Tuesday, February 10, 2009
Best Writing of the Year Returns
The annual Sidney Awards. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/02/opinion/02brooks.html?ref=todayspaper
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
Wednesday, November 19, 2008
Why Did The Chicken Cross the Road?
Courtesy of my aunt.
BARACK OBAMA: The chicken crossed the road because it was time for a
change! The chicken wanted change!
JOHN MC CAIN: My friends, that chicken crossed the road because he
recognized the need to engag e in cooperation and dialogue with all the
chickens on the other side of the road.
HILLARY CLINTON: When I was First Lady, I personally helped that little
chicken to cross the road. This experience makes me uniquely qualified
to ensure right from Day One! that every chicken in this country gets
the chance it deserves to cross the road. But then, this really isn't
about me.
GEORGE W. BUSH: We don't really care why the chicken crossed the road.
We just want to know if the chicken is on our side of the road, or not.
The chicken is either against us, or for us. There is no middle ground
here.
DICK CHENEY: Where's my gun?
COLIN POWELL: Now to the left of the screen, you can clearly see the
satellite image of the chicken crossing the road.
BILL CLINTON: I did not cross the road with that chicken. What is your
definition of chicken?
AL GORE: I invented the chicken.
JOHN KERRY: Although I voted to let the chicken cross the road, I am now
against it! It was the wrong road to cross, and I was misled about the
chicken's intentions. I am not for it now, and will remain against it.
AL SHARPTON: Why are all the chickens white? We need some black chickens.
DR. PHIL: The problem we have here is that this chicken won't realize that
he must firs t deal with the problem on this side of the road before it goes
after the problem on the other side of the road. What we need to do is help
him realize how stupid he's acting by not taking on his current problems
before adding new problems.
OPRAH: Well, I understand that the chicken is having problems, which is
why he wants to cross this road so bad. So instead of having the chicken learn
from his mistakes and take falls, which is a part of life, I'm going to
give this chicken a car so that he can just drive across the road and not live
his life like the rest of the chickens.
ANDERSON COOPER, CNN: We have reason to believe there is a chicken, but we
have not yet been allowed to have access to the other side of the road.
PAT BUCHANAN: To steal the job of a decent, hardworking American.
MARTHA STEWART: No one called me to warn me which way that chicken was
going. I had a standing order at the Farmer's Market to sell my eggs when
the price dropped to a certain level. No little bird gave me any insider
information.
DR SEUSS: Did the chicken cross the road? Did he cross it with a toad?
Yes, the chicken crossed the road, but why it crossed I've not been told.
JERRY FALWELL: Because the chicken was gay! Can't you people see the plain
truth? That's why they call it the other side. Yes, my friends, that
chicken is gay. And if you eat that chicken, you will become gay, too. I say we
boycott all chickens until we sort out this abomination that the liberal
media whitewashes with seemingly harmless phrases like the other side.That
chicken should not be crossing the road. It's as plain and as simple as
that.
GRANDPA: In my day we didn't ask why the chicken crossed the road. Somebody
told us the chicken crossed the road, and that was good enough.
BARBARA WALTERS: Isn't that interesting? In a few moments, we will be
listening to the chicken tell, for the first time, the heart warming story
of how it experienced a serious case of molting, and went on to accomplish
its lifelong dream of crossing the road.
ARISTOTLE: It is the nature of chickens to cross the road.
JOHN LENNON: Imagine all the chickens in the world crossing roads together,
in peace.
BILL GATES: I have just released chickens 2008, which will not only cross
roads, but will lay eggs, file your important documents, and balance your
checkbook. Internet Explorer is an integral part of eChicken 2008. This
new platform is much more stable and will never crash or need to be rebooted.
ALBERT EINSTEIN: Did the chicken really cross the road, or did the road
move beneath the chicken?
COLONEL SANDERS: Did I miss one?
BARACK OBAMA: The chicken crossed the road because it was time for a
change! The chicken wanted change!
JOHN MC CAIN: My friends, that chicken crossed the road because he
recognized the need to engag e in cooperation and dialogue with all the
chickens on the other side of the road.
HILLARY CLINTON: When I was First Lady, I personally helped that little
chicken to cross the road. This experience makes me uniquely qualified
to ensure right from Day One! that every chicken in this country gets
the chance it deserves to cross the road. But then, this really isn't
about me.
