Merged Gulf oil spill more serious than reported

[aggle-rithm]

lol
That's stupid. A source that says what? lol

You clearly have very strong beliefs about the dangers posed by the oil spill. I don't think it's stupid to ask where those beliefs came from. If not from a source, then I can only conclude that you're just making it up.

Yeah, Sylvia Brown told me. Moving the goal posts so far that I need a psychic now to prove that IT IS POSSIBLE. Not that it is for sure. I have already explained this. That comment has two fallacious arguments in one. Making it sound as if my position is, that I guaranteed benzene will pollute Florida is a fallacy of extension. And this question definitely is an example of moving the goalpost. So basically you are demanding impossible evidence to support an opinion I don't even hold.

Look...if you want to believe crazy things based on absolutely nothing, fine. That's your business. But if you try to make me feel irresponsible because I don't share your beliefs, then I am going to insist on evidence.

Was that supposed to educate.

I hadn't gotten my hopes up about being able to educate you.

 

[Without Rights]

You clearly have very strong beliefs about the dangers posed by the oil spill. I don't think it's stupid to ask where those beliefs came from. If not from a source, then I can only conclude that you're just making it up.

You seem to have missed the point. Do you want sources for the existence of benzene or do you want sources for what you asked for;

the spill will still be spewing benzene and H2S at lethal levels when it gets to Florida

What does that mean? The spill will still be spewing benzene when the spill reaches FL? When the benzene reaches FL? Are they one in the same or something? Does not the benzene separate from the oil and release as a gas into the air? Is it impossible for gas to shift with wind? Do I have to source that it will definitely reach land in order to prove it might reach land?

So to answer the question, my concern comes from a knowledge that benzene, h2s and other voc's exist in the well. They release as mainly gas. Do I have to source this common knowledge? The government has already shown they exist, do you want a source for that? Or do want what you asked for? Do I need a psychic or not?

Look...if you want to believe crazy things based on absolutely nothing, fine. That's your business. But if you try to make me feel irresponsible because I don't share your beliefs, then I am going to insist on evidence.

You keep saying I'm crazy, but then you require sources in the image of John Edwards.

I hadn't gotten my hopes up about being able to educate you.

Please give me a review on your position. Are the gases in question guaranteed to dissipate before traveling inland? Do the gases simply not exist in the well and on the ocean surface? Clarify what I'm supposed to prove. If you want me to prove your requirement from your last post then you require impossible evidence that makes no sense. Particularly because I never said that there is a guarantee that the toxins will make landfall. I said there is a possibility.

You definitely can't educate me with comments like;

Look...if you want to believe crazy things based on absolutely nothing, fine.

Fallacy

If you're just using common sense to deduce this, you could very well be mistaken.

Fallacy

these are pretty rational compared to your position

Fallacy
Notice the point of your arguments?

I'm crazy, common, mistaken, irrational. Yet there is no reiteration on why I am these things. What is the crazy part? I have yet to see a comprehensible reason why I am insane.

So, don't skip this part. What exactly is it you require?

 

[MattusMaximus]

So are you saying there is no benzene, h2s and other voc's. Wow, thanks. Now that I know they're mythical I can stay. I was being absurd. Benzene is only on Harry Potter.

No, I'm saying you're acting the part of an alarmist loon, making wildly unsubstantiated claims with little or no evidence and LOTS of conspiracy mongering. Clear enough?

It really wasn't funny enough to toot your own horn.

Actually, it was. In fact...

 

[MattusMaximus]

Moving the goal posts so far that I need a psychic now to prove that IT IS POSSIBLE.

Is it also possible that you're over-reacting?

 

[aggle-rithm]

Please give me a review on your position. Are the gases in question guaranteed to dissipate before traveling inland? Do the gases simply not exist in the well and on the ocean surface? Clarify what I'm supposed to prove. If you want me to prove your requirement from your last post then you require impossible evidence that makes no sense. Particularly because I never said that there is a guarantee that the toxins will make landfall. I said there is a possibility.

My position is that petroleum does indeed contain toxins that could harm humans. The question is: Is the danger from these toxic gasses severe enough to justify evacuating Florida? You have indicated that you believe that it is, and that I am irresponsible for not sharing these beliefs.

I have asked you for evidence that the danger is sufficient to justify uprooting families to get out of harm's way. Personally, if I were to force my family to pack up and leave their home and their friends, I would need a REASON to do it. Evidence that there is something to run away from.

Clear now?

 

[Without Rights]

No, I'm saying you're acting the part of an alarmist loon, making wildly unsubstantiated claims with little or no evidence and LOTS of conspiracy mongering. Clear enough?

It's clear. You will resort to the same tactics as your buddy aggle.

Loon, unsubstantiated claims, no evidence, and my favorite, conspiracy mongering.


Reiterate, your position also. You spend all your time saying I'm wrong but never a reason why I'm wrong. Fallacy is your forte.

