See other Resistance Articles
Title: Lindsey Williams on Rense Now
Source:
Here
URL Source: http://Youbetcha.yup
Published: Jun 14, 2010
Author: Some Radio Listener
Post Date: 2010-06-14 23:12:48 by Original_Intent
Keywords: None
Views: 815
Comments: 82
Lindsey William is currently on Rense - says new info.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 49.
#8. To: Original_Intent (#0)
(Edited)
Firefox can't find the server at youbetcha.yup.
Maybe if you tried Sarah Palin's website?
Nope. Didn't work either.
I had to actually type r-e-n-s-e-.-c-o-m and press enter. A nuke would work. I'm sure of it. Drill beside the old well. Drop the nuke down a mile or more. Fill the hole with cement. Get everyone far away from there. Press the big red button on the remote control. This will create a hole within the rock and pinch the old well shut. It will work. Problem is, they don't want it to work. They wanted this mess.
Problem is, they don't want it to work. They wanted this mess. Actually while I lean toward thinking this was intentional I also think a nuke is a crap shoot. The problem is that while yes it could seal the hole that is only one of several possible outcomes. However, it also could fracture the seabed more and/or trigger some severe seismic events along the New Madrid Seismic Zone. You might recall, as I pointed out in the last "Oilpocalypse", that the New Madrid Fault produced the worst earthquake in North America in the last five or six hundred years. The fault Zone extends out into the Gulf and the region and is geologically, physically, connected. The entire thriving town of New Madrid was wiped out in the 1812 event. As well even if it seals the current shaft it appears that the high pressure event has created other pathways for the oil to come out.
Please refer to post #17 first. I doubt a nuke would trigger an earthquake. I think it is something the earth itself has to do. I think it would require more force than a nuke to shift the plates or fault. Especially if the nuke is detonated a mile or more below the ocean bottom. If the nuke was detonated and the well pinched below the leak, it wouldn't matter if oil was still leaking through the other places. It would stop. I also don't believe any hollow chambers would 'collapse'.
These two on Rense don't know what they're talking about re the nuke. If they can drill a well like they did and obviously they can, they can drill another one beside it and insert a nuke into it.
True, but he was mentioning the same concern I have - which is that we don't know what it will do to the seafloor geologic structure, and that oil and gas are coming up at unprecedented pressures. 20,000 to 70,000 PSI are pressures you only find in a steam turbine. If it collapses the sea floor then stand by to stand by - because that means tsunamis and again the likelihood of setting off the New Madrid Fault into a 7+ earthquake. More remote, but not impossible, would be a reopening of the Reelfoot rift which is a weak spot in the North American Tectonic Plate, which could separate thus opening a sea channel from the Gulf all the way up into Canada and effectively dividing the continent.
What if the nuke was say, 5 miles below the sea floor surrounded by miles of granite?
Granite transmits seismic waves just fine - it is very dense and has a crystalline structure. Part of the problem is that we don't know how much of the oil has been evacuated from the underlying chamber. With a mile column of seawater on top of it there is already a lot of weight on the underlying rock structure. If you crack that support structure, and the underlying chamber has evacuate enough, then you could have the seafloor crack, opening new vents for the oil to get out, and the settling of the bottom downward is going to be a "vigorous event" i.e., earthquakes, tsunamis, you know - the usual when you have a catastrophic failure of an area of the earth's crust. That is even before we consider the possibility of opening a magma chamber and having tons of seawater hit molten rock in one big burst. It could create an explosion as big as another nuke.
I think I see what you're saying. I disagree. I think each of these things by themselves are very unlikely. The more of these possibilities you add, the more unlikely they become. I wish I could draw a picture or better, that you could watch the video of how the Russians did it successfully many times.
#50. To: Original_Intent (#49)
OI... just a tiny nuke. ; )
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestServer not found
#10. To: wudidiz (#8)
Firefox can't find the server at youbetcha.yup.
#11. To: Original_Intent (#10)
#13. To: wudidiz (#11)
Nope. Didn't work either.
Hmmm?
#14. To: Original_Intent (#13)
#19. To: wudidiz (#14)
It will work.
#22. To: Original_Intent (#19)
Actually while I lean toward thinking this was intentional I also think a nuke is a crap shoot. The problem is that while yes it could seal the hole that is only one of several possible outcomes. However, it also could fracture the seabed more and/or trigger some severe seismic events along the New Madrid Seismic Zone. You might recall, as I pointed out in the last "Oilpocalypse", that the New Madrid Fault produced the worst earthquake in North America in the last five or six hundred years. The fault Zone extends out into the Gulf and the region and is geologically, physically, connected. The entire thriving town of New Madrid was wiped out in the 1812 event. As well even if it seals the current shaft it appears that the high pressure event has created other pathways for the oil to come out.
#24. To: Original_Intent, All (#22)
#43. To: wudidiz (#24)
If they can drill a well like they did and obviously they can, they can drill another one beside it and insert a nuke into it.
#45. To: Original_Intent (#43)
#47. To: wudidiz, abraxas (#45)
(Edited)
What if the nuke was say, 5 miles below the sea floor surrounded by miles of granite?
#49. To: Original_Intent (#47)
Granite transmits seismic waves just fine - it is very dense and has a crystalline structure. Part of the problem is that we don't know how much of the oil has been evacuated from the underlying chamber. With a mile column of seawater on top of it there is already a lot of weight on the underlying rock structure. If you crack that support structure, and the underlying chamber has evacuate enough, then you could have the seafloor crack, opening new vents for the oil to get out, and the settling of the bottom downward is going to be a "vigorous event" i.e., earthquakes, tsunamis, you know - the usual when you have a catastrophic failure of an area of the earth's crust. That is even before we consider the possibility of opening a magma chamber and having tons of seawater hit molten rock in one big burst. It could create an explosion as big as another nuke.
Replies to Comment # 49.
End Trace Mode for Comment # 49.