[jsonne]

I've been seeing content on Tiktok where even 100 miles away they're seeing small dead fish which is apparently according to the folks making the videos a massive red flag.

In general I grow super weary of companies and the government downplaying these sorts of things. It seems to constantly follow the pattern of people saying "It's not that bad" and then only years later do we actually see the horrific health and environmental effects of these sorts of things play out when it's too late for the folks that have been impacted. I feel so helpless like I wish there was a way to prevent this or create enough real accountability that people actually work to minimize these sorts of things but it never seems to pan out that way. My hunch is that the behind the scenes culprit of "why" this happens is rather banal, insurance covers it so people don't have to change, and it seems like those policies create a ton of moral hazard but I don't know the alternatives. I have no answers here it just feels like yet another weight on the side of the scale that the average person has very little control over their lives even for simple things like not being hurt by toxic chemicals in soil / drinking water. Feels easy to lose even more faith in the institutions that are supposed to protect us all.

[kevin_nisbet]

> In general I grow super weary of companies and the government downplaying these sorts of things. It seems to constantly follow the pattern of people saying "It's not that bad" and then only years later do we actually see the horrific health and environmental effects of these sorts of things play out when it's too late for the folks that have been impacted. This isn't really the same, but I've been thinking in similar areas a lot lately in the context of climate change, and the debate around climate change, although debating any topic doesn't change many minds.

If you bet on the scientific majority around climate change being wrong / non-existent / something we can't control, and end up being wrong, then the worst case scenario we make the planet uninhabitable (I'm going to the extreme here).

If you bet that climate change exists and is man-made and end up wrong, we've unnecessarily invested a huge amount of money into reducing pollution, more efficient buildings / manufacturing / transport, and reduce the dependence on a limited set of oil producers to be able to hold supply of oil over nations.

For something more immediate like health concerns with this derailment, is should the officials be more willing to be wrong? And message as such?

[danaris]

Unfortunately, the problem here is that for the individual politicians, if you bet that climate change exists, the worst case scenario is that the big money turns against you and you lose office.

If you bet that climate change doesn't exist or can't be fixed, so we might as well go on with the status quo, the worst case is that you get voted out by environmentally-conscious voters...after getting scads of campaign contributions from the big money, and with a good chance of getting a cushy lobbying post from them afterwards.

These are the incentives we need to change.

[corbulo]

>If you bet on the scientific majority around climate change being wrong / non-existent / something we can't control, and end up being wrong, then the worst case scenario we make the planet uninhabitable (I'm going to the extreme here).

Have you heard of Pascals wager? What do you think of it?

The problem with your 2nd part is it hasn't been actually shifting away from oil, just shifting where in the chain uses more of it. 'Green' infrastructure and products are still overwhelmingly powered by oil & coal and require such significant amounts of emissions to extract that it is self-defeating in the majority of cases. The strongest advocates of 'Green' energy have been frequently silent on Nuclear Energy, which is an obvious and much easier solution to their own alarmism than wind farms (have you seen local eco impacts and blade disposal?) solar (works only where it's sunny with limited options for power storage which is its own can of worms).

>For something more immediate like health concerns with this derailment, is should the officials be more willing to be wrong? And message as such?

I think transparency is what is being requested, not wrongness.

[kevin_nisbet]

> Have you heard of Pascals wager? What do you think of it?

If I have I don't remember it, thanks for bring it up. I'm still trying to absorb it, but I find it to be a fascinating insight. Part of it, is I often try to remind myself that I don't know what I don't know.

> The problem with your 2nd part is it hasn't been actually shifting away from oil, just shifting where in the chain uses more of it.

Well that's true today, but is also basically correct no matter what happens. Our society only operates because of the stuff, so today, any other energy types are going to be transported by oil, manufactured using electricity from hydrocarbons, etc.

> The strongest advocates of 'Green' energy have been frequently silent on Nuclear Energy, which is an obvious and much easier solution

What really changed my mind on this side of the discussion, was a point I heard somewhere that we would've really need to start this 15 years ago. Nuclear is so capital intensive and so long to build, we don't get the necessary impact for far too long if we start now. I'm totally onboard extending lifetime of current reactors if safe to do so, and think new nuclear should be some mix of future energy supplies. I'm keeping an eye on the industry here and totally want the startups to succeed, but I'm under the impression we need to pursue other options here as well.

