Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Newspaper contacts | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

Global warming hypocrisy

February 25, 2014

Really? Global warming is the “most fearsome” destructive weapon? What about the thousands of innocent people killed by bombs, chemical weapons, guns, drones, etc? Flat earth society? Really? The......

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(172)

AmericanCitizen

Mar-03-14 8:38 AM

Guess what - that's because warmer air can hold more moisture than colder air.

Also - climate change does not dictate every year will be warmer than the last one, or that there will never again be streches of bitterly cold weather. Its a long-term trend that's being observed and its world-wide; hence the term "Global Warming," rather than "USA Warming" or "Newberry Section of Williamsport Warming."

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

rmiller

Feb-28-14 10:56 PM

Come on everyone.....this winter has put some serious doubt into "global warming"....at least for me, Sunday/Monday will be sent shoveling more white global warming stuff..

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Scott36

Feb-28-14 12:18 PM

Bornhere,

Thank you for the reply, this, along with a few other questions I pose(IF they are so easy to dispute, you would think someone would at least take a crack at it) I just keep asking along the lines of "rubbing a puppies nose in it" so that possibly some would at least try to take a look at it from a different perspective. Again Thank you, & Have a Wonderful day-Scott

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

BornHere

Feb-28-14 7:00 AM

Scott36, just to let you know I have asked the same question for many years now on here and I never got an answer, so what does that tell you? Other industries must abide by the law where the oil and gas industries are exempt.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Scott36

Feb-27-14 1:15 PM

But those against the industry choose to base their opinion on often times misinformation and lack of education in an attempt to cause hysteria among all.-Capricorn1

So , if it is so safe, Why the need for the exemption from the Safe Drinking water law?? Do you truly feel that it is worth gambling with our fresh water supply-seriously?? -Scott

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

BornHere

Feb-27-14 6:52 AM

Thank you Texas for Mr. Parson's well, if you don't mind I'm going to save this letter for future response.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ToTEXASfromPA

Feb-27-14 6:14 AM

with newer superior ones.

Sometimes old practices used only a few sacks of cement and no separate protection of fresh water zones. New techniques use multiple steel casings with ones being installed and having cement circulated across the fresh water zone all the way to surface. Deeper strings of casing also circulate cement to cover any interval that could contain hydrocarbons. Some of the old practices 70-100 years ago did not protect freshwater or may have used very small volumes of cement that didn't protect multiple zones.

One of the biggest issues that I see in PA is identifying, re-entering, and abandoning old orphaned wells that were not abandoned properly. This needs to be done before drilling and completing the new wells.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Capricorn1

Feb-27-14 6:11 AM

Scott, easy answer and I have stated it several times on other letters. I AGREE WITH OBAMA in fully supporting this industry. He, like Bush has seen the bloodshed and trillions of dollars spent in the name of foreign oil. NG is a safe, clean burning source of energy that we can capitalize on right here at home. But those against the industry choose to base their opinion on often times misinformation and lack of education in an attempt to cause hysteria among all. The same is done with gun violence. And yes Scott, I am an Independent and I still can vote in Primaries, we just have to change our registration in order to do so. And I am not alone. Independents are quickly reaching the 50% mark, more than both republicans and democrats, and if a viable third party was to emerge that truly believed in putting an end to the outrageous policies of both existing parties, I think they would dominate. Many of us are tired of business as usual on Capitol Hill and the White House.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ToTEXASfromPA

Feb-27-14 6:05 AM

"What would your response be if Obama did in fact "use his pen" to stop all(or most)fracking, his reasoning being to safeguard our drinking water." --Scott36

++

If that were the case, then he has dismissed all the real world data that exists and gotten mis-information. Depending on the sources, approximately 70% of all wells in the US have been fracture stimulated. Fracture stimulations have been done for over 50 years. I was personally involved with some over 30 years ago and some of these were what the industry called "massive hydraulic fracture stimulations."

There is one case of fresh water being contaminated by a frac; this was the Parson's well in West Virgina where the fracture traveled to an unknown well that was never abandoned properly and it became a conduit for frac fluid to travel from a deep well to the shallow fresh water zone.

Many of the contamination cases can be traced to old well completion practices that have been replaced wi

4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

CMReeder

Feb-27-14 12:23 AM

0futm2, the zoo called they want you back in your cage.

6 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

0futm2

Feb-26-14 10:48 PM

"If 100 years is enough to determine trends then what new human species has evolved in the past century?"

I don't know what's funnier, this post or the fact it currently has three "agrees."

Perhaps I was wrong, there is a species the emerged about a century ago. Not sure it's human though, doesn't have a brain. It's identified as a liberal.

3 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Scott36

Feb-26-14 9:47 PM

Cont.

