BP Oil spill shambles

[hooked_on_trout]

suprised noone has mentioned this yet, but hey what a mess, this is going to stuff up the fisheries and environment for a long time.

I mean its huge and BP who have a heap of money are too half assed too even fix it.

bloody shame, wont be long and it will be floating over here.

cheers

[qbkami]

laters! -,- our river is going to get a coating...

[Eug]

actually BP are doing something about it and it's certainly costing them. they've tried numerous techniques to no avail and are now resorting to experimental techniques because nothing is working. whilst it is their fault for the spill, we as consumers need are ultimately to blame, we need to reduce our usage and support alternative sources of energy to reduce the pressure on oil exploration/discovery.

[crazywalrus]

@ Eug - I am not sure we are to blame here with this. I agree we need to reduce our dependency on oil and coal and we are not doing enough to develop and encourage alternative power sources. But it is a big call to lay the responsibility on the end user. These businesses are at the end of the day businesses and they need to make a profit. They will do just enough to get by and I do not think there is too much philanthropy in these organisations. I do think due to scale and critical nature of this the US government should have at the very least overseen the efforts if not take them over.

I get the feeling that BP with the earlier attempts with the cap and needles that they where more interested in saving the oil rather than capturing and cleaning it up IMO. This has the potential to permanently change the gulf coast forever and who knows what the flow on effect in the environment will be.

I grew up in a conservative family with the attitude that progress is good and the environment take second place. I can remember when they wanted to drill on the reef for Oil and Gas and my parents where all for it. I am really glad now given this mishap that they did not get that passed. I worry about the other platforms we have.

I agree with you Eug we need to do more to change our attitudes and dependency on fossil fuels. I think in our life time we will start to see the effects of climate change on our fishing some negative some positives with more tropical species coming further south. We will start to get more coral bleaching and death as the temperatures rise. This will have a dramatic effect in our kids lifetimes.

Sorry for the rant just my opinion.

Cheers Ted

[ellicat]

crazywalrus wrote:

....... more interested in saving the oil rather than capturing and cleaning it up IMO. This has the potential to permanently change the gulf coast forever and who knows what the flow on effect in the environment will be.

.......

Cheers Ted

Poppyc0ck. Sensationalist. As much as this may upset a few, oil is natural. The concentration isn't, however over time it will dissipate with negligible (if any) longer term effects.

How is Moreton Island now ? There was a lot of sensationalist ranting and raving going on when the oil came ashore then. Apart from a couple of crook birds and a bit of an eyesore at the time the damage was nothing too serious. Have a look at the history of oil spills - you'll find a lot of hellabalu about it at the time but the recovery is what you'd expect from resilient mother nature. What will be harder to find is a greeny doing a song and dance about how wrong they were.

[Gad]

ellicat wrote:

crazywalrus wrote:

....... more interested in saving the oil rather than capturing and cleaning it up IMO. This has the potential to permanently change the gulf coast forever and who knows what the flow on effect in the environment will be. .......Cheers Ted

Poppyc0ck. Sensationalist. As much as this may upset a few, oil is natural. The concentration isn't, however over time it will dissipate with negligible (if any) longer term effects.

How is Moreton Island now ? There was a lot of sensationalist ranting and raving going on when the oil came ashore then. Apart from a couple of crook birds and a bit of an eyesore at the time the damage was nothing too serious. Have a look at the history of oil spills - you'll find a lot of hellabalu about it at the time but the recovery is what you'd expect from resilient mother nature. What will be harder to find is a greeny doing a song and dance about how wrong they were.

Years ago we always heard about the North Sea`s oil spills and blow outs that were going to be eternal disasters, due to the tempestuous storms that lash that region mother nature fought back.

mother natures USA hurricane season is due soon..that should put a lot through the wash and spin cycle.

Hopefully they ,BP/US government, can work together to successfully plug the well soon.