This probably isn't the best thread to debate the nuances wind and solar and storage, you're right, there are real waste and safety problems with these technologies. But I don't know that also means they aren't the current best option for some mix of new investments.

But, I simply don't know what I don't know.

[peyton]

You’re betting other people’s money in the second case, and they have a say.

[webnrrd2k]

In a civilized, democratic society that's always true. But it doesn't disqualify the original point.

And it works both ways... Other people have spent trillions of US dollars on, for e.g., the war in the middle east. Some of my tax money went to that. I didn't have the ability to veto it.

There should be a reasonable public debate and then people vote. Very often it involves spending other peoples money. That's just how it works.

[bakuninsbart]

That money was granted to them as a reward for contributing to society. Society has a say in how it can be spent.

[artificialLimbs]

They were either granted it or they weren't.

[webnrrd2k]

Getting money from society doesn't come with a grant of immunity to it's rules. Are you saying that it should?

If you use your money to start a business involving a giant tire fire in your back yard then society will, rightfully so, have something to say about it.

[m000]

A number of rescued foxes and other wild animals were also affected in the nearby area [1].

[1] https://www.newsweek.com/fox-dies-owners-arms-after-ohio-tra...

[panick21_]

> It seems to constantly follow the pattern of people saying "It's not that bad" and then only years later do we actually see the horrific health and environmental effects

Yeah but most of the time the panic spread on social media actually does get it wrong.

I am familiar with nuclear matter and the amount of insane social media post about any little nuclear thing is pretty crazy and have no scientific bases.

[RajT88]

> It seems to constantly follow the pattern of people saying "It's not that bad" and then only years later do we actually see the horrific health and environmental effects of these sorts of things play out when it's too late for the folks that have been impacted.

I recently learned that smaller versions of this even happen in the Lasalle/Peru area in Illinois with some regularity. It makes the local news, and maybe some Chicago news, but hardly a blip on national news.

And this is people telling me they live miles away from the incident, and are experiencing fuzzy orange snow. It's curious, because this is getting more press coverage, and at the same time the conspiracy wingnuts are claiming the press is covering it up.

[12345hn6789]

The cancer rates in that area are wack. I know a teacher at a local school and the amount of children who are lost to cancer is outrageous. Every year at least. The town is 10,000 people.

Also, something similar happened just recently. <fortunately> the carus chemical plant explosion is but a tiny blip compared to the Ohio disaster. https://abc7chicago.com/carus-chemical-explosion-potassium-p...

But it is terrible nonetheless.

[RajT88]

> Also, something similar happened just recently.

Yeah, exactly why this was on my mind. I had an interaction with some folks who mentioned the explosion and the fear in the community, and the response from the company and local authorities being not very satisfying.

Me: "The one a year ago?" Them: "No, it happened again a few weeks ago. It happens couple years, seems like. Welcome to LaSalle!"

[TurkishPoptart]

Better to be a labelled conspiracy wingnut, as someone who maintains justified suspicion of those who hold power in our society (media, corporate barons, politicians), than to be too trusting and assuming all is well.

[rootusrootus]

> labelled conspiracy wingnut, as someone who maintains justified suspicion

If your suspicions were justified then by definition you wouldn't be a conspiracy wingnut. But most of the wingnuts think everything is a conspiracy, which makes them no more useful than a broken clock.

[TurkishPoptart]

was I a conspiracy wingnut for thinking the war in Iraq was fought on dubious grounds? Don't have time to go down the rabbit hole. Let's just apply Mark Twain's quote and replace "read the newspaper" with "watch/read corporate news". He's still right.

“If you don't read the newspaper, you're uninformed. If you do, you're misinformed.”

[XorNot]

Was the clock broken when it told me it 6.30 the other day?

[iso1631]

Imagine a world where journalists have enough time in the day to participate in a coverup

[samstave]

>"journalists"

You keep using that word. I do not think that word means what you think it means.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q_hGKT5FI78

[RajT88]

There's a lot of self-styled "Citizen Journalists" these days of wildly variable quality.

See: Jessica Reed Krause

[ly3xqhl8g9]

A tad of Yes, Minister wisdom [1]:

  "The Four Stage Strategy:
  Stage 1. Nothing is going to happen.
  Stage 2. Something may happen, but we should do nothing about it.
  Stage 3. Maybe we should do something about it, but there's nothing we can do.
  Stage 4. Maybe there was something we could have done, but it's too late now." 

