Posted on 06/05/2015 4:05:37 AM PDT by IBD editorial writer
Want to see a perfect example of spin as a Washington art form? Read the results of the federal government's most in-depth investigation ever of fracking.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.investors.com ...
Was there any question? Besides, this is BAD news for the left and their 'religion'.
Yet states like NY are banning fracking and cutting their own financial throats. This is how glamorizing by the media (and other assorted brazen loud-mouths) always tramples the quiet facts of the truth and REAL science.
Lower energy prices leads to lower prices for goods and services.
Lower prices for goods and services leads to economic growth.
Economic growth leads to higher employment rates.
Higher employment leads to happier, more peaceful, more optimistic people.
Happy, peaceful and optimistic people tend to vote Republican.
Republicans are less inclined to favor large, intrusive government.
The EPA is a large intrusive government agency.
Therefore the EPA can not be happy about issuing this report. .
I read the news article about the results of this examination of Fracking. Said to my wife, gee, first NASA could not find evidence of global warming over the past ten years and now the EPA cannot find a problem with Fracking. I bet there are two changes coming to the administration within a few seconds, a new NASA head probably someone like Al Gore and then one for EPA, probably someone like Julia “butterfly” Hill.
That is what they do.
My Offal Official Obama Orifice and Outlet (00000) the Albany (NY) Times Union Bowdlerized headline regarding the EPA and fracking is:
“EPA: FRACKING POTENTIAL DANGER TO WATER SUPPLIES”
The article is attributed to the NY TIMES whose own headline is:
“FRACKING HAS NOT HAD BIG EFFECT ON WATER SUPPLY, E.P.A. SAYS WHILE NOTING RISKS”
It does not appear that the fellas at the Times Union Bowdlerized the article itself, though a word search for the word DANGER in the EPA’s 998 page draft report and the 28 page summary resulted in zero finds.
Along the same line, a few years ago El Rushbo said that back in the 1980s the World Health Organization, which is an offshoot of the UN, conducted an exhaustive study of the effects of secondhand smoke in Europe. They were so sure the evidence would be so incriminating that they could use it crush the “filthy habit” of smoking.
However, the study revealed that secondhand smoke, while unpleasant because of the smell, actually has little or no effect on people’s health. Only the actual smoker who inhales the full strength smoke receives detrimental effects from inhaling it. Once the smoke has been inhaled, and then exhaled into the ambient air, it is diluted 1000 times or more, and other than the odor; or the imagined harm from it, which is triggered by the odor, there is little to no actual harm from secondhand smoke.
So the World Health Org. spiked the story, buried the test results, and continues to lie about secondhand smoke by word-of-mouth; urban legend. The test results didn’t fit their narrative.
I told you so.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.