Thad Daly, Your Biodata don't Add-up & you are tripping over your own lies

• by BK Lim (12 March 2011)

Thad Daly, I took a little trip down memory lane and guess what? Within an hour, I found so many discrepancies and flip-flops in your comments I just have to write an article about your fictitious internet identity. You might also be pleasantly surprised with what I had dug up on your little naughty games with Merita Debbie Marble Blanchet, Deborah Dupre and Ian Crane. Wow! a foursome. There are more involved but I haven't got time to check them out yet. Since you have been so impatient during my absence, I thought I get yours out of the way first.

But first a little check on your biodata. You boasted on 26 Aug and again on 7 Sept 2010, you had worked 50 years on the rig, retired 2 years ago and lived well. Then on 2 Feb 2011, you said you were a Mechanical Engineer – Drilling Fluid Engineer 40+ years in the oil field. Sounds impressive until you put in a little mathematics. They don't add up. You mentioned you first went to work on the rig the summer of 1959. Assuming you graduated as a young engineer out of university at the age of 23, then your year of birth should be 1936. But your stated birthday was 30 May 1942; 6 years short isn't it? Your University of Pacific in Peru was established in 1962; 4 years after you started work as a drilling engineer.

So assuming the year your father took you to your first rig in 1959, and your stated birth date were right, then you must have started work when you were just 17 years old. Even back then I do not think you can graduate as an engineer at such a tender age of 17. So it is most probable you worked as a deckhand not an engineer. But then again you claimed that you worked the rig for 50 years. So that means you must have retired in 2009. But 2010 to 2009 is only 1 year. So you could not have retired for 2 years, 1 year maybe.

Oh I forgot. How many years did you serve with the US Navy/VAP 61 during the Nam wars? I don't believe the Navy was also operating a drilling rig in the Nam Wars. So if you serve a minimum of 2 years in Photo Intelligence, you could not have worked for 50 years on the rig itself. So it is either 48 years or you will retire only in 2011. So which is which? So you lied a little on 26 Aug and 7 Sept 2010 and when you set up your facebook page. That is 3 counts of lying. Tsk, Tsk!

So if you started work at 17 and did not take time off to study for your engineering degree, how did you qualify as a mechanical engineer or fluid engineer? Each course would have taken 4 years to complete. So either you took 8 years off to study for your degrees or you just bought them off the shelves in Bangkok during your recuperation leave from the Navy. No wonder you and Merita were so obsessed with or jealous of Dr Tom's degrees. More of that in my next article.

Without a college degree, you probably started as a trainee deckhand and slowly worked your way up to be a driller. But a rig operator is no mechanical engineer, or fluid engineer or drilling engineer as you claimed to be. It is like a bus driver claiming to be an auto engineer. An auto-engineer can choose to work as a bus driver but not the other way round unless the bus driver goes back to college to get his degrees.

Then you claimed to have worked in 40 countries in addition to US. Most rig workers are not permanent employees especially those who worked in so many countries as you. If you are a roughneck, you do not work when you are off the rig. An engineer, manager, geologist, geophysicist etc can still be working when they are off the rig or vessel. But a rig worker works with the tools and machinery on the rig. Once off the rig, you do not work. Local rig workers are permanently employed with 6 weeks on-2 weeks off or 1 month on – 1 month off schedules. They can still be considered gainfully employed but not working on the rig floor throughout their employment. But if you are working in 40 countries plus US, it tells me you are a freelance rig worker. On lean times, you might not be working for months at a time. Most offshore regulations do not allow you to work more than 6 weeks in a stretch. So when you said you work 50 years, you must be lying. Total effective work time is probably 2/3 of 50 years = approx 30 to 35 years. That my friend is your effective work experience. So 50 years experience is pure Bull$h!t, right?

Your University of Pacific is also a suspect. The links at your facebook takes me to a university of the same name in Peru. That was why I asked whether you were a Peruvian, once. If you had really graduated from the Pacific University in California, I am sure you would have been proud to say so. No wonder you kept harping on me being as fictitious as you. Safety in numbers? Sorry I am not you. I have got my principles which of course get me into collision with the likes of you in the oil industry. Everyone trying to prove how big their butts are instead of the brains. Sorry there are more prostitutes than professionals in the oil industry.

