Links 6/29/10

As world watches soccer’s Cup, Nike critic sees red Los Angeles Times

Team’s Work Uses a Virus to Convert Methane to Ethylene New York Times (hat tip reader Crocodile Chuck)

Newsflash : Airline food is inedible Gumbat Stew

A Republican Party that Really, Really Doesn’t Want Any Black or Hispanic People Voting for It Ever Again… Brad DeLong

More on Boycotting BP from the LAT Columbia Journalism Review

South Carolina: Outlier or National Precursor?Patrick Caddell and Kendra Stewart, RealClearPolitics. Is the “No Incumbent Left Standing” movement getting traction?

Guess What: Financial Reform Might Seriously Be DEAD Cluserstock

Ten untruths about central clearing Deus Ex Macchiato

The three biggest lies about the economy MarketWatch (hat tip reader John L)

In Ireland, a Picture of the High Cost of Austerity New York Times

Shock therapy is best cure for banks Financial Times. Note this is an editorial.

Britain ‘might not cope with another bank emergency‘ Independent

Force banks to bolster capital, says BIS, as G20 is criticised for delay on reforms Guardian

Official warns of asset risk for Fed Financial Times. This confirms the Ambrose Evans-Pritchard report that the Fed is divided on further QE if (ahem, when) the economy stalls. But then we have this: RBS tells clients to prepare for ‘monster’ money-printing by the Federal Reserve Ambrose Evans Pritchard, Telegraph (hat tip reader nohongosean)

Volcker Rule May Give Goldman, Citigroup Until 2022 to Comply Bloomberg. This “accommodation” makes clear what a farce the rule is.

Greece’s best option is an orderly default Nouriel Roubini, Financial Times

Slugfest! This unfortunate paper Economics is Hard. Don’t Let Bloggers Tell You Otherwise by Kartik Athreya of the Richmond Fed elicited a firestorm of reactions. I am tempted to weigh in belatedly, but here are some of the better responses thus far:

Don’t Let Fed Economists Tell You Otherwise… Mark Thoma

Bloggers can’t do economics. Discuss. FT Alphaville

Do I Have Anything Interesting to Say? Matt Yglesias

Economists behaving foolishly Ryan Avent

Economics Is Hard? Karl Denninger (hat tip reader Scott)

Fed Economist: Bloggers are Stupid Bruce Krasting

Antidote du jour:

Picture 4

Print Friendly, PDF & Email


  1. Paul Andrews

    Kartik Athreya seems to think that because most non-economists don’t know what they are talking about, economists do.

    The “science” of economics seems to be at the same stage physics was in the middle ages, so Kartik Athreya probably knows as much about economics as a reader of Ptolemy in 1500 knew about physics.

    However the average person in the street knows that people (in aggregate) can’t consume more than they produce over the long term. Some “economists” try to tell us otherwise.

      1. aet

        Upon occasion, people do produce FAR MORE then they can consume.
        They just can’t get it distributed before it spoils.
        Or is spoliation part of consumption?
        But that cannot be….
        It seems to me that people go out of their way to produce less than they can, so as to keep the prices up/

    1. Jim Haygood

      How could the physical sciences function if the units of mass, distance and time lacked fundamental definitions and were constantly drifting in value? They would be reduced to little more than the empirical observation prevalent five centuries ago.

      As long as trade and finance are denominated in undeemable, circularly-defined fiat currencies which exist only by virtue of ‘legal tender’ edicts, economics will never amount to anything but a ridiculous pseudo-science.

      Astroeconomics, homeopathonomics, tarotnomics — whatever you like, they’re all worthy intellectual competitors to the primitive lore of economic legend and superstitution proclaimed to gullible doctoral candidates in the benighted halls of Harvard, Princeton and Chicago.

    2. algernon

      If it’s all so hopelessly above us maybe he should just intimidate us by crowdsourcing review of the DSGE model he’s clearly so proud of. We’ll take it in Octave, R, or Freemat… whatever he wants. Sniffy handwaving about his awesome complexity is not going to impress anyone here. Maybe we can help him with his disastrous failure to address pervasive corruption in banking policy.

  2. Greg Thomas

    WTF is this link: A Republican Party that Really, Really Doesn’t Want Any Black or Hispanic People Voting for It Ever Again… Brad DeLong

    It’s ridiculous, absurd, and insulting. I’m unsubscribing from your blog. Next time use a little judgment before linking to trash.