Actually, it was. In fact...

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/774747dc5f01571c1.gif

Yeah, because "when half the population of Florida drops dead" is a great lead in to a joke. No, it is more morbid than funny but you got a kick out of it, that's all that matters Maximus. (a little egocentric in your name choice by the way)

You want to know what's really hilarious? How you use tactics over logic, insult rather than reason.

What am I wrong about and why? And loon is not a suitable answer.

I am sure you know my position but all I know about your position is that you think I'm wrong. How about a reason. Don't be afraid to be specific.

 

[aggle-rithm]

Fallacy

Your fallacy is false dilemma, or excluded middle. If we say the danger from toxins isn't great enough to justify radical action, you equate this as saying there is no such thing as benzyne.

In fact, as is usually the case in life, there are conditions that exist between these two extremes. For instance, it's POSSIBLE that the danger is enough to make workers who are in direct contact with the oil slick nauseous, and yet is neither non-existent nor sufficient to wipe out the population of Florida.

 

[Without Rights]

Is it also possible that you're over-reacting?

Can you provide your sources that show that the spill will still be spewing benzene and H2S at lethal levels when it gets to Florida?

No, I'm pretty sure I need a psychic source. Deann Warwick might be available.

Requiring impossible evidence, (unless you believe in psychics), is moving the goalposts into the parking lot. No exaggeration.

 

[Without Rights]

Your fallacy is false dilemma, or excluded middle. If we say the danger from toxins isn't great enough to justify radical action, you equate this as saying there is no such thing as benzyne.

Hey, you finally have a position.

So the danger isn't great enough. What do you base that assumption on? Is there a level of toxins when you would recommend action? Would a hurricane in the Gulf be a problem?

In fact, as is usually the case in life, there are conditions that exist between these two extremes. For instance, it's POSSIBLE that the danger is enough to make workers who are in direct contact with the oil slick nauseous, and yet neither non-existent nor sufficient to wipe out the population of Florida.

Cool, another position.

Your second position is that it is impossible for toxic clouds to be blown inland. They can only hurt people who are over the oil. Is that about right?

 

[aggle-rithm]

Hey, you finally have a position.

So the danger isn't great enough. What do you base that assumption on? Is there a level of toxins when you would recommend action? Would a hurricane in the Gulf be a problem?

I base it on the fact that no one has died from toxic gasses coming from the oil spill. The best evidence I have seen that there is any effect at all is news stories that describe people being treated for "symptoms".

Not illness. Symptoms. Considering the sensationalist bent of the news media, if there were any actual illnesses, they most certainly would have reported on it.

Your second position is that it is impossible for toxic clouds to be blown inland. They can only hurt people who are over the oil. Is that about right?

Not even close.

I see no point in continuing this discussion.

Lots of luck to you and your family.

 

[Without Rights]

My position is that petroleum does indeed contain toxins that could harm humans. The question is: Is the danger from these toxic gasses severe enough to justify evacuating Florida? You have indicated that you believe that it is, and that I am irresponsible for not sharing these beliefs.

I never recommended evacuating Florida. I do recommend moving away from the oil spill at least 200 miles. I didn't say you were irresponsible for not sharing my belief. I said that ignoring dangers, because people are working on it and you can't physically clean it yourself, is foolish.

That was your original position, remember?

I have asked you for evidence that the danger is sufficient to justify uprooting families to get out of harm's way.Personally, if I were to force my family to pack up and leave their home and their friends, I would need a REASON to do it. Evidence that there is something to run away from.

I never said they should force people to move out of Florida. But IF wind shifts the benzene and others inland at unsafe levels, FEMA probably will. If that happens I will be forced to relocate without being prepared. Without a job, a house. I don't want to live in a FEMA trailer.

Clear now?

It is clear, you are still exaggerating my position.

 

[Without Rights]

I base it on the fact that no one has died from toxic gasses coming from the oil spill. The best evidence I have seen that there is any effect at all is news stories that describe people being treated for "symptoms".

The toxins are not inland. You need people to die to prove that it is possible for toxic gases to move inland.

Not illness. Symptoms.

That's hilarious. Double-think much? Since the definition of symptom is "indication of illness" that statement is absurd.

Considering the sensationalist bent of the news media, if there were any actual illnesses, they most certainly would have reported on it.

Gulf oil spill workers report health problems.
http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=116864

Not even close.

I see no point in continuing this discussion.

Lots of luck to you and your family.

Well I'm confused. If my position is absurd then my position is impossible. Not the position you assigned to me but my real position that it is possible for wind to bring toxins inland. You called that absurd did you not?

And it was just a question so I can clarify your position. No need to get all huffy baby about it.

 

[MattusMaximus]

It's clear. You will resort to the same tactics as your buddy aggle.

Loon, unsubstantiated claims, no evidence, and my favorite, conspiracy mongering.

