Fox News' Gallagher repeated debunked seepage myth
SUMMARY: On Fox News' The Live Desk, Trace Gallagher repeated a debunked oil drilling myth, claiming that "more oil seeps through the ground off the coast of California than is ever spilled out there. So you're going to have much more environmental damage." In fact, according to a County of Santa Barbara report, "The evidence is clear that, far from being invisible against a background of seeps, major spills can have far greater and qualitatively different impacts on the environment than do seeps."
During the September 15 edition of Fox News' The Live Desk, co-host Trace Gallagher repeated a debunked oil drilling myth, claiming that "more oil seeps through the ground off the coast of California than is ever spilled out there. So you're going to have much more environmental damage." In fact, a report by the County of Santa Barbara discussing the effects of natural seepage and oil spills, including a 1969 oil spill off the Santa Barbara coast that released an estimated 80,000 to 100,000 barrels of oil, stated that "major spills can have far greater" environmental impact than seeps have, as the blog Think Progress noted. In its report, the Santa Barbara County Planning and Development Energy Division stated that "a comparison of the impacts of seeps and spills based solely on volume would be misleading. The evidence is clear that, far from being invisible against a background of seeps, major spills can have far greater and qualitatively different impacts on the environment than do seeps."
From the September 15 edition of Fox News' The Live Desk with Martha and Trace:
GALLAGHER: And what William has reported on before, which he left out of this, is the fact that, you know, he said one barrel of oil spilled -- more oil seeps through the ground --
MacCALLUM: That's right.
GALLAGHER: -- off the coast of California than is ever spilled out there. So you're going to have much more environmental damage. William, am I right here? You're still on camera. Much more oil seeps through the ground than is ever spilled?
LA JEUNESSE: That's right, Trace. About 60 percent of all the oil in the marine environment has come there natural, from seepage, and then followed by consumers and runoff from urban areas.
MacCALLUM: Right.
LA JEUNESSE: The amount of oil that comes out of platforms and drilling is less than 3 percent. A much bigger risk, and environmentalists will admit this, are tankers. So you've got 2,000 tankers going around the world --
GALLAGHER: Right.
MacCALLUM: Right.
LA JEUNESSE: -- much more dangerous than simply tapping it using offshore drilling. But this, of course, is just one of those bellwether issues that environmentalists are fighting on, because they fear, if we have more oil, that makes alternative energy technically more expensive, and only prolongs the period that we're on fossil fuels. And that is the much bigger debate that is going on in Congress, kind of the story behind the story, about why we may have an energy bill with no energy. Trace. Martha.
MacCALLUM: No, it's a great story. And just one last thought on it. You know, there's all this pressure about the oil companies, and, "Oh they make so much money." Oil companies have spent a tremendous amount of money researching and making this process as clean as possible, and they've done a pretty good job of it. When you look at the numbers of what actually gets spilled out there, it's extremely minimal. So something everybody needs to know to get the full picture of the story, you know?
GALLAGHER: It's very -- and that was pretty much the full picture.
MacCALLUM: And what a great job William did doing that.
Horrible people.
I knew they were horrible people back in 2004, when they were sporting their "Purple Heart Band-Aids" at their convention. How nice of them to insult thousands of servicemen and women who were injured in the line of duty simply to attack one man - John Kerry.
Funny thing is that the two Republicans on the top of the ticket in '04 both supported the war in which Kerry fought. As long as someone else's ass was in the field.
I don't condone liberal blogs treating McCain's service in any way. But there is no comparison between these two incidents.
The 2004 Republican National Convention should be required viewing for all who are serving in the military today. Unless we change the tone of the discourse in this country, the same fate awaits them as soon as they disagree with the government and exercise the free speech rights they and others including Kerry fought to protect.
What about the way Obama has been smeared by McCain and the republican party?
Belittling his age is not the same as belittling someone's military service.
Bob,
How would you compare the treatment of McCain's service at the 2008 DNC to the treatment of Kerry's at the 2004 RNC? I think if you are going to make comparisons, comparing blogs to conventions is unfair.
