(03-20-2017 01:30 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(03-20-2017 11:23 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  The same people that say denying climate change is science denial want to tell you that fracking causes earthquakes...


LOL!

ALL MY ******* SIDES!

The same people that believe in an invisible man in the sky with no evidence are more than happy to require 100 years of evidence to believe anything that they don't want to believe.

Good job proving Rath's point in the other thread.

(03-20-2017 11:20 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(03-20-2017 11:12 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(03-20-2017 10:37 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  Spoke to a Texan who has been supplying sand to fraking sights in the Texas Pan handle. I asked him about the earthquakes. He said without question, fraking causes earthquakes.

And his supporting evidence is?

The way he explained it to me, fracking is simply recreating an earthquake on a small scale by using water to destabilize the rock above potential gases. When that happens, the valuable gases are released.

After that however, the bedrock is no longer stable and will move periodically after the fact. For this reason, he says that they usually experience small earthquakes for weeks or even months after a location has been fracked.

Sand supplier = scientist

Got it.

http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/2...01542.full

One article on it. Limited to the Oklahoma situation.

(03-20-2017 01:38 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(03-20-2017 01:30 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(03-20-2017 11:23 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  The same people that say denying climate change is science denial want to tell you that fracking causes earthquakes...


LOL!

ALL MY ******* SIDES!

The same people that believe in an invisible man in the sky with no evidence are more than happy to require 100 years of evidence to believe anything that they don't want to believe.

Good job proving Rath's point in the other thread.

It's just interesting that in some cases you are willing to accept something with no evidence whatsoever, and in other cases, years of research, mounds of evidence and successful predictions are not enough.

(03-20-2017 02:25 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(03-20-2017 01:38 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(03-20-2017 01:30 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(03-20-2017 11:23 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  The same people that say denying climate change is science denial want to tell you that fracking causes earthquakes...


LOL!

ALL MY ******* SIDES!

The same people that believe in an invisible man in the sky with no evidence are more than happy to require 100 years of evidence to believe anything that they don't want to believe.

Good job proving Rath's point in the other thread.

It's just interesting that in some cases you are willing to accept something with no evidence whatsoever, and in other cases, years of research, mounds of evidence and successful predictions are not enough.

Please show me the mounds of evidence and predictions on climate change that have been proven true.

Exhibit A. Did the poles melt yet?

Exhibit B. Did we have a barrage of Katrina Cat 5 hurricanes hitting our coast?


Some of you are hysterical. You'll deny the existence of God, even though if you were scientific you would know you couldnt do that, and despite the eons of prophecy which has come true.

Yet you will believe in climate change, a topic which is so flawed that they cant even get a major forecast or prediction anywhere in the ballpark.

(03-20-2017 02:30 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(03-20-2017 02:25 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(03-20-2017 01:38 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(03-20-2017 01:30 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(03-20-2017 11:23 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  The same people that say denying climate change is science denial want to tell you that fracking causes earthquakes...


LOL!

ALL MY ******* SIDES!

The same people that believe in an invisible man in the sky with no evidence are more than happy to require 100 years of evidence to believe anything that they don't want to believe.

Good job proving Rath's point in the other thread.

It's just interesting that in some cases you are willing to accept something with no evidence whatsoever, and in other cases, years of research, mounds of evidence and successful predictions are not enough.

Please show me the mounds of evidence and predictions on climate change that have been proven true.

Exhibit A. Did the poles melt yet?

Exhibit B. Did we have a barrage of Katrina Cat 5 hurricanes hitting our coast?


Some of you are hysterical. You'll deny the existence of God, even though if you were scientific you would know you couldnt do that, and despite the eons of prophecy which has come true.

Yet you will believe in climate change, a topic which is so flawed that they cant even get a major forecast or prediction anywhere in the ballpark.

Prophecy? What prophecy?

Sure, God could exist, along with Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny. Can't prove they don't exist either.

(03-20-2017 02:37 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(03-20-2017 02:30 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(03-20-2017 02:25 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(03-20-2017 01:38 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(03-20-2017 01:30 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  The same people that believe in an invisible man in the sky with no evidence are more than happy to require 100 years of evidence to believe anything that they don't want to believe.

Good job proving Rath's point in the other thread.

It's just interesting that in some cases you are willing to accept something with no evidence whatsoever, and in other cases, years of research, mounds of evidence and successful predictions are not enough.

Please show me the mounds of evidence and predictions on climate change that have been proven true.

Exhibit A. Did the poles melt yet?

Exhibit B. Did we have a barrage of Katrina Cat 5 hurricanes hitting our coast?


Some of you are hysterical. You'll deny the existence of God, even though if you were scientific you would know you couldnt do that, and despite the eons of prophecy which has come true.

Yet you will believe in climate change, a topic which is so flawed that they cant even get a major forecast or prediction anywhere in the ballpark.

