FrackNation, an Absolute Must See For Natural Gas Supporters

FrackNation premiered on TV last night.  Many watched from home and others got together with friends and family and watched it together.  The natural gas debate has brought supporters closer than ever, in fact.  We encourage everyone to watch the movie and offer our reviews in hopes you’ll do so.

Simply put; the movie FrackNation is a great film.  It speaks up for the forgotten men and women in the natural gas debate; the landowner, the worker and the consumer; the ordinary Americans to whom natural gas development means everything.  It premiered in New York City a few weeks ago and Tom had the opportunity to go see it in the city with several different landowners who appeared in the movie.  When he returned he told us how much he enjoyed it and posted about it here.  Nicole, Joe and I had the opportunity to see it last night and we all had a very similar reaction; the movie was exceptional on both a professional and emotional basis.

fracknation-documentary-fracking-fable-620x231

Here our individual reviews of FrackNation:

Nicole’s Review:

nicole-portraitI thought the movie was utterly amazing. After Tom returned from New York City and told us about it, I was excited to view it and wasn’t disappointed with what I saw last night. For me, it represented everything we’ve been talking about and working for the last two years since EID Marcellus was launched.

The impacts of the indecision in New York State and in the DRBC region of Pennsylvania are often heartbreaking, and it was great to finally see those landowners given a voice in the media. Unlike Josh Fox, we spend a lot of time talking with the 99 percent of landowners in Susquehanna County, including Dimock, who are happy with the natural gas industry, excited for the opportunities it has brought to the region, and still a part of a caring, united community.

It was absolutely refreshing to witness a journalist finally allowing them to tell their side of the story, one the media has often ignored throughout the last few years.

The most interesting part for me, aside from seeing so many familiar faces, was the discussion of the media and foreign involvement in perpetuating the “anti-natural gas industry.” I loved that it was described in that fashion because that’s what it is. All over the internet you can find job offers for activists and others to fight the natural gas industry–positions that wouldn’t be available without said industry, I might add–demonstrating their efforts go beyond the grassroots volunteering they often claim. It is an organized effort with an agenda of stopping domestic energy production, and FrackNation nailed it right on the head.

It was like a breath of fresh air to see a journalist finally willing to sit down and take the time to listen to the majority in these communities, and actually report on it.

Joe’s Review:

Joe MassaroI had been looking forward to the premier of FrackNation for some time now as I was hoping it would help to bring the truth out to the mainstream public; it did exactly that.  I found FrackNation extremely informative, not only about the process of hydraulic fracturing, but about the mentality of those opposed to this practice.

The film exposed Josh Fox as what we knew him to be all along, a fraudulent storyteller.  It showed the Sautners we profiled in Sautnergate; threatening and unable to provide hard evidence of water contamination.  FrackNation went as far as to show how certain cynical public figures have been backing the anti movement, thereby stripping away landowner rights and putting  in jeopardy their very way of life by depriving them of the income required to hold onto their land.

The most interesting part of the movie was the explanation for why we need abundant, cheap energy.  Those opposed constantly preach about renewable energy.  While I agree renewable energy is something we certainly need to develop further down the road, it isn’t something that is feasible now on any large scale, given the growth in the amount of energy needed each year.  Moreover, there are still places around the globe that don’t even have basic access to serious energy sources.  Banning the development of shale gas and other fossil fuels is condemning those places to never having the option of electricity.  The current price of renewables makes them not an option for these people.

FrackNation does a great job at explaining why we need cheap abundant energy and exposes the fact we do not have an energy crisis but, rather, a crisis of ignorance.

