Fracking causes earthquakes? (Formerly, anyone felt that earthquake?)

[rudeguy]

No amount of your continuing to ignore the links to the academic research, right on the page that I linked to, and claiming that I haven't done so, is going to make you appear any less stupid to anyone reading your responses.

You clearly have a standard of "proof" that is not known to science, or human discourse. Though I am well aware that such exists on a sliding scale for you.

Your words:
Is it 100% accurate that a specific part of the fracking process causes earthquakes? 100%, undeniably, yes

I'm asking for the 100% undeniable evidence. But all you keep posting is insults and personal attacks.

I guess we have proved that there is no such evidence and that your ego is so fragile that instead of admitting you were wrong, you need to belittle the people who question you.

 

[zinfamous]

"Very likely" does not mean "definitely." There is still at least some measure of uncertainty, so to say "undeniable proof" isn't totally correct.

Many years ago, it was even "hard fact" the earth was flat, remember?

Just remember science isn't "it is this, we're done" it is always delving deeper and deeper. At this point it is too early to say "fracking causes earthquakes" with certainty. Is it possible? Yeah, maybe it is, so we need to be careful and look into it more.

Now back to the topic of the thread since, well, fracking had absolutely nothing to do with this earthquake for reasons already stated.

When was that, exactly...because that was actually never true. The ancient Greeks sure as shit knew the earth was not flat. So did the Egyptians. Sure, there were some people that thought this way, but the educated people of the time never did. Today, people deny that evolution is a fact. Some things never change.

It isn't "too early to say" with regard to fracking. It absolutely is not. OGS making this statement, after years of saying "it is too early to say," is a point-in-fact admission. Define very likely. Is it more than 50%? sure...Is it 70, 80, even 90%?

What does the rate have to be for you guys to claim that you agree with everyone else is seeing? Science works in ratios and percentages.

 

[zinfamous]

Your words:
Is it 100% accurate that a specific part of the fracking process causes earthquakes? 100%, undeniably, yes

I'm asking for the 100% undeniable evidence. But all you keep posting is insults and personal attacks.

I guess we have proved that there is no such evidence and that your ego is so fragile that instead of admitting you were wrong, you need to belittle the people who question you.

When will you address the articles that were linked, rather than deny that they are there for you to read?

This is why I treat you like an imbecile. You act like a 3rd grader.

From the investigative article I linked earlier:

Until 2008, Oklahoma experienced an average of one to two earthquakes of 3.0 magnitude or greater each year. (Magnitude-3.0 earthquakes tend to be felt, while smaller earthquakes may be noticed only by scientific equipment or by people close to the epicenter.) In 2009, there were twenty. The next year, there were forty-two. In 2014, there were five hundred and eighty-five, nearly triple the rate of California. Including smaller earthquakes in the count, there were more than five thousand. This year, there has been an average of two earthquakes a day of magnitude 3.0 or greater.
William Ellsworth, a research geologist at the United States Geological Survey, told me, “We can say with virtual certainty that the increased seismicity in Oklahoma has to do with recent changes in the way that oil and gas are being produced.” Many of the larger earthquakes are caused by disposal wells, where the billions of barrels of brackish water brought up by drilling for oil and gas are pumped back into the ground. (Hydraulic fracturing, or fracking—in which chemically treated water is injected into the earth to fracture rocks in order to access oil and gas reserves—causes smaller earthquakes, almost always less than 3.0.) Disposal wells trigger earthquakes when they are dug too deep, near or into basement rock, or when the wells impinge on a fault line. Ellsworth said, “Scientifically, it’s really quite clear.”

Personally, I trust the OGS geologist over a new-earth creationist.

 

[destrekor]

I was sitting on the throne when I felt the shaking. What a time for an earthquake, eh?

I had a nagging suspicion it was an earthquake, but immediate searches showed nothing. About an hour later I looked again and saw the story about a 4.0.

I'm a few hours away in Toledo.

 

[rudeguy]

So the 100% undeniable evidence is that you say so? Because the articles unlike you, left reasonable room for more evidence to provide different results.

Now go on and insult me some more. Maybe it will make you feel better about being proved 100% undeniably wrong.

 

[zinfamous]

So the 100% undeniable evidence is that you say so? Because the articles unlike you, left reasonable room for more evidence to provide different results.

Now go on and insult me some more. Maybe it will make you feel better about being proved 100% undeniably wrong.

I think you are trying to claim that I claimed that earthquakes never happened in this region before, and that all earthquakes in these regions are 100% due to fracturing?

Is that what you are saying? ...and are you further demanding that this is only scientific proof when 100% of such earthquakes are caused only by fracking?

 

[rudeguy]

Strawman.jpg

 

[zinfamous]

Strawman.jpg

how is that a strawman? I'm actually trying to understand what your demanded standards are for proof--you seem to have your own idea as to standards of qualified data.

I'm actually starting to realize that we are looking at things differently, perhaps?

How do you interpret my earlier claim "100% certain," for example? Specifically, are you thinking that I was referring to consensus, some part of the statistical data, or maybe a general reference to frequency of cause --> effect?

 

[rudeguy]

how is that a strawman? I'm actually trying to understand what your demanded standards are for proof--you seem to have your own idea as to standards of qualified data.

I'm actually starting to realize that we are looking at things differently, perhaps?

How do you interpret my earlier claim "100% certain," for example? Specifically, are you thinking that I was referring to consensus, some part of the statistical data, or maybe a general reference to frequency of cause --> effect?

Is it 100% accurate that a specific part of the fracking process causes earthquakes? 100%, undeniably, yes

I'm asking for the 100% undeniable evidence

Instead of posting the 100% undeniable evidence you said you had, you posted a survey that says it is likely, then resorted to ad hominem attacks and straw man arguments. Now it appears you are trying to change your argument after you made it.

This thread has made me lose any respect I had for you. You've insulted a ton of people, lied about what science has said and are afraid to correct what you said. As for the evidence you have posted, here is similar evidence that the divorce rate in Maine is tied to consumption of margarine:

 

[rcpratt]

That escalated quickly.

 

[John Connor]

It's global warming! Oh no!

 

[John Connor]

Oh wait... it's fracking? Fuck, I live in CO, I'm doomed! But no earthquakes yet. What about North Dakota or WY?

Just Liberal bull shit.

 

[zinfamous]

Instead of posting the 100% undeniable evidence you said you had, you posted a survey that says it is likely, then resorted to ad hominem attacks and straw man arguments. Now it appears you are trying to change your argument after you made it.

This thread has made me lose any respect I had for you. You've insulted a ton of people, lied about what science has said and are afraid to correct what you said. As for the evidence you have posted, here is similar evidence that the divorce rate in Maine is tied to consumption of margarine:

guess I'll have to relink my links for you, since you seem too handicapped to do it. If I have insulted anyone, it should be a wakeup call for them. closing your ears and shouting "nuh uh!" in the face of insurmountable evidence is rather embarrassing. I think if at least 10% of you shills actually choose to investigate this on your own, then this would be a good thing.

lol, surveys? I'm seeing now that you aren't very familiar with scholarly articles.
see, it's not hard. If you were to look at my link, and click on the link for research, you would see this:

http://earthquakes.ok.gov/what-we-know/academic-research/
Here's another
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24993347

Oh! those are jsut surveys! They don't say that every incident of wastewater injection lead to an earthquake! Oh my god, heaven forfend! if only that was something that I ever claimed!

I tell you what, you show me a situation in Maine where, over a 5 year period, the divorce rate skyrocketed from an annual <1% to progressively 200%, 400%, and 500%, while seeing the Margarine conglomerate move in and sell 1k more gallons of tubs of margarines to married households, where before none had been sold, then you might have a point.

but you don't. The sad thing is that you aren't even a shill--you have no bones in this discussion because you don't work for oil or natural gas, you don't live in Oklahoma--you are just willfully ignoring facts that don't square with your belief. You simply aren't all that interested in how science works...unless you can point to it for whatever anti-liberal cause you champion.

