Monday, July 26, 2010

Angelina Jolie Says She Was Scarred By 'Salt' - cbs5.com

Angelina Jolie Says She Was Scarred By 'Salt'

DERRIK J. LANG, AP Entertainment Writer
SAN DIEGO (AP) ― She wasn't computer generated, and she wasn't even wearing a costume.

That didn't stop Angelina Jolie, clad in a snug shiny black jacket, from dazzling the crowd at Comic-Con on Thursday afternoon as she promoted her spy action-thriller "Salt," which opens Friday.

"She's so pretty," said convention goer Christina Torres, who waited Thursday morning in a line that snaked outside the San Diego Convention Center to catch Jolie in the flesh. "I mean, I always knew she was pretty, but when you see her in person, you realize just how pretty she is."

The A-list actress tiptoed around fan questions about her mysterious character Evelyn Salt, who may or may not be a Russian spy.

"There's a real duplicity to her personality," she said. "There's a part of her that's not necessarily a good guy, and because of certain things that happened to her, she's a bit damaged. She's not just heroic. She's not even. She's not just brave. There's something a little off about her, and maybe there's something off about me."

Jolie performed her own stunts in "Salt" and recounted an on-set injury to the audience that left her scarred. She sliced open part of her face just above her nose when tumbling into a doorway with a gun.

Jolie said she first thought she suffered a concussion because she couldn't hear anything, but later realized she was wearing earplugs.

Comic-Con continues at the San Diego Convention Center through Sunday.

May she never ever mess up that look of hers. Not many have her presence ona nd off stage.

Posted via email from The World and MrDprince

Amazing Video: Whale Wallops South African Yacht

67624@kpix.dayport.com&CBS_adsCustomValues=mod=video;" quality="high" width="312" style="" />

Unbelievable the power of nature at work.

Posted via email from The World and MrDprince

Monday, July 19, 2010

Landfills Mined for Hidden T | Socyberty

Every year the average individual disposes more than 1200 pounds worth of rubbish. Nearly 70% of this waste could be recycled. The mining of our landfills for untapped resources could prove to be beneficial for the environment and the American economic system. This process is known as landfill mining and reclamation or LFMR. Nearly 70% of our landfills are reclaimable, but approximately 35% of the reclaimable products are paper oriented. Paper degrades over time and cannot be reprocessed subsequently much of this would be lost.

This leaves nearly 35% of our landfills filled with plastic, glass and scrap metals than may be reprocessed. Many of these scrap metals are common metals like steel and aluminum. Many more treasured metals may also be recovered, such as gold, silver, platinum, and copper. This could supercharge the revenues America attains by a great deal, and scale down our wastefulness in the process. Glass, for example, can be converted into glassphalt while other glass particulars and plastics are also recycled. Plastics can be formed into various items such as newfangled bottles, flowerpots, hangers, and even yarn for clothing. These materials can be obtained in abundance in our landfills, and can also be distributed to reprocessing companies. Landfill mining is relatively inexpensive and a good business opportunity for the citizenry who are environmentally friendly.

The conception of landfill mining was introduced in 1953 at a landfill in Israel. In several landfills the concentration of aluminum cans was in reality much higher in respect to the concentration of aluminum in the rock bauxite where aluminum ore is obtained. This implies that less work has to be exercised to make pure and extract the aluminum from the landfill in question. This may be a critical resource since the aluminum can be extracted for a much more modest cost, and with a great deal less work.

Once upon time, people were allowed to roam their local landfill to scavenge articles for reclamation.  Sadly, due to possible hazards and health concerns, this is no longer an allowed practice. Landfill mining and reclamation is the modern alternative that can also offer new energy resources by reclaiming methane gas and creating biofuels from the food wastes. At present our current state of technology allows numerous possibilities into reclamation to provide fuel and goods, not to mention jobs and new industries.  Only time will tell of all the buried treasures in our landfills.

