On 7/21/10 8:30 AM, Harold wrote:
wrote in message
...

wrote in message
...
On Jul 20, 9:05 am, Harry wrote:
On 7/20/10 9:01 AM, Jack wrote:





On Jul 20, 2:10 am, wrote:
wrote in message

...

On Jul 19, 9:18 pm, wrote:
wrote in message

...

On Jul 19, 7:12 pm, wrote:
wrote in message

...

On Jul 19, 6:12 pm, wrote:
wrote in message

...

On Jul 19, 3:16 pm, wrote:
wrote in message

...

On Jul 19, 2:25 pm,
wrote:
wrote in message

...

On Sun, 18 Jul 2010 18:42:30 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

Testing of BP well integrity "detected seep a distance
from
the
well"
in
the
Gulf of Mexico, Ret. Adm. Thad Allen says.

I am not sure why they don't open the valve now that they
have
a
good
cap and produce the oil to the surface. That will take off
the
pressure and still be safe/clean. After all that was the
point
in
drilling the well in the first place.
I think they are pressing their luck trying to top kill
this
with
the
cap. Something that would have been fine at the production
pressures
may rupture with it sealed and put us back 2 months.

I agree... not an oil engineer, but it seems to make sense.
I
think
they
just don't want to have to record the flow rate, so the
fine
is
lower.
Too
bad for them. I think Allen should force them to do that.

Open pipe flow rate can be determined by calculation if the
pressure,
pipe diameter, and a few other factors are known, and they
all
are
at
this point. That does not tell us how much oil has escaped,
since
except for a few hours the leak has never been in a free
flow
mode.

Any measured flow would be through the valves and hoses that
would
be
connected from the cap to the surface ships, which once
again
tell
us
nothing about the escaped oil, or the fine to be levied.
That
only
tells us how much flow those connections can accept.

The only thing you are correct about is that you are no "oil
engineer"... or any kind professional that requires
critical,
scientific thinking.

In that case, mister moron, how come just about everyone who
is
an
oil
engineer who doesn't work for BP is saying that's the likely
reason
they
don't want to do that?? Yes, you're a jerk as well as a
moron.

You wrote, " I think they just don't want to have to record
the
flow
rate...", but that's not the issue at all. If they are to
hook
up
the
pipes to the surface, they have to open the well back up,
letting
oil
again flow into the gulf for days. That's what BP doesn't
want
to
do,
it has nothing to do with recording any "flow rates".

"The apparent disagreement began to sprout Saturday when Allen
said
the cap would eventually be hooked up to a mile-long pipe to
pump
the
crude to ships on the surface. But early the next day, BP
chief
operating officer Doug Suttles said the cap should stay
clamped
shut
to keep in the oil until relief wells are finished."

"The government's plan would ease pressure on the fragile
well,
but
would require up to three more days of oil spilling into the
Gulf."

"But the company very much wants to avoid a repeat of the live
underwater video that showed millions of gallons of oil
spewing
from
the blown well for weeks."

Oh, and one "expert" that the idiot Olbermann dug up who said
the
crap
you stated does not come anywhere close to "everyone"... you
do
realize that's not news, it's entertainment for idiots, right?
You
should really stop watching that crap on TV... it's rotting
your
brain. Oops, too late.

Here you go your moronic brainiac.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/...6688083.shtml-

Brilliant! That link does absolutely *nothing* to shore up your
assertion. ~snerk~

You're a moron:

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/88bde5ee-7...feabdc0.htmlht......

Sure... BP has no interest in obscuring how much oil is actually
flowing.
After all, big corporations are good for America:

Congrats on doing your homework assignment. Unfortunately, you
fail.

All of your links are old news and irrelevant except for the
"rawstory" one that features your olbermann "expert". None of
them,
except the moonbat, back up your assertion that they are leaving
the
cap on now to avoid measuring flow rates.

They (BP and the gov) already have all the data they need to
figure
out approximately how much oil has come out. The monetary fines
will
be astronomical. Why would you want them to spill millions of
gallons
more now when this thing may be permanently capped next week? You
hate our planet?

As long as there is no sudden pressure drop, let it stay capped.

Keep pimping and lying for BP moron.

Tell us why it would be preferrable to have millions of gallons
spill
into the Gulf instead of capping it safely and permanently. Do you
think that BO and his czars would not have it under control?

So perhaps there isn't a massive and uncontrollable leak elsewhere in
the
system. But, you knew that. You're just being an ass.

And I've shown you to be an uneducated parrot.

"BP continues to work cooperatively with the guidance and approval
of
the National Incident Commander and the leadership and direction of
federal government including the Department of Energy, Department of
the Interior, Federal Science Team, Bureau of Ocean Energy,
Management, Regulation and Enforcement, U.S. Coast Guard and
secretaries Ken Salazar and Steven Chu."

