"This is good news," said Duke University scientist Rob Jackson, who was not involved with the study. He called it a "useful and important approach" to monitoring fracking, but he cautioned that the single study doesn't prove that fracking can't pollute, since geology and industry practices vary widely in Pennsylvania and across the nation.
Here's a tip: if you post a URL to a story, read it first.
Plant a tree, move closer to your work, sell your car and instead use car sharing services and transit. Stop telling "us" what to do and make definitive changes yourselves. I am not a greenie and I don't tell others what they should or should not do
</fail>
So now it's that much easier for some sexually repressed prude to complain they saw a nipple at halftime or something, and ruin it for the rest of us.
That's already happened at a public library.
Actually I think scientists have an insight into theology that actual theologians lack. Religious and tribal instincts were shaped by evolution, since they conferred a selective advantage to early humans. Back in the Stone Age, if someone shared your religion, you'd probably have more genes in common with them than with people of other faiths, and you're more likely to befriend and ally with them. But, it's a one way street. Aside from being research subjects, theologians have nothing to offer in return except for denial.
A scientist who claims that science proves religion if far more likely to be invalid! Why? Because religion involves that which is outside the natural world while science is about the natural world. Neither the supernatural or natural can be used to prove or disprove the other.
Hah! Tell that to this lady.
It would if it was hosted on a Mac OS X server somewhere...
A what?
Yes i do.
Then why are you keeping it a secret?
The real issue is that there needs to be a clean out of lazy teachers and administration that refuses to interact with parents
Do you have any basis for that assertion, other than your resume?
<< WAIT >>