Posted via email from The World and MrDprince

Monday, July 12, 2010

American Extreme Rescue Homeless in Arizona | RedGage

Maybe Arizina's Governor should concentrate on ridding her state of these people before taking on illegal aliens. It is a question of priority.

Posted via email from The World and MrDprince

Monday, July 5, 2010

Oil Spill- Is It the End of The World?

This video reflects the feelings of a lot of normal people who are plagued with questions of our future. BE ADVISED: some profanity is used in this video due to her frustration.

Posted via email from The World and MrDprince

Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill, Doomsday Scenario

Not just conspiracy theory...perhaps truth.

Posted via email from The World and MrDprince

Oil spill? Just nuke it - Breaking News, New Brunswick, Canada

A11

Nuke the Deepwater Horizon wellhead? The thought had occurred to me, over the past six weeks watching environmental catastrophe unfold in the Gulf of Mexico, that detonating a nuclear bomb at the oil well blowout site a mile below the water's surface could work where all other schemes so far have failed.

Click to Enlarge

The Associated Press
The winning sand sculpture in the Fiesta of Five Flags sand sculpture contest at Pensacola Beach, Fla., on Sunday, displays a can of BP oil being poured over a pelican. Several oil spill-themed sculptures were built by angry residents.

I figured there were probably all sorts of technical reasons why this was a fanciful notion, but it turns out not so much. Apparently the former Soviet Union (U.S.S.R.) used nuclear weapons on five separate occasions between 1966 and 1981 to successfully cap blown-out gas and oil surface wells (there was also one attempt that failed), which have been documented in a U.S. Department of Energy report on the U.S.S.R.'s peaceful uses of nuclear explosions.

Russia is now urging the United States to consider doing the same. Komsomoloskaya Pravda, the best-selling Russian daily newspaper, asserts that although based on Soviet experience there's a one-in-five chance a nuke might not seal the well, it's "a gamble the Americans could certainly risk."

Reportedly, the U.S.S.R. developed special nuclear devices explicitly for closing blown-out gas wells, theorizing that the blast from a nuclear detonation would plug any hole within 25 to 50 meters, depending on the device's power. Much as I had idly imagined, massive explosions can be employed to collapse a runaway well on itself, thus plugging, or at least substantially stanching, the flow of oil.

With no air present in underground or underwater nuclear explosions, energy released overheats and melts acres of surrounding rock into a glass-like, form-fitting plug, blocking the flow. Russian media reports also note that other subterranean nuclear blasts were used as many as 169 times in the Soviet Union for fairly mundane tasks like creating underground storage spaces for gas or building canals.

The downside, of course, is the release of radioactivity into the environment, affecting flora like phytoplankton and other marine organisms, including fish. However, those are already being severely impacted by release of oil, which if unchecked, could (and probably already has) caused more damage than would fallout from a nuclear blast. The U.S. DOE report suggests environmental risks would be relatively minimal, since the bulk of the radiation released would be far underground.

"Seafloor nuclear detonation is starting to sound surprisingly feasible and appropriate," University of Texas at Austin mechanical engineer Michael E. Webber is quoted observing, while Columbia University visiting scholar on nuclear policy and former naval officer Christopher Brownfield wrote in the Daily Beast: "We should have demolished this well with explosives over a month ago. And yet we watch in excruciating suspense while BP fumbles through plan after plan to recover its oil and cover its asset."

Mr. Brownfield criticizes U.S. President Obama's team of oil spill advisers as green on casualty response and susceptible to oil company coercion, contending that: "It would be far better for our president to pick up the red phone and call Vladimir Putin for a lesson on ninjapolitik than to leave BP in charge of the ineffectual plans that it's bringing to the table," and says Mr. Obama's opportunity to stop the spill quickly and heroically with a controlled demolition is slipping away.

