Gulf of Mexico on fire

To the ostriches of the world

 

https://www.rt.com/news/528272-pemex-fire-mexico/

 

thank you

Why would flightless birds from Africa care about a fire in the Gulf of Mexico?

 

In the French language, the expression “doing the ostrich” expresses the fact that a person refuses to see the truth in the face. This popular quote comes from the idea that the ostrich buries its head in the sand as soon as it gets scared. But this idea is completely wrong! If the bird is frightened, it runs away or defends itself with its long, powerful legs.

AN OPTICAL ILLUSION

Ostriches therefore never put their heads in the sand. They often have their heads close to the ground to dig the nests of their young and to protect them from rodents, lizards and reptiles. They also take a large part of their day feeding, they peck seeds, shoots and insects.

But what gives this impression that their heads are buried are the mirages of the desert where they live. Indeed, heat forms this illusion. This phenomenon of light reflection masks what is below and can also give the impression that there are large puddles of water.

Burning water is nothing new around here with fracking. We also had a burning river back in the '60s.

No ostriches were hurt in either incident.

 

Why would flightless birds from Africa care about a fire in the Gulf of Mexico? -- mrm
Not sure if you're trying to be funny or not, but LOL just the same. Sabolina thinks that if you don't make a post in this forum about something then you are either ignorant or uncaring. We are so blessed with his presence and so pleased with his wealth of information.

Also, thanks Morgan for that bit of trivia. Sounds like something Sheldon Leonard would say.

And, for the parrots of the world.

@mrmhead and @morgankane01 It’s been established in the Climate Change thread that @sabolina is an extremist. So anything she says is coming from the very extreme far Left that meets the very extreme far Right. It wasn’t too difficult to establish that, given she supports the PETA cult. There’s animal rights extremists and then there are animal welfare activists that aren’t so extreme. It’s the difference between the Church of God World and the Church of God Anderson Indiana or the Catholic Church and the Episcopal Church. Anything she says will be coming from the extremist view point.

@lausten

We are so blessed with his presence and so pleased with his wealth of information.

Is that sarcasm or are you serious?

@mriana , @lausten

We are so blessed with his presence and so pleased with his wealth of information. - Lausten

Is that sarcasm or are you serious? - mriana


Yeah, I think that’s right up there with my flightless birds comment. ?

But I am serious about flammable tap water and burning river.

Our burning river lead to the creation of the EPA.

… which is probably viewed as an over-reaching government intrusion into our daily lives by someone

And yes Thank You @Morgankane01 It does make sense now. I’ve seen nature shows about them, and add the optical illusion, and there you have it - Heads in the sand!

And, for the parrots of the world.
Hmmm....

Might PressTV or Al Jazeera be a more “Fair and Balanced” site?

?

Where Parrots and Lemmings cohabitate in a single mind.

Yeah, I think that’s right up there with my flightless birds comment. -- mrm
Exactly. Right up there. But then, how far up could a flightless go?

Don’t know Press TV, but Al Jazeera is not bad is it? It’s based in Qatar, a democracy. Slightly Left of center.

Here comes the club. Pile it on.

@lausten I think Al Jazeera is one of those propaganda mills, like Russia Today. It is Arabic ran. A search says this:

Al Jazeera aljazeera.net Al Jazeera is a Qatari government-funded international Arabic news channel based in Doha, Qatar that is operated by the media conglomerate Al Jazeera Media Network. The channel is a flagship of the media conglomerate and hence, is the only single offering to carry the name as simply "Al Jazeera" in its branding. The channel's willingness to broadcast no holds barred views, for example on call-in shows, created controversies in the Arab States of the Persian Gulf. One of the station's offices was the only channel to cover the War in Afghanistan live. The parent holding is a "private foundation for public benefit" under Qatari law. Under this organisational structure, the parent receives funding from the government of Qatar but maintains its editorial independence. The network is sometimes perceived to have mainly Islamist perspectives, promoting the Muslim Brotherhood, and having a pro-Sunni and an anti-Shia bias in its reporting of regional issues.Wikipedia Country: Qatar

For more info I go to this: https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/al-jazeera/ It’s credibility isn’t very high and the site not only considers it left-center, but also Conspiracy-Pseudoscience.