GEORGE W. BUSH: We don't really care why the chicken crossed the road.
We just want to know if the chicken is on our side of the road, or not.
The chicken is either against us, or for us. There is no middle ground
here.
DICK CHENEY: Where's my gun?
COLIN POWELL: Now to the left of the screen, you can clearly see the
satellite image of the chicken crossing the road.
BILL CLINTON: I did not cross the road with that chicken. What is your
definition of chicken?
AL GORE: I invented the chicken.
JOHN KERRY: Although I voted to let the chicken cross the road, I am now
against it! It was the wrong road to cross, and I was misled about the
chicken's intentions. I am not for it now, and will remain against it.
AL SHARPTON: Why are all the chickens white? We need some black chickens.
DR. PHIL: The problem we have here is that this chicken won't realize that
he must firs t deal with the problem on this side of the road before it goes
after the problem on the other side of the road. What we need to do is help
him realize how stupid he's acting by not taking on his current problems
before adding new problems.
OPRAH: Well, I understand that the chicken is having problems, which is
why he wants to cross this road so bad. So instead of having the chicken learn
from his mistakes and take falls, which is a part of life, I'm going to
give this chicken a car so that he can just drive across the road and not live
his life like the rest of the chickens.
ANDERSON COOPER, CNN: We have reason to believe there is a chicken, but we
have not yet been allowed to have access to the other side of the road.
PAT BUCHANAN: To steal the job of a decent, hardworking American.
MARTHA STEWART: No one called me to warn me which way that chicken was
going. I had a standing order at the Farmer's Market to sell my eggs when
the price dropped to a certain level. No little bird gave me any insider
information.
DR SEUSS: Did the chicken cross the road? Did he cross it with a toad?
Yes, the chicken crossed the road, but why it crossed I've not been told.
JERRY FALWELL: Because the chicken was gay! Can't you people see the plain
truth? That's why they call it the other side. Yes, my friends, that
chicken is gay. And if you eat that chicken, you will become gay, too. I say we
boycott all chickens until we sort out this abomination that the liberal
media whitewashes with seemingly harmless phrases like the other side.That
chicken should not be crossing the road. It's as plain and as simple as
that.
GRANDPA: In my day we didn't ask why the chicken crossed the road. Somebody
told us the chicken crossed the road, and that was good enough.
BARBARA WALTERS: Isn't that interesting? In a few moments, we will be
listening to the chicken tell, for the first time, the heart warming story
of how it experienced a serious case of molting, and went on to accomplish
its lifelong dream of crossing the road.
ARISTOTLE: It is the nature of chickens to cross the road.
JOHN LENNON: Imagine all the chickens in the world crossing roads together,
in peace.
BILL GATES: I have just released chickens 2008, which will not only cross
roads, but will lay eggs, file your important documents, and balance your
checkbook. Internet Explorer is an integral part of eChicken 2008. This
new platform is much more stable and will never crash or need to be rebooted.
ALBERT EINSTEIN: Did the chicken really cross the road, or did the road
move beneath the chicken?
COLONEL SANDERS: Did I miss one?
Monday, November 17, 2008
Sunday, November 9, 2008
Monday, June 30, 2008
Perhaps Online Gambling Should Be Outlawed...
but the entertainment value is quite high...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GOoSGR_1qSk&eurl=http://www.latenightshot
Talking Points Gone Bad
Regardless of what you think of oil prices, this kind of analysis should make us all nervous...this is a GOP piece in response to repeated Democrat claims that there's plenty of land to drill for oil (whether it has some or not) rather than digging in new places.
Dear Colleague,
"If we extrapolate from today’s production rates on federal land and waters, we can estimate that the 68 million acres of leased but currently inactive federal land and waters could produce an additional 4.8 million barrels of oil and 44.7 billion cubic feet of natural gas each day."
–Democrat Staff, Unofficial House Natural Resources Committee Report
How did the Democrats arrive at these numbers? We asked them for a step by step explanation of their “extrapolation” on June 20th. They have not responded. Given the National importance of this issue, and the fact that the Majority plans to bring legislation based on this curious extrapolation directly to the floor with no hearing and no markup, Republican staff took out their calculators to try to figure it out for themselves.
Here’s what Republican staff discovered: It appears that the Majority staff arrived at their “extrapolation” by assuming that every single acre of every onshore AND offshore lease holds exactly the same amount of oil and gas. And this is now the #1 talking point of the Democrat Leadership.
