On 5/4/2010 4:27 PM, A.Boater wrote:
On 4-May-2010, wrote:

Prove it


That doesn't take a lot of effort.
http://e360.yale.edu/content/feature.msp?id=2133

From Yale. Good work. Didn't you graduate from Yale?

On 5/4/2010 4:31 PM, hk wrote:
On 5/4/10 4:27 PM, A.Boater wrote:
On 4-May-2010, wrote:

Prove it


That doesn't take a lot of effort.
http://e360.yale.edu/content/feature.msp?id=2133


You're dealing with Boatless Flajim there, whose wife left him for a
cucumber.

A.Boater is one of your many aliases; is it not?

On 5/4/10 5:39 PM, anon-e-moose wrote:
On 5/4/2010 4:31 PM, hk wrote:
On 5/4/10 4:27 PM, A.Boater wrote:
On 4-May-2010, wrote:

Prove it


That doesn't take a lot of effort.
http://e360.yale.edu/content/feature.msp?id=2133


You're dealing with Boatless Flajim there, whose wife left him for a
cucumber.

A.Boater is one of your many aliases; is it not?


Nope. Sorry, ****-for-brains, it isn't me. Maybe it is a result of your
months of ID spoofing here.

It is only happenstance that I opened this post of yours. Usually, I
simply skip over your posts, as all you are here is a right-wing troll.

Flajim - no wife, no job, no kids, no boat. It really must suck to be
you, eh? No wonder you behave like the ultimate asshole here.

Perhaps you could adopt Loogy. He's got potential to be your sort of moron.

--
The Tea Party's teabaggers are just the Republican base by another name.

In article ,
says...

For a self-proclaimed "scientist," you really are an ignorant asshole.
You're also misinformed about the aftermath of the Exxon Valdez disaster.

NOAA says that everything is back to they way it was within 10 years of
the spill. That is a very fast recovery.

On 5/4/2010 5:49 PM, hk wrote:
On 5/4/10 5:39 PM, anon-e-moose wrote:
On 5/4/2010 4:31 PM, hk wrote:
On 5/4/10 4:27 PM, A.Boater wrote:
On 4-May-2010, wrote:

Prove it


That doesn't take a lot of effort.
http://e360.yale.edu/content/feature.msp?id=2133


You're dealing with Boatless Flajim there, whose wife left him for a
cucumber.

A.Boater is one of your many aliases; is it not?


Nope. Sorry, ****-for-brains, it isn't me. Maybe it is a result of your
months of ID spoofing here.

It is only happenstance that I opened this post of yours. Usually, I
simply skip over your posts, as all you are here is a right-wing troll.

Flajim - no wife, no job, no kids, no boat. It really must suck to be
you, eh? No wonder you behave like the ultimate asshole here.

Perhaps you could adopt Loogy. He's got potential to be your sort of moron.

The ultimate asshole. That would be you, and It's not an act.

Up until now I have had a pristine gulf to boat in unlike the cesspool
you boat in. And a job would interfere with the many pleasures in life I
enjoy. Sorry you need to work at your advanced age. But Karen's got
another twenty to work and you can't stop till she does. Do you think
you can make it? It must really suck awfully bad to be you. Snerk

Why don't you have a nice Kosher gherkin salad for supper. Your bride
could warm them up for you.

PS It's in the national interest to get that spill cleaned up post
haste. I hope your boy has a plan. It's getting pretty messy out there
and time's a wasting.

On 5/4/2010 5:37 PM, anon-e-moose wrote:
On 5/4/2010 4:27 PM, A.Boater wrote:
On 4-May-2010, wrote:

Prove it


That doesn't take a lot of effort.
http://e360.yale.edu/content/feature.msp?id=2133

From Yale. Good work. Didn't you graduate from Yale?

You didn't graduate from Yale?

On 5/4/2010 6:55 PM, BAR wrote:
In articleUbqdnRAMT_9NrX3WnZ2dnUVZ_vOdnZ2d@earthlink .com,
says...

For a self-proclaimed "scientist," you really are an ignorant asshole.
You're also misinformed about the aftermath of the Exxon Valdez disaster.

NOAA says that everything is back to they way it was within 10 years of
the spill. That is a very fast recovery.


