I believe that every person on this board realizes and appreciates the fact that this oil spill is a very serious situation. However, I also appreciate that some people in the world do, indeed, over-react when they see something of this nature in the news. For example, I recall that one person posted a rather hysterical sounding question, "What if the dome doesn't work? Will the whole ocean someday fill with oil?" That thinking totally ignores things like the Ixtoc 79-80 spill that flowed at much higher rates than this spill for over 9 months. Notice that the Gulf of Mexico did not die.
It is a marvel to me that this spill, perhaps because of its intensely politically charged character, has set a tone for gloom and doom and "I told you so" rhetoric. Is it serious? Of course, but other disasters in nearby waters garner almost no attention at all and are a perennial or at least annual event. Take the hypoxic zone, for example. It's many times the size of the area affected by the oil spill, its effects are very similar in regards to damage to the fisheries and benthic beds, and it IS NOT NATURAL in its causes any more than the oil spill. But because it has no single point-source and causal event, the damage gets "swept under the rug".
The point was made that "just because we can't see it (damage) from the surface doesn't mean it's not there." Well, that can be said for a lot of things that we, as a culture and stewards of the oceans, need to address. However, it requires more than anger and instant reactions.
By the way, while it is true that the amount of oil that naturally seeps into the Gulf is huge, most of that is spread out over millions of square miles over significant amounts of time. Spills such as this one have the potential of concentrating into much smaller areas, and that is what causes the increased damage.