You've refused to answer my question about whether Science Daily is the MSM, or provide me a link to the source that shows where these folks using your tax money have a clue.
But you continue to trash me.
I don't know what your problem is, but at least argue with some facts.
All I've done is respond to your challenge ~ it's pretty obvious that the scientists have had a "plan" since long before the drill went in the ground.
Whether or not that UK periodical is MSM or not, you are the fellow who planted the seeds of doubt about the accuracy of the story. The rest of us were quite willing to play along with you on that, but when you turned around and challenged us with your credentials, it was time to throw up your basic flame thrower defense.
Let me put it this way, I now doubt the utility of your initial comment/question. It is, in fact, contrary to what I've read in all the periodicals I named.