Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
It's settled science: fracking is OK
Author Message
ericsrevenge76 Away
Jesus is coming soon
*

Posts: 21,606
Joined: Mar 2011
Reputation: 3293
I Root For: The Kingdom
Location: The Body of Christ
Post: #41
RE: It's settled science: fracking is OK
(06-05-2015 11:37 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  
(06-05-2015 11:34 AM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  
(06-05-2015 11:31 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  
(06-05-2015 11:15 AM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  
(06-05-2015 11:12 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  Fracking is reall. It's the myth that it does absolutely nothing to the environment is what is a conspiracy.

More desperation hyperbole. No such myth exists.

Everything effects the environment on some level, the question is about it being safe to the water supply and other factors. Multiple studies the last few years are showing that it is.

That doesn't make it settled science.


He was baiting you with that term, mother goose. How can you STILL not be getting this?

If he was then good for him. He got me.

The teacher has become the student.


You are NOT a teacher, you live your life here daily every single school week.
06-05-2015 11:40 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DefCONNOne Offline
That damn MLS!!

Posts: 11,005
Joined: Jul 2013
I Root For: UCONN
Location: MLS HQ
Post: #42
RE: It's settled science: fracking is OK
(06-05-2015 08:59 AM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  This one seems to be getting under Mach's skin too.

We could be headed for another one of his meltdowns.

Thankfully it's early afternoon, so any imbibing of spirits will be non-existent.
06-05-2015 11:47 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fitbud Offline
Banned

Posts: 30,983
Joined: Dec 2011
I Root For: PAC 12
Location:
Post: #43
RE: It's settled science: fracking is OK
(06-05-2015 11:40 AM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  
(06-05-2015 11:37 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  
(06-05-2015 11:34 AM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  
(06-05-2015 11:31 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  
(06-05-2015 11:15 AM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  More desperation hyperbole. No such myth exists.

Everything effects the environment on some level, the question is about it being safe to the water supply and other factors. Multiple studies the last few years are showing that it is.

That doesn't make it settled science.


He was baiting you with that term, mother goose. How can you STILL not be getting this?

If he was then good for him. He got me.

The teacher has become the student.


You are NOT a teacher, you live your life here daily every single school week.

I post here when I have time. Why does that bother you?
06-05-2015 11:48 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DefCONNOne Offline
That damn MLS!!

Posts: 11,005
Joined: Jul 2013
I Root For: UCONN
Location: MLS HQ
Post: #44
RE: It's settled science: fracking is OK
(06-05-2015 10:58 AM)JDTulane Wrote:  Politics aside:

There is no such thing as "settled science". That by very definition counters what science is all about.

Any scientist that tries to tell you a matter is settled is probably a bad scientist
.

I agree with the bolded, yet the global warming crowd tries to tell me otherwise.
06-05-2015 11:51 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
blunderbuss Offline
Banned

Posts: 19,649
Joined: Apr 2011
I Root For: ECU & the CSA
Location: Buzz City, NC
Post: #45
RE: It's settled science: fracking is OK
Damn, liberals are stupid. This thread is a great illustration.

Thank op. 03-thumbsup
06-05-2015 12:01 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
UofMstateU Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 39,084
Joined: Dec 2009
Reputation: 3551
I Root For: Memphis
Location:
Post: #46
RE: It's settled science: fracking is OK
(06-05-2015 11:51 AM)DefCONNOne Wrote:  
(06-05-2015 10:58 AM)JDTulane Wrote:  Politics aside:

There is no such thing as "settled science". That by very definition counters what science is all about.

Any scientist that tries to tell you a matter is settled is probably a bad scientist
.

I agree with the bolded, yet the global warming crowd tries to tell me otherwise.