Damn, sounds like the feds are up their butts, and have the data
they
need. If you have data showing otherwise, lay it out.
Otherwise, STFU... skank.

You are a moron, but keep calling me names if it makes you feel more
like a
man.

Does all the name-calling you do make you feel more manly? ~snerk~

Gee, jackoff, if you bought a strap-on dildo and wore it, would you feel
more like a man?

I wouldn't know... how does it make you feel?

Liar. You know how it feels, since you're the one who's just gotta prove
he's got something bigger between his legs than a noodle.



Beginning to see why you bend over backwards.



When was the last time you had intercourse...with a woman...flajim?
In the early 1990s?

On Jul 21, 7:25Â*am, Harry  wrote:
On 7/21/10 8:30 AM, Harold wrote:



Â*wrote in message
...

Â*wrote in message
....
On Jul 20, 9:05 am, Harry Â*wrote:
On 7/20/10 9:01 AM, Jack wrote:

On Jul 20, 2:10 am, Â* wrote:
Â* wrote in message

...

On Jul 19, 9:18 pm, Â* wrote:
Â* wrote in message

...

On Jul 19, 7:12 pm, Â* wrote:
Â* wrote in message

...

On Jul 19, 6:12 pm, Â* wrote:
Â* wrote in message

...

On Jul 19, 3:16 pm, Â* wrote:
Â* wrote in message

...

On Jul 19, 2:25 pm,
wrote:
Â* wrote in message

news:4ct7469pgiksefoqo8er4e1bop164 ...

On Sun, 18 Jul 2010 18:42:30 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
Â* wrote:

Testing of BP well integrity "detected seep a distance
from
the
well"
in
the
Gulf of Mexico, Ret. Adm. Thad Allen says.

I am not sure why they don't open the valve now that they
have
a
good
cap and produce the oil to the surface. That will take off
the
pressure and still be safe/clean. After all that was the
point
in
drilling the well in the first place.
I think they are pressing their luck trying to top kill
this
with
the
cap. Something that would have been fine at the production
pressures
may rupture with it sealed and put us back 2 months.

I agree... not an oil engineer, but it seems to make sense.
I
think
they
just don't want to have to record the flow rate, so the
fine
is
lower.
Too
bad for them. I think Allen should force them to do that..

Open pipe flow rate can be determined by calculation if the
pressure,
pipe diameter, and a few other factors are known, and they
all
are
at
this point. Â*That does not tell us how much oil has escaped,
since
except for a few hours the leak has never been in a free
flow
mode.

Any measured flow would be through the valves and hoses that
would
be
connected from the cap to the surface ships, which once
again
tell
us
nothing about the escaped oil, or the fine to be levied.
That
only
tells us how much flow those connections can accept.

The only thing you are correct about is that you are no "oil
engineer"... or any kind professional that requires
critical,
scientific thinking.

In that case, mister moron, how come just about everyone who
is
an
oil
engineer who doesn't work for BP is saying that's the likely
reason
they
don't want to do that?? Yes, you're a jerk as well as a
moron.

You wrote, " I think they just don't want to have to record
the
flow
rate...", but that's not the issue at all. Â*If they are to
hook
up
the
pipes to the surface, they have to open the well back up,
letting
oil
again flow into the gulf for days. Â*That's what BP doesn't
want
to
do,
it has nothing to do with recording any "flow rates".

"The apparent disagreement began to sprout Saturday when Allen
said
the cap would eventually be hooked up to a mile-long pipe to
pump
the
crude to ships on the surface. But early the next day, BP
chief
operating officer Doug Suttles said the cap should stay
clamped
shut
to keep in the oil until relief wells are finished."

"The government's plan would ease pressure on the fragile
well,
but
would require up to three more days of oil spilling into the
Gulf."

"But the company very much wants to avoid a repeat of the live
underwater video that showed millions of gallons of oil
spewing
from
the blown well for weeks."

Oh, and one "expert" that the idiot Olbermann dug up who said
the
crap
you stated does not come anywhere close to "everyone"... you
do
realize that's not news, it's entertainment for idiots, right?
You
should really stop watching that crap on TV... it's rotting
your
brain. Â*Oops, too late.

Here you go your moronic brainiac.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/...6688083.shtml-

Brilliant! Â*That link does absolutely *nothing* to shore up your
assertion. ~snerk~

You're a Â*moron:

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/88bde5ee-7...feabdc0.htmlht......

Sure... BP has no interest in obscuring how much oil is actually
flowing.
After all, big corporations are good for America:

Congrats on doing your homework assignment. Unfortunately, you
fail.