Prophecy? What prophecy?

Sure, God could exist, along with Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny. Can't prove they don't exist either.

And thats the problem you have. I dont have to prove God exists, and I'm not going to force him on you. Whether or not you accept Him is up to you.

And likewise, you cant prove climate change, so stop trying to force that on me.

Last time I checked, God Almighty wasnt requiring us to wreck our economy and pick winners and losers for accepting him.

(03-20-2017 02:41 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(03-20-2017 02:37 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(03-20-2017 02:30 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(03-20-2017 02:25 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(03-20-2017 01:38 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  Good job proving Rath's point in the other thread.

It's just interesting that in some cases you are willing to accept something with no evidence whatsoever, and in other cases, years of research, mounds of evidence and successful predictions are not enough.

Please show me the mounds of evidence and predictions on climate change that have been proven true.

Exhibit A. Did the poles melt yet?

Exhibit B. Did we have a barrage of Katrina Cat 5 hurricanes hitting our coast?


Some of you are hysterical. You'll deny the existence of God, even though if you were scientific you would know you couldnt do that, and despite the eons of prophecy which has come true.

Yet you will believe in climate change, a topic which is so flawed that they cant even get a major forecast or prediction anywhere in the ballpark.

Prophecy? What prophecy?

Sure, God could exist, along with Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny. Can't prove they don't exist either.

And thats the problem you have. I dont have to prove God exists, and I'm not going to force him on you. Whether or not you accept Him is up to you.

And likewise, you cant prove climate change, so stop trying to force that on me.

Last time I checked, God Almighty wasnt requiring us to wreck our economy and pick winners and losers for accepting him.

There is a lot of evidence for one, and none for the other. So if you want to pretend they are equally valid, have at it.

(03-20-2017 02:43 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(03-20-2017 02:41 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(03-20-2017 02:37 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(03-20-2017 02:30 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(03-20-2017 02:25 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  It's just interesting that in some cases you are willing to accept something with no evidence whatsoever, and in other cases, years of research, mounds of evidence and successful predictions are not enough.

Please show me the mounds of evidence and predictions on climate change that have been proven true.

Exhibit A. Did the poles melt yet?

Exhibit B. Did we have a barrage of Katrina Cat 5 hurricanes hitting our coast?


Some of you are hysterical. You'll deny the existence of God, even though if you were scientific you would know you couldnt do that, and despite the eons of prophecy which has come true.

Yet you will believe in climate change, a topic which is so flawed that they cant even get a major forecast or prediction anywhere in the ballpark.

Prophecy? What prophecy?

Sure, God could exist, along with Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny. Can't prove they don't exist either.

And thats the problem you have. I dont have to prove God exists, and I'm not going to force him on you. Whether or not you accept Him is up to you.

And likewise, you cant prove climate change, so stop trying to force that on me.

Last time I checked, God Almighty wasnt requiring us to wreck our economy and pick winners and losers for accepting him.

There is a lot of evidence for one, and none for the other. So if you want to pretend they are equally valid, have at it.

They are not equally valid, which is why your supposed point is so screwed up.

(03-20-2017 02:48 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(03-20-2017 02:43 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(03-20-2017 02:41 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(03-20-2017 02:37 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(03-20-2017 02:30 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  Please show me the mounds of evidence and predictions on climate change that have been proven true.

Exhibit A. Did the poles melt yet?

Exhibit B. Did we have a barrage of Katrina Cat 5 hurricanes hitting our coast?


Some of you are hysterical. You'll deny the existence of God, even though if you were scientific you would know you couldnt do that, and despite the eons of prophecy which has come true.

Yet you will believe in climate change, a topic which is so flawed that they cant even get a major forecast or prediction anywhere in the ballpark.

Prophecy? What prophecy?

Sure, God could exist, along with Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny. Can't prove they don't exist either.

And thats the problem you have. I dont have to prove God exists, and I'm not going to force him on you. Whether or not you accept Him is up to you.

And likewise, you cant prove climate change, so stop trying to force that on me.

Last time I checked, God Almighty wasnt requiring us to wreck our economy and pick winners and losers for accepting him.

There is a lot of evidence for one, and none for the other. So if you want to pretend they are equally valid, have at it.

They are not equally valid, which is why your supposed point is so screwed up.

We'll just agree to disagree on that one.

The oil companies are doing research and studies on the ground and what fracking could do. They could be looking for a much safer way to frack to get the oil without causing damage.

Oil companies are now saying that water in some parts of Wyoming on ranches had some chemicals from fracking that got into the ranchers' wells that was used for giving cattle and horses drinking water. Yes, oil companies are doing more studies trying to avoid these cases to happen in the future.

(03-20-2017 02:19 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/2...01542.full

One article on it. Limited to the Oklahoma situation.

Reading that is a good cure for insomnia. I made it about 3 paragraphs and my eyes glazed over.