# Underwater Oil Plume



## markw4321 (Oct 4, 2007)

I have read some posts here on the PFF that indciate that some here don't believethat oil from thespill can move underwater in plumes. Well here is some verificationthat it can and will from two of our own locals. </h1><a href="http://www.pnj.com/article/20100606/SPORTS/6060320/1017/NEWS14">http://www.pnj.com/article/20100606/SPORTS/6060320/1017/NEWS14</a></h1>Fishermen's worst fears come true</h1><h2></h2><span class=gslAutUserPhoto id=gslshowAuthImg><p class=ratingbyline>Jamie Secola ? [email protected] ? June 6, 2010</p><!--*individual*: 9 numChar :2114
--><!--
TOTAL ELEMENTS IN ARRAY: 13
TOTAL CHARACTERS IN ARRAY: 2706
TOTAL CHARACTERS IN PAGES: 2114
LAST PAGE CONTAINS: 592
--><!--Saxotech Paragraph Count: 13
--><span class=pp><span class=pp>Capt. Paul Redman and Sean McLemore have feared the worst for weeks.<span class=aa>

<span class=adlabel-horz>On Wednesday, their darkest suspicions were confirmed. That was when McLemore came up from a dive drenched in oil while the two were on a private fishing trip.<span class=aa><span class=pp>"When I came up, I said this is my last dive, maybe ever. I knew I wasn't going to be doing it for a long time after that," McLemore said. "I had oil on my face, on my ears, around my neck. It looked like I had a full suit on."<span class=aa>

<h3>Just below the surface</h3><span class=pp>McLemore happened upon a plume of oil that was about 60 feet below the surface about nine miles offshore from Pensacola Beach, he said. He described the line of oil as being about 8 to 10 feet in depth.<span class=aa>

<span class=pp>"The situation is this: We hear about these large plumes of oil the size of Massachusetts (on the surface) and all this stuff, but how many of these (underwater plumes) are there?" Redman asked. "And how many are we going to expect on our beaches for the next however long it's going to happen?"<span class=aa>

<span class=pp>"This happened within the area that is supposed to be uncontaminated," Redman added. "This is the good-to-go stuff where everything is supposed to be OK. And it's not. It's B.S."<span class=aa>

<h3>The horror</h3><span class=pp>Redman is the president of the Pensacola Charter Boat Association and a commercial fisherman, a tradition in his family that goes back two generations. He's also running for Gene Valentino's county commission seat so he can further promote the interests of fishermen.<span class=aa>

<span class=pp>He and McLemore told their stories at a captain's meeting for the Queen of Kings Women's King Mackerel Tournament at Paradise Bar & Grill. But because the tournament was canceled Friday, the meeting became a place for the fishermen to commiserate.<span class=aa>

<span class=pp>As Redman expressed his sadness over what's happening in the Gulf, McLemore interrupted to describe what he saw on his dive.<span class=aa>

<span class=pp>"The best way I can describe it is if you have a bowl of clear water and take dark food coloring and drop it in," McLemore said. "Imagine what it does at first. That's what it looked like the whole way down. The oil is either going to sink or come on the beach. Either way, it's really going to tear up everything."<span class=aa>

<span class=pp>Redman's primary concern is the effects oil will have on the many artificial reefs fishermen have placed throughout the Gulf over the years.<span class=aa>

<span class=pp>"This is our bread and butter," Redman said. "We built this fishery, and it's been taken from us. Personally, I've spent hundreds of thousands of dollars putting these artificial reefs on natural bottom to enhance our fishery, and it's gone. It's done.<span class=aa>

<span class=pp>"I built this for my children ? for my son who wants to fish for a living. That's what he lives for. It's what I live for. All I've ever wanted to do was fish. Now, I have to clean up oil to survive."<span class=aa>


<span class=adlabel-horz>
<BANNER id=__gelement_adbanner_0 position="ArticleFlex_1"></BANNER>


----------



## GatorTamer (Oct 3, 2007)

While fishing for snapper last Wednesday, Team Lawless and I tore the snapper up 15-17 miles out. On the way back in we stopped at a couple of tugs that usually hold many different species of fish. I immediately noticed the lack of activity on the bottom machine, and then I noticed the sheen in the water and started to but two and two together....... no fish, oil sheen, PLUME. I pray the fish are not dead but leaving the area.


----------



## sealark (Sep 27, 2007)

Don't start pinging on me, but I find if funny that with ALL those fisherman and or Divers on that trip that No one had a cell phone or Camera to take a picture of the oil drenched Diver. I guess I am saying trust but verify a picture says a thousand words.


