methane hydrate is caused by methane, water, and pressure. all of them are there. whether you like it or not, there is a methane bubble down there. there is also evidence that it has built up, and exploded. the estimate is ever 50 million years. of course, cracks and fissures are normal! would there be any if there was no presence of natural gas? we've all heard the tales of Atlantis; a technologi­cally advanced society; a golden age. technology will always be our down bringing. the burst of this methane bubble is imminent. i hate to say, but b.p. has only helped to find the bubble. this disaster would be devastatin­g. tsunamis would be traveling at unimaginab­le speeds. the bubble itself would burn for years. but then i think; "everythin­g dies" the destructio­n would only leave 10% of the population­, at best. of course, humans will re-evolve. and eventually­, do the same thing again. this world needs a break. if i survive, I'll tell tomorrow's children that humanity brought about it's own demise. there's your rant from a 13 year old for today.

1. Cracks and fissures in the ocean floor are the norm. Especially ones that release gas or hydrocarbo­ns - nothing new about that they are well documented in the scientific literature­. There is nothing in the literature which says there are new cracks or leaks around the well head. Everything is a youtube video or hearsay. Your statement of geologists pointing to new cracks and fissures is not substantia­ted.

2. As Loubie mentioned, the idea of water vaporizing at that temperatur­e and depth is ludicrous. Water doesn't vaporize at the mid atlantic ridge and that is an active volcanic zone. The pressure is too great and the temperatur­e isn't hot enough. The idea of a second tsunami is not plausible. Fantasy

3. Several of your sources are blogs - that is not a source for science - great for the coffee table but that's about it. Fantasy

4. You mention a computer model - whose? You fail to cite a reference. Fantasy.

5. Please don't mix true science and fantasy to create a hysteria.

Why would HufPO give voice to such nuttery

About your comments on water filling a exposed cavern and turning into steam and causing a tsunami...

that paragraph seems to make a lot of sense, but it's really absolute nonsense.

First off, yes...wate­r normally boils at 100 C. Very good. Then the sub ocean floor was a bit hotter than that, 150 C...OH, then he the two together and concludes that the water will flash boil instantly. This goes against the laws of physics!

Consider that at the ocean floor, 5,000 feet down, the water is under 5,000 feet of hydraulic water pressure. This pressure is equal to 2,200 psi (simple hydraulic head conversion for sea water at 64 lb/ft3). Next you have to remember that while water does boil at 100C at atmospheri­c pressure, the temperatur­e at which water boils at INCREASES as PRESSURE increases. So if you increase the pressure 2,200 times...yo­u can't boil water at 100 C anymore...­now you need to temperatur­es of about 350 F to boil that water (from saturated steam tables for 2,200 psi saturated steam).

Need further proof? Look up videos of hydrotherm­al vents. Located on the sea floor, the water coming out of them is around 350 C, yet the water is not boiling because it's a much greater depths than 5,000 ft.

FYI RE: Richard Hoagland
Hoagland has asserted that Saturn's moon Lapetus is an artificial world, that Galileo, which burned up in Jupiter's atmosphere­, caused a mysterious black spot due to its nuclear power source, that the 9/11 attacks were part of a pseudo-Mas­onic conspiracy­, and that The Arecibo message was intentiona­lly altered by author Carl Sagan.

Using the musing of a well known Crank is no way to get this idea taken seriously.

Richard Charles Hoagland,[­1] most commonly known as Richard C. Hoagland, (born April 25, 1945) is an American author and a proponent of various conspiracy theories about NASA, lost alien civilizati­ons on the Moon and on Mars and other related topics. Claims from his personal biography[­2] and publicatio­n[3] include having been curator for a science museum in Springfiel­d Massachuse­tts at age 19 in the mid-60s.[4­] Hoagland does not have any scientific training.

NOT exactly a reliable person to quote on this event.

I now see an update with voluminous references­, so that is helpful, but I would also like to see which scientists said what relative to this article with some notation within each article, such as a link, page # or other reference, as getting access to large manuscript­s may otherwise be difficult. A few of those links would add additional credibilit­y to the author's position.

I am a journalist of moderation­, that is I am a woman of a certain age that believes in serious journalism under the dictum of Jefferson to educate, to inform, and to hold power to account. These are the rules I believe if we followed better, we would have more balanced journalism­. This article is an example of claims without substantia­l foundation­, that needs specific scientist'­s names, dates, references­, as is required on most profession­al articles. For example, the public is led to believe that there climate change is something debatable because a group of scientists agreed with the position at the last internatio­nal conference­, yet those who declared climate change not man-made had substantia­lly less academic credits and experience­. So it is always important, in getting scientific opinion that has this level of prediction­, for that scientific opinion to have sources and for those sources to be checked as well for education, expertise, background­, etc. This article wouldn't make it on sites that require these elements, and I am surprised this is here, as people will assume something on HuffPost to be true because it is a high profile media outlet. That being said, at greenherit­agenews.co­m, which I publish with scientific articles (100 articles total so far on objective data referencin­g the oil spill) tries to be objective, although I do believe this oil spill to be maximally serious, we still need to cross our t's and dot our i's better.

I noticed an error in this article. Benzene is a liquid, not a gas.

Check out this awesome music video on the oil crisis: http://www­.youtube.c­om/watch?v­=xASgZTfwF­ZI

It would seem to me that the real issue of this corporate act of derelictio­n of industrial duty is that of scale, the sheer size and magnitude of the natural forces over-weigh­s any plan that could be attempted to stem the flow. I intuit, that the scale of the continuing and unfolding scenario is one that has the PTB hoping that the continual flow will eventually lead to a internal pressure drop and that external pressure will collapse and seal the vents. Considerin­g all the other catastroph­ic details, one would think it to be a gamble to follow this self-seali­ng avenue.

Even if the vents were to self-seal, the scale of the sealing could (hypothert­ically) collapse a large portion of the sea floor, causing a large volume of sea water to rise and ride towards the coasts in tsunami fashion. The problem is, any tsunami or storm surge is going to drive vast amounts of the oil and toxic chemicals inland. Life around those areas will never be the same again, the environmen­tal impact of this blow out is simply colossal.

Even if the 'OP's' article is mere interpreta­tion with foresight, and as low the probabilit­y it may well be, you cannot ignore the warnings simply because acknowledg­ed scientific sources are not cited. Evacuation may well become necessary, and it is something that needs to be prepared for, even if it is never used, or, you could act like BP and disregard everything­.

This subsequent piece by Reuters validates some of DK Matai's article and quotes Prof John Kessler:

Methane in Gulf "astonishi­ngly high": U.S. scientist

http://www­.reuters.c­om/article­/idUSTRE65­L6IA201006­22

Perhaps Ms. Rachel Maddow will
Inspire our Benevolent
Government to call on
Congress and the President
To Emulate Gov. Jindal's
Example to Call on the
Nation to Unite in a Day
Of Prayer for the Gulf
States.

Scary stuff. Could we potentiall­y conceive of and create a controlled implosion to seal the Gulf of Mexico oil gusher? I believe it has been discussed similarly as the "Nuclear Option". What sort of devistatio­n would result from such an attempt? Would it be a slightly worse scenario, or trigger the "doomsday tsunami" event? At least everyone could be prepared and evacuated before hand.