All of your links are old news and irrelevant except for the
"rawstory" one that features your olbermann "expert". Â*None of
them,
except the moonbat, back up your assertion that they are leaving
the
cap on now to avoid measuring flow rates.

They (BP and the gov) already have all the data they need to
figure
out approximately how much oil has come out. Â*The monetary fines
will
be astronomical. Â*Why would you want them to spill millions of
gallons
more now when this thing may be permanently capped next week? Â*You
hate our planet?

As long as there is no sudden pressure drop, let it stay capped..

Keep pimping and lying for BP moron.

Tell us why it would be preferrable to have millions of gallons
spill
into the Gulf instead of capping it safely and permanently. Â*Do you
think that BO and his czars would not have it under control?

So perhaps there isn't a massive and uncontrollable leak elsewhere in
the
system. But, you knew that. You're just being an ass.

And I've shown you to be an uneducated parrot.

"BP continues to work cooperatively with the guidance and approval
of
the National Incident Commander and the leadership and direction of
federal government including the Department of Energy, Department of
the Interior, Federal Science Team, Bureau of Ocean Energy,
Management, Regulation and Enforcement, U.S. Coast Guard and
secretaries Ken Salazar and Steven Chu."

Damn, sounds like the feds are up their butts, and have the data
they
need. Â*If you have data showing otherwise, lay it out.
Otherwise, STFU... skank.

You are a moron, but keep calling me names if it makes you feel more
like a
man.

Does all the name-calling you do make you feel more manly? Â*~snerk~

Gee, jackoff, if you bought a strap-on dildo and wore it, would you feel
more like a man?

I wouldn't know... how does it make you feel?

Liar. You know how it feels, since you're the one who's just gotta prove
he's got something bigger between his legs than a noodle.

Beginning to see why you bend over backwards.

When was the last time you had intercourse...with a woman...flajim?
In the early 1990s?

Herr Krause. Are you wishing for details to enhance your fantasies?

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...

"Jack" wrote in message
...
On Jul 20, 9:05 am, Harry ? wrote:
On 7/20/10 9:01 AM, Jack wrote:





On Jul 20, 2:10 am, wrote:
wrote in message

...

On Jul 19, 9:18 pm, wrote:
wrote in message

...

On Jul 19, 7:12 pm, wrote:
wrote in message

...

On Jul 19, 6:12 pm, wrote:
wrote in message

...

On Jul 19, 3:16 pm, wrote:
wrote in message

...

On Jul 19, 2:25 pm,
wrote:
wrote in message

news:4ct7469pgiksefoqo8er4e1bop164ck9p ...

On Sun, 18 Jul 2010 18:42:30 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

Testing of BP well integrity "detected seep a distance
from
the
well"
in
the
Gulf of Mexico, Ret. Adm. Thad Allen says.

I am not sure why they don't open the valve now that they
have
a
good
cap and produce the oil to the surface. That will take off
the
pressure and still be safe/clean. After all that was the
point
in
drilling the well in the first place.
I think they are pressing their luck trying to top kill
this
with
the
cap. Something that would have been fine at the production
pressures
may rupture with it sealed and put us back 2 months.

I agree... not an oil engineer, but it seems to make sense.
I
think
they
just don't want to have to record the flow rate, so the
fine
is
lower.
Too
bad for them. I think Allen should force them to do that.

Open pipe flow rate can be determined by calculation if the
pressure,
pipe diameter, and a few other factors are known, and they
all
are
at
this point. That does not tell us how much oil has escaped,
since
except for a few hours the leak has never been in a free
flow
mode.

Any measured flow would be through the valves and hoses that
would
be
connected from the cap to the surface ships, which once
again
tell
us
nothing about the escaped oil, or the fine to be levied.
That
only
tells us how much flow those connections can accept.

The only thing you are correct about is that you are no "oil
engineer"... or any kind professional that requires
critical,
scientific thinking.

In that case, mister moron, how come just about everyone who
is
an
oil
engineer who doesn't work for BP is saying that's the likely
reason
they
don't want to do that?? Yes, you're a jerk as well as a
moron.

You wrote, " I think they just don't want to have to record
the
flow
rate...", but that's not the issue at all. If they are to
hook
up
the
pipes to the surface, they have to open the well back up,
letting
oil
again flow into the gulf for days. That's what BP doesn't
want
to
do,
it has nothing to do with recording any "flow rates".

"The apparent disagreement began to sprout Saturday when Allen
said
the cap would eventually be hooked up to a mile-long pipe to
pump
the
crude to ships on the surface. But early the next day, BP
chief
operating officer Doug Suttles said the cap should stay
clamped
shut
to keep in the oil until relief wells are finished."

"The government's plan would ease pressure on the fragile
well,
but
would require up to three more days of oil spilling into the
Gulf."