    1. anonymmous

      The only trash were the vicious reprobateicans taking a dump all over one of the two or three fair Supreme Court justices in the last century.

    2. chad

      Yeah things have really gone downhill lately. Yves isn’t feeling well so probably is not in full control, that’s my reason for sticking around a little while longer anyway.

      1. anonymmous

        Let’s break down that comment a little bit. First, one can presume that you agree with the politics of Republicans, and therefore any questioning of it leads to the inevitable snide and dismissive remark that the whole blog has gone downhill. Then, you insult Yves saying that it’s because her judgment is being clouded by her cold.

        Perhaps you would be happier just sticking with geniuses like Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck.

    3. Anonymous Jones

      Epistemic Closure in Action!!! Well done, Mr. Thomas.

      OK, in fairness, that did seem to be an incredibly stupid and trivial post by DeLong (and the title was just bizarre…as if anyone is really paying attention to these scheming and vacuous failed rhetoricians in Congress, especially about this trivial Kagan confirmation…oh, and Hatch is a politician who says stupid things to appeal to his stupid constituency?…wow, you could not have given me newer or more shocking information).

      That said, to decide not to read this wonderful blog because of one of the many thousand links Yves puts up during any given year (which she was not necessarily condoning but might have just been posting as “this is what people are talking about”), well, that trumps DeLong’s stupidity by a mile. It’s not even close.

      1. anonymmous

        DeLong was not stupid. For some reason, the Republicans having no ammo to attack someone who will side with them in any event (but happens to be in the other party), choose to alienate 1/3 of the voters in the country instead. Even though it’s an incredibly stupid political move, they are dealing with an even stupider populace.

        What makes it even more nauseating is that they then get on their high horse and say Supreme Court Justices have to be perfectly neutral and apolitical, even after the Supreme Court elected George Bush in 2000, and given the green light for corporations to buy politicians.

        But I can see your point about ignoring them. After all, they ignore all of you.

    4. Mayday! Mayday!

      Oh no! Greg thomas is unsubscribing from your blog!! Take it back, Take it back, or you’ll be doomed!! What will we do without greg thomas!!

      1. KFritz

        Thomas mentioned ‘trash.’ The best think about his post is that a computer doesn’t transmit the …errr…aroma of his ‘F’ ‘trash.’

    5. Francois T

      I know reality sucks to no end, but, such is life.

      Republicans don’t even want Muslims, so…Hispanics and the likes?

  3. Bates

    RE: ‘Three biggest lies about economy’

    ‘Myth 2: Markets are panicking about the deficit’

    Mr Arends argues that there is no panic or problem caused by the huge amount of debt the US has added via treasury sales the last couple of years. To confirm his belief he points out that if the added debt was troubling to markets that interest rates on US Treasury paper would be climbing, and interest rates are not climbing.

    His circular arguement does not hold water because we do not know who is buying most of the treasury issues. Of course rates on treasury bonds will not rise if the Fed is paying broker/dealers, foreign central banks, foreign soverign wealth funds, and others, to buy the treasury paper at a particular low interest rate. Bernanke has stated that there is no end to the amount of debt he will print to avoid deflation…and that is exactly what is happening with stealth treasury purchases.

    Anyone with a little uncommon sense knows that the current and rising US debt can never be paid without inflation, revaluation of the dollar, or partial/outright default. We know that many countries have stopped or cut back on their purchases of US Treasury issues because they know US debt is no better than most others if the US consumer is impotent. In order to sell US paper in an unrigged market the interest rates paid by the US Treasury would indeed have to be much higher than current bond sales reflect. The oft mentioned ‘foreigners running into riskless US Treasury bonds’ is a total farce.

    The US now has stock markets that are dominated by HFT traders on low and lower volumns, fake treasury sales, manipulation of most if not all spot commodity prices, almost no mortgage market outside that backstopped by the US Gov, and the finance/insurance sector deemed too big to fail. We have a command economy, iow.

    The Fed claims that QE 1 has ended (I seriously doubt this) and the enormous expenditure of tax payer money has done almost nothing for the real economy except pull a little demand forward. Most economic indicators, even after thorough messaging by the US Gov, show the US currently sliding back into recession. Of course the Fed can never be audited because if it was their game of endless debt printing, and manipulation of markets, would be exposed immediately.

    The Fed and US Gov are not alone in their quest to prevent deflation at any cost. Allmost all central banks are playing the same games. Otherwise there would not be such a huge rift between Germany and the US about austerity and a sound currency/economy or more printing for more stimulus.

    Faced with the choice of a double dip recession or QE 2 (a LOT more printing), which do you think the US Gov will choose?

  4. Tim

    Thanks for the tip on the CJR article on boycotting BP. We believe unless one boycotts all oil – boycotting BP won’t have the desired affect. thinks BP should match purchases to help the gulf. And no, it is not BP propaganda. Can you imagine the resources BP has to create a matching program at the pump?

  5. Bates

    RE: ‘In Ireland a Picture of the High Cost of Austerity’

    Interesting that nothing in this two page NYT article mentions the cause of the economic debacle that Ireland finds itself in.

    Kenneth Rogoff is quoted in a single sentence in the article but nowhere is it mentioned that Ireland housing prices have plummeted over 60% (see link below to Rogoff pdf below) so far.

    How about interest rates held too low for too long by central banks, causing housing prices to explode upward? How about too much government borrowing and spending on pork barrel projects that the real Irish economy could not afford?

    The Irish are now experiencing the hang over from a debt binge caused by bankers/realtors selling homes to people that could not afford those homes when the real estate bubble collapsed…the pool of greater fools ran dry, iow.

    This is a teary eyed look at what happens to a nation when it’s government and central bank make very bad decisions…especially if that nation does not print the world reserve currency in any amounts deemed ‘necessary’…as the US Fed does.

    So, Ireland is going to try to make the rentier class whole while the average working stiff pays the bill for total mismanagement of the Irish economy by collusion and corruption between the government and the rentier class?

    Sound familiar?

  6. Michael

    “She said Nike’s code of conduct mandates that the company pay the minimum legal wage in each country, which in Indonesia is $122 a month, one of Asia’s lowest.”

    So Nike’s code of conduct prevents it from breaking the law in the countries they operate does it? Wow, so honourable. And they say it like it means something …

    1. Michael

      (this is exactly what apple says too – we’re not breaking the law, so what we pay our foreign slaves is ok)

  7. Peripheral Visionary

    Re: A Republican Party that Really, Really Doesn’t Want Any Black or Hispanic People Voting for It Ever Again…

    DeLong’s primary argument is that arguing against the views of a black Supreme Court Justice is racism by definition, which is such nonsense that it scarcely needs to be addressed. But I am curious–does the same so-called logic apply to criticisms of Justice Clarence Thomas?

    But there is a larger point, and that is that individuals are complex mixtures of laudable and regrettable tendencies. Justice Marshall did laudable work in improving the fairness and accessibility of the Justice system, even as his disparaging views on the Founding Fathers were regrettable. Didn’t he himself say something about none of us having lifted ourselves up solely by our bootstraps and having required a helping hand?

    One other subtle point from the quote from Orrin Hatch bears mentioning:

    “In another case, Ms. Kagan said that the Supreme Court should take the case because ‘it’s even possible that the good guys might win on this issue.’ I’m concerned about her characterization of one party as the good guys.”

    C.S. Lewis pointed out that who is in the right and who is in the wrong in any given case is an entirely separate question from who is the better party. To make the issue of law the determination of who are the “good guys” and who are the “bad guys” destroys the very essence of justice; namely, that the law is impartial to the parties involved. The better man or woman may be in the wrong, and the worse man or woman may be in the right; it is not the Court’s business to determine who is the better party, only how they stand with respect to the facts of law. The fact that convicted criminals have Constitutionally protected rights depends on that impartiality. That Kagan would think in terms of “good guys” versus “bad guys” in the context of an issue of law is very problematic.

    1. anonymmous

      It’s not at all problematic. People in the legal profession are not under some kind of illusion that they are representing bad guys e.g. guys trying to get away with drilling unsafely in the gulf of Mexico, and then polluting an entire ocean of water. Maybe from your vantage point there is no such thing as right and wrong, but this is not the case for most people.

    2. anonymmous

      You have also misread the article. It’s not about racism.

      It would be the same if the Republicans stood before the NAACP and did nothing but insult Martin Luther King with put-downs on Martin Luther King day.

  8. Independent Accountant

    Thanks for bringing Denniger’s response to the Richmond Fed my attention. I have nothing to add to it. He should read Steve Waldman’s Interfluidity. Then see if he can follow the aruguments there. I doubt it.

  9. EmilianoZ

    I started reading Kartik Athreya’s piece with an open mind just to see if there was anything interesting in it. But I stopped when I can across that passage:

    “Why should anyone accept uncritically that Economics, or
    any field of human endeavor, for that matter, should be easy either to process or contribute to? To some extent, people don’t. Would anyone tolerate the equivalent level of public discussion on cancer research?”

    Comparing Economics to a hard science is just ridiculous. Economics is more akin to something like sociology or history. I would listen to anyone’s insight on history or psychology.

    Economics should never be allowed to parade as a hard science. So, I stopped reading because I knew it was just a waste of time. It’s nothing but a piece of self-serving propaganda.

    1. chad

      Yeah Econned does a pretty good job of tearing down the idea of economics as a hard science like physics. If you haven’t read it I highly suggest it. Yves lays out the fact that the underlying basic assumptions that economics make to build their models on are too simplified to be applied to reality.

      To me, at the end of the day, economics is a people problem. I think models and analysis are useful but at the end of the day it’s people deciding to buy or sell and not a force of nature.

    2. DownSouth


      I agree with your claim that economics falls more in the realm of history, philosophy or theology than physics.

      This brings up an issue, however, that was raised during the discussion following a post yesterday by Rob Parenteau:

      We can undoubtedly all agree that different people can come to different conclusions from a given fact set. However, does one’s ideological bent give one license to alter the fact set, at least in regard to this-worldly happenings? Even in fields like history, philosophy and theology, is there not an obligation to present this-worldly occurrences as they actually happened, so that everyone can observe the same evidence and form their own opinions?

      Another thing, there seem to be entirely too many who, if a fact set is presented that belies their assertions (and we’ve seen it matters little whether this be in soft sciences like economics or harder sciences like medicine), the kneejerk reaction is to claim that no conclusions can, or should, be formed from the data. Is this really a good idea, to claim that everything from theology to physics is faith-based and has no basis in this-world reality?

  10. Cocomaan

    Today’s consumer confidence debacle is a long time coming.

    We really need Obama to get on the TV to pat the unemployed on the head:

    “There, there”, he’ll say. “There, there… don’t you feel better now?”.

  11. john

    California Cities Shutting Police Forces to Close Budget Gaps

    San Carlos’s council voted 4-1 to pursue discussions with the San Mateo County Sheriff’s Department on taking over the 32- member police force for the city located 24 miles (39 kilometers) south of San Francisco, according to Royce.

    Taking over policing may produce annual savings of $2 million, he said. Council members also chose to replace seven parks department jobs by hiring companies to cut grass and clean restrooms. That will save $500,000 a year, according to the San Carlos website.

    1. doc holiday

      Source it all out and let the free market rule! One also thinks that we could outsource all the shopping mall retail jobs to someone else ….. there seems to be no reason to have a normal job market, so WTF, let’s just make all this shit up and play the game of chaos. There really is no reason as to why Burger King can’t ship in some cheap labor from India to run its burgers, or why should Starbucks have temp jobs for under-trained housewives — give these F’ing jobs to some kid from some other place — a kid willing to work for pennies versus dollars! *

      Re: California Cities Shutting Police Forces to Close Budget Gaps

      * The author admits to having a glass of wine… `*`*

      `*`* … ok, so it was a tall glass

  12. bena gyerek

    another random thought:

    for most countries:

    recession => localised risk aversion / expectation of falling rates => currency depreciation => competitiveness gain => net exports mitigate recession

    for the u.s.a:

    recession => global risk aversion / expectation of falling rates in all currencies => flight to quality => dollar appreciation => u.s. competitiveness loss => net exports worsen u.s. recession

  13. No Problemo

    Moral Hazard -> Risk of having morals or ethics, when dealing with amoral, immoral or unethical parties.
    Corollary one: the party with the lowest morals sets the behavior.
    Corollary two: Collusion an attempt by parties to reduce risk of having morals, no morals, ethics or no ethics.
    Corollary three: If you deal with amoral, immoral and unethical parties that collude, you be screwed.

    I hear a big sucking sound.