Are we having fun yet? To earn your keep, there must be a daily quota of trashing anti-BP or anti-Haliburton bloggers. So come back to your obsession with MIHOP – a term coined by Dr Tom to mean Make It Happen On Purpose. Without analysing the data, I thought (as with everybody) it was accidental. As soon as I analysed the data, it became apparent to me that it was negligence, recklessness or just a disaster waiting to happen. When Dr Tom first suggested MIHOP, it sounded incredible but when you look at the evidence carefully, it was just that; MIHOP.

Thad Daly came out very strongly against this MIHOP thing in Jan 2011. The arguments for it were clearly laid out in my articles. So it was indeed puzzling why Thad Daly could not understand. It was only after I did the calculation on his Biodata that I realised he did not pass his degree exams. So now we have to excuse his limited comprehension on technical aspects. No wonder he came out with words like “conspiracy theories be DISPROVEN” ~ Thad Daly 03/12/11. I would personally prefer the phrase; conspiracy theories be PROVEN false.

On 7 Sept 2010, Thad Daly did propose a conspiracy that “ultra-hazardous oilfield are being spread by BP to deflect attention from their actions”. I did not quite understand what Thad meant but I am sure the word “conspiracy” was clearly spelled out. Maybe at that time BP had not yet recruited him to “trash BK yet”. Coincidentally he invited me to be his friend on Facebook on 25 Jan 2011 (or around that date, have to check it up).

Before that I supposed he was contracted to trash BP and those who wrote against Halliburton. Why? You have to excuse his lack of grammar. I am quoting phrases so as not to be out of context. See figure 147-1 for the full comments.

On August 25, 2010 at 7:40pm; Thad Daly commented “ this was NOT an accident.” ….”And even more reason for criminal charges so no other is so arrogant, so stupid.”

August 26, 2010 at 3:28pm Thad Daly commented “Why would they NOT drill and complete a multi million dollar wel in the surest, safest manner? There are rules, regulations and safety standards that were violated. Have you seen any of the testimony on CSpan? Halliburton warned BP BEFORE the cement job in writing. And the equipment to do the job right was on the rig, just take 10 hrs to install 15 more centralizer while RIH with the liner”

September 6, 2010 at 7:49am Thad Daly commented “If all of the drlg industry safe operating standards been followed there would have been no blow. Do you truely believe other companies will not followed the proper safety standards especial as the world is watching.”

September 6, 2010 at 6:51pm Thad Daly wrote “Mac, either you can't read or chose to ignore the truth. Not rig, production platform. No explosion, no blow out, limited fire, no fatalities, all safety worked and no oil on the water.”

September 7, 2010 at 6:14am Thad Daly commented “Do not lose sight that the events on DWH WAS NOT AN ACCIDENT. It was due to intentional actions by BP. How many times does that need to be said? Saying it was an accident just apologises for BP, excusing them. Use y our "WEBSTER" look up accident, look up intentional. People harping on oilfield safety are chasing a wild hare. You want a conspiracy ? Here one, the gossip and rumors of the "ultrahazardous"oilfield are being spread by BP to deflect attention from their actions.”

Looking at all these, I am thoroughly convinced that Thad Daly was saying it was INTENTIONAL. If it was not ACCIDENTAL then it has to be planned (intentional). Doesn't “Make It Happen On Purpose” = INTENTIONAL?

So did Thad Daly have a different paymaster in 2010? Was he recruited to hound me with a different agenda and a new paymaster? So like a prostitute, he sings whatever tune the Client wishes. His skin is so thick, no nail can be hammered in. So do not waste my time. I have got better things to do. Watch out for the next article why the Deborah Dupre's article on 7 Feb 2011 was a setup.

Oh I forgot, working in the Navy Photo Intelligence does not equate to ROV interpretation. Reading a few aerial recon photos does not make one an expert in geomorphology and geohazards analysis. To understand what those ROV video means, you need to know the basics of sedimentation, geology, kinetics, oceanography and other fundamentals of science. Yeah a rigger could read aerial recon photos – big deal. No wonder he could not make out the rov images and evidences presented in my articles. To date, no one has dared to challenge me on these evidences. Only a dumb Ass rigger who knows nuts dared to open his mouth without thinking. I feel awful trashing anyone this bad but he kept asking for it …..sigh!