The point of the article is that Gasland is a special-effects movie masquerading as a documentary. The effects in the movie are whole-cloth lies.
You are essentially asking that evidence be presented to debunk hollywood invention, and treating that invention as if it were actual evidence itself.
Then please link to articles, etc. that prove, conclusively, that “The effects in the movie are whole-cloth lies.” My point is that this article makes the allegations but offers virtually nothing in the way of evidence to support those allegations.
What I am trying to find out is if there is any truth to statements like yours, just as I’m trying to find out if there is any truth to the movie. Just saying something “is” or “isn’t” doesn’t make it truth any more than anyone else making the opposite claims without evidence.
What I’ll be looking into will be scientific data regarding the strata of the formations involved, and what the possibility is that the strata in question could be fractured enough to send pollutants to the water table. I’ll also be trying to find out if there are any industry reports on the pollutants in the water table, and also any reports on failures of the wells/casings themselves that could lead to contamination.