----------



## markw4321 (Oct 4, 2007)

> *sealark (07/06/2010)*Don't start pinging on me, but I find if funny that with ALL those fisherman and or Divers on that trip that No one had a cell phone or Camera to take a picture of the oil drenched Diver. I guess I am saying trust but verify a picture says a thousand words.


For your verificationmaybe Captain Redman and or Sean McLemore would care to comment on what they saw. Both are members here on the PFF.

Mark


----------



## FLWhaler (Oct 1, 2007)

I for one believe them. If you choose to think this is BS stick your head in the sand and ignore the obvious. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize all of this oil is going somewhere. Why would you be think the gulf coast here is exempt.


----------



## markw4321 (Oct 4, 2007)

I believe them as well.

Mark


----------



## FLbeachbum (Jul 17, 2008)

It's my understanding that Capt Redman is a stand up guy and is well respected within the fishing community. What does he have to benefit by making this up.


----------



## Diesel (Jan 9, 2008)

Free publicity and a county commission seat. :angel

Actually, I believe there are oil plumes out there and I have no reason to doubt the report, just being confrontational.

I also believe the coast will recover, I just hope and pray they get the flow stopped soon, then recovery can begin.


----------



## Diesel (Jan 9, 2008)

#


> *sealark (07/06/2010)*Don't start pinging on me, but I find if funny that with ALL those fisherman and or Divers on that trip that No one had a cell phone or Camera to take a picture of the oil drenched Diver. I guess I am saying trust but verify a picture says a thousand words.



#1 Sealark, this thread is worthless without pics.


----------



## jspooney (Oct 2, 2007)

Yeah, these two guys are gonna lie about oil. Right. It's all a publicity stunt. Sure. Give me a break. Of all people who would lie, these two are not the ones. If you want picts b/c you don't believe them, go blow your own bubbles. Geeez... What an insult. Tell a blind guy that posts are worth nothing without pictures and see if you have any teeth left.


----------



## sealark (Sep 27, 2007)

Well let me see that's two people that want to give someone bodily harm for an opinion. And yes I am going out this AM and Diving (with Camera) so maybe I can produce pictures. I'm not calling anyone a lier I have seen planton blumes at this time of the year that completely block out the sun and look like everyone describes except that there is NO oil in a planton bloom just whale food. So please don't knock my teeth out as I don't have many left at my age.


----------



## Evensplit (Oct 2, 2007)

There have been dozens of trips and hundreds of divers out over the last few weeks and not one that I have talked to has reported any problems with oil in our area. 

From what we're seeing and hearing, I'dguess that what Paul and Sean ran into was an isolated patch of oil /dispersant.


----------



## CatCrusher (Jan 18, 2009)

We dove out to 20 miles of perdido pass opening day with lots of surface oil but nothing below it. Did see some big globs down to 15 feet but it wasnt oily maybe the plankton blooms sealark was referring too. I'm not on either side here just posting what I saw in the area I was in.


----------



## bmoore (Oct 10, 2007)

Id like to see a picture...not saying it didn't happen, but a picture wouldbegood for verification. :takephoto

Hey Spooney...a blind guy would have a hard time hitting me....Im a "quiet" fellow.


----------



## Realtor (Oct 1, 2007)

I think there is something out there, wonder where these guys were diving, how far out, to the east or west? None the less, it's a mess.


----------



## brnbser (Oct 1, 2007)

wow! pretty straight up confrontational especially toward a couple of our own.......had it been the govt or bp, I could see your skepticism but I sat and watched a video on abc last week of two guys offshore diving in hazmat suits and videoing a huge underwater plume, yes it was well sw of here but you can pretty much bet if it's there, it will be here........

go find the plume Ron and then reconsider your call out of Paul.

there are more people that I don't trust in this world than there are I do trust........Paul's one I do


----------



## sealark (Sep 27, 2007)

Left at 3 AM made three dives as far as 6 miles off shore, No oil of any kind there was a lot of plankton on surface. At night with light shining you could see all the millions of tiny creatures flipping around from the light. got down to about 70 feet and vis was great below the thrmalcline Vis in the plankton was like a foot. So I have no pictures of my blackened body from oil to show. No comment on my catch....


