The Gulf Oil Spill Skeptics

It’s only been a few days since the fifth year anniversary of the historic BP oil spill. Having only been five years, the skeptics are already claiming that the spill have been contained and life is nearly back to normal, and claims that the environmental experts are wrong with their estimation of the damage. In the article, “The Doomsayers Were Wrong about the BP Oil Spill” co-written by Stephen Moore and Joel Griffith for the National Review, Griffith and Moore stated in the header, “Mother Nature heals herself.” As members of Heritage Foundation, an American conservative research organization which played a role in Ronald Reagan winning presidency, their tactics in attacking environmentalists are predictable.

Both authors focused a lot on the business side of the spill. Griffith and Moore mentioned how much money BP paid in expense of cleaning up their spill and how much help that money spent to clean can provide for each person in the U.S. They also stated that proof of the aftermath is not evident today’s seafood industry, because the fish populations are robust, and seafood is safe to eat. Also as predicted by economics professionals that the travel economies on the coastal states will be affected, Griffith and Moore found that tourists are flocking the Gulf every year since the spill.

What both authors lack to understand is that “long-term effects”, as stated by many specialists, does not mean that there is going to be exceptional proof within five years. Little does these two understand that ecological research has yet to be fully understood, and even with today’s advance technology, humans have yet to fully explore the depths of the sea (where hundreds of thousands, if not millions of oil barrels sits). If they have a means to examine the ecological effects of the spill, they sadly left out of how the spill are affecting the coral reefs. If we examine the ecological community that the reefs are a part of, taking them out of the picture would mean that everything from the bottom of the food chain would slowly vanish (the reefs provides food and shelter), and then top predators would have nothing to prey, leading to what experts predicted, a declining seafood industry.

The least credible argument that these two authors made in the article was they believed that the damage was contained, because “the vast majority of the 3.2 million barrels of crude leaked into the Gulf dispersed naturally, evaporating into thin air or biodegrading.” Just because the oil no longer stays afloat does not mean that it had not already affected the surrounding environment, which includes chemical contamination and environmental exposure. A study by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) in Barataria Bay, they found that dolphins were underweight and anemic (weak), and were showing signs of liver and lung disease due to the spill. Last year, NOAA researchers also linked the spill to irregular heart heats in embryonic and newborn tuna. The National Wildlife Federation (NWF) also found that there were declines in reproduction across in the northern areas of the Gulf. It’s sad that they are glistening the shell of the problem, and ignoring the rotting truth inside.

“The Gulf recovery has been swift and impressive and the doomsayers were wrong. When something like this happens, we should heed to the sage advice of the world’s most famous lawgiver, Moses, who warned us of the false prophets…Good advice, when it comes to the Green-movement prophets of doom.”

To end their argument, Griffin and Moore cites a biblical figure to prove that the other side of the conversation is wrong, even though it was not relevant. Instead of providing proof from previous spills, they provide the readers with nothing but opinions that are from a corporal side of view. Their true attention is to falsify the facts from the real experts in the scientific field, and create a world where corporates will take the planet’s resources and leave paths of destruction for everyone to endure.

“Big Green has tried to capitalize on the BP spill as the reason to block any offshore drilling…but the real true story of horrific accidents like the BP oil spill and natural ecological occurrences like Hurricane Katrina, is that Mother Nature adapts—and she has awesome healing power.”

There it is…the sad truth about corporate greed and ideology. Everything that is done to conserve and/or preserve nature are considered resistance to progress, and the only answer they have to the devastation that they leave is that Mother Nature will heal herself. Why spend money to fix something when that thing can fix itself, right? And the sad thing about their lines quoted above is that they called Hurricane Katrina a natural ecological occurrence, when ecological relates to the relation between living organisms and their environment!


One thought on “The Gulf Oil Spill Skeptics

  1. Hopefully any attempts, like these, at revisionist history will be remembered as part of the total true history of the oil spill and its environmental and social impact. I hope that most people can see through the arguments here.

    I suppose this sort of thing is, as you said, predictable at this point. Modern debate around political, social or environmental issues seems to have taken for form of sports fandom. With all sides looking for any fact that can be twisted to their narrative.

    I do enjoy reading this sort of thing. I’m always interested to see what these special interest groups will come up with next. Good post!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s