"But the company very much wants to avoid a repeat of the live
underwater video that showed millions of gallons of oil
spewing
from
the blown well for weeks."

Oh, and one "expert" that the idiot Olbermann dug up who said
the
crap
you stated does not come anywhere close to "everyone"... you
do
realize that's not news, it's entertainment for idiots, right?
You
should really stop watching that crap on TV... it's rotting
your
brain. Oops, too late.

Here you go your moronic brainiac.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/...6688083.shtml-

Brilliant! That link does absolutely *nothing* to shore up your
assertion. ~snerk~

You're a moron:

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/88bde5ee-7...feabdc0.htmlht......

Sure... BP has no interest in obscuring how much oil is actually
flowing.
After all, big corporations are good for America:

Congrats on doing your homework assignment. Unfortunately, you
fail.

All of your links are old news and irrelevant except for the
"rawstory" one that features your olbermann "expert". None of
them,
except the moonbat, back up your assertion that they are leaving
the
cap on now to avoid measuring flow rates.

They (BP and the gov) already have all the data they need to
figure
out approximately how much oil has come out. The monetary fines
will
be astronomical. Why would you want them to spill millions of
gallons
more now when this thing may be permanently capped next week? You
hate our planet?

As long as there is no sudden pressure drop, let it stay capped.

Keep pimping and lying for BP moron.

Tell us why it would be preferrable to have millions of gallons
spill
into the Gulf instead of capping it safely and permanently. Do you
think that BO and his czars would not have it under control?

So perhaps there isn't a massive and uncontrollable leak elsewhere in
the
system. But, you knew that. You're just being an ass.

And I've shown you to be an uneducated parrot.

"BP continues to work cooperatively with the guidance and approval
of
the National Incident Commander and the leadership and direction of
federal government including the Department of Energy, Department of
the Interior, Federal Science Team, Bureau of Ocean Energy,
Management, Regulation and Enforcement, U.S. Coast Guard and
secretaries Ken Salazar and Steven Chu."

Damn, sounds like the feds are up their butts, and have the data
they
need. If you have data showing otherwise, lay it out.
Otherwise, STFU... skank.

You are a moron, but keep calling me names if it makes you feel more
like a
man.

Does all the name-calling you do make you feel more manly? ~snerk~

Gee, jackoff, if you bought a strap-on dildo and wore it, would you feel
more like a man?

I wouldn't know... how does it make you feel?

Liar. You know how it feels, since you're the one who's just gotta prove
he's got something bigger between his legs than a noodle.



Beginning to see why you bend over backwards.

--
Harold

"TopBassDog" wrote in message
...
On Jul 21, 7:25 am, Harry ? wrote:
On 7/21/10 8:30 AM, Harold wrote:



wrote in message
...

wrote in message
...
On Jul 20, 9:05 am, Harry wrote:
On 7/20/10 9:01 AM, Jack wrote:

On Jul 20, 2:10 am, wrote:
wrote in message

...

On Jul 19, 9:18 pm, wrote:
wrote in message

...

On Jul 19, 7:12 pm, wrote:
wrote in message

...

On Jul 19, 6:12 pm, wrote:
wrote in message

...

On Jul 19, 3:16 pm,
wrote:
wrote in message

...

On Jul 19, 2:25 pm,
wrote:
wrote in message

news:4ct7469pgiksefoqo8er4e1bop164 ...

On Sun, 18 Jul 2010 18:42:30 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

Testing of BP well integrity "detected seep a distance
from
the
well"
in
the
Gulf of Mexico, Ret. Adm. Thad Allen says.

I am not sure why they don't open the valve now that
they
have
a
good
cap and produce the oil to the surface. That will take
off
the
pressure and still be safe/clean. After all that was the
point
in
drilling the well in the first place.
I think they are pressing their luck trying to top kill
this
with
the
cap. Something that would have been fine at the
production
pressures
may rupture with it sealed and put us back 2 months.

I agree... not an oil engineer, but it seems to make
sense.
I
think
they
just don't want to have to record the flow rate, so the
fine
is
lower.
Too
bad for them. I think Allen should force them to do that.

Open pipe flow rate can be determined by calculation if
the
pressure,
pipe diameter, and a few other factors are known, and they
all
are
at
this point. That does not tell us how much oil has
escaped,
since
except for a few hours the leak has never been in a free
flow
mode.

Any measured flow would be through the valves and hoses
that
would
be
connected from the cap to the surface ships, which once
again
tell
us
nothing about the escaped oil, or the fine to be levied.
That
only
tells us how much flow those connections can accept.

The only thing you are correct about is that you are no
"oil
engineer"... or any kind professional that requires
critical,
scientific thinking.

