Ga. scientists: Gulf oil not gone, 80 pct remains

[cory777]

Source: Associated Press

WASHINGTON – Georgia scientists say their analysis shows that most of that BP oil the government said was gone from the Gulf of Mexico is still there.

The scientists say as much as 80 percent of the oil still lurks under the surface. The Georgia team said it is a misinterpretation of data to claim that oil that is dissolved is actually gone. The report from University of Georgia and other scientists came from an analysis of federal estimates.

Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100816/ap_on_sc/us_sci_gulf_spill_gone

---

Breaking Activist News http://activistnews.blogspot.com

[Chulanowa]

1. Well fucking duh n/t

[donheld]

27. +1

[PatrynXX]

36. So I see a pic of Obama and one of his kids taking a swim

I sure hope it wasn't in the actual gulf.


Really irritated though at Harry Reid. Obama won't show backbone but Reid pulls a doozy on the mosque. sorry what country are we in?? o_O

[Chulanowa]

41. Self-delete

misread your post :)

[PatrynXX]

58. well considering I went off on a tangent with reid

I can understand that. I'd just read the Reid thing and had two items in the brain at the time. sigh. too many craps coming out at once.

[mimitabby]

70. +++1

[geomon666]

2. Somebody forgot to buy these guys off? n/t

[NC_Nurse]

3. They must've slipped through the BP blockade.

[lark]

4. Gibbs will get em

They aren't keeping the president's lies hidden and he won't like that.

[Javaman]

45. Yeah, Gibbs will call them "professional scientists" LOL nt

[Divernan]

66. Good one!

n/t

[Ignis]

20. I sense a "persuasive" visit in their future.

[DirkGently]

80. Those are great.

[liberalmike27]

5. As Someone

who lives in Mobile Alabama, near the Gulf, I think I can honestly say that little bit of propaganda about the oil "disappearing," was almost totally rejected as BS.

[INdemo]

23. Yes well I was wondering just how damn dumb the Obama administration

thought we were. I really could expect something like this from a Bush administration but for Obama to lay this kind of BS on us was just unbelievable.This pretty much was the final nail that convinced me that Obama is a total corporatist and far from being the man he lead us to believe he was during the campaign.

[TroglodyteScholar]

52. It's really embarrassing how ridiculous the claim was...

"Oh, don't worry, Mother Nature's taken care of it!"

BTW my conservative parents are in Mobile...1/3 of their business has disappeared since the oil started gushing, and they still tend to give BP the benefit of the doubt. To their credit, though, they never asked me why Obama didn't fix it sooner. I know a lot of the small government types were more than ready to lay this at his feet.

[Autumn]

6. What a surprise. It was disgusting

watching our Government and BP saying it was gone.

[ixion]

7. gee, no kidding...

Now if those responsible would only be held accountable.

[HockeyMom]

8. USF scientists said the same weeks ago

They were told to "shut up".

[mbperrin]

9. Oh, no! You mean when I dissolve sugar in my tea, it's not gone!

Shoots my diet to hell, I tell you.












Yes, the government and BP do think we're that dumb.

[tom_paine]

10. Someone call BP and give those scientists some of that BP lucre. That'll shut 'em up.

:sarcasm: (but sadly, not that much sarcasm)

:puke:

[howaboutme]

11. Just like 9-11 and the WTC

It is in the government and President's interest to say everything is now hunky dory, but just like at the WTC and 9-11 it isn't. There is nothing in it for the administration to claim that 80% of the oil is still nesting in the gulf waiting to harm aquatic life and the environment. They want to put it behind them just as others did and covered up the true facts. They want it covered up just like BP.

[Demit]

12. The comments at that link are hilarious.

Most of them are skeptical of the scientists who either "want your money" or who just "sit behind a desk and analyze reports and think they are 'experts'." They want the scientists to prove that the oil is still there.

One writer explains why we shouldn't jump to the conclusion that the University of Ga study is right. He or she says, very confidently: "Oil does not dissolve, it gets broken up into smaller and smaller particles that get consumed by microorganisms. oil come from things that were once living, therefore all it is to some small living ogranizms is food."


And I suppose THEN it disappears!

[underpants]

13. Hold on- you mean Rush is talking out of his ass?

The "oil is gone" "it was never a problem" is a standard of the news bubble that he started on his show.