The premise now established, they went to work in earnest on their beauty of an extrapolation.
Here’s the “science” behind the Democrats’ “extrapolation:
TOTAL NON-PRODUCING ACRES = 67,945,092 ACRES
TOTAL PRODUCING ACRES = 23,752,458 ACRES
Thus, in 2007 there were 2.86 times more Non-Producing Lands than Producing Lands
Now just multiply 2.86 by the amount of oil and gas produced on “producing lands” and voila, you get “4.8 million barrels/day and 44.7 billion cubic feet/day of natural gas.”
This is the “instant coffee” of oil and gas analysis. Why do oil and gas companies invest billions of dollars every year in high-tech exploration equipment and professionals when they could have just read the Natural Resources Committee Democrat Staff report to learn that they’re sitting on 4.8 million barrels of daily oil production!
Here are just a few of the Democratic Leaders standing by this “Instant Coffee” Extrapolation:
"The fact is there are 68 million acres onshore and offshore in the U.S. that are leased by oil companies - open to drilling and actually under lease - but not developed. If oil companies tapped the 68 million federal acres of leased land it would generate an estimated 4.8 million barrels of oil a day - six times what Arctic National Wildlife Refuge would produce at its peak.” – U.S. House Speaker, Nancy Pelosi
“The 68 million acres of leased but stockpiled federal oil and gas lands have the potential to produce an additional 4.8 million barrels of oil and 44.7 billion cubic feet of natural gas each day. This would nearly double U.S. oil production and cut oil imports by one-third.” – Rep. Nick Jo Rahall (D-W. Va), press release, June 18, 2008
“Offshore, only 10.5 million of the 44 million leased acres are currently producing oil or gas. These unused areas could produce an additional 4.8 million barrels of oil and 44.7 billion cubic feet of natural gas each day, nearly double current domestic oil production. That would nearly double total U.S. oil production, and is more than six times the estimated potential peak production from the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR).”
– Rep. Mo Hinchey (D-N.Y.), press release, June 12, 2008
“Currently, oil companies are not producing oil or gas on the nearly 68 million acres of federal land already under their control. Offshore, big oil is producing on only about 20 percent of the acres they hold, while onshore, companies are producing on less than 30 percent of the acres they hold. These unused areas could produce an additional 4.8 million barrels of oil and 44.7 billion cubic feet of natural gas each day, nearly double current domestic oil production.” – Rep. Ed Markey (D-Mass.), press release, June 12, 2008
“The 68 million acres of leased but inactive federal land have the potential to produce an additional 4.8 million barrels of oil and 44.7 billion cubic feet of natural gas each day. This would nearly double total U.S. oil production, and increase natural gas production by 75 percent. It would also cut U.S. oil imports by more than one-third, reducing America's dependency on foreign oil.” – Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-N.M), press release, June 12, 2008
“The leases represent 68 million acres of federal lands and waters and have the potential to produce an additional 4.8 million barrels of oil and 44.7 billion cubic feet of natural gas each day. This amount of energy would nearly double total U.S. oil production, and increase natural gas production by 75 percent. It would also cut U.S. oil imports by more than one-third, reducing America's dependency on foreign oil.” – Rep. Bill Delahunt (D-Mass.), press release, June 18, 2008
“These unused areas could produce an additional 4.8 million barrels of oil and 44.7 billion cubic feet of natural gas each day, nearly double current domestic oil production.” – Rep. John Yarmuth (D-Ky.), press release, June 12, 2008
“The President's proposal to open up all off-shore areas to oil and gas drilling is equally unhelpful. The fact is that vast amounts of federal land, on-shore and off-shore, are leased to energy companies for development, but remain undeveloped. There are 68 million acres of leased but inactive federal land that have the potential to produce an additional 4.8 million barrels of oil and 44.7 billion cubic feet of natural gas each day.” – Sen. Ken Salazar (D-Colo.), press release – June 18, 2008
“This is in comparison with just 1.5 million acres in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge that some would like to see opened for drilling. Offshore, these companies are producing on only about 20 percent of the acres they hold, while onshore, they are producing on less than 30 percent of the acres held. Estimates indicate that these unused areas could produce an additional 4.8 million barrels of oil and 44.7 billion cubic feet of natural gas each day, nearly double current domestic oil production.” – Sen. Bob Menendez (D-N.J.), press release, June 18, 2008
Sincerely,
/s
DON YOUNG
Ranking Republican
Committee on Natural Resources
Dear Colleague,
"If we extrapolate from today’s production rates on federal land and waters, we can estimate that the 68 million acres of leased but currently inactive federal land and waters could produce an additional 4.8 million barrels of oil and 44.7 billion cubic feet of natural gas each day."