[crazywalrus]

lol Brian - Straight to the point :laugh: . I agree that I may have used pretty strong words there however I do feel strongly about this. "forever" may have been a little much however Oil has a greater effect than a few drowned birds. Oil may be natural however not all substances breakdown quickly and are inert in environment. Oil entering the wetland environment will not dissipate like it does in a beach environment like Moreton. It will enter the Mud Layers and may effect aquatic plant growth, microbial growth, crustaceans, and fish hatches for years to come.

We have just had a a couple of threads on the Sunland Hatcheries on the coast where a little over spray or drift has potentially effected the fish's embryos and possibly causing problems in the lake as well (not so sure about the lake myself). Oil has the potential to do this as well effecting both crustaceans, fish and birds. It will not dissipate once it has entered the mud layer. I have heard figures that it can take up to 25 years for it to break down. I know I am damn sure if I was there I would not be happy that my fishery could be effected like this.

You have to admit that the quantity of oil we are talking about is a lot different to the one at Moreton Island. The effect of the oil is going to be a lot greater in this environment as there is little chance it will be washed out to sea.

Cheers Ted

[tugger]

the oil that came shore from the ship off moreton island wasn't crude oil it was it's fuel oil from the ships fuel supply as it was a container ship and this was only a small deriative of crude oil with a lot of the nasties taken out. storms just brake up the oil and so much goes to the bottom and a lot ends up on the beaches and coats aquatic weed beds, mangroves, marine and bird life.

after the exxon valdez crude oil tanker grounding in cananda over 20 yrs ago it still hasn't fully recovered and after storms the oil today still comes to the surface. the salmon numbers are now a fraction from what they were and deformities in the fish are still discovered. there is toxins in crude oil and it does kill off microbiotic life under the surface for a very long time in sand and soils with chemicals that i can't prononce and it also changes the dna in auqautic life .

what these companies need to do is have better safety protocols and be regulated harder to reduce these risks but lets face it we all are dependent on crude oil and that won't change for some time yet in the forciable future. i've worked on oil rigs and was shown a video of the piper alpha oil rig disaster in the north sea off scotland during the 90's and they were hooked up to another oil rig which didn't stop pumping to piper alpha even after it caught fire and the men from the rig were pleading for the other rig to stop. over 300 men died that night and the companies procedures were never to stop production at any cost and they waited till they woke up the boss in america.

these companies have no loyalties to countries just to the bottom line, greed governs them so goverments must act and regulate them approiately

[crazywalrus]

tugger wrote:

these companies have no loyalties to countries just to the bottom line, greed governs them so goverments must act and regulate them approiately

Totaly agree with this Tugger. The US government should have been more involved from the start. At least they would not be considering the bottom line all the time when considering methods to fix this.

[fishguru5]

i didnt read the whole thing so maybe someone has mentioned this already but apparently they were going to try and fire golf balls at it. i laughed.

pat

[dhess]

Call me an extremist but I think the US deserves disasters. Just karma coming back to bite it in the ar$e. Still a shame to see ecosystmes ruined and animals suffering.

[AZZA]

dhess wrote:

Call me an extremist but I think the US deserves disasters. Just karma coming back to bite it in the ar$e. Still a shame to see ecosystmes ruined and animals suffering.

You do realize that this post has just flagged on every anti terorist watch underway in the western world and in 3 minutes your computer will be hacked by the CIA :silly: :laugh:

[ellicat]

tugger wrote:

the oil that came shore from the ship off moreton island wasn't crude oil it was it's fuel oil from the ships fuel supply as it was a container ship and this was only a small deriative of crude oil with a lot of the nasties taken out. storms just brake up the oil and so much goes to the bottom and a lot ends up on the beaches and coats aquatic weed beds, mangroves, marine and bird life.

Generally not for long.

after the exxon valdez crude oil tanker grounding in cananda over 20 yrs ago it still hasn't fully recovered and after storms the oil today still comes to the surface. the salmon numbers are now a fraction from what they were and deformities in the fish are still discovered. there is toxins in crude oil and it does kill off microbiotic life under the surface for a very long time in sand and soils with chemicals that i can't prononce and it also changes the dna in auqautic life .

