Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 29, 2010 15:44:38 GMT -5
A media outlet is asking if a news event was over-hyped, and the parties responsible for over-hyping news events are...media outlets! Wouldn't that be like Jim Boeheim exploring the question of whether basketball coaches whine too much?
|
|
|
Post by jerseyhoya34 on Jul 30, 2010 9:07:13 GMT -5
The vibe in LA is that they do not fully know the extent of the damage yet, particularly as it relates to fishing/shrimping/etc. It may take some time to understand how the leak affected ecosystems and the extent to which it contaminated oysterbeds. That being said, the Feinberg money already suggests that BP may be one of the worst tortfeasors in American history.
|
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Post by EasyEd on Jul 30, 2010 10:19:12 GMT -5
I think it's possible the damage from the oil spill will be moderate, not the catastrophe the media has played it up to be. Tides, currents, winds and other natural phenomena have a way of self-healing, just as the human body self-heals in most cases. It's also possible the greatest impact on the Gulf area may be the economic effect on fishing and tourism of the media blitz and the curtailment of new offshore drilling.
|
|
|
Post by AustinHoya03 on Jul 30, 2010 12:52:40 GMT -5
I think it's possible the damage from the oil spill will be moderate, not the catastrophe the media has played it up to be. Tides, currents, winds and other natural phenomena have a way of self-healing, just as the human body self-heals in most cases. It's also possible the greatest impact on the Gulf area may be the economic effect on fishing and tourism of the media blitz and the curtailment of new offshore drilling. NPR pointed out yesterday in a story that the Deepwater Horizon spill isn't the worst the Gulf of Mexico has ever seen. That honor belongs to the 1979 Ixtoc 1 spill in the Bay of Campeche. www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=128846214news.discovery.com/earth/gulf-oil-spill-ixtoc.htmlCurrently, the extent of the environmental damage from the Deepwater Horizon spill is unknown. If fisheries are determined to be unsustainable as a result of the oil spill, we may very well see new limitations on commercial fishing. That would certainly have a greater impact on fishermen and shrimpers than media hysteria. Offshore drilling should continue, but with vastly improved safety regulations and oversight. Fortunately for the tourism industry, Americans have short attention spans. Although many tourist towns have legitimate gripes with the media, Gulf beaches will bounce back next spring. While there may be some scientific evidence to support "self-healing," we still need to ask at what rate such healing occurs, and whether we need to alter our behavior to engender such healing. There's certainly a possibility that the environmental damage is overstated, but environmental damage absolutely exists as a result of the spill, and we shouldn't be surprised if federal, state and local governments feel that additional regulations are needed to deal with that damage.
|
|
Nevada Hoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 18,459
|
Post by Nevada Hoya on Jul 30, 2010 13:10:30 GMT -5
|
|
theexorcist
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,506
|
Post by theexorcist on Jul 30, 2010 13:41:30 GMT -5
I think it's possible the damage from the oil spill will be moderate, not the catastrophe the media has played it up to be. Tides, currents, winds and other natural phenomena have a way of self-healing, just as the human body self-heals in most cases. It's also possible the greatest impact on the Gulf area may be the economic effect on fishing and tourism of the media blitz and the curtailment of new offshore drilling. NPR pointed out yesterday in a story that the Deepwater Horizon spill isn't the worst the Gulf of Mexico has ever seen. That honor belongs to the 1979 Ixtoc 1 spill in the Bay of Campeche. www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=128846214news.discovery.com/earth/gulf-oil-spill-ixtoc.htmlCurrently, the extent of the environmental damage from the Deepwater Horizon spill is unknown. If fisheries are determined to be unsustainable as a result of the oil spill, we may very well see new limitations on commercial fishing. That would certainly have a greater impact on fishermen and shrimpers than media hysteria. Offshore drilling should continue, but with vastly improved safety regulations and oversight. Fortunately for the tourism industry, Americans have short attention spans. Although many tourist towns have legitimate gripes with the media, Gulf beaches will bounce back next spring. While there may be some scientific evidence to support "self-healing," we still need to ask at what rate such healing occurs, and whether we need to alter our behavior to engender such healing. There's certainly a possibility that the environmental damage is overstated, but environmental damage absolutely exists as a result of the spill, and we shouldn't be surprised if federal, state and local governments feel that additional regulations are needed to deal with that damage. As someone who graduated from Georgetown and thus have experience dealing with oppressive bureaucracy, I'd caution against more regulations. When the current regulations aren't followed, you fix that, rather than creating more regulations that no one will follow.
|
|
|
Post by AustinHoya03 on Jul 30, 2010 15:57:13 GMT -5
As someone who graduated from Georgetown and thus have experience dealing with oppressive bureaucracy, I'd caution against more regulations. When the current regulations aren't followed, you fix that, rather than creating more regulations that no one will follow. How do you "fix that" if "no one will follow" regulations anyway? If you think the current rules are fine, you should argue for enforcement. I have no issue with that position. But enforcement is pointless if you also allege that it's impossible. Your position can't seriously be that individual actors don't care about rules, so the old rules will do just fine. Look, if fisheries are expected to decline in stock by 40%, we'll probably need some new rules, even if the actual decline is "only" 30%. All I'm saying is that government won't want to rely on the supposed "self-healing" power of the ocean environment. They'll want to take immediate action. How do you think they'll do that?