Reiterate, your position also. You spend all your time saying I'm wrong but never a reason why I'm wrong. Fallacy is your forte.

Yeah, because "when half the population of Florida drops dead" is a great lead in to a joke. No, it is more morbid than funny but you got a kick out of it, that's all that matters Maximus. (a little egocentric in your name choice by the way)

You want to know what's really hilarious? How you use tactics over logic, insult rather than reason.

What am I wrong about and why? And loon is not a suitable answer.

I am sure you know my position but all I know about your position is that you think I'm wrong. How about a reason. Don't be afraid to be specific.

Well, seeing as how the EPA seems to disagree with your assessment, and they are not recommending the immediate evacuation of Florida, I think that puts you a bit... out there.

You can rant all you want - but if your goal is to convince the rest of us that you're correct, then you've failed terribly.

 

[EHocking]

Well, seeing as how the EPA seems to disagree with your assessment, and they are not recommending the immediate evacuation of Florida, I think that puts you a bit... out there.

Nor are they recommending evacuation of the blowout site where dozens of craft and hundreds of people are working - not just downwind of the site, but directly over where the spill is coming to the surface.

 

[aggle-rithm]

That's hilarious. Double-think much? Since the definition of symptom is "indication of illness" that statement is absurd.

FYI, I know from first-hand experience that the mere suggestion of toxic gas causes people to have symptoms. I worked at a call center that had to be evacuated when a UPS exploded, sending toxic gas into the environment. After the mess was cleaned up and the air tested as safe, we all went back in...only to evacuate again when many people began to feel sick. It was entirely psychosomatic.

 

[Without Rights]

FYI, I know from first-hand experience that the mere suggestion of toxic gas causes people to have symptoms. I worked at a call center that had to be evacuated when a UPS exploded, sending toxic gas into the environment. After the mess was cleaned up and the air tested as safe, we all went back in...only to evacuate again when many people began to feel sick. It was entirely psychosomatic.

Over the gulf the levels have not been tested safe, actually they have been tested deadly.

In the case of your workplace accident, safe tested levels is not a guarantee. Residual matter may be left behind, which can become airborne if disturbed or come into contact with the skin. Your assumption that it is definite that your work peers were all a result of the placebo effect is not very compelling. I would need to see toxicology screens before I jumped to that conclusion.

How about this
http://www.businessinsider.com/gulf-spill-may-be-causing-oil-rain-in-louisiana-2010-6

Oil rain MAY be caused by the spill. I wonder how much benzene, h2s, hexane, toluene, and xylene MAY have showed up.

I'm upset that you ignored the rest of the post. I know, it was too crazy or not worthy of comment or some other fallacy.

 

[Without Rights]

Nor are they recommending evacuation of the blowout site where dozens of craft and hundreds of people are working - not just downwind of the site, but directly over where the spill is coming to the surface.

Because they have to clean it up. They were respirators, they know toxins are not good for you.

Read this government document.
http://tfr.faa.gov/save_pages/detail_0_5100.html

See, the dangers are real. Toxins really do harm you.

 

[MattusMaximus]

Over the gulf the levels have not been tested safe, actually they have been tested deadly.

So this explains why people have been dying out in the GOM and the EPA & government are recommending mandatory evacuation of the affected areas and Florida coastline, right?

Oh wait... yeah, that's not happening

 

[EHocking]

Because they have to clean it up. They were respirators, they know toxins are not good for you.

Read this government document.
http://tfr.faa.gov/save_pages/detail_0_5100.html

See, the dangers are real. Toxins really do harm you.

THis describes flight restrictions over the spill area except for those supporting the spill mitigation.

"All aircraft operations are prohibited except those flights authorized by ATC, routine flights supporting offshore oil operations; federal, state, local and military flight operations supporting oil spill recovery and reconstitution efforts; and air medical and law enforcement operations. "

Absolutely no reference to toxins on that page.

 

[Without Rights]

Well, seeing as how the EPA seems to disagree with your assessment, and they are not recommending the immediate evacuation of Florida, I think that puts you a bit... out there.

Is that your response to my posts?

How thick is your skull? My assessment is not that they should evacuate Florida. It is my opinion that I am going to evacuate just in case. I've made this statement previously, more than once.

You can rant all you want - but if your goal is to convince the rest of us that you're correct, then you've failed terribly.

I see you cannot gather a legitimate position in your maximus head. After all the begging I still get the same two fallacious arguments. Of course you know the two I mean, but I'll say them anyway. Fallacy of extension and ad hominem. Your bread and butter.

I can give reason why I think Sylvia Brown is a loon without a single fallacy. If I am so absurd dismantle my absurd argument. You can bust on me all you want as long as you have a point I can contend. My points are simple, you still haven't addressed them in any logical manner.

It's like a cycle. A point and an insult a point and a insult... Not insult, insult, insult, then act like somehow your insults were insightful. I expect more here.