Liberal Dictionary

Settled Science - A term used that neither describes something thats actually settled, nor anything scientific. It's a term that should be used to shut down debate. When your ideology has no facts, but consists of made up data, manipulated data, complete rubbish, or stats that were pulled out of the butt of a poo-flinging monkey, you will find that those on the other side of the debate can completely obliterate your ideology. So tell them that your viewpoint is "settled science." Then proceed to call them a liar or ignorant.
06-05-2015 12:24 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JMUDunk Offline
Rootin' fer Dukes, bud
*

Posts: 29,500
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 1721
I Root For: Freedom
Location: Shmocation
Post: #47
RE: It's settled science: fracking is OK
(06-05-2015 12:24 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  
(06-05-2015 11:51 AM)DefCONNOne Wrote:  
(06-05-2015 10:58 AM)JDTulane Wrote:  Politics aside:

There is no such thing as "settled science". That by very definition counters what science is all about.

Any scientist that tries to tell you a matter is settled is probably a bad scientist
.

I agree with the bolded, yet the global warming crowd tries to tell me otherwise.


Liberal Dictionary

Settled Science - A term used that neither describes something thats actually settled, nor anything scientific. It's a term that should be used to shut down debate. When your ideology has no facts, but consists of made up data, manipulated data, complete rubbish, or stats that were pulled out of the butt of a poo-flinging monkey, you will find that those on the other side of the debate can completely obliterate your ideology. So tell them that your viewpoint is "settled science." Then proceed to call them a liar or ignorant.

Link? Research to cite?






03-lmfao

And I'm pretty sure it's Chimps that fling the poo, but I could be wrong. 07-coffee3
(This post was last modified: 06-05-2015 01:07 PM by JMUDunk.)
06-05-2015 01:06 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fo Shizzle Offline
Pragmatic Classical Liberal
*

Posts: 42,023
Joined: Dec 2006
Reputation: 1206
I Root For: ECU PIRATES
Location: North Carolina

Balance of Power Contest
Post: #48
RE: It's settled science: fracking is OK
(06-05-2015 07:41 AM)QuestionSocratic Wrote:  None other than the EPA, yes the economic destruction unit of the Obama administration, has declared that there is no evidence that fracking negatively effects drinking water.

Let's make this point clear. This was a study done by the EPA (5 years and millions of dollars), and was not funded by any oil or gas companies.

This hits home for me, as the Op-Ed in the Wall Street Journal ends with

Quote:The Rochester and Buffalo metro areas are the third and fourth poorest cities in America after Detroit and Cleveland, according to the Census, but they could become the northeastern capitals of the U.S. energy renaissance. When even the EPA blesses fracking, the self-serving political hackery behind Mr. Cuomo’s ban is exposed for all the world to see.

Can't wait for the other side's replies.

I have no problem per se with fracking in rural areas. Regardless of that finding, I would not want that schit going on close to me.
06-05-2015 03:59 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Paul M Offline
American-American
*

Posts: 21,196
Joined: May 2008
Reputation: 649
I Root For: OU
Location: Next to Boomer
Post: #49
RE: It's settled science: fracking is OK
(06-05-2015 10:52 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  
(06-05-2015 08:38 AM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  
(06-05-2015 08:35 AM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  
(06-05-2015 08:29 AM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  
(06-05-2015 08:28 AM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  Maybe it is safe. Then what a liberal to do?

see post #2

I would have hoped it was a response more along the lines of "It's great to know that fracking is not dangerous and I'm happy fracking keeps energy costs down for women and minorities."

Instead we get, "your ignorant/ illiterate/ liar"

Their true colors shining through again

The positive impacts of fracking for struggling American families are the furthest thing from their minds.

No, the response you got is the OP is either ignorant or a liar, because those are the two possible results of his statement. One study does not a scientific consensus make.

He had already said it was cynicism before you posted so...
06-05-2015 06:14 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
UConn-SMU Offline
often wrong, never in doubt
*

Posts: 12,961
Joined: Sep 2011
Reputation: 373
I Root For: the AAC
Location: Fuzzy's Taco Shop
Post: #50
RE: It's settled science: fracking is OK
Another liberal myth shattered ...
06-05-2015 06:25 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Owl 69/70/75 Offline
Just an old rugby coach
*

Posts: 80,655
Joined: Sep 2005
Reputation: 3192
I Root For: RiceBathChelsea
Location: Montgomery, TX

DonatorsNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #51
RE: It's settled science: fracking is OK
(06-05-2015 08:35 AM)Niner National Wrote:  I believe fracking is inherently safe when things are done correctly. There is always a human element of error though, which undeniably causes water contamination in some cases.
The penalties for screwing up need to be severe and not a slap on the wrist to ensure that companies that engage in fracking are not cutting corners.