[SILVER__FOX52]

14. Anybody with common sense knew there was more then

25 % left. The real question is, will the Federal Government acknowledge these numbers? If not, why?

[metapunditedgy]

15. I hope these scientists don't face reprisal... scientists need grant money. n/t

[anachro1]

16. How can the oil be gone?

They were dumping dispersants on the oil. Did these chemicals 'break down' the oil's contents to the point that most of the chemicals simply sank to the bottom? I would guess this is how dispersants work, but I'm only guessing.

I call BULLSHIT on the oil being gone.

[JJW]

17. Another leak to plug

Leaking information. Plug the hole!

[MsPithy]

18. DAMMIT!

What am I supposed to do with the MISSION ACCOMPLISHED banner?

[BeFree]

21. Thanks for the laugh

But Obama, unlike bush was wont to do, will never claim mission accomplished.

I hope.

[MsPithy]

31. You may want to take back your "Thanks."

It was the Obama administration, Carol Browner, who said that 75% of the worst oil spill in history was gone. I'm so sorry, but you need to know the unhappy truth. Politifact gives Browner's performance a "half truth," I think it at least 75% smarmy cover-up.


http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2010/aug/16/carol-browner/carol-browner-says-three-quarters-oil-spilled-gulf/

[ProfessionalLeftist]

19. Oh my THAT'S a surprise....

... :sarcasm:

[CocaNova]

24. Yes,yes.

I'm totally dumbfounded about this.

[Beacool]

22. I thought that it sounded too good to be true.

How can that massive amount of oil have disappeared when they are still finding oil globs from the Ixtoc spill and that happened in 1979?

:-(

[HillbillyBob]

51. That was where my reasoning went.

If there is still oil from Valdez disaster, then the oil from BPs mess is STILL going to be in/under the sand on the coast and inland poisoning the sea critters nurseries for quite some time.

I understand that warmer climate will deteriorate oil faster, but not in mere weeks or months its going to take years.

When I was a kid we had an oil burner furnace and the oil delivery guy was clumsy and spilled 2 or 3 gallons of diesel fuel beside the tank..that was about 140 feet from our well head.. in 2 wks that oil got into our well and took almost a year to finally clear out. In the mean time we had to haul in water.

[Beacool]

94. It appears that there's more than oil under the sand.

Mainly the B.S. spewed by BP, the WH and the right wingers like Limbaugh. It's as if they all expect us to pretend that the spill was not a big deal and now all is A-OK. Shame on them all!!!

x(

[FedUpWithIt All]

25. Finally.

It was just too beyond belief that the BP talking points were going uncontested. After all the lies and deceit, payoffs and unethical behavior how could anything they, or their lackeys, say be taken seriously. Of course the oil is still there...:think:

[earcandle]

26. Did somebody lie to Obama and Shasha? I hope they weren't in the oily water with dispersants... yuk

[madrchsod]

28. i thought everything as a -ok....

it really is confusing because everyone has an opinion on what the truth is...

[HCE SuiGeneris]

29. It's meant to be confusing. Much harder to have the peasants unite against the tyranny.

[earcandle]

32. But we have brains! We are the Professional Left! We have a nomenclature now! We are in!

Go to work, boys and girls!  
We are doing something great very soon.
Can we invest some of our money in social security to create
capital, build banks, or build credit unions? 

What can we do to help ourselves?  We are the labor force and
the consumer who provides all of this money for taxation
but this is for services for us, not for the elite to use as
they might when we do not stand up for what America is about.
IT CAN BE DONE WITH LANGUAGE, for sure.

[cwydro]

30. Of course it is not gone.

What kind of idiot would think after hundreds of thousands of gallons of oil spewed out that it would all be gone?

I mean, other than our government and BP?

[peacetalksforall]

33. Well finally. That makes more sense. There are no magicians, just normal people who

have been taught to think for themselves and simple, simple logic says no bugs are that big that they can devour the oil and leave beatifully composted ocean floors with new coral popping up already and plenty of plankton.

Who started the grandest lie since the bailout?

[tomm2thumbs]

34. bbbbut the magic oil eating plankton ate everything and burped pure, fresh air into the sky

didn't they realize that?

[crim son]

35. Misinterpretation of data, huh?

We all knew this, so it's impossible that Obama didn't know this, yet he took his daughters for a swim. I guess he figured the risk to he and his family is minimal and fuck the rest of us. Or?

[JJW]

37. Drug Testing

Gibbs, you might want to drug test Carol Browner, Obama's top adviser on energy.

