[ExI] Cephalization, proles--Where is government going?

[Adrian Tymes]

On Sat, May 21, 2011 at 7:24 PM, Richard Loosemore <rpwl at lightlink.com> wrote:
> Mirco Romanato wrote:
>> Why not outlaw these (if they are not already) instead to outlaw
>> something far related?
>
> That is what we are trying to DO!
>
> But you have to look at the technology:  if we outlawed these things they
> woudl not be able to use hydraulic fracturing at all, because they would
> then be taking whole rivers, filling them with (undisclosed) poisons,
> sending them underground to do the fracking, then bringing them up and
> ...... putting them WHERE?
>
> There would be no place for them to go.  They could not store them in
> plastic bottles.
>
> So, outlawing these problems is, ipso facto, equivalent to outlawing
> fracking itself.

And thus you see the problem.  The quick, easy, and reliable
means to prevent those other, somewhat inevitable results is
simply to outlaw fracking.  If they are inevitable, and to outlaw the
one is to outlaw the other, then why object to outlawing the other
if the one should be prevented by law?

But that assumes they are indeed inevitable.  Could the water not
be purified after?  Could the poisons not be recycled?  If the
answer is, "Yes, but it wouldn't be profitable," then the technology
needs to be refined until this is profitable, before fracking may be
allowed.  Otherwise, it devolves into letting someone poison
rivers and pay nothing for doing so.