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.

You're completely misrepresenting what 'settled science' actually means by portraying like a single EPA study warrants that description. That's either because you don't care about being a liar, or because you're ignorant to what would be considered 'settled science' by any scientifically literate adult.

Well, looks like the response is just going to be a bunch of predictable JR high level insults and personal attacks.

Shocking.

I'm not really interested in addressing fracking, I admittedly don't know nearly enough about the issue to even comment on the science behind it, nor do I really have the motivation to get into it. That doesn't mean what I said above isn't entirely accurate. Because it is, hence why you didn't attempt to address the point I made.

What I said, while admittedly snarky, was entirely factual.

SCIENCE

Maybe it is safe. Then what a liberal to do?

(06-05-2015 08:28 AM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  Maybe it is safe. Then what a liberal to do?

see post #2

So QuestionSocratic is a liar is entirely factual. You and Tom sure are loose throwing that word around.

He should have used ignorant instead of liar. To lie you have to be purposely trying to deceive. There is a difference.

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.

(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."

(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.

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?

I would call the op ignorant and you too eager in seeking out opnions that validate your preconceived notions.

(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?

I dont believe thee are many non-liberals who ever trust the government.

Instead, he was just showing what you guys, who pimp what the government says without even being able to think on your own (ie Obamacare, GLobal Warming, ISIS is a JV team, Benghazi was due to a youtube video, etc), will do when the government says something you dont like.

This one seems to be getting under Mach's skin too.

We could be headed for another one of his meltdowns.

1. Non liberal who trust the govt. bit......... What is the thread for then?


2. Under the skin bit........ I see you still haven't answered the question. I'll repeat it. Does one study make the science settled?

(06-05-2015 09:03 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  1. Non liberal who trust the govt. bit......... What is the thread for then?


2. Under the skin bit........ I see you still haven't answered the question. I'll repeat it. Does one study make the science settled?

This is the first study on fracking in human history?

I've seen dozens of stories on fracking studies and the environmental impacts the last few years. There are often posted here.

How many do you need before you stop being so bitter over this incredibly helpful energy source?

Man, can't you libs detect cynicism? How many times have I posted that there is no such thing as settled science. Often the thread title is just a "come-on" to the post. Further I'd match my knowledge of science with either of you.

Really, you two need to lighten up and not be so reflexively anal.

Nonetheless, let me address one specific counter claim:

Quote:...portraying like a single EPA study..."

Quote: Does one study make the science settled?

It was a review of 17 studies and 20 peer reviewed papers.

Plus I get a distinct pleasure from pissing off the two of you. And I can do it without relying on name calling. And that's the truth.

(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.

Settled science? Is there really such a thing?

Was it settled when it was determined that the planets and sun revolved around the earth?

Was it settled when it was determined that the earth was flat?

Was it settled when scientist said man was causing climate change?