In that case, mister moron, how come just about everyone
who
is
an
oil
engineer who doesn't work for BP is saying that's the
likely
reason
they
don't want to do that?? Yes, you're a jerk as well as a
moron.

You wrote, " I think they just don't want to have to record
the
flow
rate...", but that's not the issue at all. If they are to
hook
up
the
pipes to the surface, they have to open the well back up,
letting
oil
again flow into the gulf for days. That's what BP doesn't
want
to
do,
it has nothing to do with recording any "flow rates".

"The apparent disagreement began to sprout Saturday when
Allen
said
the cap would eventually be hooked up to a mile-long pipe to
pump
the
crude to ships on the surface. But early the next day, BP
chief
operating officer Doug Suttles said the cap should stay
clamped
shut
to keep in the oil until relief wells are finished."

"The government's plan would ease pressure on the fragile
well,
but
would require up to three more days of oil spilling into the
Gulf."

"But the company very much wants to avoid a repeat of the
live
underwater video that showed millions of gallons of oil
spewing
from
the blown well for weeks."

Oh, and one "expert" that the idiot Olbermann dug up who
said
the
crap
you stated does not come anywhere close to "everyone"... you
do
realize that's not news, it's entertainment for idiots,
right?
You
should really stop watching that crap on TV... it's rotting
your
brain. Oops, too late.

Here you go your moronic brainiac.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/...6688083.shtml-

Brilliant! That link does absolutely *nothing* to shore up
your
assertion. ~snerk~

You're a moron:

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/88bde5ee-7...feabdc0.htmlht......

Sure... BP has no interest in obscuring how much oil is
actually
flowing.
After all, big corporations are good for America:

Congrats on doing your homework assignment. Unfortunately, you
fail.

All of your links are old news and irrelevant except for the
"rawstory" one that features your olbermann "expert". None of
them,
except the moonbat, back up your assertion that they are leaving
the
cap on now to avoid measuring flow rates.

They (BP and the gov) already have all the data they need to
figure
out approximately how much oil has come out. The monetary fines
will
be astronomical. Why would you want them to spill millions of
gallons
more now when this thing may be permanently capped next week?
You
hate our planet?

As long as there is no sudden pressure drop, let it stay capped.

Keep pimping and lying for BP moron.

Tell us why it would be preferrable to have millions of gallons
spill
into the Gulf instead of capping it safely and permanently. Do you
think that BO and his czars would not have it under control?

So perhaps there isn't a massive and uncontrollable leak elsewhere
in
the
system. But, you knew that. You're just being an ass.

And I've shown you to be an uneducated parrot.

"BP continues to work cooperatively with the guidance and approval
of
the National Incident Commander and the leadership and direction
of
federal government including the Department of Energy, Department
of
the Interior, Federal Science Team, Bureau of Ocean Energy,
Management, Regulation and Enforcement, U.S. Coast Guard and
secretaries Ken Salazar and Steven Chu."

Damn, sounds like the feds are up their butts, and have the data
they
need. If you have data showing otherwise, lay it out.
Otherwise, STFU... skank.

You are a moron, but keep calling me names if it makes you feel
more
like a
man.

Does all the name-calling you do make you feel more manly? ~snerk~

Gee, jackoff, if you bought a strap-on dildo and wore it, would you
feel
more like a man?

I wouldn't know... how does it make you feel?

Liar. You know how it feels, since you're the one who's just gotta
prove
he's got something bigger between his legs than a noodle.

Beginning to see why you bend over backwards.

When was the last time you had intercourse...with a woman...flajim?
In the early 1990s?

Herr Krause. Are you wishing for details to enhance your fantasies?


Krausie keeps a poster of penelope cruse on his bedroom wall in hopes of
generating some wood. So far he's got deadwood.
--
Harold

In article 2a564569-4492-4ec4-bd53-6ea967965069
@t10g2000yqg.googlegroups.com, says...

On Jul 21, 7:25*am, Harry ? wrote:
On 7/21/10 8:30 AM, Harold wrote:



*wrote in message
...

*wrote in message
...
On Jul 20, 9:05 am, Harry *wrote:
On 7/20/10 9:01 AM, Jack wrote:

On Jul 20, 2:10 am, * wrote:
* wrote in message

...

On Jul 19, 9:18 pm, * wrote:
* wrote in message

...

On Jul 19, 7:12 pm, * wrote:
* wrote in message

...

On Jul 19, 6:12 pm, * wrote:
* wrote in message

...

On Jul 19, 3:16 pm, * wrote:
* wrote in message

...

On Jul 19, 2:25 pm,
wrote:
* wrote in message

news:4ct7469pgiksefoqo8er4e1bop164 ...

