Gulf Oil Spill Image Gallery
Last 30 Uploads
Dquixote1217
11 y
1,390
† C †
Research: Gulf Shrimp Widely Contaminated With Carcinogens
by Sayer Ji
See more articles by Sayer Ji
(The Best Years in Life) Conservative estimates indicate that the 2010 BP oil disaster released over 200 million gallons of oil into the Gulf, followed by at least 1.8 million gallons of dispersants. While the use ofdispersants helped mitigate the public relations disaster by preventing the persistent formation of surface oil, as well as keeping many beaches visibly untouched, they also drove the oil deeper into the water column (and food chain) rendering a 2-dimensional problem (surface oil) into a 3-dimensional one. Additionally, research indicates that dispersants prevent the biodegradation of toxic oil components, as well as increasing dispersant absorption into fish from between 6 to 1100 fold higher levels.
See also:
Natural Help for Removing Benzene and Other Gulf Spill Toxins
If you live near the Gulf of Mexico oil spill, think "house plants"
trapper/kcmo
12 y
1,336
Rense & Pedigo - BP Killed The Gulf & Hid The Body - Pt 1- Vid
Rense & Pedigo - BP Killed The Gulf & Hid The Body - Pt 2- Vid
Rense & Pedigo - BP Killed The Gulf & Hid The Body - Pt 3- Vid
Rense & Pedigo - BP Killed The Gulf & Hid The Body - Pt 4- Vid
BP's Corexit Oil Tar Sponged Up by Human Skin
By Julia Whitty
Tue Apr. 17, 2012 3:04 AM PDT
Corexit® dispersed oil residue accelerates the absorption of toxins into the skin. The results aren't visible under normal light (top), but the contamination into the skin appear as fluorescent spots under UV light (bottom). Credit: James H “Rip” Kirby III, Surfrider Foundation
The Surfrider Foundation has released its preliminary "State of the Beach" study for the Gulf of Mexico from BP's ongoing Deepwater Horizon disaster.
Sadly, things aren't getting cleaner faster, according to their results. The Corexit that BP used to "disperse" the oil now appears to be making it tougher for microbes to digest the oil. I wrote about this problem in depth in "The BP Cover-Up."
More at this link: http://motherjones.com/blue-marble/2012/04/microbes-arent-eating-oil-gulf-bea...
Discovered at: http://www.rense.com/
trapper/kcmo
12 y
862
Somehow, I don't think he would be interested in publishing this article:
The All Natural Cause of Global Warming
http://www.tbyil.com/Global_Warming.htm
I did,however like the quote from Ron Paul at the Global(ist ) Warming newsletter site:
"the greatest hoax I think that has been around for many, many years, if not hundreds of years."
Oh now, just keep drinking your fluoridated water, eating your MSG laced food, and getting your vaccinations, donate to the Monsanto supported green organizations and don't be lighting any campfires.
As a historical matter, the US didn't risk troops to end the Holocaust; FDR rejected Morgenthau's entreaties that he bomb the train lines to Auschwitz or take similar actions, on the theory that the US wouldn't support the war if it became perceived as a War for Jews.
After the war, Operation Keelhaul forcibly repatriated Soviet-bloc displaced persons into Stalin’s hands, a move in many cases morally tantamount to sending Jewish refugees back to Hitler. I bet you that Ron Paul would not have done that!
You might correctly say that Ron Paul is consistently non-interventionist to a fault, but at least he is consistent, which can hardly be said about the lying, flip-flopping candidates of the global elite that we will likely have to chose between.
Ron Paul's statement was simply in keeping with his belief that our founders intended that we have no military intervention unless our country were directly threatened. If you want to go on moral imperatives, then one could argue that there are places all over the world where intervention should take place - and the globalists would dearly love to see just such a policy.
Who appointed us as the policeman of the world or the moral enforcer of the world? God? I hardly think so.
As for that link to the anti-Ron Paul site, good grief, Karlin. Dredging up garbage like the thoroughly-discredited items in the old newsletters. The racism card yet again? Look at the negative quote there about Martin Luther King. How does that, or any other racist item, jive with anything Ron Paul has ever done before or after the newsletters whose articles he did not write? How does it jive with the fact that he SUPPORTED a national holiday for Martin Luther King or that he has consistently said that Martin Luther King was one of his heroes?
trapper/kcmo
13 y
4,499
† C †
Add This Forum To Your Favorites!
Challenge the message and not the messenger!
The first person to resort to name calling and personal attacks automatically loses the debate!
Forum Stats:
forum viewed 1,813,426 times
3,386 messages
647 topics
topics per page limited to: 8
average number of messages per page: 42
81 pages
CureZone Newsletter is distributed in partnership with www.netatlantic.com
Copyright 1999 - 2024 www.curezone.org