----------



## seanmclemore (Aug 20, 2008)

those of you who know me know i'm not stranger to replyingto criticism...

first off, the media can make you imagine what they want you to imagine. i told pnj that i had a film of oil on my suit and that i had some heavier patches. they made me sound like a seagull washing up on the beach...NONE THE LESS, i know that most of you have kids, imagine that they had a film of oil on their head and in their ears...I'M SURE NOBODY ON THE PFF WOULD TELL ANYBODY, RIGHT!!!!

NOW, when i got out of the water, the last thing i was worried about at the time was trying to get a picture of an oil film...i was going straight for the beer cooler. i was so pissed off at the whole situation that i could have thrown up. immediately after slamming a cold budlight, i grabbed my camera and took a picture of the bottom machine which was reading the thickest part of the oil at 60 feet.

I KNOW YOU GUYS/GALS CAN READ A BOTTOM MACHINE










this pic was as we drifted well away from the structure as you can tell by the bottom it is nice and flat. (don't bust my balls for having it in the goldfish mode :satisfied: ) there were actually fish swimming through that thick layer like it was a drug to them. they were acting different than i have ever seen fish act. if you notice there aren't any fish on the bottom....they weren't on the bottom on the barge i was diving....they were above me...it was nuts. i keep getting the comments that i don't know what i saw, or i am full of shit, and there is no oil out there because "we haven't seen any"....if you don't beleive the oil is out there GO TO THE BEACH PEOPLE!

now, some people think i am single handedly going to screw their businesses/livelyhood by telling a story of what happened and what i saw.and if theywould stop and think about who i am they SHOULD know better. i wanted everybody to know what IS actually happening out there under the surface...for one reason only. every one of us eats fish, most of you are still going or gunna go untill the last day possible. PAY ATTENTION TO THE INSIDE OF YOUR FISH!!!! who knows what this is, i have contacted UWF, and the gulf coast reasearch lab to try to find out what is going on in these fish.

we kept the snappers from this spot seperate from the rest (as good as possible)...when we got to the cleaning table we found what appeared to be some sort of internal bleed/hemorage/bruise/growth....whatever u want to call it. captain paul, my dad, myself, and a few others that were on the boat who have killed/cleaned their share of fish have never seen anything like this.




























NOW DON'T YOU GUYS THINK IF I WAS GOING TO LIE ABOUT SOMETHING IT WOULD BE ABOUT THE FISH THAT GOT AWAY. the oil irritated me so bad i didn't even get on here to brag about a few good days of snapper killin....oh, well may as well do it now.










(150qt cooler by the way)




























oh, and there weren't any waterspouts out there either...










can't believe there are people out there that believe that if they haven't seen it personally, then it didn't happen or doesn't exist. 

i sure was looking forward to the spearfishing tournaments this year. THANKS BP!


----------



## Gulf Coast Outfitters (Oct 8, 2007)

Wow, I have never seen the internal bleeding like that at all before. I have seen worms in fish but thats about it. Any chance of taking the bleeding fish to UWF or something?


----------



## A Salt Weapon (May 11, 2010)

Why are you jumping on Ron (sealark) for asking about pictures. I would have expected pictures too. They would speak volumes over a tale about oil covering your body and that you "may never dive again". You took a picture of the bottom machine but none of the "chocolate milk" covering you? 

And to the guy that said to say that to a blind guy and see how many teeth are left. How is he gonna know where to swing? What a jack ass coment. 

Ron is a veteran and has a TON of dives under him and I respect the man.


----------



## sealark (Sep 27, 2007)

> *brnbser (08/06/2010)*wow! pretty straight up confrontational especially toward a couple of our own.......had it been the govt or bp, I could see your skepticism but I sat and watched a video on abc last week of two guys offshore diving in hazmat suits and videoing a huge underwater plume, yes it was well sw of here but you can pretty much bet if it's there, it will be here........
> 
> go find the plume Ron and then reconsider your call out of Paul.
> 
> there are more people that I don't trust in this world than there are I do trust........Paul's one I do


Scott I haven't called anyone out or a lier I just want to see a picture of the oil. As for the cousteau in a hasmat suit I say the same thing Plankton I looked at that picture many times and it looked ex actually like what I dove through a couple weeks ago. When Cousteau came out did he have any oil on him hell no he was as clean as I was at 3 AM this morning after coming out of the water after swimming through a almost zero vis brownish media. If I did go find a plume I would photograph it and post it on here for everyone to see.


----------



## Realtor (Oct 1, 2007)

Nice mess of fish, I just think everyone (most) are so full of the news and media, they are just confused (including me) as to what is REALLY going on in our GOM.

I mean, think about it, who can we believe? The media has us going on one direction, while another channel has us going in another. best info thus far is coming from the PFF and other local forums.