–Democrat Staff, Unofficial House Natural Resources Committee Report
How did the Democrats arrive at these numbers? We asked them for a step by step explanation of their “extrapolation” on June 20th. They have not responded. Given the National importance of this issue, and the fact that the Majority plans to bring legislation based on this curious extrapolation directly to the floor with no hearing and no markup, Republican staff took out their calculators to try to figure it out for themselves.
Here’s what Republican staff discovered: It appears that the Majority staff arrived at their “extrapolation” by assuming that every single acre of every onshore AND offshore lease holds exactly the same amount of oil and gas. And this is now the #1 talking point of the Democrat Leadership.
The premise now established, they went to work in earnest on their beauty of an extrapolation.
Here’s the “science” behind the Democrats’ “extrapolation:
TOTAL NON-PRODUCING ACRES = 67,945,092 ACRES
TOTAL PRODUCING ACRES = 23,752,458 ACRES
Thus, in 2007 there were 2.86 times more Non-Producing Lands than Producing Lands
Now just multiply 2.86 by the amount of oil and gas produced on “producing lands” and voila, you get “4.8 million barrels/day and 44.7 billion cubic feet/day of natural gas.”
This is the “instant coffee” of oil and gas analysis. Why do oil and gas companies invest billions of dollars every year in high-tech exploration equipment and professionals when they could have just read the Natural Resources Committee Democrat Staff report to learn that they’re sitting on 4.8 million barrels of daily oil production!
Here are just a few of the Democratic Leaders standing by this “Instant Coffee” Extrapolation:
"The fact is there are 68 million acres onshore and offshore in the U.S. that are leased by oil companies - open to drilling and actually under lease - but not developed. If oil companies tapped the 68 million federal acres of leased land it would generate an estimated 4.8 million barrels of oil a day - six times what Arctic National Wildlife Refuge would produce at its peak.” – U.S. House Speaker, Nancy Pelosi
“The 68 million acres of leased but stockpiled federal oil and gas lands have the potential to produce an additional 4.8 million barrels of oil and 44.7 billion cubic feet of natural gas each day. This would nearly double U.S. oil production and cut oil imports by one-third.” – Rep. Nick Jo Rahall (D-W. Va), press release, June 18, 2008
“Offshore, only 10.5 million of the 44 million leased acres are currently producing oil or gas. These unused areas could produce an additional 4.8 million barrels of oil and 44.7 billion cubic feet of natural gas each day, nearly double current domestic oil production. That would nearly double total U.S. oil production, and is more than six times the estimated potential peak production from the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR).”
– Rep. Mo Hinchey (D-N.Y.), press release, June 12, 2008
“Currently, oil companies are not producing oil or gas on the nearly 68 million acres of federal land already under their control. Offshore, big oil is producing on only about 20 percent of the acres they hold, while onshore, companies are producing on less than 30 percent of the acres they hold. These unused areas could produce an additional 4.8 million barrels of oil and 44.7 billion cubic feet of natural gas each day, nearly double current domestic oil production.” – Rep. Ed Markey (D-Mass.), press release, June 12, 2008
“The 68 million acres of leased but inactive federal land have the potential to produce an additional 4.8 million barrels of oil and 44.7 billion cubic feet of natural gas each day. This would nearly double total U.S. oil production, and increase natural gas production by 75 percent. It would also cut U.S. oil imports by more than one-third, reducing America's dependency on foreign oil.” – Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-N.M), press release, June 12, 2008
“The leases represent 68 million acres of federal lands and waters and have the potential to produce an additional 4.8 million barrels of oil and 44.7 billion cubic feet of natural gas each day. This amount of energy would nearly double total U.S. oil production, and increase natural gas production by 75 percent. It would also cut U.S. oil imports by more than one-third, reducing America's dependency on foreign oil.” – Rep. Bill Delahunt (D-Mass.), press release, June 18, 2008
“These unused areas could produce an additional 4.8 million barrels of oil and 44.7 billion cubic feet of natural gas each day, nearly double current domestic oil production.” – Rep. John Yarmuth (D-Ky.), press release, June 12, 2008
“The President's proposal to open up all off-shore areas to oil and gas drilling is equally unhelpful. The fact is that vast amounts of federal land, on-shore and off-shore, are leased to energy companies for development, but remain undeveloped. There are 68 million acres of leased but inactive federal land that have the potential to produce an additional 4.8 million barrels of oil and 44.7 billion cubic feet of natural gas each day.” – Sen. Ken Salazar (D-Colo.), press release – June 18, 2008
“This is in comparison with just 1.5 million acres in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge that some would like to see opened for drilling. Offshore, these companies are producing on only about 20 percent of the acres they hold, while onshore, they are producing on less than 30 percent of the acres held. Estimates indicate that these unused areas could produce an additional 4.8 million barrels of oil and 44.7 billion cubic feet of natural gas each day, nearly double current domestic oil production.” – Sen. Bob Menendez (D-N.J.), press release, June 18, 2008
Sincerely,
/s
DON YOUNG
Ranking Republican
Committee on Natural Resources
Schaumburg Makes The Onion!!