John’s Review:

johnkrohnQuite simply I thought “FrackNation” was masterfully done.  From an investigative journalist’s standpoint, Phelim covered many bases and, as the New York Times recently declared, had a dogged persistence to uncover the truth behind Josh Fox’s accusations.  In addition, “FrackNation” was the first piece of popular culture to highlight the main point in this whole discussion.  Hydraulic fracturing is one of our generations most important discoveries and is poised to shape our communities, the nation and the world over the course of our lifetimes.  It will literally supply the lifeblood our shared global economy needs to grow and prosper. As such, its effects will be far-reaching.  Very few other technologies have the mutual benefit of improving the lives of everyday Americans (who are the backbone and moral fiber of this nation) while challenging the economic security of some of the world’s most oppressive regimes.  It goes without saying that any issue that touches all of these areas is going to be controversial.  As they say, all politics is local, and in this case hydraulic fracturing is being tested by politics, politicians, and special interest groups across the globe.  Each have their own motive but they all seek the same goal.  Limit the expanse of fracturing to support their special interest.  It doesn’t get any simpler than that.

“FrackNation” showed, for the first time, that these shared efforts to resist fracturing’s advance have very real consequences.  Those include bankrupting hard-working American farmers, decreasing the quality of life for our European allies and limiting the supply of affordable energy that developing countries need to prosper.  For far too long those opposing hydraulic fracturing have operated with a sense of impunity and in some cases self-righteousness while ignoring these consequences. Hopefully, this film changes that dynamic. In my view, that would be a measure of its true success.

“FrackNation” also showed, for the first time, the inter-connectivity between individuals suing oil and gas companies (in many cases without merit) and their direct connections to special interest groups in Washington, D.C.  Don’t take my word for it, ask Julie Sautner. During the movie she told Phelim:

“I hope you make lot’s of money cause your going to need it. I will tell you that right now.  What do you think we are small time? I’ll have the NRDC and everybody else on you as fast…”

While the movie was very good overall, there were areas that blurred events and in some cases left out important details. As a result, it will likely receive criticism in the coming weeks from anti-natural gas activists and their friends in Washington, D.C. and elsewhere. Regardless, the message it brought needed to be told and made us all a bit more aware of how the manufactured controversy over hydraulic fracturing arrived at our doorstep.  Now that we have this information its up to each of us to decide whether we embrace a technology that is scientifically proven, creating insurmountable wealth, and helping reduce carbon emissions around the globe or reject it based on fear-driven speculation by multiple actors who, for various reasons, have a shared goal of keeping America’s hydrocarbons locked in the ground forever.

My Own Review:

Watching FrackNation for the first time last night was eye opening and energizing for me.

Over the past year and a half I have worked hand in hand with landowners, trying to stand up and support them whenever they needed it. I have gone to meetings just so they aren’t scared being the only supporter of natural gas in a room full of antis.  I have visited homes, farms, and businesses.  I’ve become passionate beyond what I ever imagined for the livelihood of the people who need natural gas to save those homes, farms, and businesses I have visited.  And, for the first time ever, I can put sincere feelings behind my favorite saying, “stand for something or you’ll fall for anything.”

I came into this position knowing there was going to be a long struggle fused with intense arguments, but I never realized, along the path, I would become so emotionally and personally involved in this struggle, not owning much land or holding a lease myself.  Watching farmers talk frankly about their situations, though, tugged on my heart strings.

Josh Fox tried his hardest to pull pity from everyone who watched Gasland but he gets none from me because he has misrepresented just about everything in his film, as FrackNation vividly demonstrates.  I feel bad for the people I work and interact with each day who just need one glimmer of hope to wake up in the morning and go to work to support their families.  Call me cynical, and maybe I am, but I don’t know how anyone could watch FrackNation and believe a word Fox said in Gasland.

Regardless of the emotional roller-coaster the movie takes you on when you live in the reality of FrackNation, there were several parts of the movie that were beyond funny.  I find it hard to pick the most humorous part but I”d say it’s a toss up between the following.

1)  Julie Sautner threatening to sue Phelim and telling him all about her pistol while suggesting she might resort to the ultimate punishment; siccing the NRDC on him. Or..

2)  The discussion of coffee, cabbage, and broccoli.  The idea these edible foods (being a vegetarian this just about sums up my entire diet) come with “risk” in high consumption really makes you think!