Is anyone going to resign or get fired for lying to us? Does the buck still stop on Obama's desk or he does he figure his cover has been blown by now and we all realize he is just a puppet for Wall Street.

[SammyWinstonJack]

92. Cover blown and a puppet for Wall Street gets my vote.

:thumbsup:

[orleans]

38. flashback to bush administration

everything new is old again

[AllTooEasy]

39. So now we are believing redneck Georgia scientists?!

I'm sorry, but I need a second opinion. These clowns probably voted for Bush.

[Dr.Phool]

42. We already had one from USF.

They were politely told to shut up.

[thereismore]

49. Empirical science requires confirmation but you sound like you don't

believe Georgians can do science. Can you?

[Dawgs]

65. Uh, Athens Georgia is pretty fucking liberal.

Have you ever been there? Didn't think so, you ignorant shit.

[Stuckinthebush]

77. No kidding

Plus it has become one of the premiere universities in the south in the past decade.

I guess there are still people who believe that if it is in the south then it has to be stupid.

Jesus.

[Hosnon]

88. You're kidding, right? nt.

[Q3JR4]

40. This story, right here, makes two spectacular points.

First and foremost science will not be denied. Scientific consensus is reached when a majority of the evidence points in one direction. You may pay off ten or a hundred scientists to your way of thinking, but you can never forget about the thousands of individual scientists who have access to the same data that you do. Obscure the truth how you want, but if the scientific evidence is not there to back up your version of events it will get you nowhere.

Second, how many people do you think got paid off to try to hoodwink the public? How long did it take for the truth to come out? Even with the vast power of the federal government behind the attempt, clear unambiguous evidence came forth to disavow the claims. So I ask you, where is the clear unambiguous evidence of a U.S. plot to destroy the World Trade Center? Or a plot to cover up alien visitations? Or a plot to kill Kennedy? Or a plot to cover up the moon landings?

The simple fact of the matter is that the more people you have to involve in your conspiracy theory of choice, the less able you will be to control the flow of information.

Even given all this there is no doubt in my mind that some will use this research to say, "I told you so," but will shout from the heavens about the miracles of equally disproved homeopathic remedies while grumbling about the U.S. plot to bring down the World Trade Center.

Use the evidence when it suits you but piss away everything that disagrees with your previous conclusions. It's how things are done I suppose.

Q3JR4.

[L0oniX]

56. If you want to cover up the truth ...put the military in charge of it.

[lonestarnot]

43. Welp deteefuckingdee.

[xchrom]

44. should we drug test them? nt

[progressoid]

46. Huh, imagine that.

[Javaman]

47. Just last week there were a whole slew of defenders on DU...

supporting the "75% of the oil is gone" trope.

Where are they now?

crickets.

[Horse with no Name]

83. Not in this thread

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=8952198&mesg_id=8952474

[Uncle Joe]

48. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, cory.

[valerief]

50. No, no, no, they mean it's gone FROM VIEW. And that's all that counts.

Do I really need the sarcasm tag?

[MBS]

53. I'm glad to see the real facts getting out there n/t

[obxhead]

54. No shit. nt

[L0oniX]

55. Don't worry. What you can't see or what you don't ingest cannot harm you.

In other news, Texas scientist released findings today that a daily cup of crude oil (instead of coffee) increases your lifespan by 3 minutes per cup. Hearing these results, BP announced that it is starting hostile takeover bids of Starbucks, Dunkin Donuts, and Waffle House.

[jeff47]

57. That depends on the definition of "oil"

In this case, both the government and these scientists are correct. They're just describing 2 different things as "oil".

The majority of the oil is out of the water, if you define oil as the crude oil that came out of the well. Most of the lighter molecules would have evaporated, and most of the heavier molecules would have sunk to the gulf floor.

If you define oil to include the tars and other heavy molecules, then it's still there as the GA scientists claim...but it's technically not oil, it's tar.

[bobalew]

64. Even Tar floats

Depending on the specific gravity of the water it's in.... Dispersed oil, is nothing more than a suspension, eventually it will recombine with other things & float back up the surface, or agglomerate & do the same.

[jeff47]

86. It also depends on the specific gravity of the tar.

Admittely "Tar sinks" is an oversimplification but this is DU, not Nature.

