I don’t understand how they thought this was a good idea, for either Korman or the Fucking company.
-
My[Confined]Space
Better Than Bread
Movies Coming Soon- Star Trek Books
- Happy 2024 Birthday to Christie Golden!
- “Star Trek: Voyager: 16 Seven Of Nine” Review by Deepspacespines.com
- Nana Visitor Joins Us to Talk About Her New Book – Star Trek: Open a Channel: A Woman’s Trek!
- Out Today: “Star Trek #26”
- Star Trek Strange New Worlds Asylum Book Review
- John Jackson Miller Books Ranked!
- “Star Trek: The Next Generation: Headlong Flight” Review by Lessaccurategrandmother.blogspot.com
- Jumping into Adventure with “Into the Void”
- Happy 2024 Birthday to Jim Johnson!
- “Star Trek: Strange New Worlds: Asylum” Review by Trek.fm
- Movie Related Products
- “Deadpool & Wolverine” Review
- Kevin Smith Is Getting Closer and Closer to Dogma 2
- “The Garfield Movie” Review
- Disney Said to be Considering a Surprising Replacement for Bob Iger: EA CEO Andrew Wilson – IGN
- Amazon Is Shutting Down Freevee, Its Ad-Supported Video Streamer
- “Breathe” Review
- “Transformers One” Review
- Captain America: Brave New World | Official Trailer
- Marvel Studios’ Thunderbolts* | D23 Brazil Special Look | In Theaters May 2, 2025
- Mattel apologizes after mistakenly printing porn site on ‘Wicked’ movie dolls packaging | CNN Business
- Music Video DB
I thought it was some S\M version of the Hitachi “wand”.
Is that bad ?
What specific “fracking chemicals” cause cancer?
Literally who knows. One of the biggest (legitimate) complaints about fracking is that the companies don’t have to say what chemicals they use.
Literally anyone can know because they have to disclose them.
fracfocus.org/chemical-use/what-chemicals-are-used
Okay, now how are these fracking chemicals causing cancer? Do they have naked women frolic in them or something?
Many are known to be carcinogenic. And now I can’t get the image of naked women frolicking out of my mind.
Wait…That was in my mind before…Never mind.
All I’m asking for is actual proof that fracking is directly causing cancer. If you can’t prove it, please indicate it by voting me down.
it’s when it gets into the ground water that it causes problems.
Only if they fuck it up. Tradition oil drilling can be just as problematic. Like the Gulf of Mexico.
Yeah, but usually they don’t drill for oil near people’s drinking water resources.
They do drill near our food sources.
Of the 55 to 60 chemicals used: napthalene, benzyl chloride, and formaldehyde. [Sarah Palin] I should know, I can see fracking from my back yard. [/Sarah Palin]
Groundwater contamination a couple decades down the road is also a big worry from all the salts, acids, and hydrocarbons being used. Time to sell high and gtfooh.
Wow. Okay, here we go…
There are no known cases to date. However, many of the chemicals used are proven to cause cancer, hence the term “carcinogenic”. This is why people are all up in arms about fracking, because they use chemicals that have been proven to cause cancer.
So there’s no evidence that fracking causes cancer. Therefore the claim made in the pic is false.
he just gave you the evidence dingus
No, he said there are no known cases.
Pouring alcohol in your coffee doesn’t cause drunkenness.
No, he said that “many of the chemicals used are proven to cause cancer”.
pretty unambiguous.
Many of the chemicals used to manufacture your cell phone cause cancer, but it doesn’t necessarily mean the phone itself is going to give you cancer.
You don’t drink from your phone.
But you do hold it up to your face for long periods of time, and in your hands and your pocket, close to your genitals.
Dude, seriously?
You do not encorporate your cellphone.
You do encorporate your drinking water.
You are running out of straws.
There’s still no known cases.
heh heh. Pink bits.
These chemicals you are so worried about are in parts per billion – even trillion – and are not a worry. The EPA is doing it’s level best to make it sound like it is dangerous but keep failing and so relies on bad information – much like global warming – err, climate change – err, whatever the newest term they have is . . .
why would you think it’s parts per billion? it’s a pure chemical slurry that they’re shoving into the ground, not a homeopathic medicine
Incorrect. It’s almost entirely water. Dallasalice is correct about it being parts per billion.
5 seconds of googling have proved you wrong:
www.google.com/search?q=chemicals+used+in+fracking
Read it again: 10.2 million gallons that CONTAINED chemicals, not 10.2 million gallons OF chemicals. You need to improve your reading comprehension.
did you miss the part that the fracking guys said it was at least 1%?
jesus, it’s like you’re willfully ignorant.
either that or a troll, lol.
oh Poe, you’re so hard to nail down.
Where did you post that?
from the thing I read on the internet, looks like I forgot to include that link.