Florida State scientist: NOAA ignores spill findings

[highplainsdem]

Source: Houston Chronicle

A prominent oceanographer, who was among the first to say official estimates understated the volume of the Gulf of Mexico oil spill, charged Tuesday that a federal agency is punishing scientists whose findings disagree with government figures.

Ian MacDonald, an oceanographer with Florida State University, who more than two weeks ago said the oil spill was likely five times as large as the 5,000 barrel-a-day estimate from the National Oceanic Atmospheric and Administration, said the agency is attacking scientists who challenged government estimates, while itself doing little to glean new information about the spill size.

“The scientific community in the Gulf of Mexico is fairly small ... and we've been very dedicated for a long time and not only is nobody listening to us in this, but it seems like they really want us to shut up,” MacDonald said. “It's very, very punitive and anybody who is doing this is getting attacked by NOAA.”

A NOAA spokesman did not address MacDonald's claims directly, but said that the agency's spill response includes scientists with key federal agencies as well as partners in the scientific community and the private sector.

-snip-

Read more: http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/business/deepwaterhorizon/7011584.html

[EFerrari]

1. I thought we voted Bush science out of office. n/t

[TheWatcher]

5. I thought we had voted Bush out of Office.

I mean honestly, is this administration REALLY just going to let an entire OCEAN die?

At what point do We The People fight back?

[No Elephants]

7. I vote for yesterday, but will settle for ASAP. But, we can't wait for permission or consensus.

[sce56]

2. Yes this is the change we voted for

SOSDP :sarcasm:

[Wilms]

3. .

[BadGimp]

4. Is it possible...

that there are so many hold overs from BUsh/Chenney that the Obama WH simply has no control over these things?

just asking..

[sce56]

6. No it has been over a year now he owns it! Just like Bush owned 9-11 n/t

[No Elephants]

9. Conspiracy theories aside, Bush had less control over Bin Laden than Obama has over his NOAA.

And Bush did not okay the 911 attack.


Again, conspiracy theories aside.

[sce56]

18. For one Shrub's admin tried to lay the blame on Clinton!

Giuliani says no 'domestic terror attacks' under Bush
Posted: January 8th, 2010 12:37 PM ET

From CNN Ticker Producer Alexander Mooney
Rudy Giuliani said Friday that the United States was not subjected to domestic terror attacks when he was in office.


(CNN) - Echoing recent comments from former Bush administration officials, Rudy Giuliani defended former President George Bush's record on terrorism Friday, saying the country was not subjected to domestic terror attacks when he was in office.

"We had no domestic attacks under Bush; we've had one under Obama," Giuliani said on ABC's Good Morning America.

Democrats and other political observers were quick to question Giuliani's comments, wondering how the former New York City mayor would classify the attacks of September 11, 2001, as well as Richard Reid's attempted shoe-bombing in late 2001.

"Giuliani seems to have forgotten about the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks and shoe bomber Richard Reid," ABC's George Stephanopoulos, who conducted the Giuliani interview, wrote on his blog.



And the Anthrax attacks





As for Bush Ok'ing 911 why was it that the attacks happened the same day four military exercises were happening including simulated radar inputs of hijacked aircraft as well as a live fly (US Air Force Planes used to simulate hijacked US aircraft) there was an article in Vanity Fair,
Politics
9/11 Live: The NORAD Tapes By Michael Bronner Aug 2006,
where the audio tapes were studied and NEAD's center personnel were interviewed. The Commander that day stated when heard the first hijack alarm he looked at his watch and thought they are a half hour early!
At the very least LIHOP!

[Rosa Luxemburg]

19. I'm not sure about the former!

[No Elephants]

8. No.

Defying science is cause to fire even a civil service employee. Besides, the head of the agency is the boss of the employees. And Obama is the boss of both the agency head and the employees.

[tomm2thumbs]

10. sounds like when they reported the air around 9/11 site was just peachy! - lies, all lies

if anyone doubts they will lie and cover-up with an 'oops, sorry' later on, you haven't been paying attention

[ixion]

11. "it seems like they really want us to shut up"

Yep, such is the government response for just about anything these days. They're only interested in their damage control, and not the least bit interested in hearing from people who know what's going on. :argh:

[IndianaGreen]

12. NOAA chief dismisses Loop Current threat: 'very little tarballs'

NOAA chief dismisses Loop Current threat: 'very little tarballs'

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x303423

Watching the video of NOAA chief dismissing the problem shows that NOAA is led by another Brownie.