[DirkGently]

59. But if we can't SEE it, it doesn't EXIST. Uh, right?

[KansDem]

60. More dispersant! We need more dispersant!

Dispersant will make the oil go away. It'll make it disperse!

[Vinca]

61. Out of sight, out of mind coming back to bite big time.

[NorthCarolina]

62. Out of sight, out of mind. That's the hope anyway. eom

[nalnn]

63. The Oil

Where is it? What will happen with it now? What will happen to it next? Next year? 10 years from now?

[Botany]

67. Guess BP wasn't able to buy these scientists

n/t

[jpak]

68. The UGA report & Federal Science Report say the same thing - most of the oil remains in the Gulf

The August 4 Federal Science Report stated the following:

http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2010/PDFs/OilBudget...

26% of the oil remains the ocean surface, below the surface or in beaches and marshes - it is still there and did not "disappear". This was stated explicitly in the FSR.

24% of the oil was dispersed chemically or naturally - it is still there and and not "disappear". This was stated explicitly in the FSR.

25% evaporated or dissolved. FSR did not break this down into how much was dissolved in the water column and how much evaporated - while the evaporated fraction was presumably removed from the ocean surface (and did not get redeposited in precipitation), the dissolved fraction is still there and did not "disappear"...and...NOAA has posted the CTD profiles that measured the dissolved fraction on-line...

http://www.noaa.gov/sciencemissions/bpoilspill.html

25% of the oil was recovered at the wellhead, burned off or skimmed. That portion of the oil was removed from the Gulf and actually did "disappear".

So, the FSR concluded 50% of the oil remains in the Gulf. Depending on how much oil dissolved in the water column, the FSR estimate of Deep Horizon oil remaining in the Gulf is greater than 50% and as much as 60% remains - it did not "disappear".

The University of Georgia estimate of the fate of the oil was reported in the media this morning - it stated that 70-79% of the oil remains in the Gulf.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/08/17/gulf.oil.disaster/inde...

The full UGA report has not been released. It is a memo. Their data, methods and assumptions have not been reported.

Neither the UGA memo or Federal Science Report has been peer reviewed.

So where did all the oil go?

Both reports clearly state that most of oil (>50-79%) remains in the Gulf.

So where do folks get the notion that it has "disappeared"?

[pleah]

69. K&R Now, tell me something I don't know. lol n/t

[dipsydoodle]

71. Scientists Say as Much as 79% of Oil Remains in Gulf of Mexico

Source: Bloomberg

A group of scientists says as much as 79 percent of BP Plc’s leaked oil remains in the Gulf of Mexico, challenging an Obama administration assessment that the crude is largely gone or rapidly disappearing.

Most of the oil that leaked from BP’s Macondo well from April 20 to July 15 is still beneath the water’s surface, five scientists including Samantha Joye, a professor of marine sciences at the University of Georgia in Athens, concluded in a memo made public yesterday. The researchers say they drew upon the U.S. government’s study while reaching different conclusions.

The Obama administration’s Aug. 4 report indicated that almost three-fourths of the crude that leaked has disappeared or soon will be eaten by bacteria. Jane Lubchenco, administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, has said at least half of the oil released is now “completely gone.”

Read more: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-08-17/scientists-say-79-of-spilled-oil-may-remain-challenging-administration.html

[LWolf]

72. Where, exactly, was the oil supposed to have gone?

Of course it's still there.

[jpak]

73. The media seriously misrepresented the Federal Science Report on the BP spill

The August 4 Federal Science Report stated the following:

http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2010/PDFs/OilBudget...

26% of the oil remains the ocean surface, below the surface or in beaches and marshes - it is still there and did not "disappear". This was stated explicitly in the FSR.

24% of the oil was dispersed chemically or naturally - it is still there and did not "disappear". This was stated explicitly in the FSR.

25% evaporated or dissolved. FSR did not break this down into how much was dissolved in the water column and how much evaporated - while the evaporated fraction was presumably removed from the ocean surface (and did not get redeposited in precipitation), the dissolved fraction is still there and did not "disappear"...and...NOAA has posted the CTD profiles that measured the dissolved fraction on-line...

http://www.noaa.gov/sciencemissions/bpoilspill.html

25% of the oil was recovered at the wellhead, burned off or skimmed. That portion of the oil was removed from the Gulf and actually did "disappear".

So, the FSR concluded 50% of the oil remains in the Gulf. Depending on how much oil dissolved in the water column, the FSR estimate of Deep Horizon oil remaining in the Gulf is greater than 50% and as much as 60% remains - it did not "disappear".