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nSXIetP5iak

[r00fus]

Why does this sound really familiar? Because it's very close to the Narcissist's Prayer [1]

That didn't happen.

And if it did, it wasn't that bad.

And if it was, that's not a big deal.

And if it is, that's not my fault.

And if it was, I didn't mean it.

And if I did, you deserved it.

https://www.thelifedoctor.org/the-narcissist-s-prayer

[nabla9]

Legislation passed under President Obama required trains carrying hazardous flammable materials to have ECP brakes.

The law was rescinded in 2017 by the Trump administration.

[onetimeusename]

Would ECP brakes have stopped this, a serious question? I don't know if the severity of this warrants blame on a lack of ECP braking. There is a study done[1] that compared different pneumatic vs electronic signal brakes and ECP brakes could have potentially reduced the number of cars in a derailment but I don't know if it's a significant decrease in cars that are derailed, 50 cars derailed. It does not seem that way to me. But I could be wrong.

[1]: https://www.ntsb.gov/news/events/Documents/2017_casselton_BM...

[MrOwnPut]

No it would not have, as another posted, the NTSB has reported this was a bearing failure[1].

Bearing failures account for 5.9% of all train derailments[2].

It's possible to help prevent this (not fully as many things derail trains) with more sensors[3] and tighter maintenance checks.

This was most likely due to a lack of maintenance.

[1] https://www.ntsb.gov/news/press-releases/Pages/NR20230214.as...

[2] https://www.wisnerbaum.com/blog/2016/september/the-most-comm...

[3] https://www.southampton.ac.uk/engineering/research/projects/...

[georgeg23]

In another universe, ECP brakes would have saved the day. It sounds like the Trump administration still deserves criticism for decaying train safety.

[MrOwnPut]

> ECP brakes would have saved the day

Citation needed.

It sounds like all administrations (especially those currently in charge) deserve criticism for not focusing on the correct regulations for train safety.

Requiring something that isn't needed doesn't help... It can hurt as it takes resources away from actual necessities, like sensors, and tighter maintenance inspections.

[onetimeusename]

Read the link I posted above. It estimates braking distance with EPC vs pneumatic along with reductions in cars that derail. It DOES reduce breaking time in emergency stops which has fewer cars derail but I don't know if it is enough of a reduction to be worthwhile. I don't think it would have dramatically reduced the number of cars that derailed in this accident. I am willing to be proven wrong.

[gowings97]

Fair point, but from what I've read the preliminary cause identified pertains to an axle (not braking) issue?

[TylerE]

The idea is that you stop quicker, before the axle actually fails.

[gowings97]

So the train initiated a stop, the axle broke, and they did not stop in time? Why did they initiate the stop?

First I've heard of this.

*Update - NTSB is saying it was bearing failure - https://www.ntsb.gov/news/press-releases/Pages/NR20230214.as...

ctrl+f for 'axle' or 'brake' from the NTSB statement - zero results

[TylerE]

What do you think the bearing is containing?

[avidphantasm]

And Biden and Buttigieg didn’t make it a priority to re-implement the law while they had control of both houses, and instead shoved an unfair contract down railroad workers throats.

[stolenmerch]

Sure, but it's a little more complicated than that. A 2015 act of Congress mandated that the Department of Transportation repeal the braking requirement if an analysis showed more costs than benefits. The act was mostly to address high profile oil tanker derailments, shipments which peaked around 2014. The Trump administration concluded, probably mistakenly, that an cost-benefit analysis justified it revocation. Of course there was much lobbying by the railroad and oil industries.

Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg’s department has no plans to reinstate an Obama-era rail safety rule aimed at expanding the use of better braking technology, even though a former federal safety official recently warned Congress that without the better brakes.

The Biden administration has had every opportunity to reinstate the safety rule in the past two years.

https://www.sltrib.com/news/nation-world/2018/12/20/trump-ad...

https://jacobin.com/2023/02/department-of-transportation-tra...

[Maursault]

To be fair, besides the primary initiative of keeping all the wealth in the hands of a few, the secondary purpose of a Republican administration is to undo anything done by a Democratic administration. There was no way for Trump to know whether the legislation was good or bad. It could have gone either way, really.

[mgkimsal]

It's felt like any republican 'rolling back' dem-initiated legislation tends to have more negative consequences for more people than positive benefits for others. I don't have any specifics in mind - if I think of any I'll edit/add here. But perhaps others have counter examples to correct my gut feeling?

