prole

What's puzzling here is your question...

You can touch it too..if you want.

DYNASTY!!!

I'm glad Rachael Maddow could bring y'all together. Now STFU!!

It's not that I mind you returning the favor, I just wish you were better at it. "Constant attacks on my intellect". LMFAO! It's exactly those kinds of statements that make you irresistible.

I said your scientific findings refuting the Oklahoma USGS earthquake data would be published in the journal, Dumbass. When can the world expect to see that again?

I think for professional conservatives, it's about introducing a enough of a measure of reasonable doubt in the public's mind through obfuscation and messenger assassination to squeeze a leeetle bit more money out of whatever it is coming under attack. For a hobbyist like FW? No idea, but I know I'd be getting paid for these displays.

I think I watched the Rachael Maddow show once in a hotel room with limited channels in 2009. Media Literacy Quiztime!: Exactly what role did the Rachael Maddow Show play in the originally posted article. Then go back and read this excruciating thread. Winner gets a peek into how conservative denialism works!

Is your attempted face-saving show over now?

Looking forward to your rebuttal of the works and scientists quoted and cited in the article. Remember, your own original research only!

So it's the concept of journalism you have a problem with now?

Can't wait for your own data on Oklahoma earthquakes to come out in the journal: Dumbass.

So, the data that makes up the infographic is in question? The number and frequency of earthquakes in Oklahoma from 2009-2014 sourced from the USGS? Is that where you're going?

"It" was this (your quote, btw): The infographic, you know, the one quoted in the piece, the one that doesn't say anything about fracking? Yeah, at the bottom it's credited to the Oklahoma USGS. Really, is this how you plan on spending the rest of your life? As a buffoon?

Go back in your hole before you embarrass yourself further.