On Sun, 18 Jul 2010 18:42:30 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
* wrote:

Testing of BP well integrity "detected seep a distance
from
the
well"
in
the
Gulf of Mexico, Ret. Adm. Thad Allen says.

I am not sure why they don't open the valve now that they
have
a
good
cap and produce the oil to the surface. That will take off
the
pressure and still be safe/clean. After all that was the
point
in
drilling the well in the first place.
I think they are pressing their luck trying to top kill
this
with
the
cap. Something that would have been fine at the production
pressures
may rupture with it sealed and put us back 2 months.

I agree... not an oil engineer, but it seems to make sense.
I
think
they
just don't want to have to record the flow rate, so the
fine
is
lower.
Too
bad for them. I think Allen should force them to do that.

Open pipe flow rate can be determined by calculation if the
pressure,
pipe diameter, and a few other factors are known, and they
all
are
at
this point. *That does not tell us how much oil has escaped,
since
except for a few hours the leak has never been in a free
flow
mode.

Any measured flow would be through the valves and hoses that
would
be
connected from the cap to the surface ships, which once
again
tell
us
nothing about the escaped oil, or the fine to be levied.
That
only
tells us how much flow those connections can accept.

The only thing you are correct about is that you are no "oil
engineer"... or any kind professional that requires
critical,
scientific thinking.

In that case, mister moron, how come just about everyone who
is
an
oil
engineer who doesn't work for BP is saying that's the likely
reason
they
don't want to do that?? Yes, you're a jerk as well as a
moron.

You wrote, " I think they just don't want to have to record
the
flow
rate...", but that's not the issue at all. *If they are to
hook
up
the
pipes to the surface, they have to open the well back up,
letting
oil
again flow into the gulf for days. *That's what BP doesn't
want
to
do,
it has nothing to do with recording any "flow rates".

"The apparent disagreement began to sprout Saturday when Allen
said
the cap would eventually be hooked up to a mile-long pipe to
pump
the
crude to ships on the surface. But early the next day, BP
chief
operating officer Doug Suttles said the cap should stay
clamped
shut
to keep in the oil until relief wells are finished."

"The government's plan would ease pressure on the fragile
well,
but
would require up to three more days of oil spilling into the
Gulf."

"But the company very much wants to avoid a repeat of the live
underwater video that showed millions of gallons of oil
spewing
from
the blown well for weeks."

Oh, and one "expert" that the idiot Olbermann dug up who said
the
crap
you stated does not come anywhere close to "everyone"... you
do
realize that's not news, it's entertainment for idiots, right?
You
should really stop watching that crap on TV... it's rotting
your
brain. *Oops, too late.

Here you go your moronic brainiac.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/...6688083.shtml-

Brilliant! *That link does absolutely *nothing* to shore up your
assertion. ~snerk~

You're a *moron:

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/88bde5ee-7...feabdc0.htmlht......

Sure... BP has no interest in obscuring how much oil is actually
flowing.
After all, big corporations are good for America:

Congrats on doing your homework assignment. Unfortunately, you
fail.

All of your links are old news and irrelevant except for the
"rawstory" one that features your olbermann "expert". *None of
them,
except the moonbat, back up your assertion that they are leaving
the
cap on now to avoid measuring flow rates.

They (BP and the gov) already have all the data they need to
figure
out approximately how much oil has come out. *The monetary fines
will
be astronomical. *Why would you want them to spill millions of
gallons
more now when this thing may be permanently capped next week? *You
hate our planet?

As long as there is no sudden pressure drop, let it stay capped.

Keep pimping and lying for BP moron.

Tell us why it would be preferrable to have millions of gallons
spill
into the Gulf instead of capping it safely and permanently. *Do you
think that BO and his czars would not have it under control?

So perhaps there isn't a massive and uncontrollable leak elsewhere in
the
system. But, you knew that. You're just being an ass.

And I've shown you to be an uneducated parrot.

"BP continues to work cooperatively with the guidance and approval
of
the National Incident Commander and the leadership and direction of
federal government including the Department of Energy, Department of
the Interior, Federal Science Team, Bureau of Ocean Energy,
Management, Regulation and Enforcement, U.S. Coast Guard and
secretaries Ken Salazar and Steven Chu."

Damn, sounds like the feds are up their butts, and have the data
they
need. *If you have data showing otherwise, lay it out.
Otherwise, STFU... skank.

You are a moron, but keep calling me names if it makes you feel more
like a
man.

Does all the name-calling you do make you feel more manly? *~snerk~

Gee, jackoff, if you bought a strap-on dildo and wore it, would you feel
more like a man?

I wouldn't know... how does it make you feel?

Liar. You know how it feels, since you're the one who's just gotta prove
he's got something bigger between his legs than a noodle.

Beginning to see why you bend over backwards.