Exactly.

Where I am aware of problems, they have come from chemicals leaking out of surface storage. That is a problem and should not be denied. But a fracking ban is not the best solution to that problem from a cost/benefit perspective.
(This post was last modified: 06-09-2015 11:24 AM by Owl 69/70/75.)
06-09-2015 11:24 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ECUGrad07 Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 12,200
Joined: Feb 2011
Reputation: 1261
I Root For: ECU
Location: Lafayette, LA
Post: #52
RE: It's settled science: fracking is OK
This thread is great.

Libs reacted like

[Image: tantrum-2.gif]
06-09-2015 12:44 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Hambone10 Offline
Hooter
*

Posts: 40,279
Joined: Nov 2005
Reputation: 1284
I Root For: My Kids
Location: Right Down th Middle

New Orleans BowlDonatorsThe Parliament Awards
Post: #53
RE: It's settled science: fracking is OK
(06-05-2015 08:51 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Do you understand his complaint Eric? If you want to go this route, Address his complaint. Is one study settled science? Now it's good news, but it's absolutely AMAZING to me the trust you guys exhibit in the government when a decision falls your way. Try to keep a level head and address his concerns. Does one study make the science settled?


Do you not understand the intentional sarcasm in his posts?

There are obviously far more than one report that says it is safe.... and nobody is REALLY out there claiming that the science is settled and that there can be no debate... It was primarily intended to echo the claims that studies not funded by industry are somehow inherently more reliable.

Well are they? Or aren't they? Do I really need to post the thousands of reports funded by industry that say it's okay?

Frankly, most of the people out there claiming that science is settled (with regard to climate change) AREN'T the scientists making the claims... but people writing articles about those claims. The scientists almost all admit that their 'projections' are merely logical inferences. When THEY talk about 'settled science' they aren't talking about their predictions... but more like things along the lines of, cars emit CO, and CO is a greenhouse gas that gets trapped in our atmosphere.... etc etc etc. Too many pundits take this to argue that the ice caps being completely gone in 50 years (or whatever) is what is 'settled science'. Scientists would admit that they have thousands of assumptions in their projections... and if only one of them is found to be off, it could change their projection 180 degrees.
06-09-2015 02:27 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
NIU007 Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 34,240
Joined: Sep 2004
Reputation: 315
I Root For: NIU, MAC
Location: Naperville, IL
Post: #54
RE: It's settled science: fracking is OK
(06-09-2015 02:27 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  
(06-05-2015 08:51 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Do you understand his complaint Eric? If you want to go this route, Address his complaint. Is one study settled science? Now it's good news, but it's absolutely AMAZING to me the trust you guys exhibit in the government when a decision falls your way. Try to keep a level head and address his concerns. Does one study make the science settled?


Do you not understand the intentional sarcasm in his posts?

There are obviously far more than one report that says it is safe.... and nobody is REALLY out there claiming that the science is settled and that there can be no debate... It was primarily intended to echo the claims that studies not funded by industry are somehow inherently more reliable.

Well are they? Or aren't they? Do I really need to post the thousands of reports funded by industry that say it's okay?

Frankly, most of the people out there claiming that science is settled (with regard to climate change) AREN'T the scientists making the claims... but people writing articles about those claims. The scientists almost all admit that their 'projections' are merely logical inferences. When THEY talk about 'settled science' they aren't talking about their predictions... but more like things along the lines of, cars emit CO, and CO is a greenhouse gas that gets trapped in our atmosphere.... etc etc etc. Too many pundits take this to argue that the ice caps being completely gone in 50 years (or whatever) is what is 'settled science'. Scientists would admit that they have thousands of assumptions in their projections... and if only one of them is found to be off, it could change their projection 180 degrees.