I just hope and pray this stupid thing gets turned off and we can get back to what we all do best.

have a good one.


----------



## Runned Over (Sep 6, 2008)

I don't think Ron was being confrontational at all, skeptical sure, but not confrontational. 

If you read the original article, there was ALOT OF DRAMA in it. (sensationalized??)

Looking at the bottom machine picture, that "plume" looks about 1 ft thick.

Did the diver try to disperse it before swimming thru it? Isn't it risky to dive thru it?

No one's at fault here except for the drama queen who wrote the story.


----------



## CrossCreek (May 22, 2010)

I am on no side in this.
If they say they saw oil, I'll take them at their word.
If someone else says they did not see oil, I'll take them at their word also.

But the cold hard fact is... with all the oil spewing into the Gulf every minute of each day..... <span style="text-decoration: underline;">it is there somewhere. 
Whether we see it or not right now........ it is there. 
One does not have to be a rocket scientist or oil field guru o figure that out.

Only so much will evaporate... the rest will either float or be dispersed somewhere in the water column.

And no sir, I am not a fatalist saying we are all doomed here on the Gulf. 

BUT, the cold hard truth of that statement also is that I really do not know. <span style="font-weight: bold;">Do any of you really know????

Do any of you really know what the long term effects of this oil and all the chemical dispersant will really be on the Gulf????
<br style="font-weight: bold;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">I am not talking about "opinions" or emotional "answers", no matter which side of the fence they are on . 
I am talking about the cold, hard, reality of what the affects will be...... <span style="font-weight: bold;">do any of you really know??????

Yeah, we can see the problems caused by the oil we can see.

What about that that we cannot see?

Does anybody out there really think that "out of sight, out of mind" means all is well in paradise?????

I sure don't, but then that again is just an opinion....... cause I really have no idea.

So, we can get on here all day long and call people liars, fatalists, non-liars non-fatalists....whatever, and throw e-punches at each other till we are tired........... and not accomplish one thing. 

<span style="font-weight: bold;">The cold hard fact is that untold hundreds of thousands of gallons of crap have been spewing into the Gulf every day since around 22 April 2010. We can see the short term effect of some of it.

What about that which we can't see?????? 
It is out there somewhere.... it did not just magically all disappear.
It will show up somewhere..... sometime.

Do you know where or what affect is is having on the Gulf till it does????
I sure don't..........

We will just have to wait and see..........
My .02...........


----------



## floridafisherman (Oct 1, 2007)

With BP spraying thousands of gallons of dispersant, how could there not be underwater oil plumes?!?!?!


----------



## CrossCreek (May 22, 2010)

> *floridafisherman (08/06/2010)*With BP spraying thousands of gallons of dispersant, how could there not be underwater oil plumes?!?!?!


Exactly...........


----------



## brnbser (Oct 1, 2007)

first thing to keep in mind here when throwing out barbs and skepticism and where all your comments first where directed at is that it's the mullet wrapper article with all it's hype and glory to sell copies, it was not Paul or Sean's words. but you immediately jumped on it with the I don't believe it, no proof, no pics...... again, it was the pnj's sensationalized story, not the words of the person.

now that an individual has posted, it wasn't the oil covered birds version, it was a thin layer. sure pics would have been nice and maybe shut several of you up before your rants started.

my point in all this being, several of you lit in on individuals (that are forum members and capable of stating their own words on here) based on a copy and pasted article from the new urinal instead of anything they had actuallycome on here and said to us.......

I'm a see it for myself type of person also (headed to the beach myself tomorrow w/ my daughters) and would have preferred proof/pics too but don't blast a member based off media sensationalism, go to the source and get an answer or at least their version instead of believing our trustworthy media.......


----------



## DVR6 (Jan 28, 2009)

Sorry but those were direct quotes according to the article. Here is just one: 

McLemore said. "I had oil on my face, on my ears, around my neck. It looked like I had a full suit on."

See the quotes there? If the PNJ misquoted he should have jumped on it and brought that to light and made them retract the article. 

Devils Advocate ---It is odd that they had all of those pictures but none of oil on the diver. The sounder could very well be showing plankton resting on the thermocline. Fish infrenzy act intoxicated, while eating on shrimp and small fish that live in the plankton. That snapper with the leasion could have been caused from a spear traveling through its body.Etc, Etc. Everyone hasthere own opinions.

I do know that their is nothing wrong with what sealark ask. Just had an inquiring mind and it was a logical question. If your gonna put yourself in thenews cyclethen youshould expect some scrutiny...