Notwithstanding my misgivings about possible consequences of unleashing radiation, I'm becoming more and more convinced it could be a lesser evil than letting oil continue to gush despite British Petroleum's six weeks of serial ineffectual schemes to plug the flow.

Matt Simmons, founder of the energy investment bank Simmons & Company, told Bloomberg News that "Probably the only thing we can do is create a weapon system and send it down 18,000 feet and detonate it, hopefully encasing the oil."

Of course, the current U.S. administration is solidly Democratic, and a large, core Democrat Party constituency is rigidly and reflexively opposed to use of nukes. Then there's international politics. Blowing up a nuclear device in the Gulf would violate the Comprehensive Test-Ban Treaty at a time when President Obama is championing global nuclear disarmament. According to the New York Times, the Obama administration's stance on nuking the oil well has been: "absolutely not," a DOE spokeswoman confirming that the nuclear option never was, and is not, on the table.

Ideological and political hesitancy about using possibly the only means available to effectively plug the leak before at least August, when relief wells are completed, hopefully relieving pressure, could result in environmental tragedy of Biblical proportions reaching far beyond the U.S. Gulf coast. Last week, the National Center for Atmospheric Research released findings of a detailed computer modeling study projecting that oil from Deepwater Horizon could contaminate thousands of miles of the U.S. Atlantic coast and move out into mid-Atlantic as early as this summer.

Things are more than bad enough already, and oil continues escaping.

Charles W. Moore is a Nova Scotia based freelance writer and editor. He can be reached by e-mail at cwmoore@gmx.net. His column appears each Thursday.

This is a followup piece for the article about scientists warnings of the Gulf of Mexico Sea Floor.

Posted via email from The World and MrDprince

Scientists Warn Gulf Of Mexico Sea Floor Fractured “Beyond Repair” | The Liberty Blog

Scientists Warn Gulf Of Mexico Sea Floor Fractured “Beyond Repair”

Scientists Warn Gulf Of Mexico Sea Floor Fractured “Beyond Repair”


A dire report circulating in the Kremlin today that was prepared for Prime Minister Putin by Anatoly Sagalevich of Russia's Shirshov Institute of Oceanology warns that the Gulf of Mexico sea floor has been fractured “beyond all repair” and our World should begin preparing for an ecological disaster “beyond comprehension” unless “extraordinary measures” are undertaken to stop the massive flow of oil into our Planet’s eleventh largest body of water.

Most important to note about Sagalevich’s warning is that he and his fellow scientists from the Russian Academy of Sciences are the only human beings to have actually been to the Gulf of Mexico oil leak site after their being called to the disaster scene by British oil giant BP shortly after the April 22nd sinking of the Deepwater Horizon oil platform.

BP’s calling on Sagalevich after this catastrophe began is due to his being the holder of the World’s record for the deepest freshwater dive and his expertise with Russia’s two Deep Submergence Vehicles MIR 1 and MIR 2  which are able to take their crews to the depth of 6,000 meters (19,685 ft).

According to Sagalevich’s report, the oil leaking into the Gulf of Mexico is not just coming from the 22 inch well bore site being shown on American television, but from at least 18 other sites on the “fractured seafloor” with the largest being nearly 11 kilometers (7 miles) from where the Deepwater Horizon sank and is spewing into these precious waters an estimated 2 million gallons of oil a day.

Interesting to note in this report is Sagalevich stating that he and the other Russian scientists were required by the United States to sign documents forbidding them to report their findings to either the American public or media, and which they had to do in order to legally operate in US territorial waters.

However, Sagalevich says that he and the other scientists gave nearly hourly updates to both US government and BP officials about what they were seeing on the sea floor, including the US Senator from their State of Florida Bill Nelson who after one such briefing stated to the MSNBC news service “Andrea we’re looking into something new right now, that there’s reports of oil that’s seeping up from the seabed… which would indicate, if that’s true, that the well casing itself is actually pierced… underneath the seabed. So, you know, the problems could be just enormous with what we’re facing.”