The University of Georgia estimate of the fate of the oil was reported in the media this morning - it stated that 70-79% of the oil remains in the Gulf.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/08/17/gulf.oil.disaster/inde...

The full UGA report has not been released. It is a memo. Their data, methods and assumptions have not been reported.

Neither the UGA memo or Federal Science Report has been peer reviewed.

So where did all the oil go?

Both reports clearly state that most of oil (>50-79%) remains in the Gulf.

So where do folks get the notion that it has "disappeared"?

[Go2Peace]

76. And unfortunately so did the administration

This should be a teaching moment to educate the population to what is at risk and to strengthen the importance of environmental regulation and assessment.

Instead, the message is "there is no risk or problem, nature will take care of it"

[joeybee12]

79. Exactly...n/t

[jpak]

101. No they did not - the UGA group stated that the media seriously misrepresented

the Federal Science Report on the spill - and confirmed their conclusions

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=bookmark&forum=389&topic_id=8968473

yup

[Go2Peace]

104. No, the administration actually had meetings and told progressive media

the same thing. Ed Schultz was on the air the next day. He said it was hard to believe but the administration insisted that most of the oil was gone. He was not critisizing what they said, he believed them and spread that disinformation unknowingly.

[Phillip Walker]

103. Good post

Thanks for the info.

[femrap]

74. Eaten by bacteria????

Dissolved by Corexit??? Who eats the Corexit???

If the admin says it, I don't believe it. Especially about the GOM. The admin says what BP tells it to say.

[jeff47]

85. Lots of ways Corexit breaks down.

Corexit is a chemical soup, after all. Each component will have it's own way of breaking down.

Some of it is unstable, and breaks down all on it's own.
Some of it is has a relatively low boiling point, so it evaporates.
Some of it is dispersed through enough water to be considered 'gone' (aka undetectable)
Some of it is eaten by bacteria, which use it as a food source.
Some of it is eaten/absorbed by other lifeforms, to which it's toxic.

[femrap]

90. Corexit seems to me

to be a crime against Mother Nature. What the Corporations get away with. Fuck Nalco.

[jeff47]

95. Normally, I'd agree with you

But crude oil is more toxic than Corexit, at least according to the EPA. Since the Corexit helps to mitigate the oil, it is useful in this narrow case.

[Uncle Joe]

75. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, dipsydoodle.

[Frisbee]

78. So the new definition of misinterpret = to deceive?

[Horse with no Name]

81. The apologists here are spinning so fast it makes you dizzy

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=8952198&mesg_id=8952474

[nightrain]

82. knr. I'm so disgusted that we are consistently lied to. Of course BP couldn't

have swooped up 75% of the millions of gallons, even with ?evaporation or whatever naturally might occur.

I didn't go to Harvard, but even I could figure that out!

[earth mom]

84. Of course the oil isn't gone. Anyone who thought it was is in denial.

:argh:

[MellowDem]

87. The report said 74% of the oil was dissolved, correct?

Wasn't it the media idiots who said "gone", not the government? (Not to mention some elected idiots). So this report is saying that 20% is "gone" completely. The only interesting thing would be if they came up with a different number for dissolved oil. Of course it is a misinterpretation of the data to claim dissolved means "gone", but I think that's more an indictment of the many on here and in the media who looked at it exactly that way, and were incredulous as a result.

[LTX]

97. Rationality regarding the studies

seems to be the last thing anyone around here wants. The topic seems to have devolved into a contest to "prove" that the entire Gulf is a poison cesspool, and that the President is an evil liar. But of course, things aren't so conveniently monochrome.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8967119

[Yeahyeah]

89. They haven't fired up the Atlantis stargate which will transport it to Mars' oil-guzzling Face?

I may have been misinformed.

[DeSwiss]

91. These are the scientists.....

...that receive no federal funding, right?

- Well if they did, they won't anymore.....

K&R

[LTX]

102. Actually, USF scientists are working under a BP grant,

and the grant remains fully funded and active.