When was the last time you had intercourse...with a woman...flajim?
In the early 1990s?

Herr Krause. Are you wishing for details to enhance your fantasies?

Yes. Some people here know what a pervert I am.

On Jul 18, 10:08*pm, Canuck57 wrote:
On 18/07/2010 7:42 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:

Testing of BP well integrity "detected seep a distance from the well" in
the Gulf of Mexico, Ret. Adm. Thad Allen says.

If true, not good news. *BP better get a pipe on that well and let it
blow out oil to lower the top pressure some. *If oil has fractured
around the well head, they will be in a world of grief for years dealing
with this as real disaster.

Lets see how far BP stock drops tomorrow, if this is a real issue, $5
off the top easy.

I hear BP is looking for cleanup workers. *All you have to do is make
sure they have a suit your size and you can get a job!
--

Government has liberals, idealists and lawyers, but where is the common
sense?

I think I saw that BP is looking to sell off about $ 7 Bil. in assets
for clean up. Now if the pipe is leaking ok, it's leaking,a nd that's
easier to deal with than what they've had blasting out into the Gulf.
I believe the hardest part is over, but it's far from done, but yes,
they shoud concentrate on the ruptures.

"Harold" wrote in message
...
"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...

"Jack" wrote in message
...
On Jul 20, 9:05 am, Harry ? wrote:
On 7/20/10 9:01 AM, Jack wrote:





On Jul 20, 2:10 am, wrote:
wrote in message

...

On Jul 19, 9:18 pm, wrote:
wrote in message

...

On Jul 19, 7:12 pm, wrote:
wrote in message

...

On Jul 19, 6:12 pm, wrote:
wrote in message

...

On Jul 19, 3:16 pm,
wrote:
wrote in message

...

On Jul 19, 2:25 pm,
wrote:
wrote in message

news:4ct7469pgiksefoqo8er4e1bop164ck9p ...

On Sun, 18 Jul 2010 18:42:30 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

Testing of BP well integrity "detected seep a distance
from
the
well"
in
the
Gulf of Mexico, Ret. Adm. Thad Allen says.

I am not sure why they don't open the valve now that they
have
a
good
cap and produce the oil to the surface. That will take
off
the
pressure and still be safe/clean. After all that was the
point
in
drilling the well in the first place.
I think they are pressing their luck trying to top kill
this
with
the
cap. Something that would have been fine at the
production
pressures
may rupture with it sealed and put us back 2 months.

I agree... not an oil engineer, but it seems to make
sense. I
think
they
just don't want to have to record the flow rate, so the
fine
is
lower.
Too
bad for them. I think Allen should force them to do that.

Open pipe flow rate can be determined by calculation if the
pressure,
pipe diameter, and a few other factors are known, and they
all
are
at
this point. That does not tell us how much oil has
escaped,
since
except for a few hours the leak has never been in a free
flow
mode.

Any measured flow would be through the valves and hoses
that
would
be
connected from the cap to the surface ships, which once
again
tell
us
nothing about the escaped oil, or the fine to be levied.
That
only
tells us how much flow those connections can accept.

The only thing you are correct about is that you are no
"oil
engineer"... or any kind professional that requires
critical,
scientific thinking.

In that case, mister moron, how come just about everyone who
is
an
oil
engineer who doesn't work for BP is saying that's the likely
reason
they
don't want to do that?? Yes, you're a jerk as well as a
moron.

You wrote, " I think they just don't want to have to record
the
flow
rate...", but that's not the issue at all. If they are to
hook
up
the
pipes to the surface, they have to open the well back up,
letting
oil
again flow into the gulf for days. That's what BP doesn't
want
to
do,
it has nothing to do with recording any "flow rates".

"The apparent disagreement began to sprout Saturday when
Allen
said
the cap would eventually be hooked up to a mile-long pipe to
pump
the
crude to ships on the surface. But early the next day, BP
chief
operating officer Doug Suttles said the cap should stay
clamped
shut
to keep in the oil until relief wells are finished."

"The government's plan would ease pressure on the fragile
well,
but
would require up to three more days of oil spilling into the
Gulf."

"But the company very much wants to avoid a repeat of the
live
underwater video that showed millions of gallons of oil
spewing
from
the blown well for weeks."

Oh, and one "expert" that the idiot Olbermann dug up who said
the
crap
you stated does not come anywhere close to "everyone"... you
do
realize that's not news, it's entertainment for idiots,
right?
You
should really stop watching that crap on TV... it's rotting
your
brain. Oops, too late.

Here you go your moronic brainiac.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/...6688083.shtml-

Brilliant! That link does absolutely *nothing* to shore up
your
assertion. ~snerk~

You're a moron:

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/88bde5ee-7...feabdc0.htmlht......

