Oil In Carpenteria, California

The oil pours out of the rocks, flooding the beach here.

Offshore rigs with the Channel Islands in the background.

Advertisements

About stevengoddard

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

27 Responses to Oil In Carpenteria, California

  1. Ralph says:

    Why aren’t the environmentalists screaming about this?

    • joe spanky says:

      IT is a shame. If we actually DRILLED more in California this wouldn’t be a problem..
      Insted, NOT drilling causes these oil seeps to just leach into the oceans.
      More proof that environmentalists are just mental.

    • NoMoreGore says:

      Oil isn’t evil until man tries to sell it for profit.

  2. John of Cloverdale WA (Aus) says:

    Remember the pet rock craze? I think the greenie type people that were into this fad will be abusing their rocks now. Little do most of them realize that rocks tell a story about the climate and sea-level history of the earth.
    Drat those pesty rocks. And what would a geologist know about climate?
    I hear it all the time. Ho ho!

    • suyts says:

      I wish more geologists would speak out about this. Climatology is attempting to turn geology and archeology on its head!! They say there was no MWP nor LIA. They say there wasn’t a RWP…..they say climate was essentially static until evil man came by and started burning fossil fuels. We all know this is a crock, but it would be nice if the ones that studied the earth and earth’s history would finally get up and say, “Enough!”

      • NikFromNYC says:

        No, no, you see, the big spikes in the Greenland ice core proves that climate is hyper sensitive to even mild “forcings.” Er, well, except that history is a hockey stick, but if it *did* show major warm spikes in the past, that would mean that climate is much more sensitive than we ever before expected it to be. Much worse. The sky is exploding, not just falling.

      • Robert of Ottawa says:

        The warmistas are in fact deniers of natural climate change.

      • Tony Duncan says:

        SUYTS,

        I read climate scientists discuss the LIA and WMP and the other holocene and other geological “warm” periods on a regular basis. I have yet to read a paper or press release from any scientific group involved in climate studies that gives any indication that climate has ever been static

      • P.J. says:

        @Tony Duncan: I think the issue here is that too many climatologists seem intent on erasing any evidence of the MWP, Roman WP, LIA, etc, to make 20th century warming look unprecedented. When compared to the MWP and Holocene Maximum, 20th century warming isn’t scary and these climatologists are looking for something else to get a research grant for.

      • Mike Davis says:

        TonyD:
        I guess it is all a matter of interpretation of what and how they say it. IF the past warmer periods existed then the current minor warming would be nothing to be concerned about and the IPCC would not exist in its current state. IF historical warm periods had been considered it would be well established that we are currently enjoying a relatively stable climate compared to some historical periods and the IPCC would not exist in its current form and there would be no reason for this or many other web sites discussing a none problem or fantasy if you want a better description.

      • papertiger says:

        Tony says (in this sort of androgenous tiny tim queer falsetto voice) “I have yet to read a paper or press release from any scientific group involved in climate studies that gives any indication that climate has ever been static

        LIAR

        Here’s a but load.
        http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/recons.html

    • Tony Duncan says:

      Paper,

      no, i glanced at the abstracts for a few of the papers and NONE say anything about an essentially static climate. Not even the Mann papers.

      Mike, no real argument with your assertions.

      PJ. maybe

      • papertiger says:

        Well lets take one at random. Say um…. the first one?

        We review evidence for climate change over the past several millennia from instrumental and high-resolution climate “proxy” data sources and climate modeling studies. We focus on changes over the past 1 to 2 millennia. … [blah blah blah]. …Our assessment affirms the conclusion that late 20th century warmth is unprecedented at hemispheric and, likely, global … [blah blah blah] … underscore the limited utility in the use of terms such as the “Little Ice Age” and “Medieval Warm Period” for describing past climate epochs during the last millennium. Comparison of empirical evidence with proxy-based reconstructions demonstrates that natural factors appear to explain relatively well the major surface temperature changes of the past millennium through the 19th century (including hemispheric means and some spatial patterns). Only anthropogenic forcing of climate, however, can explain the recent anomalous warming in the late 20th century.

