Caedes

Non-art Website Issues

Discussion Board -> Non-art Website Issues -> Gulf Oil Spill

Gulf Oil Spill

.marcaribe
06/07/10 3:10 PM GMT
When I lived on the coast of South Texas from 82-87 there were always oil and tar balls washing up on the beach from the 1979 oil spill from the Ixtop rig Spend a day at the beach and before you go in the house you had to spend 20 minutes wiping tar off your feet, plus there was always so much junk washed up on the beach from industrial size bleach jugs to rusty cans. They were not items left from normal beach goers but dumped into the sea off oil rigs and cargo ships. It could really be disgusting especially after a storm.
0∈ [?]
Please Join The Caedes Kiva Team

Comments

Post a Comment  -  Subscribe to this discussion
.Nikoneer
06/07/10 3:41 PM GMT
When I was a Seabee in the early 70's, and my homeport station was Port Hueneme, California, near Oxnard, we would walk the beautiful nearly-white beach, but not with our shoes off. The first time I did walk it barefoot, I walked about a half-mile with my shoes off and found I needed to scrape a quarter-inch of tar off the bottom of my feet. You just couldn't see what was in the sand, and this was 37 years ago! Imagine the volume of crud that has built up since.

A long ways out in the vast Pacific, along the same latitude (I believe) as Guatemala, currents collide to create a several-mile vortex. It doesn't move very fast and isn't like a strong whirlpool or anything, but anything that floats into it stays there unless physically removed (and who would do that?). Right now it is filled with tons of floating trash, about a mile across, plastic, mostly.

We're going to kill this planet eventually.

-Nik
0∈ [?]
::colocolor
06/09/10 2:23 AM GMT
So we better enjoy it while we can. The greatest gift I hope to pass on to my fosters is respect of our planet and everything and everyone on it. It's really frightening to think what's in the future if we (big enterprise) keep going the way we are heedless of the greasy footprints we leave behind. anne
0∈ [?]
Critiquing art of any kind is utterly subjective. When I vote on your images, I look at several things. First, my initial gut reaction. Then, is it straight (if it should be); is the color correct or if intentionally saturated or desaturated, was it done properly and does it enhance the image; composition - if you intended a bulls-eye, unless it's an outstanding image that is really served by centering the subject, it'll get dinged; is the horizon dead center - again, unless there's an obvious reason that makes it a better photo, no points; is the subject interesting and uncluttered; is the image sharp; is the depth of field right for this composition, is there a catchlight in the creature's eye; would I hang this on my wall; is it an image I'd be proud to display; is it artistic or just a snapshot; does it move me; is there a message conveyed; is it documentary in nature and if so, does it tell the story in such a way it makes me want more. When I critique a photo in your gallery, I'm only suggesting what my subjective nature prefers. No need to defend your position if you like your image the way it is. If you give me constructive criticism on my pieces, I guarantee you I will take them to heart. I love to improve! Bring it on Caedians! Love, anne =D
.marcaribe
06/12/10 1:34 PM GMT
It just makes me sad, I can barely stand to look at pictures of Oily Pelicans, gulls and sand pipers I feel terrible about the Gulf Oil Spill It is Depressing me to no end....now they may even consider a nuke.
Diane
0∈ [?]
Please Join The Caedes Kiva Team
.Nikoneer
06/12/10 4:19 PM GMT
What? What do you mean, a "nuke?"
0∈ [?]
.marcaribe
06/12/10 4:29 PM GMT
Oil spill latest: BP and government may be forced to utilize a nuclear warhead to stem the flow of oil in the Gulf.
Go Google it.
Diane
0∈ [?]
Please Join The Caedes Kiva Team
.Nikoneer
06/12/10 8:00 PM GMT
Isn't that a bit like putting out a fire by throwing gas on it? (resounding slap to the forehead!) I realize it's a mile under water, and water in a nuclear reactor is what keeps it from going red-line, but using a nuke seems like a last ditch effort. I've always subscribed to Murphy's Law about things going wrong. If we have the technology to drill a mile under the ocean, we should have the technology to stem the flow. There is already a large section of the gulf, a little ways offshore from the main flow of the Mississippi in the delta, that has no life in it. Really. No plant or fish or aquatic life at all. Just empty ocean with a sandy floor and a few rocks — as barren as Mars appears to be. Scientists believe it's a result of all the agriculture chemicals that have washed downstream from the central U.S. Radiating another portion of the gulf can't possibly be a good solution for wildlife or the industries that utilize those waters.
0∈ [?]
.marcaribe
06/12/10 9:01 PM GMT
I agree with you Nik, The Gulf could very well become the dead sea with no living creature that need H2O. The 70's Oil Crisis was a wake up call and if they had stuck with it we would be using another fuel by now. But when the gas prices dropped in the 80s everyone just forgot all about it.
0∈ [?]
Please Join The Caedes Kiva Team

Leave a comment (registration required):

Subject: