Think of an open garden hose...

spewing freely at one end. Now consider puncturing it. Do two holes relieve more pressure from the spewing end than one? (think of those holes you're cutting into the hose as relief wells...)

Now, force your hand over the open nozzle, but don't cut the pressure. Is it an old hose? How long can you keep that water temporarily bottled up in the hose? (with more pressure coming, remember). Is the liquid trying to find the weakest point to escape? Are you holding your hand over the open nozzle before cutting that hole (or two) up higher in the hose?

What do you think will happen if we experimented like this on a broader scale? Will the physical laws still hold? What if it wasn't water spilling but oil? Does that matter much? Doesn't liquid under pressure always find the weakest point to escape?

In the early stages of the 90 day-old disaster, oil industry expert Matt Simmons told NBC News that a major area of seepage was coming from an area about 7 miles from the well. Simmons called it the “elephant behind the mouse.”

Why the heck would you try to cap the end -- before making the cut to relieve the pressure? Because it looks good?

Should the sea floor leak announced today be confirmed in same location as the one Simmons and Senator Nelson have reported, then BP and the government have been aware of it all along, further substantiating fears of an oil spill media blackout.

Wouldn't it be best at this point to leave cosmetic efforts well enough alone -- freely spilling if need be -- than to potentially mess up your later efforts in trying to cut that hole (or two) into the stream to alleviate the pressure? What if the weakest point the liquid finds -- either on the ocean floor, or in the weakest rubber point in the hose -- messes up your efforts to cut in later to provide relief?

Think... you better think...