Which is why I'd MUCH prefer if people would link to articles from scientists, and not from some miscellaneous blogger with an axe to grind, or from a business publication.
06-09-2015 02:55 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
QuestionSocratic Offline
Banned

Posts: 8,276
Joined: Jul 2013
I Root For: Buffalo
Location:
Post: #55
RE: It's settled science: fracking is OK
(06-09-2015 02:55 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  
(06-09-2015 02:27 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  
(06-05-2015 08:51 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Do you understand his complaint Eric? If you want to go this route, Address his complaint. Is one study settled science? Now it's good news, but it's absolutely AMAZING to me the trust you guys exhibit in the government when a decision falls your way. Try to keep a level head and address his concerns. Does one study make the science settled?


Do you not understand the intentional sarcasm in his posts?

There are obviously far more than one report that says it is safe.... and nobody is REALLY out there claiming that the science is settled and that there can be no debate... It was primarily intended to echo the claims that studies not funded by industry are somehow inherently more reliable.

Well are they? Or aren't they? Do I really need to post the thousands of reports funded by industry that say it's okay?

Frankly, most of the people out there claiming that science is settled (with regard to climate change) AREN'T the scientists making the claims... but people writing articles about those claims. The scientists almost all admit that their 'projections' are merely logical inferences. When THEY talk about 'settled science' they aren't talking about their predictions... but more like things along the lines of, cars emit CO, and CO is a greenhouse gas that gets trapped in our atmosphere.... etc etc etc. Too many pundits take this to argue that the ice caps being completely gone in 50 years (or whatever) is what is 'settled science'. Scientists would admit that they have thousands of assumptions in their projections... and if only one of them is found to be off, it could change their projection 180 degrees.

Which is why I'd MUCH prefer if people would link to articles from scientists, and not from some miscellaneous blogger with an axe to grind, or from a business publication.

Link to executive summary

Methodology:
Quote:This assessment relies on relevant scientific literature and data. Literature evaluated included articles published in science and engineering journals, federal and state government reports, non-governmental organization (NGO) reports, and industry publications. Data sources examined included federal- and state-collected data sets, databases maintained by federal and state government agencies, other publicly-available data and information, and data, including confidential and non-confidential business information, submitted by industry to the EPA.

Findings:
Quote:We did not find evidence that these mechanisms have led to widespread, systemic impacts on drinking water resources in the United States.

Quote:...we found specific instances where one or more mechanisms led to impacts on drinking water resources, including contamination of drinking water wells. The number of identified cases, however, was small compared to the number of hydraulically fractured wells.
This finding could reflect a rarity of effects on drinking water resources, but may also be due to other limiting factors. These factors include: insufficient pre- and post-fracturing data on the quality of drinking water resources...

Now would anyone like to comment on the report without relying on deflections or sophomoric insults?
(This post was last modified: 06-09-2015 04:20 PM by QuestionSocratic.)
06-09-2015 04:09 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
NIU007 Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 34,240
Joined: Sep 2004
Reputation: 315
I Root For: NIU, MAC
Location: Naperville, IL
Post: #56
RE: It's settled science: fracking is OK
(06-09-2015 04:09 PM)QuestionSocratic Wrote:  
(06-09-2015 02:55 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  
(06-09-2015 02:27 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  
(06-05-2015 08:51 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Do you understand his complaint Eric? If you want to go this route, Address his complaint. Is one study settled science? Now it's good news, but it's absolutely AMAZING to me the trust you guys exhibit in the government when a decision falls your way. Try to keep a level head and address his concerns. Does one study make the science settled?


Do you not understand the intentional sarcasm in his posts?

There are obviously far more than one report that says it is safe.... and nobody is REALLY out there claiming that the science is settled and that there can be no debate... It was primarily intended to echo the claims that studies not funded by industry are somehow inherently more reliable.

Well are they? Or aren't they? Do I really need to post the thousands of reports funded by industry that say it's okay?

