "coral list" <coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>, caribbean-biodiversity at yahoogroups.com, carib-coral-reefs at yahoogroups..com, birdscaribbean at yahoogroups.com
Date: Wednesday, August 4, 2010, 12:04 PM
Just a little remainder that the Gulf of Mexico is the 9th largest body of water in the planet, and the only way to know exactly how much oil remains from the BP oil spill is to obtain data on site, both on the surface and throughout the water column at a systematic number of stations throughout the Gulf, and through time. So that means, extensive space and time coverage.
There have been a few brave oceanographers working on shoestring budgets that have managed to divert their research vessels to survey "ground zero" and have detected subsurface plumes (and we know how much denial they encountered at first). But the spatial and temporal coverage, with hard data in hand, is not there yet.
So after reading the findings of the new report, we must demand: Show me the data. I mean, the raw data, the data that apparently, without anyone knowing, and perhaps with a flotilla of ghost oceanographic ships, and an army of oceanographers and marine biologists working 24/7 have been collected during the last 106 days. Then, once we have the data freely available to all researchers, and after we analyze those data, perhaps we can have a better idea of where the oil is, and what the impact has been and will be to the marine ecosystem.
Until then, it will be hard to believe a word of that report.
Sarah Frias-Torres, Ph.D. http://independent.academia.edu/SarahFriasTorres
> Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2010 09:43:01 -0700
> From: southern_caribbean at yahoo.com
> To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov; caribbean-biodiversity at yahoogroups.com; carib-coral-reefs at yahoogroups.com; birdscaribbean at yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Coral-List] NY Times: Oil in Gulf Poses Only Slight Risk, New US Report Says
> Today in the NY Times:
> The 64 million dollar question is can we trust this expert report?
> Who contributed the evidence to support the findings in this report?
> Same goes for the expected "earlier lifting" of ban on offshore oil exploration.
> This is 2010, but it makes me think of "1984", where "doublespeak" and "doublethink' ruled supreme.
> Are there any reports from scientists or coral reef or marine research organizations, institutes or networks which corroborate or refute these findings?
> Milton Ponson, President
> Rainbow Warriors Core Foundation
> (Rainbow Warriors International) Tel. +297 568 5908
> PO Box 1154, Oranjestad
> Aruba, Dutch Caribbean
> Email: southern_caribbean at yahoo.com http://www.rainbowwarriors.net
> To unite humanity in a global society dedicated to a sustainable way of life
> Coral-List mailing list
> Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
More information about the Coral-List