All in all I would argue this is a must see.  I am so thankful I had the opportunity to meet, work with, and experience all the amazing people featured in it.

70556da5bfcc43b0b9f2ef00f9ffe0bf

Watching the Twitter feed last night following the showing of the movie on AXS Channel, it was clear just how big a hit the movie was with the people for whom we try to speak; those forgotten individuals whose message doesn’t fit the major media template in so many instances.  Everyone surrounding us as we watched the movie, absolutely loved it.  It was an extraordinary example of truth-telling that will go a long way in correcting a record distorted by Gasland.

Did you get a chance to watch it?  What was your reaction?  Give us your review to add to ours!

Comments

  1. Peter Olausson says:

    Yes it is a great movie, but me and every other Pro Gas activist already knows all the things in the movie, we have been fighting against the antis for 4 years now. What are the plans to show this movie to politicians, lawmakers and regular Americans who only are fed the “fracking is dangerous” by the media channels they use?

  2. Cris McConkey says:

    Why is this movie called “Frack Nation”? Shouldn’t it be “Frac Nation” or “Frac’d Nation”? Or is this embrace the “k” now.

    • Victor Furman says:

      This is a good point but I believe it was smart to name it as it was, FRACK NATION with the k, It is unfortunately how most think it is spelled and the smartest thing the anti obstructionalist have ever done. I over heard Sandra Stiengraber telling some of her friends that by changing the spelling of fracing to frac”k”ing that it has become a household name associated with that other dirty word and that is how they turned the uniformed into pawns for their side.

      The movie is now on sale here – http://fracknation.com/purchase/

      read the review from the Huffington Post

      review: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/grover-norquist/review-of-frack-nation_b_2523185.html

      The 70-minute documentary destroys the claims made in Gasland. It eviscerates Gasland’s credibility and makes clear that its director knowingly lied again and again. On the facts, the science, the conflicts of interest of its protagonists.

      Frack Nation is worth seeing because it is a good film. It is funny in upending the pathetic lies of Gasland. It is fast-paced. (Is that legal in a documentary?) It is not heavy handed, self-congratulatory, or “full of itself.” It breaks all the rules, or at least traditions, of the modern documentary.

      It is worth watching. It has already changed the debate about our energy future for the better.

  3. fred jones says:

    I think the title of this EID piece says it all. 😉

  4. getthefacts says:

    This is a great example of a woman who should not be able to have a gun. Her permit should be revoked. As a matter of fact it should have never been issued. Can’t you go to jail for calling the police for no reason and for not telling the truth to the police.? I’m sure it’s happened numerous times.

    • NY4GAS says:

      falsely reporting a crime is a crime.

  5. observer says:

    I wonder if the Saunters brought the pistola’s too there new quarter million dollar home in Bershire NY on 38 “GAS LEASED ACRES” Now being NY residents the PA pistol permit is no good and I do believe if the judge in Berkshire saw the video obtaining a new permit would be hard to do.

  6. Shawn Reed says:

    I believe it is a lot more important for the anti’s who have swallowed the Schlockumentary. I have recently had an ongoing conversation with a guy who has a “green” radio show in California. With a the steady dose of patience and facts, though initially telling me he would not listen to any more “BS” (in much more colorful terms), agreed to “sit back, open my ears and watch”. This is a very intelligent individual who got caught up in the hype and followed that side of the coin only. It may or may not change his mind, but he at least gave a look at the facts. The movie doesn’t provide all the necessary explanations of our processes, but it is a very positive factual look. I agree on the comments regarding the funny parts. Cabbage and concealed carry, I found the Kitchen table scene with the EPA and the Sautners interesting as well. I find it very interesting that some believe the EPA is in the industries pocket. My experience has been that they are watchdogs at best and more commonly detracters. All I can counsel is for our industry to take one individual at a time with respect and understanding. Thanks to the makers of Fracknation. You dun Good!