You have never been interested in discussion. You have never been interested in knowledge. You only define the "enemy." If what you say runs counter to what your "enemy" says, then you are by default correct. Damn the truth. Damn humanity. You have defined me as "liberal," and so only ever assume that I am the enemy, that I must always be wrong. You have taken the Texashiker approach to data and gone full retard. Do you ever see me go to your little gun clubs and tell you that you don't understand shit about guns? No, I don't, because I don't dally in that subculture. I don't know shit about guns, and I sure as shit don't try to proclaim that I fully grasp the things that you guys talk about, as if I am some sort of expert.

Engaging in areas where you are unfamiliar is great, and should be openly encouraged. This is how people learn. But this is not what you do. You take a side, pick a fight, and just go. You don't give a rat's ass about learning a fucking thing. You jump in telling people they don't know shit about their work, because your infowars boyfriends are telling you how to think. Grow the fuck up, and please try to be a useful member of humanity for once. Strop being so goddamn angry about things you refuse to understand: Scientists said something that I believe to be wrong! They must be evil and wrong;l I hate them! waaaaah! They have a shitton of data. It must be wrong! Clearly, it doesn't fit the standards of significance that I have defined for myself! Damn Science! Waaaa!


Hey--at least you have John Conner on your side, which surprises no one!

I don't have anything against conservatives, generally. But I think people like you, that alarmingly growing corner of the base, are the absolute worst part of this country--Desperately flailing to send us back to the Stone age.

 

[rudeguy]

guess I'll have to relink my links for you, since you seem too handicapped to do it. If I have insulted anyone, it should be a wakeup call for them. closing your ears and shouting "nuh uh!" in the face of insurmountable evidence is rather embarrassing. I think if at least 10% of you shills actually choose to investigate this on your own, then this would be a good thing.

lol, surveys? I'm seeing now that you aren't very familiar with scholarly articles.
see, it's not hard. If you were to look at my link, and click on the link for research, you would see this:

http://earthquakes.ok.gov/what-we-know/academic-research/
Here's another
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24993347

Oh! those are jsut surveys! They don't say that every incident of wastewater injection lead to an earthquake! Oh my god, heaven forfend! if only that was something that I ever claimed!

I tell you what, you show me a situation in Maine where, over a 5 year period, the divorce rate skyrocketed from an annual <1% to progressively 200%, 400%, and 500%, while seeing the Margarine conglomerate move in and sell 1k more gallons of tubs of margarines to married households, where before none had been sold, then you might have a point.

but you don't. The sad thing is that you aren't even a shill--you have no bones in this discussion because you don't work for oil or natural gas, you don't live in Oklahoma--you are just willfully ignoring facts that don't square with your belief. You simply aren't all that interested in how science works...unless you can point to it for whatever anti-liberal cause you champion.

You have never been interested in discussion. You have never been interested in knowledge. You only define the "enemy." If what you say runs counter to what your "enemy" says, then you are by default correct. Damn the truth. Damn humanity. You have defined me as "liberal," and so only ever assume that I am the enemy, that I must always be wrong. You have taken the Texashiker approach to data and gone full retard. Do you ever see me go to your little gun clubs and tell you that you don't understand shit about guns? No, I don't, because I don't dally in that subculture. I don't know shit about guns, and I sure as shit don't try to proclaim that I fully grasp the things that you guys talk about, as if I am some sort of expert.

Engaging in areas where you are unfamiliar is great, and should be openly encouraged. This is how people learn. But this is not what you do. You take a side, pick a fight, and just go. You don't give a rat's ass about learning a fucking thing. You jump in telling people they don't know shit about their work, because your infowars boyfriends are telling you how to think. Grow the fuck up, and please try to be a useful member of humanity for once. Strop being so goddamn angry about things you refuse to understand: Scientists said something that I believe to be wrong! They must be evil and wrong;l I hate them! waaaaah! They have a shitton of data. It must be wrong! Clearly, it doesn't fit the standards of significance that I have defined for myself! Damn Science! Waaaa!


Hey--at least you have John Conner on your side, which surprises no one!

I don't have anything against conservatives, generally. But I think people like you, that alarmingly growing corner of the base, are the absolute worst part of this country--Desperately flailing to send us back to the Stone age.

Keep ranting and insulting. Its making you look even more childish. From your own link:

high-rate disposal wells in Oklahoma is potentially responsible

You said you had 100% undeniable evidence that fracking causes earthquakes. Please kindly post it or shut the fuck up.