Did you vote today?

Created by Rick on Jun 8, 2010

6,229 votes

Click on an option to vote

Yes

No

Other (explain below)

Reality Check

Lonoke, AR

#29201 Feb 9, 2014
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
Stay with me here, from the post, to which you are responding I am very clear the deaths I am talking about is well outside the exclusive realm of the BP accident.
Another thing, I think it would be fair to say that you had just about -0- civilians on and oil derrick 41 miles from the shore.
If for some reason you don't think that burning oil from a oil spill can not cause a death I highly suggest that you DO NOT run upon such and event.......... keep your distance.
I don't think I would be grabbing a hold of any electric wires either,,, just saying.
BTW - My argument for the last few post is that oil spills can be just as destructive and deadly as a bomb.
It comforts me to know that you " feel a little like you're piling on".
I do not feel so guilty for exploiting your ignorance for my entertainment.
Did the oil spill not affect the mainland? At least the media attempted to convince America that there was a catastrophe in the Gulf. Were civilians not exposed to the oil or was that just a fabricated lie on the media's part? How many civilians exposed to the BP spill died as a result of the oil itself? Yes, common sense of keeping ones distance from a burning oil spill would be wise. This common sense was shown by over 320 million Americans thus there was no oil exposure related deaths from that spill. Yet 1000 people per year die from electricity every single year and there is no call to rid ourselves of it. Why is that? If your a glutton for punishment and oblivious to reality, I can't help that. I will choose to stay grounded in what is real and not what is hypothetically trumped up as you do.
Reality Check

Lonoke, AR

#29202 Feb 9, 2014
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
INDEED A BOMB-
The oil on the train had been picked up in North Dakota.
Around 40 people are still missing 48 hours after a runaway freight train carrying crude oil derailed and exploded in a Quebec town - leading to fears they may have been vaporized in the blast with no remains to be found.
Five people were killed after the train sparked a massive inferno in Lac-Megantic, which is about 250km from Montreal, in the early hours on Saturday morning.
But it is believed the death toll will with experts suggesting that some remains may never be found because of the intensity and duration of the oil fires which locals claim erupted like an 'atom bomb'.
Scroll down for video
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-23581...
Follow us:@MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
Again, they died as a result of the explosion and not the oil. That train could have been carrying tanks of oxygen and the result would have been much worse. Heck, we need oxygen to survive. It's a losing argument for you so just hang it up and accept the failure of liberal ideology.

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#29203 Feb 9, 2014
Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>
Again, they died as a result of the explosion and not the oil. That train could have been carrying tanks of oxygen and the result would have been much worse. Heck, we need oxygen to survive. It's a losing argument for you so just hang it up and accept the failure of liberal ideology.
WTF do you think was burning ?

It was the OIL that exploded !!

Some of those poor people were vaporized, do you have any idea what that means?

LMFAO ---------- Oxygen, by itself, WILL NOT BURN. If it did, our atmosphere which is 20.9% oxygen would have burned up a long time ago.

I don't know what the hell you are smoking, but I think you have had enough for today.

“Frankly my dear...”

Since: Apr 08

Location hidden

#29204 Feb 9, 2014
Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>
Again, they died as a result of the explosion and not the oil. That train could have been carrying tanks of oxygen and the result would have been much worse. Heck, we need oxygen to survive. It's a losing argument for you so just hang it up and accept the failure of liberal ideology.
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/funderprof...

All of Barney' s 'catch phrases' are fed to him by a network of puppet masters...Barney is one of many gullible, easy to control, brainwashed puppets that will never be able to think outside the tiny box he lives in because his brain will never be able to comprehend just how big government is, the political agenda for today's world, what this really means for the future of America/globally, and certainly won't be able to comprehend the information from the link above .
His spoon-fed, superficial, and uneducated opinion on pipelines in general is evident by the fact he has nothing more than cut and paste articles from others, and no ability to speak for himself.
The common sense example you gave above to refute Barney' s cut and paste is yet another example that Barney is a puppet,. "Ticking time bomb" has replaced the word 'pipeline' on every liberal website. Thus, the puppet repeats it here.
Now...we can wait for his irrational and incoherent rant...as soon as he finds a leftist article that he can use as his 'opinion'....and followed up by a Tim the Tool Man grunt that poor Barney sees as cool. In reality, it's just so sad.

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#29205 Feb 9, 2014
Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>
Did the oil spill not affect the mainland? At least the media attempted to convince America that there was a catastrophe in the Gulf. Were civilians not exposed to the oil or was that just a fabricated lie on the media's part? How many civilians exposed to the BP spill died as a result of the oil itself? Yes, common sense of keeping ones distance from a burning oil spill would be wise. This common sense was shown by over 320 million Americans thus there was no oil exposure related deaths from that spill. Yet 1000 people per year die from electricity every single year and there is no call to rid ourselves of it. Why is that? If your a glutton for punishment and oblivious to reality, I can't help that. I will choose to stay grounded in what is real and not what is hypothetically trumped up as you do.

" there was no oil exposure related deaths from that spill"

Can you please tell me exactly what it is you are trying to say in that statement?