Though not directly stated in Sagalevich’s report, Russian scientists findings on the true state of the Gulf of Mexico oil disaster are beyond doubt being leaked to his longtime friend, and former US President George W. Bush’s top energy advisor Matthew Simmons, who US media reports state has openly said: “Matthew Simmons is sticking by his story that there's another giant leak in the Gulf of Mexico blowing massive amounts of oil into the Gulf of Mexico. On CNBC's Fast Money, he says he'd be surprised if BP lasted this summer, saying this is disaster is entirely BP's fault.”

As a prominent oil-industry insider, and one of the World's leading experts on peak oil, Simmons further warns that the US has only two options, “let the well run dry (taking 30 years, and probably ruining the Atlantic ocean) or nuking the well.”

Obama’s government, on the other hand, has stated that a nuclear option for ending this catastrophe is not being discussed, but which brings him into conflict with both Russian and American experts advocating such an extreme measure before all is lost, and as we can read as reported by Britain’s Telegraph News Service:

“The former Soviet Union (U.S.S.R.) used nuclear weapons on five separate occasions between 1966 and 1981 to successfully cap blown-out gas and oil surface wells (there was also one attempt that failed), which have been documented in a U.S. Department of Energy report on the U.S.S.R.'s peaceful uses of nuclear explosions.

Russia is now urging the United States to consider doing the same. Komsomoloskaya Pravda, the best-selling Russian daily newspaper, asserts that although based on Soviet experience there's a one-in-five chance a nuke might not seal the well, it's "a gamble the Americans could certainly risk."

Reportedly, the U.S.S.R. developed special nuclear devices explicitly for closing blown-out gas wells, theorizing that the blast from a nuclear detonation would plug any hole within 25 to 50 meters, depending on the device's power. Much as I had idly imagined, massive explosions can be employed to collapse a runaway well on itself, thus plugging, or at least substantially stanching, the flow of oil.

“Seafloor nuclear detonation is starting to sound surprisingly feasible and appropriate," University of Texas at Austin mechanical engineer Michael E. Webber is quoted observing, while Columbia University visiting scholar on nuclear policy and former naval officer Christopher Brownfield wrote in the Daily Beast: "We should have demolished this well with explosives over a month ago. And yet we watch in excruciating suspense while BP fumbles through plan after plan to recover its oil and cover its asset.”

As to the reason for Obama’s government refusing to consider nuking this oil well, Sagalevich states in this report that the American’s “main concern” is not the environmental catastrophe this disaster is causing, but rather what the impact of using a nuclear weapon to stop this leak would have on the continued production of oil from the Gulf of Mexico, and which in an energy starved World remains the Planet’s only oil producing region able to increase its production.

On top of the environmental catastrophe currently unfolding in the Gulf of Mexico the situation may about to get even worse as new reports from the US are confirming the grim predictions of Russian scientists regarding the oil dispersement poisons being used by BP which are being swept up into the clouds and falling as toxic rain destroying every living plant it touches, and as we had detailed in our May 23rd report titled “Toxic Oil Spill Rains Warned Could Destroy North America

To what the final outcome of this catastrophe will be it is not in our knowing other than to state the obvious that the choice facing the American’s today is to either stop this disaster now, by any means, or pay dearly for it later. After all, is cheap petrol really worth the cost of destroying our own Earth? BP surely thinks so, let’s keep hoping Obama doesn’t.

http://www.whatdoesitmean.com/index1379.htm

Believe it or not, I have been having thoughts about what truths are being hidden about this oil spill. If this report is valid...then God help us all.

Posted via email from The World and MrDprince

Friday, July 2, 2010

BBC News - Day in pictures

Newly naturalized citizens in Arizona. It is a shame that not all illegal immigrants are able to accomplish this feat. For many it is not for a lack of trying.

Posted via email from The World and MrDprince

Please Donate to help us create ways to help those who are socially disadvantaged.