  7. Observer says:

    heard comments saying that the movie failed to show the EPA official refusing to drink the water after he told Saunters there was no frac chemicals in it and was safe to drink . Those making that comment conveniently also left out the part where although it was determined safe to drink according to EPA & safe water drinking act the EPA official still wouldn’t drink it because the Saunters well was contaminated to a level with Saunter family fecal matter from a non regulated water well/ceptic system. Disgusting, can you imagine liviing in a home where until gas drilling came you din’t know the family water supply was connected to the toiliet.

    • Shawn Reed says:

      Sounds like a missed opportunity, but one I can sort of understand. Sort of explains the buckets of “musty” water all over the front yard. Many states have almost no controls or regs for construction of water wells. Settlers have been in PA for 300+ years, there are perhaps thousands of undocumented water wells. Lots of opportunity for that sort of “interaction”.

  8. Chris A says:

    I’m wondering whether the Iranians and other nuclear bomb wannabes will contact the Saunter’s now that they’ve publically disclosed that their water contains “weapons grade” uranium?

  9. Matt LandOwner says:

    EnergyInDepth… Hmmm I wonder who you’re operated by…
    Oh look! You’re operated by the American Petroleum Institute and the Independent Petroleum Association of America!

    I no longer am confused about why this website is emphatically putting corporate interests above the interests of the individual. Why would ANYONE believe that the people who stand to gain the most from “frac”ing would be honest and truthful about it? Why would ANYONE assume that what a corporation tells them is actually in their best interests? ASK QUESTIONS, don’t just blindly accept what you’re told…

    Having a few dozen acres and a vested stake in the whole business, I’ve educated myself using only academic sources (and ignoring the media and politics), and while there are many obvious benefits from Fracing, there are also many surprising hazards and dangers associated with it as well… Several people in my community have been killed over the past couple years because the gas companies hire truck drivers from Texas who have no idea how to drive in bad conditions…

    I’m not saying don’t Frac… I’m just saying lets not be a bunch of idiots about it and assume that everything is being done correctly, lets ENSURE that everything is being done correctly by coming together as a community and laying down reasonable expectations and repercussions for when they screw up… which they have… right outside my house…

    “Out of sight, Out of Mind” Is the real American axiom…
    We have no way of determining if any of the Strontium and Barium in the fracing water is making it’s way down to the water table… So might as well not worry about it and keep right on truckin’ right?

    • Matt LandOwner says:

      Or should I assume that nothing I post that makes the connection between EID and the API and the IPAA will actually be posted?

      • Tom Shepstone says:

        We tell everyone we’re part of IPAA on our website. This is supposed to be a revelation? I suggest you drop investigative reporting and go back to your day job.

    • Matt LandOwner says:

      Funding provided by!

      El Paso Corporation, XTO Energy, Occidental Petroleum, BP, Anadarko, Marathon, EnCana, Chevron, Talisman, Shell, API, the Independent Petroleum Association of America, Halliburton, Schlumberger and the Ohio Oil and Gas Association

      YIKES!

    • Tom Shepstone says:

      You say question everything and then ask nothing but a rhetorical question intended to drive home your unsupported assertions.

  10. Matt LandOwner says:

    Why would I ask you any questions? You’re not a research group, you’re not a think tank, you’re not an academic institution… you parrot whatever you see that supports your point of view… pointless for learning…

    I asked myself the questions and then did everything I could to find supporting and conflicting evidence on both sides… and not from entertainment media like this website… from academic sources…
    I didn’t think I was being a super sleuth, lol, I was just appalled by peoples trust of corporations, and lack of desire to take the initiative to scratch the surface a little…

    • Tom Shepstone says:

      So you are not interested in the facts from the folks actually doing the work. I see..