.........

The Exxon Valdez occurred in a sound that is near the North Pole and the oil was trapped in calm water areas in freezing conditions. The waters contain low oxygen levels and do not support well the micro-organisms and bacteria that naturally breakdown oil. Sure there are some longlasting effects on some species, but the current lists of recovering/recovered species is much bigger than the lists of not recovering/unknowns. Even the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Trustee Council admit they aren't sure if those on the lists are a result of the spill or other causes - natural and man-made. Not to mention the clean up techniques did more harm than good in some instances.

"Status of Injured Resources & Services

The following information is from the 2010 Injured Resources & Services Update adopted in May 2010 by the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Trustee Council.

In November 1994, the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Trustee Council adopted an official list of resources and services injured by the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill (EVOS) as part of its Restoration Plan. The Injured Resources and Services List (List) serves three main purposes in the Restoration Program:

1. Initially, the List identified natural resource and human service injuries caused by the oil spill and clean-up efforts.

2. The List helped guide the Restoration Plan and was especially important in 1994 when the plan was first adopted. The List was created as guidance for the expenditure of public restoration funds under the Plan, and assisted the Trustees and the public with ensuring that money was expended on resources that needed attention. The List continues to serve that purpose today.

3. Finally, the status of injured resources on the List provides the Trustees and the public a way to monitor recovery of ecological functions and human services that depend on those resources.

Although the fish and wildlife resources that appear on the List experienced population-level or chronic injury from the spill, not every species that suffered some degree of injury was included. For example, carcasses of about 90 different species of oiled birds were recovered in 1989, but only 10 species of birds were included on the List.

Moreover, it should be noted that the analysis of resources and services in relation to their recovery status only pertains to amelioration of effects from the 1989 oil spill. When the Restoration Plan was first drafted, the distinction between effects of the oil spill and the effects of other natural or anthropogenic stressors on affected natural resources was not clearly delineated. At that time, the spill was recent; the impact to the spill area ecosystem was profound and adverse effects of the oil on biological resources were apparent. As time passes, the ability to distinguish effects of oil from other factors affecting fish and wildlife populations diminishes. Currently, natural and human perturbations may be hindering recovery of some resources initially injured by the spill. While those perturbations warrant consideration in defining and assessing recovery, they do not negate the responsibility of the Trustee Council to pursue restoration of spill-affected resources. However, the passage of ti me and the evolution of science from the listing of species to an ecosystem approach have shifted the purpose and utility of the Injured Resources and Species List. The Council recognizes that the complexities and the difficulties in measuring the continuing impacts from the spill result in some inherent uncertainty in defining the status of a resource or service through a specific list and the Council’s focus has accordingly expanded to a more ecosystem approach. The 1994 Plan also outlined an ecosystem approach to restoration and this more integrated view has become increasingly recognized as essential and the original organization of efforts through a list of species in the Update is no longer a viable approach.

Recognizing that funding for future restoration is limited and that it is becoming increasingly difficult to distinguish between spill impacts and other effects in measuring recovery, the Council’s efforts are now focused on making an organized and strategic transition to a modest program which focuses the remaining funds on a few specific programs. Building on its past efforts, the Council has identified the following areas of focus: (1) herring; (2) lingering oil; (3) long-term monitoring of marine conditions; (4) harbor protection and marine restoration; and (5) habitat acquisition and protection.

The Council also recognizes that long-term management of species and resources initially injured by the spill lies with the agencies and entities that have the mandate and resources to pursue these long-term goals. To support natural restoration and to enable management consistent with this long-term restoration, the Council has increasingly directed funds toward research that provides information that is critical to monitor and support the healthy functioning of the spill ecosystem.

