[Natural Born 54]

I found a web site that is Project Avalon’s new forum. I don’t have time to poke around there but I did see that the discussion concerned an interview with Dr. Bill so and so on the 16th of the month and that may be where you picked up the METHYLENE CHLORIDE reference.

The audio recording I listened to was a different broadcast on the 14th and was with Richard Hoagland. (I think it was recorded by a listener rather than the source.) I know his rep is mixed but he was no dummy. He never used meth chloride once in his statements.

Here’s a summary of the interview:

Hoagland said his sources for the information he has include people working for BP and people working for the U.S. government. There is a gas bubble (generic “gas” is what he said) that has formed around the well head that is 15 to 20 miles across. This was discovered by surface ships using GPS and depth finders. He then brings into his talk a reference to a geologist who is president of his own company and was the guy in charge of putting the oil fires out in Kuwait (he’s a Red Adair type). He said this man was willing to come on the radio show, under certain conditions, and talk about the problem with the host. This guy was one of the geologists hired to do a study on the formations in the gulf so he is very familiar with the with them. He advised people that it is not safe to drill deep wells there. He felt the formations could not stand the pressures of opening up a deep, deep well.

Hoagland proceeded to say that the well goes down 22,500 feet (4.5 miles) and the geologist believes the psi is 100,000 (gases). The mixture of gas and oil roared up the pipe and blew the casing away. He then talked about cavitation resulting from the continued rush of stuff up the pipe. He said the pipe goes through as many as 50-60 layers of geological materials - sandstone, gas pockets, different oil reservoirs, sand lenses (not sure if I have that right - wasn’t clear), etc. He said it’s like turning on a bubble machine.

Side comments back and forth - this is why they haven’t capped the well; drilling 2 relief wells is the wrong thing to do. Brief mention of abiotic oil. Comments to the effect that it is possible to tell whether this oil is “new” oil or “old” oil. A Chis Landau has actually written 2 papers stating that he believes abiotic oil could be produced in the gulf. Both papers have peer review.

Hoagland went on to discuss a worst case scenario that if the well is pressurizing the upper level strata and were to create cracks in the ocean floor at the top level which appears to be happening and they try to cap the well or the final rupture occurs, you could have the most horrendous gas explosion. Results would be toxic cloud drifting over land and a 400 to 600 mph tsunami which would primarily endanger Florida but wouldn’t be insignificant elsewhere along the coast where the land is higher.

Finally, he believes the mud (dog) log data from BP on the Deep Horizon well and all the wells in the gulf (he knows they are proprietary) need to be analyzed and a network of buoys set up in the gulf in conjunction with gps (military gps would be best of course) and echo sounding to get what in effect would be a cat scan of the gulf to see if this threat is as serious as is feared so people can be warned.

That’s the gist of it. What’s your reaction?

[Natural Born 54]

This might be of interest to you. I transcribed (loosely) a radio broadcast on the oil spill. If true, OH OH!

I did it for one of the resident FReeper experts who has hearing problems and couldn’t listen to the recording. He has promised to respond with his opinion and perhaps the opinion of his in law who is qualified to comment on the geology aspects.

Comment #59 - link:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/2536374/posts?page=59#59

[LucyT]

Wolf Blitzer: “Billion potential barrels of oil” under BP well; “Could really explode”

Check out # 59.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/2536374/posts?page=59#59

[Thanks, Natural Born 54.]

[mojitojoe]

Is it this Richard Hoagland?

Richard Charles Hoagland,[1] most commonly known as Richard C. Hoagland, (born April 25, 1945) is an American author and a proponent of various conspiracy theories about NASA, lost alien civilizations on the Moon and on Mars and other related topics. Claims from his personal biography[2] and publication[3] include having been curator for a science museum in Springfield Massachusetts at age 19 in the mid-60s.[4] Hoagland does not have any scientific training.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_C._Hoagland
http://cc.bingj.com/cache.aspx?q=Richard+Hoagland&d=4593008063677608&mkt=en-US&setlang=en-US&w=3ba461ea,f2b0e364

[Wonder Warthog]

"That’s the gist of it. What’s your reaction?"

Totally whacko.

How does one form a "gas bubble" a mile under the ocean, since EVERY gas associated in any way with oil is less dense than water and immediately skyrockets to the surface? This is the same problem with Simmons' "lake of oil".....oil FLOATS on water, unless it is treated with dispersant and dissolves....but there hasn't been enough dispersant dispensed to form a lake, and the actual MEASUREMENTS on the notorious "plumes" only show 0.5ppm of hydrocarbons.

I don't know where all these flakes are coming from, but most of what they talk about simply can't happen due to the laws of physics and chemistry.

[yield 2 the right]

I listen to the whole thing C2C AM with Noory interviewing Hoagland......sounds like “Tin Foil Hat Time”. However, anything is possible.

[El Gato]

gland went on to discuss a worst case scenario that if the well is pressurizing the upper level strata and were to create cracks in the ocean floor at the top level which appears to be happening and they try to cap the well or the final rupture occurs, you could have the most horrendous gas explosion.

You might get an explosive eruption, but under the water, where would the oxygen or other oxidizer come from to cause the gas bubble to explode in the sense of rapid combustion. Most "explosives" have their own oxidizer built in.

(military gps would be best of course)

Unless selective availability is turned on (at the satellites) commercial GPS is just as good as military. Sure some, but not many, military GPS sets have special capabilities, like cycle counting, but for this application, commercial surveying quality GPS sets would be better than most military GPS. Military sets tend to be better in "high dynamic" environments, as in a fighter aircraft", but in a boat, not moving all that fast, commercial sets would be fine, and probably better. They all work with the same signals from the satellites... again, unless selective availability is on. It was turned off in May of 2000 and is still off, AFAIK. It was still off on the 10th anniversary, last month.