Please define, "oil exposure"

And you give this a little thought in your spare time;

Pipelines Fiascos Since 2006

The industry’s track record shows that pipelines are incident-prone. Just between 2006 and 2009,

PHMSA reports that there have been over 1,000 pipeline ‘significant incidents’ that resulted in 56 fatalities, 208 injuries,$950 million in property damage, and over 1.6 million gallons of spilled hazardous liquids. The following is a sampling of some of the worst pipeline fiascos since 2006:

http://www.nwf.org/pdf/Global-Warming/Onshore...

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#29206 Feb 9, 2014
Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>
I took you up on your suggestion that I do a little more research. You were right, there aren't 40,000 miles of pipeline in the U.S. There is actually 95,000 miles bringing the total footage of pipeline carrying oil to 501,600,000. Boy was I wrong. You can read the article for yourself
http://www.pipeline101.com/overview/energy-pl...
As for deaths, there are approximately 40,000 deaths from car accidents each year yet nobody is crying for us to do away with cars. The pipeline to cars example I used is perfectly valid. You just don't want to admit it because it vividly highlights the absurdity of your pipeline and crude oil argument. But all liberal arguments are absurd and backwards. People are now paying attention to just how backwards liberal arguments are and they are changing their point of view. That's why you see the Obama administration playing damage control. Question is how many will see the light in time enough to show the results at the voting booth?
95 K miles of pipeline- NO, you are wrong again'

The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) is a United States Department of Transportation agency responsible for developing and enforcing regulations for the safe, reliable, and environmentally sound operation of the United States' 2.6 million mile pipeline transportation.

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#29207 Feb 9, 2014
scarlett o hara wrote:
<quoted text> http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/funderprof...

All of Barney' s 'catch phrases' are fed to him by a network of puppet masters...Barney is one of many gullible, easy to control, brainwashed puppets that will never be able to think outside the tiny box he lives in because his brain will never be able to comprehend just how big government is, the political agenda for today's world, what this really means for the future of America/globally, and certainly won't be able to comprehend the information from the link above .
His spoon-fed, superficial, and uneducated opinion on pipelines in general is evident by the fact he has nothing more than cut and paste articles from others, and no ability to speak for himself.
The common sense example you gave above to refute Barney' s cut and paste is yet another example that Barney is a puppet,. "Ticking time bomb" has replaced the word 'pipeline' on every liberal website. Thus, the puppet repeats it here.
Now...we can wait for his irrational and incoherent rant...as soon as he finds a leftist article that he can use as his 'opinion'....and followed up by a Tim the Tool Man grunt that poor Barney sees as cool. In reality, it's just so sad.
. Poster you for damn sure don't make any more sense under this Handel than you do any others your just pretty much a idiot under any name that you use
Redd

Little Rock, AR

#29208 Feb 9, 2014
OMG wrote:
<quoted text>
As frustrated as Barney gets them I bet the soiled BVD's gets changed first..........
and the mental image of once a week ,
I'm scared for life!
WTF

You thought it up, little late to be scared or scarred, but fourteen is a trying time for some on here.
Reality Check

Lonoke, AR

#29209 Feb 9, 2014
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
WTF do you think was burning ?
It was the OIL that exploded !!
Some of those poor people were vaporized, do you have any idea what that means?
LMFAO ---------- Oxygen, by itself, WILL NOT BURN. If it did, our atmosphere which is 20.9% oxygen would have burned up a long time ago.
I don't know what the hell you are smoking, but I think you have had enough for today.
Oil cannot explode by itself but there is another "element" in my post that could help oil "explode", I wonder what that is? Are you telling me that burning oil can vaporize a person? Maybe it's you that's smoking something. The sheer force of the explosion is what killed those people. Did I say Oxygen by itself would burn or would changing my post to fit your idea bring you to that conclusion? Better read my post again.
Reality Check

Lonoke, AR

#29210 Feb 9, 2014
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
" there was no oil exposure related deaths from that spill"
Can you please tell me exactly what it is you are trying to say in that statement?
Please define, "oil exposure"
And you give this a little thought in your spare time;
Pipelines Fiascos Since 2006
The industry’s track record shows that pipelines are incident-prone. Just between 2006 and 2009,
PHMSA reports that there have been over 1,000 pipeline ‘significant incidents’ that resulted in 56 fatalities, 208 injuries,$950 million in property damage, and over 1.6 million gallons of spilled hazardous liquids. The following is a sampling of some of the worst pipeline fiascos since 2006:
http://www.nwf.org/pdf/Global-Warming/Onshore...
I am simply stating that not one single person died from oil exposure. You know the oil on the top of the water, the oil on the beaches, or the oil spilling from the ruptured pipe. You give this a little thought in your spare time. Cars are incident prone which have resulted 5.25 million accidents resulting in 40,000 deaths and 2.9 million injuries, annually, not over the course of 7 years, causing millions of dollars in property damage (mainly personal property in the form of cars) and a few gallons of gas to be spilled. So to recap, your "significant" pipeline scenario (I'll use your numbers) results in 1 significant incident every 2.55 days and a death every 45.63 days. My automobile scenario results in 14,383.56 crashes EVERY SINGLE DAY causing 7,945.20 injuries EVERY SINGLE DAY, and 109.59 deaths EVERY SINGLE DAY. I keep thinking you will catch on but you continue to get hung up on trying to prove to me that oil is deadly to people and the environment. I am confident you will never see what I am trying to tell you so I will spell it out for you. We as a society have become increasingly advanced. Those advancements have resulted in the necessity to advance our technology in order to keep up with the demands of a growing advanced society. With those advancements comes concessions we must make. Things like cars and oil are necessary to meet those demands but with cars and oil, things like explosions from oil spills and car accidents injure or kill people that may not have been injured or killed had cars and oil not been around. But we accept the unintended consequences of those advancements because ultimately the good far outweighs the bad. Oil, like cars have far greater benefits than detriments. It's only when the detriments, like oil spills, are politicized for the advancement of an agenda in order to gain power that they get negative attention and start people to thinking that we should in some way do away with something that has benefitted us so much.
Reality Check