So, why compare blogs to conventions? Unless you know of some connection by the bloggers directly to the party, anyone has the right to be an idiot (meaning people who go too far).
On the other hand, Republicans, at their conventions, have been straight-up nasty to both Kerry and Obama.
You know, I think that the Democrats need to get just as nasty as the GOP. It's unfortunate to do so, but it resonates.
Where is the blame for the party that's been preaching your either with us or against us?
Where is the blame for the party that questions the patriotism of any who disagree with them?
Where is the blame for the party which calls honorable people traitors?
America is dividied because of partisans like you and JLyons. Is that better?
That's very partisan of you, Bob.
Well then, let's start by discussing what's preventing you from doing so.
Bob is starting to remind me of this guy:
I know the Moran Family.
America is divided because of the current incarnation of the Republican Party, whose only campaign themes since 1968 have been hate and fear. The details change but the resentment theme is always the same.
Speaking of making film footage of the 2008 GOP convention required viewing, the Democratic Party should make a film montage of all of the GOP conventions for the last 40 years and use it in a campaign ad. Maybe the Dittoheads and Hannityites in this country would finally see how cynically and consistently they are being used to thwart their own interests.
"No plan for alternative energy , just lets drill and destoy what is left of Americans wilderness and enviornment."
Our environment is a "partisan" reason? That's interesting.
Bob
You are a piece of trash. And not worth my time.
J Lyons
Grow up.
Your a prime example of why America is a divided nation.
Sorry, Bob, but that ship sailed a long time ago when Republicans decided to run their campaigns based upon wedge issues such as, for example, abortion rights and gay marriage. Credit Karl Rove with that and save your homilies for someone who hasn't followed politics as long as many of us have.
Who's "smearing about his age"? asking about it is completely legitimate. He'll be the oldest President we've ever had IF he's elected. By the way, Tom Delay Republican House Leader was one of the biggest dividers I've seen in my lifetime. (53 yrs. old) The right wing has done more to make this a divided country than the left for the last almost twenty years. K Street Project anyone? Threatening to do away with the filibuster anyone? Redistricting before census anyone? Questioning someone's patriotism because they disagree anyone? Lots more where those came from.
god, I am having such a hard time maintaining my composure this morning! McCain's campaign advisor just said that McCain invented the blackberry! I poop you not! McCain, who can't send e-mails because he was tortured as a POW invented the most hand intensive piece of technology of the 21st century! I'll post it a little later, but in the meantime, with oil at $97 a barrel, I thought it would be a good time to bring back another oldy but goodie! Courtesy of Think Progress, y'all...
Rep. Sali: There ‘Could Be Up To Forty Barrels Of Oil In A Single Tree’»
Sali made a similar comment in 2006:
Sali is apparently confusing cellulosic ethanol with oil, so let’s review the differences for the representative:
Sali is prone to making outlandish statements. Last summer, he claimed that religious diversity in Congress was not “envisioned by the Founding Fathers.”
"there 'could be up to 40 barrels of oil' in a single tree." - Congressman Sali
Oh, Snoopy, that's fun.
Yes, folks, it's time for another episode of Mr. Calculator! We will assume that Congressman Sali's 40 barrels of oil in a single tree is spot on correct. The U.S. oil usage amounts to 21 million barrels per day. See where this is going? If we clear our forests of a mere 525,000 trees per day (of course the oil has to be squeezed out as well), the U.S. will be entirely OPEC independent! Take that, A-rabs!!
Chop, baby, chop!
"more oil seeps through the ground off the coast of California than is ever spilled out there. So you're going to have much more environmental damage."
Correct me if I'm wrong, but if something happens naturally, doesn't nature sort of take it into account, adapt to it on its own? If fish don't live near where the seepage occurs, that's different from having an oil spill in an area where the fish actually are. It's like I chopped down a tree and it landed on someone's house, and I said "hey, trees fall down in the forest all the time. That's a much bigger problem."
until they break open and wipe everything out.
The left is always defending Darwinism.