My hometown is Schaumburg IL -- a suburb of Chicago know as Motorola's HQs and a big shopping mall. Its easy to understand how this gentleman feels the way he does: http://www.theonion.com/content/node/29383
Wednesday, June 18, 2008
Who knew? Maybe they will find the diamond...
itanic Was Found During Secret Cold War Navy Mission
By John Roach, National Geographic News, June 2, 2008
The 1985 discovery of the Titanic stemmed from a secret United States Navy investigation of two wrecked nuclear submarines, according to the oceanographer who found the infamous ocean liner.
Pieces of this Cold War tale have been known since the mid-1990s, but more complete details are now coming to light, said Titanic's discoverer, Robert Ballard.
"The Navy is finally discussing it," said Ballard, an oceanographer at the University of Rhode Island in Narragansett and the Mystic Aquarium and Institute for Exploration in Connecticut.
Ballard met with the Navy in 1982 to request funding to develop the robotic submersible technology he needed to find the Titanic.
Ballard is also a National Geographic Society explorer-in-residence. (National Geographic News is owned by the National Geographic Society.)
Surprise Find
Ronald Thunman, then the deputy chief of naval operations for submarine warfare, told Ballard the military was interested in the technology—but for the purpose of investigating the wreckage of the U.S.S. Thresher and U.S.S. Scorpion.
Since Ballard's technology would be able to reach the sunken subs and take pictures, the oceanographer agreed to help out.
He then asked the Navy if he could search for the Titanic, which was located between the two wrecks.
"I was a little short with him," said Thunman, who retired as a vice admiral and now lives in Springfield, Illinois. He emphasized that the mission was to study the sunken warships.
Once Ballard had completed his mission—if time was left—Thunman said, Ballard could do what he wanted, but never gave him explicit permission to search for the Titanic.
Ballard said Navy Secretary John Lehman knew of the plan.
"But the Navy never expected me to find the Titanic, and so when that happened, they got really nervous because of the publicity," Ballard said. "But people were so focused on the legend of the Titanic they never connected the dots."
Titanic: The Final Secret, a documentary on the discoveries, airs Monday, June 2, at 9 pm ET/PT on the National Geographic Channel.
Sunken Subs
The Thresher and Scorpion had sunk in the North Atlantic Ocean at depths of between 10,000 and 15,000 feet (3,000 and 4,600 meters). The military wanted to know the fate of the nuclear reactors that powered the ships, Ballard said. This knowledge was to help determine the environmental safety of disposing of additional nuclear materials in the oceans.
The Navy also wanted to find out if there was any evidence to support the theory that the Scorpion had been shot down by the Soviets.
Ballard's data showed that the nuclear reactors were safe on the ocean bottom and were having no impact on the environment, according to Thunman. The data also confirmed that Thresher likely had sunk after a piping failure led to a nuclear power collapse, he added. Details surrounding the Scorpion are less certain.
A catastrophic mishap of some sort led to a flooding of the forward end of the submarine, Thunman said. The rear end remained sealed and imploded once the sub sank beneath a certain depth. "We saw no indication of some sort of external weapon that caused the ship to go down," Thunman said—dismissing the theory that the Russians torpedoed the submarine in retaliation for spying.