Recovering: Recovering resources are demonstrating substantive progress toward recovery objectives, but are still adversely affected by residual impacts of the spill or are currently being exposed to lingering oil. The amount of progress and time needed to attain full recovery varies depending on the species.

Barrow's Goldeneyes

Black Oystercatchers

Clams

Designated Wilderness Areas

Harlequin Ducks

Intertidal Communities

Killer Whales

Mussels

Sea Otters

Sediments

Not Recovering: Resources that are Not Recovering continue to show little or no clear improvement from injuries stemming from the oil spill. Recovery objectives have not been met.

Pacific Herring

Pigeon Guillemots

Human Services: Human services that rely on natural resources were also injured by the oil spill and can thus be placed in one of the above categories. Because the recovery status of injured services is inextricably linked to the state of the resource on which it depends, full recovery of the spill area cannot occur until both resources and services are restored.

Commercial Fishing

Passive Use

Recreation and Tourism

Subsistence

Very Likely Recovered: While there has been limited scientific research on the recovery status of these resources in recent years, prior studies suggest that there had been substantial progress toward recovery in the decade following the spill. In addition so much time has passed since any indications of some spill injury, including exposure to oil, it is unlikely that there are any residual effects of the spill.

Cutthroat Trout

Rockfish

Subtidal Communities"

In other words their job is almost done (apart from 2 species) and they are trying to find a way to keep their jobs.

If you have a look at the list of all the oil spills over the years and then added the sensationalism that surrounds them, the earth should have slipped out of orbit a decade or so ago. :dry: :laugh:

[tugger]

i wonder who the exxon valdez oil spill trustee council is with the money involved with these companies that could be oil companies propaganda plus that was 1 tanker, this well is spewing out that size tanker a week and will be the biggest oil spill the world has ever seen at sea

[hooked_on_trout]

I cannot believe your saying that, ellicat.

And eug I don't know what your thinking.

This is a lot of oil.

The gulf of Mexico is an enclosed gulf so most of the oil will end up on the shore, it will not be at sea long.

Except for the oil that has been 'chemically dispersed', which will most probably settle on the sea floor and stay there for centuries.

oh well, a bit sad really

but hey kudos to you guys for standing up for big fantastic BP, maybe you will get 4c off a litre next time you fill up.

cheers

[ellicat]

PS

I'm not suggesting that noone should be concerned - oil spills aren't a good thing !

I'm just not in with the doomsayers. I have faith in mankinds ability to learn and deal with issues. We've been doing a pretty good job since beating down the neanderthals and getting better after each game. (Despite what certain groups suggest).

[ellicat]

tugger wrote:

i wonder who the exxon valdez oil spill trustee council is with the money involved with these companies that could be oil companies propaganda plus that was 1 tanker, this well is spewing out that size tanker a week and will be the biggest oil spill the world has ever seen at sea

See above comment. I wasn't specifically speaking about the current debacle, but similarities can be drawn.

Also the EVOSTC is the independent body formed to deal / oversee the issue.

Behave Dan. Try to comprehend what I've said and what scientists more acquainted have said about oil.

[Eug]

im in no way backing BP, i think you are looking into what i wrote far too much. im sure BP do not want a spill on their hands.

the point im trying to get across is that we as consumers are using more and more fossil fuels, thus indirectly we demand further exploration and prospecting - which can then inadvertently lead to spills. the less we as consumers rely on fossil technology the less we will be drilling sea floors.

[kriso]

hooked_on_trout wrote:

suprised noone has mentioned this yet, but hey what a mess, this is going to stuff up the fisheries and environment for a long time.