  14. gordon

    So Ambrose Evans-Pritchard is still predicting a massive liquidity injection (buying spree) by the Federal Reserve. In comments previously – see thread under this post:

    I asked if anybody knew where the resulting mountain of cash would go and how it would be spent. Since Ambrose E.-P.’s last, it has occurred to me that the money will probably be deposited in bank’s accounts at central banks, or be retained by banks as capital. If that is right, it will have little or no stimulatory effect. So why have the buying spree in the first place?

    1. gordon

      Along the same lines is this piece from the Sydney Morning Herald (via Reuters) which speculates on the enormous amounts of cash banks need to remain (?) solvent (I say solvent, not liquid, after a moment’s thought):

      An extract:

      “Unless there is a profound sovereign debt crisis, we can count on governments taking the needed steps to see that the banking system does not fall over for lack of funding. So, if liquidity or support schemes need to be extended or invented anew, they will be.

      “But a banking system that has not fallen over, while a precondition for strong economic growth, is not in and of it self sufficient to cause strong economic growth. Expensive funding and a rising term premium will stunt growth and they will impose a haircut on risk asset prices”.

  15. bob goodwin

    re A Republican Party that Really, Really Doesn’t Want Any Black or Hispanic People Voting for It Ever Again…

    If I deconstruct Brad’s argument, the republicans mentioned a black man disparagingly 34 times, but only mention Obama 17 times (presumably because he is only half black.) Therefore Republicans are scaring away black voters (and since they are racist are also scaring away Hispanic votes.)

    Republicans get few black or hispanic votes, so there is little fear of reprisal, even if disparaging a person of a racial minority counted as racism. If the goal of liberals is to make their ideology be above criticism by hiding behind race, then the republicans will gain far more votes from non-liberal ideologies than the ones they will lose from false claims of racism.

  16. thumbs up holiday

    NASA May Get Off Its Ass?

    The National Aeronautics and Space Administration will use its equipment in a series of flights to help measure the change in the size of the oil spill on the Gulf of Mexico’s surface.
    The flights will begin July 1 and continue until July 12, Stephen Cole, a NASA spokesman, said by phone today. The data collected by the airborne visible/infrared imaging spectrometer, known as Aviris, will be provided to the U.S. Geological Survey to analyze, he said.
    This will be the second time NASA has used the equipment to measure the spill.

    >> BP must have given thumbs up to NASA — but, what about that other cute plane sitting in Texas with that there infrared imaging capability, that the hillbillys are hiding … huh, huh??

  17. monkey poop

    Oh shit, these retards again… these clowns toss darts at monkeys and have no clue what they are doing….. please, God, please, help us!

    ==> The Mass Balance Team of the FRTG is using remote sensing data from deployment of the Airborne Visible InfraRed Imaging Spectrometer (AVIRIS) and satellite imagery to calculate the amount of oil on the ocean surface on a certain day. The team is correcting the value for oil evaporated, skimmed, burned, and dispersed up to that day and divided by time to produce an average rate.

    Based on observations on May 17th, and given the amount of oil observed and the adjusted calculations for the amount of oil that has been burned, skimmed, dispersed, or evaporated the initial estimate from the Mass Balance Team that was announced on May 27 was in the range of 12,000 to 19,000 barrels of oil per day. The team continued to refine its estimate and has concluded that the best estimate for the average flow rate was in the range of 12,600 to 21,500 barrels of oil per day.

  18. Sundog

    Longish but very worthwhile comment on the current situation in Afghanistan by William Dalrymple. His forthcoming book on Britain’s first Afghan war is likely to be a must.

    “Afghanistan is like the crossroads for every nation that comes to power,” agreed Anwar Khan Jegdalek. “But we do not have the strength to control our own destiny – our fate is always determined by our neighbours. Next, it will be China. This is the last days of the Americans.”

