Greenpeace None Too Happy with Mighty O Sinking...

Please register or login

Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

Benefits of registering include

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

If Greenpeace has that much money then why didn't they volunteer to remove all the PCB's first. Would have been good for publicity.
 
Wijbrandus:
Dr. Bill, as a resident of Colorado, I can tell you from experience that forest fires do not maintain squat. I lived through the fires we dealt with a few years back, and it was directly caused by people saying exactly that. Leave the woods alone, fire is natural, fire will clear it out. Bull****. People lost homes and wildfires scoured entire mountains. The smoke covered the state, and we had ash falling in Denver.

Yellowstone as well still bears the scars of the fires in the '80s. The moose will not be able to return to northern Yellowstone for over 100 years, because they need old growth timber for habitat. It all burned down because we didn't maintain it. And that came directly from the park service.

I respect your credentials, your experience, and your education, but from down here on the ground, I disagree with your statement.

You are referring largely to impacts on the human population from fires while I am referring to the effects on the ecosystem itself.

No question that fire cycles in most habitats these days are artificially suppressed, often to protect human dwellings, etc. (and I want my house protected too!). This artificial suppression is in part what makes the fires that do occur so much more intense than they would be under a strictly natural disturbance regime. That is why the Yellowstone fire was so devastating.

We are looking at the issue from two different perspectives, both with validity.
 
i think Greenpeace is irrelevant to this issue

the issue is: are the PCB's left in electrical wiring in the Oriskany a danger to
divers and wildlife?

seeing as how electrical wiring is the SLOWEST leacher of PCB's, and PCB's leach
pretty slow to begin with, I think the danger is minimal.

it's like saying we're worried about this tree growing too fast, but trees grow very slowly, and this particular tree is the slowest growing of all trees.

sure, there's a possibility for damage there, but i think it's a rather low possibility

i don't like the way the press makes it sound like there's all this PCB floating
around in the Oriskany waiting for a hapless diver to swim by and get turned
into Swamp Thing
 
dherbman:
GP is a political group and this is a political issue. I'm surprised this thread has made it this far.

Although GP certainly acts in the political realm, I don't see how the "politics" in this thread violate the TOS of SB.
 
I am assuming that all the Greenpeace divers are NOT coming to dive the Oriskany?
 
Uh, have I missed something, or is it just so blatant that the whole world--Greenpeace, Navy, and all--has failed to think about it?

Has anyone done PCB studies on NON-reef military and civilian shipwrecks? (In other words, those sunk in warfare and through accident.) Those ships have far more of the contaminated materials (plastics, etc...) than the Oriskany, which was largely (but not completely) stripped of these substances. It seems to me that type of study would provide an accurate baseline for the rate and dangerousness of PCB's to the environment. It would also go a long way towards shaping procedures and practices far into the future.
In fact, there may very well be such studies in use right now. Could the Navy have relied upon those to make the decision on the Oriskany? I don't know, but it would be worth finding out before skewering this type of program.
Is it valid for Greenpeace to inquire? Sure, it's within their rights. I'm no fan of Greenpeace (sorry, I've seen some of their antics up close), but I don't mind some of their more sane actions like asking for information. But I'm going to reserve my judgement on the Oriskany matter until I have evidence that something was done incorrectly or imprudently.
 
navy is just be Target i mean EPA is no joke they don't do anything that will hurt the ecosystem EPA fines the use gov millions on millions when i was in the army i bag more dirty cuz it was in the motor pool and it just might have oil on it so we have to have IT cleaned before it can go back out its freaking dirt from rain sure a nu ff we bagged it and throw it the dirt pill to be cleaned so if EPA says its OK it has to be OK the Greenpeace just use this to get them in the new again i don't understand why i mean hell its good for the ecosystem and the economy why do they still have to be haters?
 
mike_s:
Yep. you're right. It's hard to pay the $145 charter fee with Grannola.


No they'll just have their parents pay for it for them
 
super opus:
navy is just be Target i mean EPA is no joke they don't do anything that will hurt the ecosystem EPA fines the use gov millions on millions when i was in the army i bag more dirty cuz it was in the motor pool and it just might have oil on it so we have to have IT cleaned before it can go back out its freaking dirt from rain sure a nu ff we bagged it and throw it the dirt pill to be cleaned so if EPA says its OK it has to be OK the Greenpeace just use this to get them in the new again i don't understand why i mean hell its good for the ecosystem and the economy why do they still have to be haters?


I'll take "Punctuation" for $1000, Alex.
 

Back
Top Bottom