I mean its huge and BP who have a heap of money are too half assed too even fix it.

bloody shame, wont be long and it will be floating over here.

cheers

you say this like there is simple fix to plug the leak? while i couldnt give a rats about BP do you really think there happy watching billions of cash leak everywhere? the cost to stop the leak is nothing to them as with the worlds need for crude oil they will always recover that easy, its not as easy as just cramming a cork in a hole. with todays resources and science things will get better and man will keep working to further reduce the impact of this mess. we might even see the making of the real teenage mutant ninja turtles!.

my opinion - yeah the whole situation sucks arse a bit but everything man made always has a margin of error and when the error comes along then they go back to the books to reduce it. unfortunatley there is always casualties. but if your so passionate that BP has just screwed the world and dont care then protest away go back to using candles for light and get yourself a new pair of shoes cause you will need them for all the walking you will be doing.

[Eug]

not sure if that was directed at me or not kriso.

i actually cycle to work everyday and only use the car for weekends and groceries. i'm also reasearching alternative energy sources for biodiesel and biohydrogen.

[Do$tylz]

^^ don't think it was directed at you mate.

.. at the rate you're going... get your paddles out for your boat too man hahaha

[nadders]

they'll have to be wooden paddles too mind you henry :cheer:

brian, i am behaving!!

cheers

Dan

[kriso]

Eug wrote:

not sure if that was directed at me or not kriso.

i actually cycle to work everyday and only use the car for weekends and groceries. i'm also reasearching alternative energy sources for biodiesel and biohydrogen.

wasnt directed @ anyone in particular mate, the point in my opinion (and thats just purely what it is - the way i see the situation) is we can hang shit on Bp on here till the cows come home but doesnt change anything and that if you purely pissed at BP and the oil companies untill there is a realiable and abundent alternative energy source and want to make a protest about it go back to living before we relied on crude oil e.g. no cars, trains, etc etc. once your left sitting in the dark holding a candle you might have a diffrent opinion on the fact - sorta ties in with your comment about the people being the demand for crude oil in the first place we wouldnt have it if we didnt need it.

[kriso]

nadders wrote:

they'll have to be wooden paddles too mind you henry :cheer:

brian, i am behaving!!

cheers

Dan

hahahha or steam engine with moving parts lubricated from animal fats lol oh and we have a 500th dan to the site - hooked on trout. why so many dans and bean counters on here i have no idea you guys are like moths to a light rofl!!!

[rayke1938]

I try to do my bit and only use my car when I go out. :blush:

On a more serious note I have been reading and watching a fair bit of Canadian tv over the last few weeks and it hardly gets a mention except from a few smaller left wing newspapers.

The failure of the mud and cement pumping attempt only rated about 6 lines on page 12 of the major Vancouver daily.

The Canadians seem to still be going full stream ahead granting exploration permits where an oil company wishes to have a go.

The general consensus of the press seems to be its a one off event and cant happen to us.

It would appear to me that the oil lobby in Canada is very strong.

Cheers

Ray

[Eug]

Do$tylz wrote:

^^ don't think it was directed at you mate.

.. at the rate you're going... get your paddles out for your boat too man hahaha

such a smart arse!

kriso wrote:

wasnt directed @ anyone in particular mate, the point in my opinion (and thats just purely what it is - the way i see the situation) is we can hang **** on Bp on here till the cows come home but doesnt change anything and that if you purely pissed at BP and the oil companies untill there is a realiable and abundent alternative energy source and want to make a protest about it go back to living before we relied on crude oil e.g. no cars, trains, etc etc. once your left sitting in the dark holding a candle you might have a diffrent opinion on the fact - sorta ties in with your comment about the people being the demand for crude oil in the first place we wouldnt have it if we didnt need it.

yes i'm inclined to agree with you on that. i'm of the belief that it's all economics, the consumers demand it so they produce it and charge a premium for it.

the technology for alternative energy is available, it's just not economically feasible because the consumers demand low cost energy. education also plays a major part, if more consumers knew that alternative energy was available and demanded it, then the costs of production (due to volume and investment) would decrease significantly - thus starting a pricing war between fossil vs. green.

just to put it in a little perspective for those who don't think alternative energy technology is already available; the first diesel engine ever invented ran on peanut oil.

so there's a little more to it than just waiting around for someone else to drive the technology. as consumers, demanding it will force the governments to play their hand and invest money into research and development. now i understand that it's a lot easier to say and write than do, i'm not expecting everyone to boycott fossil fuels - all i'm saying is that the more aware people are of their options the better they can drive certain outcomes.