      • Matt LandOwner says:

        NO!!! The PR guy from Talisman isn’t doing the work… he’s not on the rigs… my friends are though… I’ve asked them…

        You didn’t seem to catch my point that corporations are responsible, not to the consumers, but to their investors… All of em…

        The tobacco industry provided years of “research” proving that cigarettes were harmless…
        Vodka adds don’t show all the pictures of car wrecks and corpses that they inadvertently help create…
        Meat processors don’t tell us that they add some sludge to ground beef as a filler…

        Why would I ask the people who stand to gain the most? I’m struggling to see your argument, examples might help…

        • Tom Shepstone says:

          Because they actually know how to do the work. Do you want your brain surgery done by a brain surgeon or the fellow who wrote the academic study on how the brain works?

  11. Matt LandOwner says:

    Are you really not bothered by the gas companies being unwilling to disclose what’s in the frack water?

    • Tom Shepstone says:
      • Matt LandOwner says:

        ACCORDING TO THE EPA:
        The oil and gas service companies used hydraulic fracturing products containing 29
        chemicals that are (1) known or possible human carcinogens, (2) regulated under the Safe
        Drinking Water Act for their risks to human health, or (3) listed as hazardous air pollutants under the Clean Air Act. These 29 chemicals were components of 652 different products used in hydraulic fracturing. [below] lists these toxic chemicals and their frequency of use.

        Chemicals Components of Concern: Carcinogens, SDWA-Regulated
        Chemicals, and Hazardous Air Pollutants
        Methanol
        Ethylene glycol
        Diesel
        Naphthalene
        Xylene
        Hydrogen chloride
        Toluene
        Ethylbenzene
        Diethanolamine
        Formaldehyde
        Sulfuric acid
        Thiourea
        Benzyl chloride
        Cumene
        Nitrilotriacetic acid
        Dimethyl formamide
        Phenol
        Benzene
        Di (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
        Acrylamide
        Hydrogen fluoride
        Phthalic anhydride
        Acetaldehyde
        Acetophenone
        Copper
        Ethylene oxide
        Lead
        Propylene oxide
        p-Xylene

        Also from the EPA:
        Between 2005 and 2009, the hydraulic fracturing companies used 95 products containing 13 different carcinogens. These included naphthalene (a possible human carcinogen), benzene (a known human carcinogen), and acrylamide (a probable human carcinogen). Overall, these companies injected 10.2 million gallons of fracturing products containing at least one carcinogen.

        • Tom Shepstone says:

          This is hyperbole at its worst. There are over 1,000 chemicals in coffee including numerous carcinogens. None of it matters unless the dose is excessive. You are trying to also suggest all this stuff ends up in drinking water and in 60 years of doing this, it never has, so your entire argument is flawed.

      • Matt LandOwner says:

        If your fact sheet on the breakdown of the frackwater solution is accurate, then there could be up to 4000 gallons of carcinogenic chemicals being used PER WELL.
        Your article that you linked me to was more of an attack against governmental regulatory agencies (which is needed so I’ll applaud that), than a clear outlining of what the chemicals are (not just their compound names but what they actually are) and in what quantity (in something that’s actually measurable not a worthless percentage).

        • Matt LandOwner says:

          After looking at Fracfocus and doing some math your fact sheet is clearly not indicative of most of the recently drilled wells across northern PA , I’m getting 6,000 to 11,000 gallons of chemicals deemed hazardous by the EPA per well.

          One area I looked at had 14 wells well within a mile of each other, they had all required more than the typical amount of water, ranging from 4.5 to 6.4 million gallons. According to the PDF’s provided by the gas companies themselves 85-86% is water, this means the total volume of the “solution” is between 5.4 million and 7.5 million. The data provided also showed that between .15% and .18% of the total solution were chemicals that are known to be hazardous in varying degrees, but are at the very least toxic to drink.

          So, with a little math, that’s 10,624 gallons per well… and there are 14 wells within a mile of each other, that’s 148,736 gallons of hazardous chemicals pumped in to the ground within a very small area… I’d be more than happy to provide the A.P.I numbers for all the wells so you can look them up on Fracfocus yourself.

          • Tom Shepstone says:

            No one is drinking it, Matt. That’s the point and where you head off into demagoguery. Hey, what’s your real name, b the way? Afraid to give it?