BTW sealark is one of those old Navy Divers most can only read about. Look at the hardhat rig he's in on his picture, you can only see those in museums for christ sake (MK-V). They were still writing the diving rules back then based on real time incidents. Hell, he probably has more time in the water thanmost of you have on this earth. He deserves some respect when asking a question as well. Just my opinion...


----------



## seanmclemore (Aug 20, 2008)

scrutiny i don't mind at all, and i have never had a problem with sealark...still don't. the quote that you are getting hung up on should have read i had it on my face etc, etc, AND MY SUIT. but who cares....because as you guy are saying, you haven't seen it so it aint there. as far as me saying "my last dive every" COME ON GUYS...YOU BELEIVE I AIN'T DIVING ANYMORE?????? next, yes i plowed a hole through the thicker stuff, no i didn't just go through without concern. none of the people making these comments have every dove with me, if you had you would know the level of experience i have in the water...that is in no way saying i have more experience than sealark or that i know more than jacques cousteau about things in the water. (this is the reason i have all but stopped posting on the forum too many people read too far into things.)

as far as the spot inside the fish, if you look at the snapper in the picture, it was hit in the top of the body (poor shot i know) and the spot is in the bellies. i would not have gone out of my way to contact uwf and others to analyze if it was from my speargun. i have killed more than my share of fish in the gulf of mexico...probly more than most peoples share in the last week. scrutiny i don't mind, if it actually made sense.

diving destin on thursday to try to find clean water...i hear its been clean at the oriskany, but pretty sure that federal waters are closed so i don't need to go there before anybodies panties get wadded up about the clean water comment.


----------



## bmoore (Oct 10, 2007)

Hey Sean,

Did you notice the red areas in the other fish besides the snapper?

Just courious. Snapper will travel up the water column...more so than say grouper.


----------



## brnbser (Oct 1, 2007)

don't get me wrong guys, I have known Ron for years and have the utmost respect for him. I'm just addressing my impression (opinion) of what was being said in the beginning of this thread.

I'm a diver also and have spent timetalking with Ron numerous times over the yrs and even been fortunate enough to have heard some of his stories and I'm retired Navy just like Ron also.....

I just don't subscribe to the sky is falling/alarmist mentality but I'm not naive enough to think there's no chance of oil plumes not being out there in our waters either.......expecially based off of the information I get that most never do.

The reports I get daily in speaking with the aircraft flying over the mess giving them a much better view than you or I will ever get from a boat or underwater aren't what I would like to hear either. I've been controlling tons of aircraft going to an from and operating out there since the day after the rig explosion and none of the info I've gotten is what I wanted or hoped to hear......and I'll leave it at that.

No harm/no foul/no mal intentRon, just stating my opinion and we all know how those are.........


----------



## CAPT. PAUL REDMAN (Oct 3, 2007)

<span style="font-weight: bold;">Here goes some free publicity so I can pretend to act concerned about our fishery and the surrounding waters in hopes it well help me get in the county commissioners seat give me a freaking break please. The information was shared amongst friends and was also passed on the FWC out of concern what was found in the fish we harvested . The talk grew and as you can imagine the media found out , just so happens that they are our new tourists (thousands of them on the beach).<br style="font-weight: bold;"><br style="font-weight: bold;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">As far as a picture of Sean I don't think it would have shown much it was equivalent to a heavy diesel sheen and made the entire boat a slippery mess. I am definitely not going to argue the point very much, but if you don't think that the equivalent of 8 or 10 Exxon valdeeze accidents and the amount of dispersant sprayed on that oil, that there are not hundreds if not thousands of smaller underwater plumes than the few big ones they've found I think your kidding yourselves.<br style="font-weight: bold;"><br style="font-weight: bold;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">I ALSO DON'T THINK WE SHOULD SPEND MILLIONS OF DOLLARS TO BRING TOURIST TO Florida i THINK THEY SHOULD EITHER PURCHASE RECOVERY EQUIPMENT OR GIVE THE MONEY TO THE TOURISM RELATED BUSINESSES ..TACKLE & DIVE SHOPS SEAFOOD RESTAURANTS AND HOTELS ETC.....<br style="font-weight: bold;"><br style="font-weight: bold;"><br style="font-weight: bold;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">If we were having a hurricane of or any other disaster we would ask them to stay away.<br style="font-weight: bold;"><br style="font-weight: bold;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Let me again say that this is in know way a publicity stunt if you dont think I have and always will have our fishery in my best interest you are kidding yourself.<br style="font-weight: bold;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">


----------



## jspooney (Oct 2, 2007)

Well put, Capt. Paul. My issue is not with the desire to see pictures, but with the clear insinuation that two respected guys on the forum are lying because no pictures are produced. I guess everyone has an opinion, it just irritated me. Perhaps just a "too bad you didn't take pictures, maybe you can take some next time" would be a better way to post. As for the blind guy knocking your teeth out remark, it was an analogy...not a threat. 