Personally, I’m more of a NY Times, Wash Po, NPR, Aussie BC, and BBC person, which are all left-center, according to media fact check, but it’s not on Media fact’s Conspiracy-Pseudoscience list. PETA is on Media Fact’s Conspiracy-Pseudoscience list, and only on that list - since we are talking about Media Fact and it’s lists of sites that are either reliable or not.

Yeah, I browse those sites (AJ, RT, PTV) on occasion to see what’s got their boxers in a bunch at that time.

https://www.popsci.com/environment/gulf-of-mexico-ocean-on-fire/

Greenpeace Mexico said the accident Friday appeared to have been caused by the failure of an underwater valve and that it illustrates the dangers of Mexico policy of promoting fossil fuels.

President Andrés Manuel López Obrador has bet heavily on drilling more wells and buying or building oil refineries. He touts oil as “the best business in the world.”

Greenpeace wrote in a statement that the fire, which took five hours to extinguish, “demonstrates the serious risks that Mexico’s fossil fuel model poses for the environment and people’s safety.”

Climate activist Greta Thunberg reposted a video clip of the massive fireball on her Twitter account.

https://apnews.com/article/caribbean-mexico-environment-business-fires-ce3a307625d5c6d9ad8ab6669b3c591c

True enough, heck of video though. What man hath wrought.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U3yBnodXI7E

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ikGyZh0VbPQ

 

True story.

So it goes, and then there’s today to live.

It’s a weird time for sure, I’m thinking the increasingly important challenge is how we are dealing with our own own mental health, as the cascading consequences of our disregard for this planet’s biosphere and giving ability, starts impacting us.

This changing climate system of our’s will always be a creeping slow thing, a hit here, a hit there, but our society and the systems we depend on are heading for a hideous reckoning. But those reckonings will be isolated failures that cascade. For instance, the reality of the long term drought situation hitting my very homeland in the Southwest. When there’s no more water in crops and livestock, because it’s all been poured on fires, then what, don’t you think domestic water supplies will follow? River basins are localized, the Southwest and California have millions of people crammed together oblivious to what’s happening within this watershed and ecosystem we depend on, namely the Colorado River watershed. Man, when that bottom falls out, there’s going to be hell to pay. Looking at the big and little reservoirs within that watershed, it’s frightful, and one can almost taste that ugly day, when taps run dry, and the chain reaction starts, then chaotic terror will ensue in cities we love. Then what?

This sort of thing is unfolding all over the place. Some regions will do better than others. Earth will never be like cancer metastasizing, then it dies. Earth is big and vigorous and doesn’t care who survives and who doesn’t. The biosphere will adjust to conditions, jettisoning the species that can’t keep up with environmental changes, and opening new frontiers for the survivors.

@Sabolina, I imagine you as struggling with all those horrors, flailing with your sense of self and future and futility. Does any of that ring true?

I’m writing this sci-fi book, where an alien race that never had religion in charge of nations, never had land as capital or sold food as a commodity, comes to earth and offers us large areas to settle on their planet so they can help clean up ours. There’s conflict too, but anyway, I was flipping through notes and found one on Sam Harris. He says wealth is supposed to remember that to create more wealth, it has to re-invest, it has to use some of that wealth to educate, encourage innovation, generally keep the environment healthy so more wealth can be created. We, or at least the ones who hold the wealth, have forgotten that.

Amazon and WalMart and others have supplanted the commons of the marketplace. Private markets are always a risk, that’s why we regulate them. But the capital of buying crap now has a political advantage. It could be worse, but what is bad now is the vulnerability to that market being taken over. We give so much freedom to a few men, mostly men, as CEO’s. We know what happens when evil gets elected, but when evil gets in charge of selling books, that’s really dangerous.

[quote=“sabolina, post:15, topic:8019”]
President Andrés Manuel López Obrador has bet heavily on drilling more wells and buying or building oil refineries. He touts oil as “the best business in the world.”

Apparently, this president is in it for the short term profit, being that the world will run out of oil in about 40 years and start-up costs are enormous.

Yes, we have exhausted the recoverable oil reserves and it is downhill from here at current consumption levels. That’s why car manufacturers are coming out with electric cars which they resisted for such a long time, while oil was cheap and plentiful.

I previously thought you meant that we know about the recoverable oil / FF available and predicted we have 40 years.
We haven’t exhausted all resources. North Slope:

Biden Administration Defends Huge Alaska Oil Drilling Project

The administration says the country must pivot away from fossil fuels but backed a project set to produce more than 100,000 barrels of oil each day for 30 years.