[ellicat]

Eug wrote:

........

just to put it in a little perspective for those who don't think alternative energy technology is already available; the first diesel engine ever invented ran on peanut oil.

......

A whole new perspective on getting "well oiled" at the bar....from the nut dish :silly: :laugh:

[ellicat]

.....and here is the final say :laugh:

/>http://www.abc.net.au/news/video/2010/06/03/2917782.htm

[Ben Derecki]

Anyone seen this yet:

http://www.ifitwasmyhome.com

You might need to change the location in the top left corner depending on where your ISP is registered.

Pretty crazy putting it into perspective like that!

[ellicat]

and also...

[video]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gWPwlMv8lNI

[hooked_on_trout]

Eug wrote:

Do$tylz wrote:

^^ don't think it was directed at you mate.

.. at the rate you're going... get your paddles out for your boat too man hahaha

such a smart arse!

kriso wrote:

wasnt directed @ anyone in particular mate, the point in my opinion (and thats just purely what it is - the way i see the situation) is we can hang **** on Bp on here till the cows come home but doesnt change anything and that if you purely pissed at BP and the oil companies untill there is a realiable and abundent alternative energy source and want to make a protest about it go back to living before we relied on crude oil e.g. no cars, trains, etc etc. once your left sitting in the dark holding a candle you might have a diffrent opinion on the fact - sorta ties in with your comment about the people being the demand for crude oil in the first place we wouldnt have it if we didnt need it.

yes i'm inclined to agree with you on that. i'm of the belief that it's all economics, the consumers demand it so they produce it and charge a premium for it.

the technology for alternative energy is available, it's just not economically feasible because the consumers demand low cost energy. education also plays a major part, if more consumers knew that alternative energy was available and demanded it, then the costs of production (due to volume and investment) would decrease significantly - thus starting a pricing war between fossil vs. green.

just to put it in a little perspective for those who don't think alternative energy technology is already available; the first diesel engine ever invented ran on peanut oil.

so there's a little more to it than just waiting around for someone else to drive the technology. as consumers, demanding it will force the governments to play their hand and invest money into research and development. now i understand that it's a lot easier to say and write than do, i'm not expecting everyone to boycott fossil fuels - all i'm saying is that the more aware people are of their options the better they can drive certain outcomes.

yes so what?

Bio Diesel has been around quite some time and sugar farmers now sell sugar for ethanol production.

You just bought a flash brand new car didn't you?

Pity you don't practice what you preach but by the way your talking down to everyone I think you believe we are all stupid or something.

It is not about us demanding petrol it is about industry demanding fuel, the plastic industry for example uses huge amounts of petroleum to produce plastic.

It is not about us consuming petrol it is about consuming products.

No one here has to kiss BP's ass or listen to your lingo- bingo, BP shares have fallen 18% so I think there are quite a few people "blaming" BP.

It also seems to be going further as we become more and more dependent on China's money and economy and China's economy is becoming more and more dependent on exporting consumer products.

Lets face it BP are making a mess of it and there is no way I would want to be living in the gulf of Mexico as it will be a heart breaking sight.

Cheers

[ellicat]

Ben Derecki wrote:

Anyone seen this yet:

http://www.ifitwasmyhome.com

You might need to change the location in the top left corner depending on where your ISP is registered.

Pretty crazy putting it into perspective like that!

Lucky it doesn't reach down to Lennox Head - they've had a bad week already :dry: :laugh:

[Eug]

hooked_on_trout wrote:

yes so what?

Bio Diesel has been around quite some time and sugar farmers now sell sugar for ethanol production.

You just bought a flash brand new car didn't you?