Brian...he would find you not by sound, but by smell. He'd smell the sushi on your breath! MMMMMMMM


----------



## markw4321 (Oct 4, 2007)

NOAA confirms underwater oil plumes-

<a href="http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1995234,00.html">http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1995234,00.html</a>


----------



## DVR6 (Jan 28, 2009)

Yes and if you read the NOAA and University papers they also make mention that these 'plumes' are being measured in ppm (parts per million). That is obviously invisible to the naked eye... To me, *from this data set only*it appears that the *subsea*oil is being effectively diluted within the water column. At least what has been found so far by NOAA.

From MSNBC----

<p class=textBodyBlack itxtvisited="1"><span id=byLine itxtvisited="1">"NOAA is confirming the presence of very low concentrations of subsurface oil at sampling depths ranging from the surface to 3,300 feet at locations 40 and 42 nautical miles northeast of the well site and another sampling station at 142 nautical miles southeast of the wellhead," Lubchenco said. </p><p class=textBodyBlack itxtvisited="1"><span id=byLine itxtvisited="1">*The oil is "in very low concentrations" around 0.5 parts per million," and other NOAA research ships are in the Gulf to gather additional samples, she said.* </p><p class=textBodyBlack itxtvisited="1"><span id=byLine itxtvisited="1">Undersea oil depletes the water's oxygen content and threatens marine life like mussels, clams, crabs, eels, jellyfish and shrimp. </p><p class=textBodyBlack itxtvisited="1"><span id=byLine itxtvisited="1">Small concentrations<BR itxtvisited="1">One researcher who recently studied the undersea oil aboard the NOAA research ship Thomas Jefferson said the oil detected south of the spill site appeared to be in small concentrations. </p><p class=textBodyBlack itxtvisited="1"><span id=byLine itxtvisited="1">*"These are not like rivers of oil flowing down deep,"* said Daniel Torres, a scientist with Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution in Massachusetts. "We're detecting pretty low levels." </p>


----------



## sealark (Sep 27, 2007)

> *jspooney (08/06/2010)*Well put, Capt. Paul. My issue is not with the desire to see pictures, but with the clear insinuation that two respected guys on the forum are lying because no pictures are produced. I guess everyone has an opinion, it just irritated me. Perhaps just a "too bad you didn't take pictures, maybe you can take some next time" would be a better way to post. As for the blind guy knocking your teeth out remark, it was an analogy...not a threat.
> 
> Brian...he would find you not by sound, but by smell. He'd smell the sushi on your breath! MMMMMMMM


JS, Why must you keep using the words lying. My posts intention as stated by me were to imply that just maybe someone was mistaken about the clouds and low vis being from oil or not from oil. Just maybe the oil on his suit was picked up from the surface when he surfaced through the slick and that the plume might be from plankton. If I was there on the trip I would be able to say that some one was lying and I was not there and haven't called or insinuated a damn thing.


----------



## markw4321 (Oct 4, 2007)

> *DVR6 (09/06/2010)*Yes and if you read the NOAA and University papers they also make mention that these 'plumes' are being measured in ppm (parts per million). That is obviously invisible to the naked eye... To me, *from this data set only*it appears that the *subsea*oil is being effectively diluted within the water column. At least what has been found so far by NOAA.
> 
> From MSNBC----
> 
> <p class=textBodyBlack itxtvisited="1"><span id=byLine itxtvisited="1">"NOAA is confirming the presence of very low concentrations of subsurface oil at sampling depths ranging from the surface to 3,300 feet at locations 40 and 42 nautical miles northeast of the well site and another sampling station at 142 nautical miles southeast of the wellhead," Lubchenco said. </p><p class=textBodyBlack itxtvisited="1"><span id=byLine itxtvisited="1">*The oil is "in very low concentrations" around 0.5 parts per million," and other NOAA research ships are in the Gulf to gather additional samples, she said.* </p><p class=textBodyBlack itxtvisited="1"><span id=byLine itxtvisited="1">Undersea oil depletes the water's oxygen content and threatens marine life like mussels, clams, crabs, eels, jellyfish and shrimp. </p><p class=textBodyBlack itxtvisited="1"><span id=byLine itxtvisited="1">Small concentrations<BR itxtvisited="1">One researcher who recently studied the undersea oil aboard the NOAA research ship Thomas Jefferson said the oil detected south of the spill site appeared to be in small concentrations. </p><p class=textBodyBlack itxtvisited="1"><span id=byLine itxtvisited="1">*"These are not like rivers of oil flowing down deep,"* said Daniel Torres, a scientist with Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution in Massachusetts. "We're detecting pretty low levels." </p>