    In 1842, by the time they realised they had to negotiate a political solution, their power had ebbed too far, and the only thing the insurgents were willing to negotiate was an unconditional surrender. Today, too, there is no easy military solution to Afghanistan: even if we proceed with the plan to equip an army of half a million troops (at the cost of roughly $2bn a year, when the entire revenue of the Afghan government is $1.1bn – in other words, 180 per cent of revenue), that army will never be able to guarantee security or shore up such a discredited regime. Every day, despite the military power of the US and Nato and the $25bn so far ploughed into rebuilding the Afghan army, security gets worse, and the area under government control contracts week by week. (emphasis mine)

    William Dalrymple, “Why the Taliban is winning in Afghanistan”

    Massive, massive cheers & vuvuzela storms to Bloomberg for publishing the story on Mexican drug money. Hey you BB writers scanning this: Demand more recognition and attention! The hed leading to your deep reporting shows up on my screen with the same emphasis as a [story to follow] placemarker. (These seem more rare lately or maybe I just don’t bother to check BB so often anymore.) You people at BB have real talent and skills, applying them to valuable work, backed by serious resources, and sometimes even making the results available to people who don’t all have PhDs but who give a shit and want to be informed. Make it just a little easier for us to weed the wheat from the chaff. A simple word count next to the hed might be a decent start.

    Wachovia admitted it didn’t do enough to spot illicit funds in handling $378.4 billion for Mexican-currency-exchange houses from 2004 to 2007. That’s the largest violation of the Bank Secrecy Act, an anti-money-laundering law, in U.S. history — a sum equal to one-third of Mexico’s current gross domestic product.
    “If you don’t see the correlation between the money laundering by banks and the 22,000 people killed in Mexico, you’re missing the point,” Woods says.
    No big U.S. bank — Wells Fargo included — has ever been indicted for violating the Bank Secrecy Act or any other federal law. Instead, the Justice Department settles criminal charges by using deferred-prosecution agreements, in which a bank pays a fine and promises not to break the law again.

    Michael Smith, “Banks Financing Mexico Gangs Admitted in Wells Fargo Deal”

    I don’t often recommend watching video, rather than listening to audio or reading a transcript. In this case I make an exception. Please watch Charles Bowden talk about his latest book.

    1. gordon

      Sundog, thanks for the moneylaundering link. When Govts. showed enormous reluctance to nationalise banks back in 2008 I speculated that it was because they were scared of what they would find by way of criminal activity. Moneylaundering and tax havens are open secrets but no Govt. has the courage to confront these activities.

  19. NASA Best Estimates Suck?

    Re: The team continued to refine its estimate and has concluded that the best estimate for the average flow rate was in the range of 12,600 to 21,500 barrels of oil per day.

    Scale of BP oil leak revised up to 40,000 barrels a day

    NASA apparently went to the moon, but can’t estimate the flow rate of an oil rig? Time to shut down NASA IMHO … it would save taxpayers billions!!!

  20. Coast Guard Morons

    EPA plane sanctioned to spot oil in state waters (Jun. 28)

    On the flight Taylor took Monday, the team found numerous oil masses or streamers from five to seven miles south of Pascagoula near Petit Bois and Horn islands and two oil streamers 7.5 miles, and nine miles off Biloxi’s shoreline. They did not find any areas of oil west of Biloxi in Mississippi waters.

    Read more:

    The team’s leader, Mark Thomas, is assembling equipment that could be used on a second airplane.

    70+ days in this disaster, and this guy is getting a second plane ready, and they have not even used the first one — The Coast Guard is filled with a large bunch of retarded idiots — or else they are working for BP! The CG has 100% authority to do anything they want on state or federal waters and can use any agency for any purpose … WTF is going on?

    ==> See:

    In the case of spills fromMMS-regulated facilities, the USCG FOSCs are encouraged to work closely with the RP and MMSRS in developing appropriate response strategies. The USCG FOSC has the authority to direct Federal, State, and private actions
    The MMS, upon request from the FOSC, will provide engineering, technical, and scientific expertise to support responses to significant oil discharges from MMS-regulated facilities in the OCS. Assistance may include remote help such as identification of RPs using MMS regional databases and mapping programs, or on-site help at Joint Field Offices (JFOs) or Unified Command (UC) Posts. Incooperation with the FOSC, MMS may deploy Regional and/or District engineering, scientific, or technical staff to support the response and participate in USCG over flights of OCS energyinfrastructure to assist assessing damage to offshore facilities…


  21. ...CGM

    Oil-Soaked Dolphin Gets Rescued From Gulf But Does Not Survive Trip To Rescue Facility

    In the event that you needed even more visual evidence of the catastrophic environmental impact of the BP oil disaster there is this video which shows an individual pulling an oil covered dolphin from a Pensacola beach. Alas, the dolphin did not survive its rescue, dying on its way to a local rescue facility in Panama City.

Comments are closed.