|
|
SirSaxa
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 747
|
Post by SirSaxa on Aug 2, 2010 19:40:13 GMT -5
|
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Post by EasyEd on Aug 3, 2010 12:33:30 GMT -5
Yet, people are having trouble finding the oil.
|
|
TC
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 9,457
|
Post by TC on Aug 3, 2010 12:41:55 GMT -5
Who's having trouble finding the oil? The other big story is the amount of dispersant used, pretty sure you can find the oil pretty easily if you look below.
|
|
Boz
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
123 Fireballs!
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Boz on Aug 3, 2010 12:54:06 GMT -5
|
|
hoyainspirit
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
When life puts that voodoo on me, music is my gris-gris.
Posts: 8,394
|
Post by hoyainspirit on Aug 3, 2010 12:56:56 GMT -5
An under reported story is that the smaller fish that commercial fishermen use as bait are dying in record numbers. Scientists at LSU postulate that the oil and dispersants are responsible for the fish kill, and are testing that theory. The price of bait fish has escalated significantly since this mess began.
|
|
Boz
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
123 Fireballs!
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Boz on Aug 3, 2010 13:33:00 GMT -5
An under reported story is that the smaller fish that commercial fisherman use as bait are dying in record numbers. Scientists at LSU postulate that the oil and dispersants are responsible for the fish kill, and are testing that theory. The price of bait fish has escalated significantly since this mess began. There will be hundreds of stories like that, sadly. The fact that they are having a hard time finding the oil doesn't mean it's not there. We all saw it. It's there. And it will have a huge ecological impact over time. It just means the Gulf Of Mexico is gigantic both in surface area and in volume.
|
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Post by EasyEd on Aug 3, 2010 19:14:57 GMT -5
Some people seem to be having trouble accepting good news. The well is capped and will probably be permanently put out of commission by mid-month. People are having trouble finding the oil that was spilled and all predictions about this have been way off. Since we can't find much of the oil we're now looking for other news that could be bad. Now it's the dispersant; tomorrow it will be some other dire prediction. Maybe the gigantic Gulf of Mexico and it's neighbor, the Atlantic Ocean, are doing a pretty good job of dispersing the oil out into its mass of water. Maybe the predictions of a huge ecological impact over time will be just as far off as other predictions to date on this spill. Of course that would not fit into the world some have accepted where man's actions overcome nature's. Seems to me the impact of this spill is moderate and is confined to a small area of the coastline centered in Louisiana, but, even there, it does not appear to be the catastrophe that was predicted. Some fish have died and a few birds have died but the numbers are not large. Even the marsh areas that have been affected have new grass growing in the area.
Lastly, I suspect President Obama deserves a lot of credit for some hidden actions he took.
|
|
jgalt
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,380
|
Post by jgalt on Aug 3, 2010 21:19:45 GMT -5
I just find it funny that 24 hour news channels are willing to show a life feed of what amounts to a concrete block on the bottom of the ocean. Also that they characterize the plugging of the well as "Breaking News" when BP has had this scheduled all weekend.
When the problem is that rules were ignored, more rules do nothing. What will the new rule be? "Dont ignore the first rule"? You can tell people not to do something as much as you want but if they dont want to do it, they wont.
|
|
|
Post by jerseyhoya34 on Aug 4, 2010 12:32:54 GMT -5
One thing to keep in mind with the "where is the oil" debate - who is looking for the oil underwater? Local officials in Plaquemines Parish (IIRC) were upset last week that assumptions were being made about underwater based on what was visible on the surface. Saw a story about the Parish president (IIRC) or a local mayor who was planning to troll a net from his own boat to verify the assumption about underwater. I am not sure what came of that or any similar effort.
|
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Post by EasyEd on Aug 4, 2010 13:52:15 GMT -5
|
|
kchoya
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Enter your message here...
Posts: 9,934
|
Post by kchoya on Aug 4, 2010 15:10:02 GMT -5
As the old saying goes, it's better to spill millions of gallons of oil in warm water rather than cold water.
|
|
|
Post by AustinHoya03 on Aug 4, 2010 16:34:11 GMT -5
When did easyed start believing Big Brother? Great news indeed, which most likely negates some of my previous comments in this thread.
|
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Post by EasyEd on Aug 4, 2010 18:18:53 GMT -5
When did easyed start believing Big Brother? Great news indeed, which most likely negates some of my previous comments in this thread. EasyEd does not believe Big Brother. BB is only admitting what others were reporting but the good news deniers on this board tend to put faith in BB so I used their reporting to jab them.
|
|