....extremely popular, ALL the credit would go to our former Pres. I also would be willing to bet that if Obama were to "use his pen" you would find fault in that. Now, I have been very frank in this post, like it or not, it is my honest opinion. It does not mean that I admire, or detest you, it is just the feeling I get from reading your posts, & the back,& forth we have had. I try to answer questions posed to me, you may not like the answers, but I do try to respond, I do not try to deflect. Now please give me an honest reply to this question(a persons opinion is just that, his/her opinion, it does not have to be popular/or even factual) What would your response be if Obama did in fact "use his pen" to stop all(or most)fracking, his reasoning being to safeguard our drinking water. I'll go first. I personally think it was extremely reckless to have endangered our drinking water it in the first place, @ do wish he would "use his pen".JMO--

5 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Scott36

Feb-26-14 9:24 PM

Capricorn1, Speaking of Teflon, "W" has his share also. Nice deflection, Since you graciously gave your opinion of what you perceive of me, I feel obliged to return the favor. The endangering of safe drinking water was started under the "Dubya/Darth Vader" dynasty--That is fact. But you as a vast majority of Con/T-party choose to attempt to ignore certain parts of history, & lay all of the blame on our current Commander in Chief. You screech about being 'Independent", yet your posts(IMO)betray that claim. I am assuming that you make this claim in order to make yourself appear to be more toward the center. Not that it matters, but you are missing an opportunity to vote in primaries--That is a shame. This industry from what I can see in the LTE's of this Extremely Pro Fracking paper, is quite frankly wearing out it's welcome. So ALL you seem to see is an opportunity to bash our current Pres. I would be willing to bet that if this industry was extreme

5 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Capricorn1

Feb-26-14 6:43 PM

Scott, my opinion is irrelevant, although I do support the safe extraction of NG and I think there is a lot of hysteria surrounding the process. But, I noticed you, like others totally dismiss the fact that Obama has continued the Bush policies regarding this Act and he fully supports the industry. You even chose to leave out "But, by no means has President Obama taken the action needed to halt this kind of irresponsible fossil fuel development." It would be nice if liberals would admit that the blame for much of this, if there is blame to be placed, should go just as much to this administration, as the industry. But I NEVER hear anyone mention Obama when they rail against fracking. The guy is made of Teflon.

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Scott36

Feb-26-14 5:35 PM

"The Bush Administration (champion of the oil and gas industry) amended the Energy Policy Act in 2005 to grant hydraulic fracturing exceptions from the rules of the Safe Drinking Water Act, a move that stimulated America’s recent fracking boom.-Capricorn1

This IMO, is one of the reasons people get so upset. Had they waited until they could do it in a way that would not need exceptions to the clean water act, & a need to be wrapped in so much secrecy, I have a feeling that it would be more widely accepted. BTW, what is your opinion on "Dubya's" making this exception??-Scott

5 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

CMReeder

Feb-26-14 1:22 PM

No I am not responding to you Born, sorry if it seems that way. The actions of this CEO and the whole industry of gas and oil just ticks me off. I would like my property unspoiled by the likes of the gas/oil industry too. I would the state game lands and state parks unspoiled by the likes of you also.

4 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

CMReeder

Feb-26-14 1:16 PM

He is against it because it will devalue his $5 million property. In think his property is like over 300 acres. The wells are located away from his property not on his property. I say he should have a couple of those wells on his property also. Not only doesn't he have a well on his property he doesn't want any of the infrastructure that goes with fracking on his property or next to it. He and his neighbors paid good money for the pristine area they reside in and they don't want anything spoiling it.

Yet he is promoting fracking and making money from it that so he can afford his $5 million unspoiled estate.

5 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

BornHere

Feb-26-14 11:48 AM

Mr. Reeder, I don't know if you were responding to me, my post was about what erik said, "that there was no fracking to take place anywhere near Tillerson's property", when in fact there was fracking going on and this is another reason why they need this water tower, which Tillerson is objecting too.

4 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

johnnyad3

Feb-26-14 11:47 AM

Understood Born. I remember last year seeing a number of places in Farragut with For Sale signs. Probably for the same reason as you since that beautiful well is right across the street.

4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

CMReeder

Feb-26-14 11:45 AM

In the lawsuit that Mr. Tillerson is part of it cites the same complaints that many in this area cite; the heavy traffic, the noise, that is disturbing and intrusive and inconvenient. They just don't want in their backyards.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

BornHere

Feb-26-14 11:37 AM

johnnyad3, I lived on 87 but not near the creek, you are correct about the water withdrawal I was told that last year by some landowners that live out that way.

Also the big farm on the right on 87 heading north past the "Welcome to Plunketts Creek" sign also signed a lease with Inflection Energy for natural gas.

This is the reason why we sold our home out there, I did not want to have any part of it.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

CMReeder

Feb-26-14 11:36 AM

But he doesn't want a water tower erected near his home that would be used for these wells. Those wells are not on his property.

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

johnnyad3

Feb-26-14 11:25 AM

It seems, by reading these posts, that climate change/global warming is like religion or evolution. You believe it or you don't. For example, due to strict adherence to the Bible, the earth is 8,000 years old and nothing you show them or anything else in print will convince them otherwise.

I happen to believe climate change is happening. Whether man is the cause, I am not 100% sure yet.

Some things that convince me that it is occurring is animal and plant life moving to higher latitudes. Extended growing seasons. Recently, whoever takes care of these things, the map that shows when you can plant flowers was redrawn to show earlier planting times.

If you do believe it is happening, do you think we are planning enough for future events, especially for those that live along the coast.

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

johnnyad3

Feb-26-14 11:12 AM

Born-Did you say you live or lived along the Loyalsock?

I heard recently, Inflection has submitted an application to the SRBC for water withdrawal from the Loyalsock at Horn Road near the elementary school.

Cap-Do you vote for a lawmaker based on a single issue?

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

BornHere

Feb-26-14 10:54 AM

Fracking has taken place near the Tillerson's ranch.

Mr. Tillerson moved to Bartonville in 2001 and became CEO in 2006.

Since 2007 companies have fracked at least 9 shale wells within 1 mile of the Tillerson home, according to the Texas regulatory and real-estate records.

4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 172 comments Show More Comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web