Pity you don't practice what you preach but by the way your talking down to everyone I think you believe we are all stupid or something.

It is not about us demanding petrol it is about industry demanding fuel, the plastic industry for example uses huge amounts of petroleum to produce plastic.

It is not about us consuming petrol it is about consuming products.

No one here has to kiss BP's ass or listen to your lingo- bingo, BP shares have fallen 18% so I think there are quite a few people "blaming" BP.

It also seems to be going further as we become more and more dependent on China's money and economy and China's economy is becoming more and more dependent on exporting consumer products.

Lets face it BP are making a mess of it and there is no way I would want to be living in the gulf of Mexico as it will be a heart breaking sight.

Cheers

What's with the attitude? Pull your head in, this is a general discussion and if you feel stupid it's probably because you don't understand my words.

Actually I do practice what I preach, I've put on less than 100 km in the month that I've owned the car and it's filled with B10 biodiesel. You certainly know a lot about me for someone who I've never met. If you hadn't realised some (not all and certainly not most) industries are switching to biodegradable plastics made from plant material - I actually purchase vegan shampoo which has biodegradble containers. Now I can't do it for all the products I use, but certainly if the option was made available I would buy it. What do you do?

Petrol is a product, you are taking what I've said far too literally. You demand petrol to be able to get to work to produce a product or a service to earn money to buy products and the cycle continues. The petrol is what's required to transport those products and that's why the current target is transport fuels to set an example for the average consumer.

If you don't like my lingo-bingo, then simply don't read it. No one is forcing you to. If you don't understand or feel stupid because of it I can draw up a picture book for you.

[hooked_on_trout]

If you don't like my lingo-bingo, then simply don't read it. No one is forcing you to. If you don't understand or feel stupid because of it I can draw up a picture book for you.

Hit a nerve hey

Truth hurts mate

Also all you "green" products cost a mint and are only really there so people can have a clear conscience.

Not sure about all industry turning to plant fibre, plants are an exhaustible resource and they need WATER to grow (Another rare resource), just like your bio diesel.

Yeah almost forgot.. phosphate is an exhaustible resource too, not much of it around but without phosphate how will produce bio diesel or plant fibre?

Lot more to an issue than whats written on the back of you shampoo bottle.

Cheers

[Eug]

suit yourself...

[hooked_on_trout]

Eug wrote:

suit yourself...

Ok

you got your opinion and I have mine..simple

I shouldn't really do what I despise, and that is other people ranting others down.

so no hard feelings.

lets just say I got carried away.

cheers

[crazywalrus]

ellicat wrote:

.....and here is the final say :laugh:

/>http://www.abc.net.au/news/video/2010/06/03/2917782.htm

hmmm so real it is funny

thanks for the link

[kriso]

Dan deadset pull your figgin head in, everyone is entitled to say there view on the matter wether you think it is stupid or not if you cant discuss the matter at hand without making personal attacks then leave the site or shut up its that simple. get my lingo- bingo?.

[hooked_on_trout]

kriso wrote:

Dan deadset pull your figgin head in, everyone is entitled to say there view on the matter wether you think it is stupid or not if you cant discuss the matter at hand without making personal attacks then leave the site or shut up its that simple. get my lingo- bingo?.

yes no worries like I said I did not want to rant people down just got carried away .

I respect the fact that Eug is aware of himself as a consumer.

Hope his world is not too shattered..

Cheers

[Eug]

hooked_on_trout

hey mate, had a few beers this afternoon and they must of went to my head, no worries hey, didn't mean to rant you down with talk.

You have a point and I respect the fact your aware of your consumerism.

cheers

hooked_on_trout

I am sorry for crushing your reality,

next time I will handle you with kid gloves as you seem to have problems taking the truth.

cheers MATE

typical answer from an unmotivated nobody who's quite happy to ride the wave and let others do the hard work in the world. if you don't have the stones to post it publicly, don't bother to contact me privately sober or not.