Jon wrote:
I can't decide on fracking. If it's safe I'm all for it, if it's not, I'm not. Hard to know because I don't believe a word environmentalists say.
That's an interesting response.
As to the 'safety' of fracking; we only have the word of the energy firms and the politicians claiming that fracking is safe. And I don't believe a word either of those groups say.
The energy corporations have proven themselves to be greedy beyond measure, with no concern for the well-being of their fellow man. We have also received far too many reports where energy companies have been involved in massive environmental damage – with much of it having been due to irresponsible behaviour on the part of the energy company.
And we know that governments continually lie to us: the man-made global warming/climate change agenda is proof of that: lack of proper UK border controls and totally uncontrolled immigration is another: “The pound in your pocket” lie from Wilson: WMD within 45 minutes from Blair: Education, education, education is another: The Common Market is not a political union from Heath: The treasonable deceit over the EU from the whole of the LibLabCon has earned all three parties the growing distrust of the electorate. And so it goes on and on; the lying deceit and theft by the political class over their expenses claims brings the untrustworthiness down the to very large numbers of individual MPs. Now there are real suspicions that the Establishment is heavily involved in paedophilia and what appears to be a massive police cover-up. I'm afraid the political class only has itself to blame for the lack of trust I have towards them.
As for disbelieving environmentalists; they too can be untrustworthy and utterly irrational. CO2 is not a poison - it is an essential element in the growth of all plant life and our food supply.
'Experts', are not trustworthy either. No two of them can ever agree on anything. One day fat in our diet is the cause of heart disease, the next, fat is good for us – and sugar is the culprit. First red wine is good for the heart, now all wine is dangerous. First we were told that aspirin reduces the risk of heart attacks, now they are not so sure. We are told to avoid exposure to the sun because of the risk of skin cancer, now we are told that sun block lotions are responsible for too little sun exposure and is the cause of vitamin D deficiency.
Statins are constantly being pushed by the political class and some medics; there are even calls from some medics to put statins in the general water supply. I carry positive damage in my own body that is directly due to statins, and still my GP won't acknowledge that fact to my face, even though I have a copy of a consultant's letter clearly stating that statins are the cause of the damage.
Back to fracking: If the government was truly convinced that fracking is 100% safe, then it should present its case in the public domain and provide convincing evidence that all the reports of fracking having severely damaged the environment in parts of the USA, Canada, and Australia are all false. So far the government hasn't proved anything, apart from its unseemly rush to unleash potential disaster on our local communities. But if we apply common sense to the fracking argument, then there are serious questions to be answered by the politicians and the energy companies. Common sense says that pumping millions of gallons of unrecoverable known toxic chemicals into the environment will probably have serious consequences, and many reports from around the globe suggest that fracking is not safe.
I think we all need to exercise our common sense, and rely less on the frequently biased opinions of so-called experts. And my common sense tells me that fracking contains lots of unknown risks that nobody in officialdom is yet prepared to discuss in public. When I read that certain insurance companies are not prepared to offer home insurance on properties in areas where fracking is taking place, then I strongly suspect that my common sense is going in the right direction.
Login
FAQ
Search