        • Tom Shepstone says:

          Do those chemicals end up in drinking water? No.

  12. Matt LandOwner says:

    Those unsupported assertions that you claim I backed up with a rhetorical question… what were those again? As I re-read my post it seems I’m saying corporations are primarily focused on maximizing the return for their investors… which is a fact… ask ANY CEO… and as a result, it doesn’t make sense to take advice from them regarding their product….
    they OWE IT to their investors to get as many people as possible on board for as little money as possible. So why should we trust them? That’s a question, not an assertion… And I’m seriously asking you… why should we trust that they have our best interests in mind?

    • Tom Shepstone says:

      Because they cannot succeed without doing it correctly.

      • Matt LandOwner says:

        Lots of business succeed very well without doing it “correctly”
        Tobacco companies literally kill their customers, but they’re insanely successful… guess that means they’re doing it right…

        • Tom Shepstone says:

          Sorry, but that’s a ridiculous analogy. We’re selling a product the world depends upon.

          • Matt LandOwner says:

            Okay, you’re right, totally not fair… here’s a better one.

            Leaded gasoline.

            There’s lots of debate over when the industry knew that leaded gasoline significantly contaminated the air, but they certainly knew it before Nixon created the EPA and subsequently required they phase leaded gasoline out of production.

            Without the EPA the industry would not have switched to unleaded when they did. It was costly to do so and in order to be a responsible company dedicated to their investors they had to hold out as long as they could.

            Companies owe their investors, not their customers.

          • Tom Shepstone says:

            That is a better example to be sure, but you’re missing the point that leaded gasoline didn’t cause an individual impact but a community one and there is no evidence hydraulic fracturing has ever polluted anything or caused either a community or an individual impact. There are occasional methane issues associated with drilling but they’re no different than what can hapeen drilling a water well. Let me hasten to add, however, the industry is regulated, heavily so, and wants reasonable regulation, like all businesses seeking long-term prosperity because ultimately you have to please the customer befopre yoy can please the investor. I’ve never understood why some people don’t grasp that.

  13. Matt LandOwner says:

    And let me be clear, I want them to extract NG… everywhere… It’s just painfully apparent to me that the technology is still not perfect, and because of how caustic the agents in the fracking water are, any spill can be extremely hazardous… I want them to drill… I just don’t understand the rush… 10 years from now the technology will be better and the cost of gas will be higher… everyone will make more money and there will be less risk….
    why is everyone so anxious to drill that they can’t see the forest for the trees

    • Tom Shepstone says:

      And, how does the technology get better if no one’s doing it? Are you kidding? And, tell the farmers trying desperately to hang onto their land in this economy that they can wait. Yeah, right.

  14. Matt LandOwner says:

    I never once suggested that the farmers shouldn’t sign leases or that the gas companies shouldn’t start plotting out where the best places for wells might be… Trust me, my friends, family, and neighbors are all farmers… and the signing bonuses are sufficient to help farmers keep their land… and every one of them that I’ve spoken with care just as much about ensuring the safety of their family and livestock as they do about money…

    You’re still treating me as an opponent of NG development when I’m simply pushing for the further development of it… You ask how the technology will get better if no one’s doing it. Well, not many people are focused on it because we seem to be content with the technology as it exists right now… my point is… never be satisfied, we can always do better…
    And no, I’m not kidding, we are more than capable of doing this right…

  15. Matt LandOwner says:

    obviously the “antis” as you call them are opposed to the current tech, and the ones who don’t want to drill at all don’t quite get the big picture… but the majority of people don’t know enough to understand that the ARE risks associated with it, AS WITH EVERYTHING… The point is simply to weigh the risks and ask ourselves if its worth rushing in to or is it better to demand more from the gas companies… They have billions and are competing for a trillion dollar market, it’s absolutely within their power to do a better job, we just simply have to come together and demand it.
    There is no reason why we can’t have our cake and eat it too, ya know what I mean?