[marions ghost]

17. "it sounds scarier than it is..."

Oh Boy. With ocean protectors like Ms. Lubchenco guarding the news pipelines, what chance do the area scientists have with getting the truth out? Not much x(

OK this does it for me--yes, I'm afraid it's another Heckuva Job Brownie.

Complain to Democrats I guess. At least go on record.

She is SO depressing. Just another mouthpiece.

[florida08]

13. we know we have a corporate oligarchy

so it's not surprising. Disgusting maybe. The article says they're flaring off the natural gas. Not suppose to be doing that either.
Puts all kind of pollutants in the air.

[IndianaGreen]

14. Coast Guard under BP rules.

Coast Guard under BP rules.

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=6496749n

MSM only allowed to cover the disaster if embedded with the Coast Guard.

[florida08]

15. yep

So much for states rights..thanks :(

[marshall]

16. Does this man want to keep his government funding?

He better start towing the line!

[CanonRay]

20. All these government agencies have a real cozy realtionship

with big oil, or so it begins to appear.

[ensho]

21. I believe the Fl. scientists and not NOAA

for one thing the Fl. scientists really care about the Gulf

[ensho]

22. there are still neo cons working in NOAA

get them out of there and NOAA could be reliable again

[GoddessOfGuinness]

23. I'd be willing to bet that those who compiled the government estimates

were told to revise their initial findings.

My father was a statistician with the now defunct Bureau of Mines for over 30 years. He would write reports and submit them, then was told what information needed to be "cleaned up". I've heard similar stories from friends working for the EPA. I suspect this is the real reason rethugs want "smaller government". The fewer people they have working for them, the less the likelihood that government misinformation will be exposed.

[fascisthunter]

24. there goes his credibility in the science community

another corrupt bastard

[suffragette]

25. I'm glad that the scientists are pressing forward

Oil spill scientists head to loop current on USF vessel
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8370008

USF = University of South Florida


And some politicians as well:
http://markey.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3983&Itemid=141
May 17, 2010: Markey to EPA on Oil Dispersants: How Toxic, How Effective?

Questions Arise on Chemicals Used in Gulf Spill, Including Link to Giant Undersea Oil Plumes

WASHINGTON (May 17, 2010) -- Rep. Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.) today queried the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency on the dangers of applying oil-dispersing chemicals deep underwater as an effort to mitigate the Gulf of Mexico oil spill. In the letter sent to EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson, Rep. Markey raises questions about the potential toxicity of the trademarked formulation, called Corexit, and whether the chemical could be contributing to new reports of large undersea “plumes” of oil suspended thousands of feet below the water's surface.


“The release of hundreds of thousands of gallons of chemicals into the Gulf of Mexico could be an unprecedented, large and aggressive experiment on our oceans,” said Rep. Markey, chair of the Energy and Environment Subcommittee in the Energy and Commerce Committee, which is conducting an extensive investigation into the spill. “The information regarding the chemical composition, efficacy and toxicity of the dispersants currently being used is scarce.”

A copy of the letter can be found here:http://markey.house.gov/docs/ejmdispersant51710.pdf

On the first question of the levels of toxicity of the dispersant chemicals, Rep. Markey notes that some formulations of Corexit, the substances being used in the Gulf of Mexico, were banned in Britain more than a decade ago due to their tested harmful effects to sea life. Rep. Markey also asks for information on the eighteen dispersants EPA has approved for use, including a ranking of their efficacy and toxicity.

The letter also asks about the effects of water temperature and pressure on the chemicals, as they are currently and for the first time being used at 5,000 feet where the temperature is near freezing and the pressure of the water is extremely high.

Recent reports from independent scientists have told of large, undersea oil “plumes.” Instead of rising to the surface, large clouds of oil are currently suspended thousands of feet below the ocean and are found at various depths within the water column, making the issue of quantifying the spill much more difficult.

Citing concerns of scientists that the formation of these plumes may be linked to the use of dispersants, Rep. Markey asks whether EPA considered this scenario for the interaction of the dispersants with the oil plume when applied at the depth of the Deepwater Horizon leak.

Finally, Rep. Markey asks EPA whether these chemicals could accumulate in marine life over time, and what human health impacts could result from eating Gulf seafood.


It's been disheartening to see how NOAA, the EPA and OSHA have acted ( or not, as the case may be). And now attacking the scientists who are trying to help. Despicable.