What! You aren't going to take Harry's word for it?

In article ,
says...

On 5/4/2010 6:55 PM, BAR wrote:
In articleUbqdnRAMT_9NrX3WnZ2dnUVZ_vOdnZ2d@earthlink .com,
says...

For a self-proclaimed "scientist," you really are an ignorant asshole.
You're also misinformed about the aftermath of the Exxon Valdez disaster.

NOAA says that everything is back to they way it was within 10 years of
the spill. That is a very fast recovery.


What! You aren't going to take Harry's word for it?

A great American once said trust but verify. However, in Harry's case it
is verify first and even then be skeptical.

"anon-e-moose" wrote in message
...
On 5/4/2010 10:35 AM, hk wrote:
On 5/4/10 10:32 AM, Frogwatch wrote:
As a Florida native, I have seen our beaches and estuaries destroyed
by the effects of tourism including the filling of marshes and
destruction of habitat by overbuilding. These natural areas WILL
NEVER RECOVER. On the other hand, I remember the Exxon Valdez oil
spill and only 3 years after the accident, almost all of the oil was
gone and by 7 years organisms in the bottom had mostly recovered. 20
years afterwards, all animals initially listed as being affected by
the spill had recovered according to NOAA. Remaining oil has
weathered so much that most volatiles are gone and it is mostly
tolerated by organisms according to NOAA.
This means that recovery from a major oil spill can happen over a 20
year period even when it happens in the far north. Here at 30 degree
latitude where the UV index is very high, the oil would degrade much
faster and recovery would be much faster. All you have to consider is
the occasional styrofoam cup you find that has been weathered for a
year, it is basically rotten and will be gone within a year.
Our beaches and estuaries will NEVER recover from the ravages of
tourism but would easily recover from even a major oil spill.

David OHara


For a self-proclaimed "scientist," you really are an ignorant asshole.
You're also misinformed about the aftermath of the Exxon Valdez disaster.

Prove it Harrie.



Prove you're an ignorant asshole? Do you really think he needs to prove the
obvious.

On May 4, 9:31*pm, "A.Boater" wrote:
On *4-May-2010, anon-e-moose wrote:

*From Yale. Good work. Didn't you graduate from Yale?

You didn't graduate from Yale?

WTF would cause you to reach into your huge bag of confusion and pick some
assumption (out of all the schools on the planet) that I ever attended Yale?

Do you EVER get anything right?

This all reminds me of the first business I started, Rocky Mountain
Pressure Survey, Inc. Me and a two other oil field trash friends
leased two pressure guages and 10,000' of multi-conductor stainless
armored cable, some stainless strapping and a device to apply it
around tubing and we leased two of the old Osborne "portable"
computers (this was 1981). We were going to put the guages in wells
for months and then go around measuring them in real time with the
computers via phone line. The guages would be at the bottoms of the
wells and the cable strapped to the outside of the tubing as it was
run into the well. Knowing the pressure was critical to knowing how
the efforts to stimulate an old depleted oil field was responding to
injection from nearby wells. Our scheme was to instrument every well
in a field with each connected via phone to a computer.

We actually had an agreement with Chevron to test 5 wells in the
Midwest field north of Casper, WY but our timing was bad with the
collapse of oil prices so did our business and they cancelled the job
but they did pay for our equipment lease. I went back to grad school
and my friends both went to work offshore Argentina. Now, I know it
was all for the best that it failed because it it had sorta succeeded,
I'd still be in the oil business and that was a young mans game.

However, it did lead to my first patent attempt, a scheme to measure
fluid levels in wells using microwaves using the tubing as a
waveguide. By measuring the standing wave ratio, and its position on
a "Smith Chart" one could determine not only the fluid depth but the
nature of the gas/liquid interface. Being in grad school at the time,
I could not interest anybody in an oil patent so I had to drop it.

I figger that if the carbon credit scam ever got going, I'd buy up
abandoned oil wells near cement plants because cement plants produce
huge amounts of CO2 and inject the CO2 into one well to stimulate
production in another. Not only would I get the CO2 for free, I'd be
able to sell the carbon credit AND produce a small amount of oil
(about 3 barrels/day) for free.