Won't the species effected by the oil spills learn to adapt? After all, isn't adaptation one of the tenets of the Evolutionist's religion.
Nothing would surprise me anymore after hearing about McCain's claim that when he speaks of the "fundamentals" of our economy, he's talking about working people.
We've gone beyond Orwell.
McCain is beginning to reveal himself more and more as a confused and petulant old man.
Bob,
Then present an issue that you would like to discuss. Stop calling people names, stop binging up partison statements, stop doing what you accuse everyone else of doing and discuss a topic!
People grow old.
In my observation and opinion this grueling campaign is taking its toll on McCain. The presidency ages people quickly...and John McCain is already 72 years old. It's a legitmate area of discussion. If Bob doesn't like the jokes about McCain then let him go elsewhere...a place where Barack Obama is the brunt of jokes.
McCain has ridiculed Obama many times because of his youth, but we're not allowed to mention McCain's age?
Now that McCain has picked a creationist, book banning, vindictive hockey mom who likes to kill animals from moving vehicles, it should be in the forefront of any discussion about issues.
Could this pick be a sign of his faculties failing? Or is it just another instance of the "Mavrick's" pandering to those who until recently he considered to be agents of intolerance, the religious right?
but palin is mc cain's number two pick, so i guess you and i can rest easy.
-- a confused and petulant old man. -- irony
He must be confusing the electorate as well...Obama's early lead has fizzled.
RCP calls the current electoral race...McCain 227...Obama 207.
Looking at the latest state polls...McCain leads Obama 39 - 4.
Minn/Mich/Virg/Penn are ties.
McCain 227 + 39 = 266
Obama 207 + 4 = 211
Age could very well be a factor in this race. Obama is young enough to have another chance in 2012...and re-fight the Hillary crowd.
But the Palins should be able to keep that secret for 50 more days.
http://www.vanityfair.com/online/politics/2008/09/the-authoritative-trig-palin-conspiracy-time-line.html
Wesley,
You can't mix and match polls. According to RCP there are 104 toss up votes. Obama currently leads in Colorado, Michigan, Pennsylvania, New Mexico, New Hampshire and MInnesota. That's 66 more votes. McCain leads in Ohio and Nevada. That's 25 additional votes. Virginia is a tie with 13 votes. So, Obama has 273 vs. McCain's 252 with 13 up for grabs.
For someone who doesn't believe in polls, as you've previously stated, you go a long way to distort them.
No distortion...you're using the average of polls...some a month old or more. I prefer to look at the latest poll numbers...reflecting the current situation.
I hope you enjoyed your trip to the RCP site...hope you learned something for your effort.
The polls are not predictors of the final outcome...they are indicators of the current trend...one that finds Obama's once large lead has eroded. Simpletons will watch the national polling numbers...but the real story is the outcome of the key battleground states.
Wesley,
Don't pull that crap with me. The numbers I cited are right off RCP's website today with up to date polls.
You distorted or took numbers from some other poll.
If not, provide the link to prove your numbers.
Ok...anything to help Heckle and Jeckle.
RCP assigns electoral votes by state. They start with state that are solid/leaning to each candidate...there you find Obama 207...McCain 227.
Next they list 9 toss up states with 104 electoral votes. Now pay attention because here comes your homework. Look at the most current poll in each toss up state. There you will find that McCain leads Obama by 39-4 with MN/MI/PA/VA tied with 61 votes pending.
Now you two can get cracking...glad to help.
It's really very simple...sorry you're struggling with the concept and the math.
Here's a little tip for you...the latest poll, released today, shows PA tied...hence neither candidate gets credit for the 21 electoral votes. Do the math for each toss up state and there you have it. McCain 266 - Obama 211 with the remaining 61 electoral votes unassigned to either candidate.
Save your breath on any speeches about margins of error...I'm fully aware of how they work. This method makes it very simple to check daily for the current trends...state by state...and that is where the race will be won or lost...in those key battleground states.
I'm also aware that different polling outfits can produce different results...but I'm only looking for trends. I'm not a campaign manager...just a curious voter.