DVR,

So you thinklarge oil plumes underwater in the Gulf will be good for all concerned I guess?

Mark


----------



## CrossCreek (May 22, 2010)

Under water oil plumes video.......

Watch it and and decide for yourself if you think they exist and whether they are "bad" or not.

Just my "opinion", but I'll go with..... "<span style="text-decoration: underline; font-weight: bold; font-style: italic;">yeah they are there, and they sure are not good".

You, can decide for yourself...................

<span class="yshortcuts" id="lw_1276100502_3"><a href="http://cosmos.bcst.yahoo.com/up/player/popup/?cl=20240840">http://cosmos.bcst.yahoo.com/up/player/popup/?cl=20240840</a>


----------



## sealark (Sep 27, 2007)

I think this topic is like....







Time to go fishing


----------



## CrossCreek (May 22, 2010)

> *sealark (09/06/2010)*I think this topic is like....
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Yeah, you are probably right. 
Most of what is being said is just a constant re-hash of things that have been said over and over and over....... and what we are saying isn't gonna change a thing. 

Sadly,<span style="text-decoration: underline;"> it is what it is and will not be over till it is over.......... whenever that may be.

Fishing sounds like a winner...... Bass or Bream???


----------



## Evensplit (Oct 2, 2007)

> *CrossCreek (09/06/2010)*Under water oil plumes video.......
> 
> Watch it and and decide for yourself if you think they exist and whether they are "bad" or not.
> 
> ...


----------



## brnbser (Oct 1, 2007)

awesome Jim, I love the new avatar, that one says it all........


----------



## seanmclemore (Aug 20, 2008)

HOLY SHIT, MCLEMORE WAS TELLING THE TRUTH....EVEN THOUGH HE DIDN'T HAVE A VIDEO CAMERA TO CONFIRM. BUT NOW WE ARE BEATING A DEAD HORSE (no offense sealark...i never took offense to your comments)

hope all those sceptics will do like sealark said and go fishing whilestate waters isstill open andstop hiding behind the keyboard. guys/gals, watch out out there, they finally put out a notice to perdido key and west waters that "THE OIL IS BAD FOR YOU"...

i know what i saw out there, it showed the floating snot on the video, it showed it sticking to the camera lense just as i described how i had it on my skin, all i was trying to do by talking to the PNJ was to get the word out to all the people that i share my backyard with...i'm going EAST!!!

SEE YOU ON THE WATER


----------



## CrossCreek (May 22, 2010)

> *Evensplit (09/06/2010)*
> 
> 
> > *CrossCreek (09/06/2010)*Under water oil plumes video.......
> ...


You might want to watch that video again. When they are talking about oil at <span style="font-weight: bold;">60 & <span style="font-weight: bold;">120 feet...... that kinda seems.... "<span style="font-weight: bold; font-style: italic; text-decoration: underline;">underwater"..... to me anyway..... "plume" or not.

And as far as <span style="font-weight: bold;">ppm [parts per million] and <span style="font-weight: bold;">ppb [parts per billion] goes, do <span style="text-decoration: underline;">real search and see how "harmless" you think it is gonna end up being after you read what your search turns up.

You want even need close to 3 million bucks to figure it out...... it'll only take about 30 minutes.


----------



## jspooney (Oct 2, 2007)

> *sealark (09/06/2010)*
> 
> 
> > *jspooney (08/06/2010)*Well put, Capt. Paul. My issue is not with the desire to see pictures, but with the clear insinuation that two respected guys on the forum are lying because no pictures are produced. I guess everyone has an opinion, it just irritated me. Perhaps just a "too bad you didn't take pictures, maybe you can take some next time" would be a better way to post. As for the blind guy knocking your teeth out remark, it was an analogy...not a threat.
> ...


My apologies, Sealark, I must have misread your intention. That's the downside of internet discussion, we must assume and infer that which may not be accurate.