Frankly, most of the people out there claiming that science is settled (with regard to climate change) AREN'T the scientists making the claims... but people writing articles about those claims. The scientists almost all admit that their 'projections' are merely logical inferences. When THEY talk about 'settled science' they aren't talking about their predictions... but more like things along the lines of, cars emit CO, and CO is a greenhouse gas that gets trapped in our atmosphere.... etc etc etc. Too many pundits take this to argue that the ice caps being completely gone in 50 years (or whatever) is what is 'settled science'. Scientists would admit that they have thousands of assumptions in their projections... and if only one of them is found to be off, it could change their projection 180 degrees.

Which is why I'd MUCH prefer if people would link to articles from scientists, and not from some miscellaneous blogger with an axe to grind, or from a business publication.

Link to executive summary

Methodology:
Quote:This assessment relies on relevant scientific literature and data. Literature evaluated included articles published in science and engineering journals, federal and state government reports, non-governmental organization (NGO) reports, and industry publications. Data sources examined included federal- and state-collected data sets, databases maintained by federal and state government agencies, other publicly-available data and information, and data, including confidential and non-confidential business information, submitted by industry to the EPA.

Findings:
Quote:We did not find evidence that these mechanisms have led to widespread, systemic impacts on drinking water resources in the United States.

Quote:...we found specific instances where one or more mechanisms led to impacts on drinking water resources, including contamination of drinking water wells. The number of identified cases, however, was small compared to the number of hydraulically fractured wells.
This finding could reflect a rarity of effects on drinking water resources, but may also be due to other limiting factors. These factors include: insufficient pre- and post-fracturing data on the quality of drinking water resources...

Now would anyone like to comment on the report without relying on deflections or sophomoric insults?

Thanks.
06-09-2015 04:25 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Hambone10 Offline
Hooter
*

Posts: 40,279
Joined: Nov 2005
Reputation: 1284
I Root For: My Kids
Location: Right Down th Middle

New Orleans BowlDonatorsThe Parliament Awards
Post: #57
RE: It's settled science: fracking is OK
(06-09-2015 02:55 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  Which is why I'd MUCH prefer if people would link to articles from scientists, and not from some miscellaneous blogger with an axe to grind, or from a business publication.

Agreed, but scientists are rarely as 'forthcoming' as pundits want them to be. Having spent a lot of time around specifically economists, who like all of these scientists use all sorts of models in an effort to predict things in the future... they rarely come out and make the sort of bold claims that are often attributed to them. Yes, they say what they are quoted as saying, but they also put in lots of caveats and presumptions which are always left out when the pundits summarize their findings. They use words like 'may' or 'likely' and often say they 'rely on data which they believe to be accurate, but cannot independently substantiate'... or they simply say the 'do not find' something, which doesn't mean it doesn't exist... merely that they didn't find it.
06-09-2015 04:31 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
NIU007 Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 34,240
Joined: Sep 2004
Reputation: 315
I Root For: NIU, MAC
Location: Naperville, IL
Post: #58
RE: It's settled science: fracking is OK
(06-09-2015 04:31 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  
(06-09-2015 02:55 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  Which is why I'd MUCH prefer if people would link to articles from scientists, and not from some miscellaneous blogger with an axe to grind, or from a business publication.

Agreed, but scientists are rarely as 'forthcoming' as pundits want them to be. Having spent a lot of time around specifically economists, who like all of these scientists use all sorts of models in an effort to predict things in the future... they rarely come out and make the sort of bold claims that are often attributed to them. Yes, they say what they are quoted as saying, but they also put in lots of caveats and presumptions which are always left out when the pundits summarize their findings. They use words like 'may' or 'likely' and often say they 'rely on data which they believe to be accurate, but cannot independently substantiate'... or they simply say the 'do not find' something, which doesn't mean it doesn't exist... merely that they didn't find it.

This is all true, and all the more reason to read what the scientist said and not what the pundit is claiming he said. The media wants black and white answers, not caveats, even if those caveats completely change the tenor of the issue.
06-10-2015 10:20 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.