Lonoke, AR

#29211 Feb 9, 2014
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
95 K miles of pipeline- NO, you are wrong again'
The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) is a United States Department of Transportation agency responsible for developing and enforcing regulations for the safe, reliable, and environmentally sound operation of the United States' 2.6 million mile pipeline transportation.
So you weaken your argument. Thanks.

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#29212 Feb 9, 2014
Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>So you weaken your argument. Thanks.
Lol , need I remind you again of what I said that you are talking your self blue in the face to contradict. And you can't

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#29213 Feb 9, 2014
Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>Oil cannot explode by itself but there is another "element" in my post that could help oil "explode", I wonder what that is? Are you telling me that burning oil can vaporize a person? Maybe it's you that's smoking something. The sheer force of the explosion is what killed those people. Did I say Oxygen by itself would burn or would changing my post to fit your idea bring you to that conclusion? Better read my post again.
No I am telling you the heat from the oil burning vaporized those people.
smoke on the water

Rochester, NY

#29214 Feb 9, 2014
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
No I am telling you the heat from the oil burning vaporized those people.
No it burned them. Oil does not burn in atmospheric oxygen nearly hot enough to vaporize a human or any carbon based solid matter.

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#29215 Feb 10, 2014
smoke on the water wrote:
<quoted text>No it burned them. Oil does not burn in atmospheric oxygen nearly hot enough to vaporize a human or any carbon based solid matter.
I agree, and stand corrected, thank you.

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#29216 Feb 10, 2014
smoke on the water wrote:
<quoted text>No it burned them. Oil does not burn in atmospheric oxygen nearly hot enough to vaporize a human or any carbon based solid matter.
Had a conservative made the same remark, and got corrected, as I just did, the rebuttal would have went much like this;

The body is 70% water and the fire was hot enough to vaporize water, so they were vaporized, you stupid, ugly, low life, freeloading, liberal.
Reality Check

Camden, AR

#29217 Feb 10, 2014
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
No I am telling you the heat from the oil burning vaporized those people.
If Scotty had only been able to beam them up in time, the Klingon's would not have been able to vaporize them with their oil burning vaporization guns. Just believe what you wish.
Reality Check

Camden, AR

#29218 Feb 10, 2014
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
No I am telling you the heat from the oil burning vaporized those people.
Is vaporization what happened to the thousands of volunteer workers that were exposed to the dangerous oil after the spill or was that a different Star Trek episode? Oh wait, that's right, no civilians, volunteer or otherwise, were killed as a result of exposure to the oil. At least no one knows of anyone.
tom

United States

#29219 Feb 10, 2014
Yes

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#29220 Feb 10, 2014
Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>
Is vaporization what happened to the thousands of volunteer workers that were exposed to the dangerous oil after the spill or was that a different Star Trek episode? Oh wait, that's right, no civilians, volunteer or otherwise, were killed as a result of exposure to the oil. At least no one
You really need to park your excruciating arrogant ignorance and show some respect for the individuals who lost their lives in those TWO tragedies.

Now let me point some thing out, that you obviously keep ignoring,

WTF, it was I said.........

QUOTE;

The aftermath of a oil spill in my opinion is kind of like a bomb exploding, it only takes one to really fu*k things up and kill people.

unquote.

Now tell me, how the Hell do get out of that, that I said some human being touched raw crude oil and died?

YOU see, "aftermath"- that would be the results of the spill.

The results of a chain of events that lead up to and during the accident.

This argument you can not shut up about belongs to you, I did not say nor did I imply any one person got killed by touching raw crude oil.

You are arguing with yourself.

Told you two times to look what I said..........

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Pocahontas Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Jeff Pfeffer 6 hr SMH 1
Jania Sullinger? (Jun '09) 7 hr See 19
Mid South or Family's Inc? (Oct '11) 8 hr Just Sayin 15
Ericas the best 9 hr ILY 86
She's Not There 10 hr love in 44
Eugenia Riney dating snd sleepovers married men 11 hr really 6
Starla F. and her friends (Nov '09) 12 hr who cares 145
More from around the web

Pocahontas People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]