I'll say it again...the polls are not predictors...they are indicators of the current trend. If you want to use dated polling averages, 8 ball cubes, or tarot cards...matters not to me.
I prefer to use RCP's data that way RCP uses it. You still have not addressed Skeptical's argument, other than to make juvenile comments that all boil down to nannynannybooboo. You wouldn't survive summary judgment, bucky.
nannynannybooboo...oh lord...I'm lmao on that one.
I wondered what court manners and jargon they were teaching in law school...now I know. Instead of stuttering or sputtering an objection to the judge...you can fire off a raucus "nannynannybooboo"...I'll bet that works every time.
I couldn't care less how you look at the race...I'm not trying to persuade you of any argument. But I can tell you this without requiring a retainer fee...the current trend shows Obama - down...and McCain - up...so help me god...and lol.
Like I said Wes,
You can't mix and match polls. RCP shows Obama way ahead.
So what you are doing is making stuff up with distortions, like I said originally.
Nice job.
Simpletons will watch the national polling numbers...but the real story is the outcome of the key battleground states. - Wesley
Simpletons disregard the national polls at their own peril. It's extremely unusual for large numbers of states to trend in opposite directions from each other. When you see properly done national polls consistently moving in one direction it's highly likely that most of the individual state polls will trend the same way.
It's also a fact that the sites that put together all of those state polls (not all of which follow great statistical procedures, but those that don't get cited anyway) always lag the national polls in those trends. When the national polls were a few days into the Palin novelty bump, sites like RCP and Electoral-vote.com were still showing Obama with a strong electoral vote margin. It took a few days for that to shrink on those sites, but those of us who saw the national trends still expected it before we saw it.
Now we've been seeing the McCain bump steadily shrinking in the national polls. The trend I pointed out to you last weekend has continued. No bouncing, just a slow and steady decline. I expect to see that trend continue and it will probably be reflected in the national electoral maps in the next five or six days.
Please feel free to take whatever scant comfort you are able to from the current RCP numbers. It's not an indication of a trend. It represents McCain's peak. As we shall soon see reflected in polls all over.
Grampy's got backup from "Independent" commentator BilldO. Last night, the Factor focused on the economy, and BO's take was that the fundamentals are sound (as McCain said), it just that "craziness' with the housing thing. If they can convince enough Americans that the current problems with banks and housing are completely unrelated and separate issues from the economy, they may do pretty well.
I guess the voting bloc they need is the same people who are so bad at math and logic that they don't understand the difference betwen natural oil seepage and a massive concentrated spill.
Oh, and nice threads. You didn't mention your top-hat, but of course, a gentleman removes his top-hat when riding in a motor car.
All you needed was the addition of the ascot to wear with the blazer and I knew that the world would be your oyster.
We professional hazardous material people know for sure, maybe, that there is a difference between what we call a chronic and an acute dose of your everyday down to earth toxin.
Ignoring this difference is defined in the profession as, "stuupid."
God ole Trace Gallagher claimed in a couple of his onlone bio's that he was a graduate of The University of San Diego!
A quick e-mail in between Christmas and New Years Day (last year) to the Registrar's Office, I was e-mailed back the next day and the word was that Trace had attended the University, but "Did Not" graduate!
His big claim to fame before being a lying puppet on Faux New was that he was a water skier at Africa World, San Diego and Six Flags in New Jersey !
The Dems introduced a doozy energy bill last night, with NO amendments offered. No drilling within 50 miles of coastline, and no profit sharing (that's how Lousiana makes almost ALL of its oil revenues right now, some 30% of their state budget.) Oh, you can drill 100 miles offshore, except that only 2 states currently have the infrastructure to do so, and wouldn't anyway because of the profit-sharing clause.
They sure did whine when the Repubs did this sort of legislative crap when they were in power. Change? Hardly.
Oh, and that crook Rangel's district gets $1.1 billion in pork included in the bill as well; I suppose regardless of whether he retains his chair of the Ways & Means.
Change? Hardly.
Hey Dex,
Any facts to back up your rant?
Any facts to back up your rant?
Probably not.