[BrklynLiberal]

93. You mean the gubmint LIED TO US!!!?????

I am shocked, I tell you..just shocked.
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_zoBTKiA4xhM/SAN6YgybOlI/AAAAAAAABsg/glfRtY8e4G0/s320/Casablanca+02.jpg

[LTX]

96. No, "the gubmint" didn't "lie to us."

Sheesh.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8967119

[BrklynLiberal]

98. Guess I just trust the scientists at the University of South Florida and the University of Georgia

more than I trust the government and BP spokespersons who might have more reason to lie and cover up the true extent of the devastation that is still ongoing in the Gulf.

http://peoplesworld.org/oil-still-a-problem-in-the-gulf-scientists-warn/

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

http://www.redorbit.com/news/science/1906041/much_oil_remains_in_gulf_scientists_claim/

Much Oil Remains In Gulf, Scientists Claim

Posted on: Wednesday, 18 August 2010, 09:55 CDT


"The oil is not gone, that's for sure. There is oil and we need to deal with it," scientist David Hollander told Borenstein on Tuesday. He also told the AP reporter that two out of every five plankton samples that his team retrieved from depths of between 900 and 3,300 feet "some degree of toxicity" and that the pollutants that are poisoning them could linger for an indeterminate amount of time.

The USF and Georgia reports contradict comments made by NOAA chief Jane Lubchenco, who on August 4 told reporters that "at least 50-percent" of the oil that had been leaking out of the BP-leased Deepwater Horizon oil rig for more than three months "is now completely gone from the system, and most of the remainder is degrading rapidly or is being removed from the beaches."

[LTX]

99. Here's the UGA report:

http://uga.edu/aboutUGA/joye_pkit/GeorgiaSeaGrant_OilSpillReport8-16.pdf

You will note that, regarding the NIC report and the issues of dispersed oil, the UGA report states the following:

"This group determined that the media interpretation of the report’s findings has been largely
inaccurate and misleading. Oil that the NIC report categorizes as Evaporated or Dissolved,
Naturally Dispersed and Chemically Dispersed has been widely interpreted by the media to mean
“gone” and no longer a threat to the ecosystem. However, this group believes that most of the
dissolved and dispersed forms of oil are still present and not necessarily harmless."

Rather different from the media hype.

In addition, the UGA report has not been subjected to peer review, makes clear that it is a preliminary assessment and requires follow up research, and has been been critisized by some as overly pessimisstic regarding degradation rates and non-inclusive of immediate containment estimates. In short, there is no nifty story line about "lying government scientists," there is no "cover up," and there is no side to pick.

As for the USF report, I understood that USF was going to release a report on August 17 concerning the samples collected by their research ship, the Weatherbird II, during its August 6 sampling cruise. I don't see that report posted on their information page:

http://guides.lib.usf.edu/content.php?pid=121415&sid=10...

The only synopsis of the USF Weatherbird II August 6 sampling cruise that I can find is the following:

"The researchers found micro-droplets of oil scattered across the ocean floor and they also found those droplets moving up through a part of the Gulf called the DeSoto Canyon, a channel which funnels water and nutrients into the popular commercial and recreational waters along the Florida Gulf Coast. The scientists say even though it's getting harder to see the oil the Gulf is still not safe."

Brief as it is, this synopsis is consistent with the full analysis of the earlier Weatherbird II samples from May 23-26, which can found here:

http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2010/PDFs/noaa_weat...

Thus, the enormous, bold print story that you provide about there being a contradictory USF "report" appears to media hogwash.

And to assuage your concerns about there being some kind of evil conspiracy to cover up information about the spill, its trajectory, and its consquences, I'll also provide the following for your perusal:

http://www.deepwaterhorizonresponse.com/go/doctype/2931... /

http://response.restoration.noaa.gov/dwh.php?entry_id=8... See, e.g.,

http://response.restoration.noaa.gov/book_shelf/1926_Tr...

http://response.restoration.noaa.gov/book_shelf/2056_NO...

http://response.restoration.noaa.gov/book_shelf/2418_lo...

http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2010/20100608_weath...

http://ocgweb.marine.usf.edu/models.html See, e.g.,

http://ocg6.marine.usf.edu/~liu/oil_spill_ensemble_fore...

http://ocgweb.marine.usf.edu/~liu/Drifters/latest_rtofs...

http://gohsep.la.gov/oilspill.aspx

http://www.dep.state.fl.us/deepwaterhorizon/default.htm

http://www.arcgis.com/home/group.html?owner=ESRI_respon...

http://news.sciencemag.org/oilspill /

[LTX]

100. Oh, and by the way, the scientists at the University of South Florida

are working under a BP grant.