Sure... BP has no interest in obscuring how much oil is actually
flowing.
After all, big corporations are good for America:

Congrats on doing your homework assignment. Unfortunately, you
fail.

All of your links are old news and irrelevant except for the
"rawstory" one that features your olbermann "expert". None of
them,
except the moonbat, back up your assertion that they are leaving
the
cap on now to avoid measuring flow rates.

They (BP and the gov) already have all the data they need to
figure
out approximately how much oil has come out. The monetary fines
will
be astronomical. Why would you want them to spill millions of
gallons
more now when this thing may be permanently capped next week?
You
hate our planet?

As long as there is no sudden pressure drop, let it stay capped.

Keep pimping and lying for BP moron.

Tell us why it would be preferrable to have millions of gallons
spill
into the Gulf instead of capping it safely and permanently. Do you
think that BO and his czars would not have it under control?

So perhaps there isn't a massive and uncontrollable leak elsewhere
in the
system. But, you knew that. You're just being an ass.

And I've shown you to be an uneducated parrot.

"BP continues to work cooperatively with the guidance and approval
of
the National Incident Commander and the leadership and direction of
federal government including the Department of Energy, Department
of
the Interior, Federal Science Team, Bureau of Ocean Energy,
Management, Regulation and Enforcement, U.S. Coast Guard and
secretaries Ken Salazar and Steven Chu."

Damn, sounds like the feds are up their butts, and have the data
they
need. If you have data showing otherwise, lay it out.
Otherwise, STFU... skank.

You are a moron, but keep calling me names if it makes you feel more
like a
man.

Does all the name-calling you do make you feel more manly? ~snerk~

Gee, jackoff, if you bought a strap-on dildo and wore it, would you
feel
more like a man?

I wouldn't know... how does it make you feel?

Liar. You know how it feels, since you're the one who's just gotta prove
he's got something bigger between his legs than a noodle.



Beginning to see why you bend over backwards.

--
Harold


Because you're a moron?

I also think so.

On Thu, 22 Jul 2010 03:21:38 +0100, nicoledc109 wrote:


'nom=de=plume[_2_ Wrote:
;809778']"Canuck57" wrote in message
...-
On 18/07/2010 7:42 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:
-
Testing of BP well integrity "detected seep a distance from the well"
in
the Gulf of Mexico, Ret. Adm. Thad Allen says.-

If true, not good news. BP better get a pipe on that well and let it
blow
out oil to lower the top pressure some. If oil has fractured around
the
well head, they will be in a world of grief for years dealing with this
as
real disaster.

Lets see how far BP stock drops tomorrow, if this is a real issue, $5
off
the top easy.

I hear BP is looking for cleanup workers. All you have to do is make
sure
they have a suit your size and you can get a job!-

I guess you think Allen is lying because he represents the gov't. I
guess
letting BP do whatever it wants isn't such a great idea. Fortunately,
the
GOVERNMENT has so far not agreed to let them leave the seal in place.
Therefore, the oil disaster is Obama's fault.

You're a moron. Even if they let you into this wonderful country, you
would
not have the brain power to work on the cleanup. Why? You'd have
trouble
figuring out how to put on the suit.

I also think so.

So nincdepoop found a friend to join the group.

Just remember, always agree with de poop and Harry. You'll do well that way.
--

John H

On 7/22/10 12:14 PM, John H wrote:
On Thu, 22 Jul 2010 03:21:38 +0100, wrote:


'nom=de=plume[_2_ Wrote:
;809778']"Canuck57" wrote in message
...-
On 18/07/2010 7:42 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:
-
Testing of BP well integrity "detected seep a distance from the well"
in
the Gulf of Mexico, Ret. Adm. Thad Allen says.-

If true, not good news. BP better get a pipe on that well and let it
blow
out oil to lower the top pressure some. If oil has fractured around
the
well head, they will be in a world of grief for years dealing with this
as
real disaster.

Lets see how far BP stock drops tomorrow, if this is a real issue, $5
off
the top easy.

I hear BP is looking for cleanup workers. All you have to do is make
sure
they have a suit your size and you can get a job!-

I guess you think Allen is lying because he represents the gov't. I
guess
letting BP do whatever it wants isn't such a great idea. Fortunately,
the
GOVERNMENT has so far not agreed to let them leave the seal in place.
Therefore, the oil disaster is Obama's fault.

You're a moron. Even if they let you into this wonderful country, you
would
not have the brain power to work on the cleanup. Why? You'd have
trouble
figuring out how to put on the suit.

I also think so.

So nincdepoop found a friend to join the group.

Just remember, always agree with de poop and Harry. You'll do well that way.

John Herring, self-avowed racist...extraordinaire.