Debris Trails
While searching for the sunken submarines, Ballard learned an invaluable lesson on the effects of ocean currents on sinking debris: The heaviest stuff sinks quickly. The result is a debris trail laid out according to the physics of the currents.
With just 12 days left over in his mission, Ballard began searching for the Titanic, using this information to track down the ocean liner. He speculated that the ship had broken in half and left a debris trail as it sank. "That's what saved our butts," Ballard said. "It turned out to be true."
The explorer has since used a similar technique to find other sunken ships and treasures, including his recent expeditions to the Black Sea.
Are these expeditions also part of top-secret missions? After all, the Black Sea is in the volatile Middle East.
“The Cold War is over," Ballard said. "I'm no longer in the Navy."
By John Roach, National Geographic News, June 2, 2008
The 1985 discovery of the Titanic stemmed from a secret United States Navy investigation of two wrecked nuclear submarines, according to the oceanographer who found the infamous ocean liner.
Pieces of this Cold War tale have been known since the mid-1990s, but more complete details are now coming to light, said Titanic's discoverer, Robert Ballard.
"The Navy is finally discussing it," said Ballard, an oceanographer at the University of Rhode Island in Narragansett and the Mystic Aquarium and Institute for Exploration in Connecticut.
Ballard met with the Navy in 1982 to request funding to develop the robotic submersible technology he needed to find the Titanic.
Ballard is also a National Geographic Society explorer-in-residence. (National Geographic News is owned by the National Geographic Society.)
Surprise Find
Ronald Thunman, then the deputy chief of naval operations for submarine warfare, told Ballard the military was interested in the technology—but for the purpose of investigating the wreckage of the U.S.S. Thresher and U.S.S. Scorpion.
Since Ballard's technology would be able to reach the sunken subs and take pictures, the oceanographer agreed to help out.
He then asked the Navy if he could search for the Titanic, which was located between the two wrecks.
"I was a little short with him," said Thunman, who retired as a vice admiral and now lives in Springfield, Illinois. He emphasized that the mission was to study the sunken warships.
Once Ballard had completed his mission—if time was left—Thunman said, Ballard could do what he wanted, but never gave him explicit permission to search for the Titanic.
Ballard said Navy Secretary John Lehman knew of the plan.
"But the Navy never expected me to find the Titanic, and so when that happened, they got really nervous because of the publicity," Ballard said. "But people were so focused on the legend of the Titanic they never connected the dots."
Titanic: The Final Secret, a documentary on the discoveries, airs Monday, June 2, at 9 pm ET/PT on the National Geographic Channel.
Sunken Subs
The Thresher and Scorpion had sunk in the North Atlantic Ocean at depths of between 10,000 and 15,000 feet (3,000 and 4,600 meters). The military wanted to know the fate of the nuclear reactors that powered the ships, Ballard said. This knowledge was to help determine the environmental safety of disposing of additional nuclear materials in the oceans.
The Navy also wanted to find out if there was any evidence to support the theory that the Scorpion had been shot down by the Soviets.
Ballard's data showed that the nuclear reactors were safe on the ocean bottom and were having no impact on the environment, according to Thunman. The data also confirmed that Thresher likely had sunk after a piping failure led to a nuclear power collapse, he added. Details surrounding the Scorpion are less certain.
A catastrophic mishap of some sort led to a flooding of the forward end of the submarine, Thunman said. The rear end remained sealed and imploded once the sub sank beneath a certain depth. "We saw no indication of some sort of external weapon that caused the ship to go down," Thunman said—dismissing the theory that the Russians torpedoed the submarine in retaliation for spying.
Debris Trails
While searching for the sunken submarines, Ballard learned an invaluable lesson on the effects of ocean currents on sinking debris: The heaviest stuff sinks quickly. The result is a debris trail laid out according to the physics of the currents.
With just 12 days left over in his mission, Ballard began searching for the Titanic, using this information to track down the ocean liner. He speculated that the ship had broken in half and left a debris trail as it sank. "That's what saved our butts," Ballard said. "It turned out to be true."
The explorer has since used a similar technique to find other sunken ships and treasures, including his recent expeditions to the Black Sea.
Are these expeditions also part of top-secret missions? After all, the Black Sea is in the volatile Middle East.
“The Cold War is over," Ballard said. "I'm no longer in the Navy."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