----------



## sealark (Sep 27, 2007)

> *CrossCreek (09/06/2010)*
> 
> 
> > *Evensplit (09/06/2010)*
> ...



Oil at 60 to 120 feet <span style="text-decoration: underline; font-weight: bold;">Underwater I always thought oil <span style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: underline;">Floats :doh


----------



## Evensplit (Oct 2, 2007)

> *CrossCreek (09/06/2010)*
> 
> 
> > *Evensplit (09/06/2010)*
> ...


The video was shot off of Loisianna, and the guy dives into oil ON THE SURFACE and swims around in it and under it - he wasn't at 60 and 120 feet - and he states that he stayed shallow because his buddies were smarter than he was and wouldn't dive in it. They alsoshowed B Roll film of the rigs that did not include the reporter. Not sure what I need to watch again.

I don't know where the ppm / ppb comment came from, and I never said this isn't the worst thing that has happened to the Gulf...probably ever. What Real research are you talking about, because to date I don't know that anyone has done any real research - too many agendas fighting for the grant money.


----------



## WW2 (Sep 28, 2007)

> *sealark (10/06/2010)*
> 
> 
> > *CrossCreek (09/06/2010)*
> ...


Is it possible that because of the chemical makeup, temperatures and salt versus fresh water that it might act differently than the usual EVOO in water scenario?


----------



## DVR6 (Jan 28, 2009)

> I don't know where the ppm / ppb comment came from, and I never said this isn't the worst thing that has happened to the Gulf...probably ever. What Real research are you talking about, because to date I don't know that anyone has done any real research - too many agendas fighting for the grant money.


<span style="font-size: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Verdana; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-bidi-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA">I think he got the ppm comments from my post earlier in this thread. That data came from the NOAA research vessels. They said the giant "plumes" reportedwas oil measured ataround .5ppm. That's obviously undetectable withouttest equipment.To date no one has produced a picture or video of an underwater "oil plume" that is visible. Thick surface oil yes. So far the only evidence ofthese "plumes" arethe .5ppm measurements.

Think about this. If oil plumeswere caused from oil sinking due to dispersants or for whatever reason, wouldn't we be seeing a massive blanket of oil in all of those liveROV videos around the bop and the riser? With the rate of oil flowing and the dispersants injected right there at the site I would think we should seesome sort of oilcovering the bottom.

I think we can all agree that this is probably the worst thing that could happen to the Gulf and it makes me sick to see it. It looks like we're already dealing withsome oilcoming into our bays and that is bad news.We shouldfocus onthe problems that arise based on the hard data we have at the timeand not imaginary or media hypedproblems. I mean, why get worked up about a problem that *may not* even exist.


----------



## CrossCreek (May 22, 2010)

> *sealark (10/06/2010)*
> 
> 
> > *CrossCreek (09/06/2010)*
> ...


Yeah, me too on the oil floating. 

I guess when it is mixed with about.... a million gallons of dispersant.... that changes things.
Imagine that.................... 

Maybe.... "out of sight out of mind". lol............ for the present anyway.


----------



## sealark (Sep 27, 2007)

I'm sorry I've ruffled enough feathers, I'm through posting about the oil spill


----------



## CrossCreek (May 22, 2010)

> *Evensplit (10/06/2010)*
> 
> 
> > *CrossCreek (09/06/2010)*
> ...


<span style="font-weight: bold;">Evensplit, I am not trying to get into "pissing contest" and am not trying to come across as disrespectful in any way..... if I have I am sorry.

This video does for sure show surface oil and the guy did jump right into it.

But at 1:15 in the video he states that from 0 to 30 feet the water was murky & fish were absent.
From 30 to 60 was clear with fish present.

At 1:39 in the video he states at 60 feet he ran into what appeared to be dispersed oil [my words, you can hear it for yourself.]

At 2:19 in the video he states at 120 feet he ran into the same thing again.

These dives were on different weeks at the same rig.

At least that is what I hear them say in the video.

As far as the ppm / ppb comment, much research has already been done in the past on the detrimental affect that even minute traces of oil/chemicals have on life........ sea life in this case. 

I read your .... "microscopic invisible clear oil plume that can't be seen or smelled"....... comment as you thinking that if it could not be "seen" there was no danger. That was why I made the ppm / ppb comment.

<span style="text-decoration: underline; font-weight: bold;">I probably read your intent wrong....... my apologies.

I think we are all pretty much on the same side here and all hope for the best.
It just sucks right now with all the known and........ the unknown.................


----------