        Horseshit description of Global & Hemispheric Temperature, NAO, and SOI (Review), 2000 Years, Jones and Mann 2004. – the infamous hockeystick graph.

      • Latitude says:

        Shouldn’t we all be focused on this first……..

        “…Our assessment affirms the conclusion that late 20th century warmth is unprecedented at hemispheric and, likely, global”

        That is an assumption and everything after it is an assumption……………

  3. JeffT says:

    There is some good information from the USGS on oil seeps, tarballs in California –
    http://walrus.wr.usgs.gov/seeps/where.html
    2x .kmz files that plot on Google Earth.
    It is ironic that all these areas that have been oozing oil etc for possibly thousands of years are in green anti hydrocarbon use California.
    There are also natural oil seeps in the Gulf of Mexico, that apparently exceed more than two Exxon Valdez equivalent oils spills each year.
    http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/IOTD/view.php?id=36873
    But the M.S.M. won’t tell us that – not alarmist enough.

  4. Les Johnson says:

    The largest known oil spill is in Northern Alberta. It was precipitated by that capitalist, anti-environmental who is named Mother Nature; when she released 1.7 trillion barrels of oil into the sand under the pristine boreal forest.

    Albertans were outraged by this desecration of Gaia, and as soon as they developed the technology, they started cleaning this mess up.

    Albertans know that this will be a long process, and will take 100s of years to clean the oil from the sands, but they are determined and unwavering in their sacred duty to Gaia.

    If only the people of California were so dedicated to the environment as Alberta.

    • Alan S. Blue says:

      That’s exactly it.

      Oil Companies should stop asking for ‘drilling permits’ and start asking permission to clean up toxic, volatile, self-igniting, carcinogenic, mutagenic, teratogenic, inflammable, waste by the billions of tons.

      The fact that people are willing to leave this stuff -lying around- is mind-blowing. This is way worse than lead paint – that doesn’t tend to be quite so volatile, for instance.

  5. Amino Acids in Meteorites says:

    That oil is because of Dick Cheney. It is his fault. I think I remember George Clooney saying that.

    ;O)

  6. Les Johnson says:

    I could have been confused between Cheney and Mother Nature. Both are mythical, invisible characters, who control the world while staying behind the scenes.

    Of course, Mother Nature is a better shot. I think she would have killed the lawyer.

  7. DERise says:

    Maybe a little controlled drilling might relieve the pressure and stop these sort of damaging uncontrolled releases. While they are at it, maybe they could relieve some of the pressure in the near off shore oil deposits that cause damage to the beaches. Course being Kali, if they did dirll and capture the oil, they wouldn’t use it, they would ship it to a toxic waste landfill at great taxpayer expense. Sigh.

  8. Paul H says:

    In the 70’s politicians found it easy to control the climate.

    Denis Howell was made Minister for Drought in 1976, which was the driest summer in over 200 years, but days later heavy rainfall caused widespread flooding, and he was made Minister of Floods.

    Nowadays our Climate Change Ministers seem to be preoccupied to do their jobs properly.

    Ed Miliband was a leading member of Gordon Brown’s inner circle that conspired to overthrow Tony Blair within weeks of Labour’s election victory in 2005.

    as Liberal Democrat Energy Secretary Chris Huhne announced that he was leaving his wife for his mistress.

  9. Amino Acids in Meteorites says:

    OT

    Obama popularity in Pennsylvania and Florida not good. If he has troubles in Ohio he could lose next November. Let’s see as 2012 unfolds.

  10. PhilJourdan says:

    Tony Duncan says:
    June 12, 2011 at 10:01 pm

    I have yet to read a paper or press release from any scientific group involved in climate studies that gives any indication that climate has ever been static

    Good weasel word – static. While the not static, I have seen some that show it to be serene, peaceful, little changing – it is called the shaft of the hockey stick.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s