  16. Matt LandOwner says:

    Tom you sound more like an angry visitor to the website than a concerned and compassionate advocate… I understand you’re probably sick of dealing with incompetence but I’m not slamming NG… I just know we can do better and shouldn’t settle for the risks as they stand right now…

    Example: Green Completion didn’t exist when the industry started fracking in Colorado… the community eventually voted to enact the EPA’s new rules giving the Gas companies 2 years to adjust. As you know, the gas industry decided to move east where states were not requiring Green Completion yet and where it is still not a state wide requirement. While some wells in PA are using it, which is great… All of the Williams and WPX wells in my area are not… and that’s discouraging… If we could just all agree to the same sets of rules then the industry would find a way to comply and everyone would win…

  17. Victor Furman says:

    Matt Landowner
    you don’t offer your name. Hello I am Victor Furman.

    You say your not an anti but your argument is very reflective of the activist argument. “Wait for Improved science” I argue that the science in place now is improved and drastically because of the last 30 years and near two million gas HVHF wells drilled. Improved enough to the point where I say going forward will only lead to even more improvements and better techniques. However I don’t see them improving the overall water protection and since Lisa Jackson former head of the EPA and every state that is drilling for natural gas has stated there has never been a water aquifer polluted from HVHF. There is no improving upon that!

    Another thing I would like to point out is that although this site is funded and the people who run it are paid employees of the companies they list in their “About Us” section, many many many of us that blog here have never received a dime for doing so. We come here for the same reason you do, INFORMATION. Much of which is presented through non related to drilling Government agencies. The scientific community, and government agencies that oversee the drilling all across America such as the USGS, EPA, AGS, etc.etc.etc To me this site is a valuable source of information as it should be to you. Recently I read a blog on Texas Sharon were it was suggested that the anti gas bloggers should over power this site with their opinions to hijack and run this site in the ground with mis information. Are you one of Texas Sharon’s disciples? Why don’t you use your real name, your own arguments? are you capable of thinking for yourself. You seem intelligent in your writing just too much “in the box” if you know what I mean.

    Again I am Victor Furman of Chenango Forks and I don’t mean to sound like this is an attack on your character, but I do believe what your arguing in your postings above is an attack on the intelligence of those of us who come here for serious debate and information.

    This site no matter how you perceive it is not putting corporate interest above the individual’s who come here to read it, But the corporations that pay for this site was smart enough to put someone in the driver seat who can debate the issue’s at hand on a day to day basis and a group of people who live right here at your so called ground zero for drilling. they don’t spend time defending the CEO’s or stock holders where I can see, They take the questions the anti’s have as well as the pro’s research them and offer data with co responding links. The take the mis information and debunk it when needed just like McDonalds would debunk it if someone bloged McDonalds uses donkey meat in their Big Mac. Have a nice day and don’t forget to turn down the heat before you go to work.
    Victor Furman

    • Tom Shepstone says:

      Right on, Vic! You nailed it here.

    • Matt LandOwner says:

      Very well said Victor and I wanted to thank you for actually giving me an intelligent statement to respond to, which I’ve been extremely eager for… I don’t have the time this moment for a full response, but I will later this evening and am looking forward to it very much.

      I’ve been withholding my name as I’m currently involved in a court case regarding a specific company… I’m not the plaintiff/homeowner, but I cannot discuss it further…

      I am a lifelong PA resident, but know the Binghamton and Chenango Forks area well, I understand how important this topic is for everyone so I’m going to make sure to try to clearly and concisely lay out exactly what my argument is…

      Thank you, and I look forward to continuing this discussion!

      • Victor Furman says:

        2 days later ???

  18. Definitely appreciate what you’ve got here, grateful you’re putting it around and what you have to say.
    You are presenting it in a way that is enjoyable and yet
    you still make sure to make it intelligent.
    I can’t wait to learn much more from you. This is absolutely a remarkable web site.

    • Adam Sopko says:

      Thanks for reading! Please continue to check back for more updates.

Speak Your Mind

*