Yellowstone Oil Spill

On Jul 7, 8:42*pm, "Russell D." wrote:
On 07/07/2011 05:58 PM, Bob wrote:

Ah, so its all about you. If a poster doesn't give you what you like,
mischaracterize their post and use that mischaracterization to insult
them.

You're new here aren't you?

Welcome. It can be a wacky place.

Russell
No, I've been around here about as long as Fortenberry and
intellectually know better than to respond to his jibes. But when he
gets that far off the wall, I just can't help myself. Actually I have
met him in person, and face to face he is not nearly as repugnant as
he comes off here .

On 7/8/2011 12:33 AM, Bob wrote:

No, I've been around here about as long as Fortenberry and
intellectually know better than to respond to his jibes. But when he
gets that far off the wall, I just can't help myself. Actually I have
met him in person, and face to face he is not nearly as repugnant as
he comes off here .

"not nearly"... a little repugnant is still repugnant. whisky and a
nearby trout stream help though.

jeff

On Jul 8, 5:35*am, jeff wrote:
On 7/8/2011 12:33 AM, Bob wrote:

No, I've been around here about as long as Fortenberry and
intellectually know better than to respond to his jibes. *But when he
gets that far off the wall, I just can't help myself. Actually I have
met him in person, and face to face he is not nearly as repugnant as
he comes off here .

"not nearly"... *a little repugnant is still repugnant. whisky and a
nearby trout stream help though.

jeff

A good guess or were you hiding somewhere in the bushes at that clave?
I only remember Fortenberry, Cyli, & me.

Bob wrote:
No, I've been around here about as long as Fortenberry and
intellectually know better than to respond to his jibes. But when he
gets that far off the wall, I just can't help myself.

Off the wall ? Hardly. You posted dumbass bull**** and I called
you on it, very politely if I do say so myself. Standard roff,
except for the very politely. ;-)

Actually I have
met him in person, and face to face he is not nearly as repugnant as
he comes off here .

This coming from Rear Echelon Bob who defamed and slandered a
genuine American war hero. Talk about coming off as repugnant,
you and your allegedly dishonored clothes stunk to high heaven.

--
Ken Fortenberry

On Jul 8, 4:14*pm, Ken Fortenberry
wrote:
Bob wrote:
No, I've been around here about as long as Fortenberry and
intellectually know better than to respond to his jibes. *But when he
gets that far off the wall, I just can't help myself.

Off the wall ? Hardly. You posted dumbass bull**** and I called
you on it, very politely if I do say so myself. Standard roff,
except for the very politely. ;-)

Actually I have
met him in person, and face to face he is not nearly as repugnant as
he comes off here .

This coming from Rear Echelon Bob who defamed and slandered a
genuine American war hero. Talk about coming off as repugnant,
you and your allegedly dishonored clothes stunk to high heaven.

--
Ken Fortenberry

And this from someone who never served in the military or even sought
humanitarian duty as an alternative.

Bob Weinberger - Viet Nam 65-66 including duty as a Naval Gunfire
forward observer

Bob wrote:
Ken Fortenberry wrote:
Bob wrote:
Actually I have
met him in person, and face to face he is not nearly as repugnant as
he comes off here .

This coming from Rear Echelon Bob who defamed and slandered a
genuine American war hero. Talk about coming off as repugnant,
you and your allegedly dishonored clothes stunk to high heaven.

And this from someone who never served in the military or even sought
humanitarian duty as an alternative.

Bob Weinberger - Viet Nam 65-66 including duty as a Naval Gunfire
forward observer

I'm perfectly happy to agree that the repugnance is mutual.

All that notwithstanding your post in response to a request for
details beyond the superficial on the Yellowstone River oil spill
was dumbass bull****.

--
Ken Fortenberry - roff 87-present including duty as early warning
bull**** detector

On Jul 8, 5:43*pm, Ken Fortenberry
wrote:

Ken Fortenberry *- roff 87-present including duty as early warning
bull**** detector

Geeze, must be awfully annoying always setting off your own alarm.

Bob wrote:
Ken Fortenberry wrote:
...
Ken Fortenberry - roff 87-present including duty as early warning
bull**** detector

Geeze, must be awfully annoying always setting off your own alarm.

Few things can set off all five bull**** detectors at once but this
gem is bona fide five-alarm bull****.

"3. The Yellowstone is in full flood and flowing very swiftly, thus
much of the oil will be in the lower Missouri & the Mississippi and
widely dispersed very soon."
-- Big Mouth Billy Bob

The fact of the matter is that the flood has pushed significant
amounts of the oil into fragile wetlands and marshes and it has
*not* washed downstream.

Dumbass.

--
Ken Fortenberry

On Jul 9, 8:09*am, Ken Fortenberry
wrote:
Bob wrote:
Ken Fortenberry wrote:
...
Ken Fortenberry *- roff 87-present including duty as early warning
bull**** detector

Geeze, must be awfully annoying always setting off your own alarm.

Few things can set off all five bull**** detectors at once but this
gem is bona fide five-alarm bull****.

"3. The Yellowstone is in full flood and flowing very swiftly, thus
much of the oil will be in the lower Missouri & the Mississippi and
widely dispersed very soon."
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * *-- Big Mouth Billy Bob

The fact of the matter is that the flood has pushed significant
amounts of the oil into fragile wetlands and marshes and it has
*not* washed downstream.

Dumbass.

--
Ken Fortenberry

And this fact is based on? If you study the pictures of the
Yellowstone in that area you will quickly see that:
1. Due to the high level of flooding, MOST streamside wetlands are
underwater with strong current flowing through them. Undoubtedly there
are a few permanent wetlands away from the normal channel that are
affected. However, that is not at odds with my statement about
" ...MUCH of the oil...".
2 A significant amount of oil has been (though, based on the
pictures, is only a small fraction of the 1000 barrels) pushed up onto
dry land pastures and crop land where it certainly can be a problem,
but is also much easier to clean up there than if it remained in the
river. My original comments never addressed this issue, and regardless
are not at odds with it.

You are either a very sloppy reader or ,more likely, choose to ignore
all qualifiers in any statement, and your response is to your skewed
interpretation of what was said or to your skewed perception of the
posters intent.