[throwaway-blaze]

So republicans are just guilty until proven innocent?

[celdon25]

You posted two duplicate comments in this thread only to claim that it was Trump's fault?

[e40]

Agreed.

1. Let's not pretend that this was a "crazy" Trump move. Any Republican would have done this.

2. Let's stop pretending both parties are the same. Yes, there are places where they overlap, but there are important places where there is NO overlap. Environmental action is the big area where there is little to no overlap.

[kneebonian]

And yet despite having a majority of the house and senate under Biden they've been unable to deliver almost anything except an unfair railroad contract.

So maybe, just maybe, the 2 sides are willing to shout about different things but at the end of the day are in fact the same.

[e40]

Razor thin margin in the Senate and at least 2 of the "Democrats" are not really going to vote on anything controversial. They have been shills, so far, for business interests.

[swearwolf]

Have you ever considered that maybe the reason there’s always a Democrat or two willing to block progressive legislation is that the Democratic Party wants it that way? That way they can have their cake, by promising progressive reform, and eat it, by not delivering that reform and thus, not pissing off their donors. I’ve been hearing about these one or two non-compliant Democrats my whole voting life (remember Joe Lieberman?), and yet the party never invests resources in primarying them.

Just a thought.

[peyton]

Are you saying there was no possible way to get railroad safety through?

[kritiko]

Moral Mazes has many good examples of how this happens.

Aaron Swartz quoted one excerpt about an industrial accident towards the bottom of this blog: http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/bizethics

Management deferred replacement of a $6M battery and the cost of its failure was 100-150M.

>People are always calculating how others will see the decisions they make. … They know that they have to gauge not just the external … market consequences of a decision, but the internal political consequences. And sometimes you can make the right market decision, but it can be the wrong political decision.

[swordsmith]

> I've been seeing content on Tiktok where even 100 miles away they're seeing small dead fish which is apparently according to the folks making the videos a massive red flag.

It's interesting that you mention that you saw this on TikTok. In the last two days, the Ohio train derailment has become one of the hottest topics in ALL of Chinese social media (Weibo, tiktok, Little red book, etc), 10 days after its happening.

I was confused when my Chinese friends started asking me about this event, which I saw on the news the day it happened.

Why the huge lag? Oh yeah, because of the Chinese "balloons" -- nationalist citizens are mad that CCP has taken a "soft" stance in the face of US shooting down Chinese balloons. Chinese official statements are along the lines of "how dare you shoot down my balloons, they are just passing through on accident", then stating that American balloons have entered Chinese airspace previously and that's unacceptable.

This entire thing is a mess, so here comes the typical media manipulation to focus both Chinese and non-Chinese negative attention on America, even though American media has been giving this event no less attention than something like this usually receives.

[laurentbh]

yeah, it's not that bad when you are in DC or on Wall Street

[EGreg]

Many peopl say that capitalism should be laidsez-faire and government should leave us alone. But actually, government is on the SIDE of capital and corporations, and they constantly work together to keep the public distracted and divided enough to actually force these corporations to change:

https://magarshak.com/blog/?p=362

[mbostleman]

I'm finding it extremely hard to separate signal from noise in the social and legacy media spheres right now. I'm waiting for things to settle.

[seafoam]

Yeah, I used to do that.

Then I realized that it is always a conspiracy theory until it is too late.

If you are potentially impacted, you have to do your own homework, and learn from your mistakes.

[s1artibartfast]

I think it is still a good heuristic that most people should follow.

Step 1: do I need to have an informed opinion

Step 2: Do I need that opinion NOW

Step 3: WHAT do I need to know NOW

There is a vast amount of conspiracy theorizing that people could avoid by following this approach.

[pathartl]

Absolutely. I live in a completely different state and I'm pretty unaffected by this whole tragedy/negligence. I could sit and speculate about what actually happened, but what does that do other than spend energy on something that I'm not actually involved with?

[r00fus]

Well, first off, trains run everywhere. So if it happens in Ohio, it can happen near where you live too.

Workers have been pushing to get a single day of paid leave per month and threatening a strike - but rail bosses have greedily ignored them to give more money to their stockholders (ie, themselves too). Then Congress voted to force a bad deal.

What you could do is to get informed and see the results of this blatant corruption.

[s1artibartfast]

You didn't actually explain why they should care if you aren't worried about train derailment near you.

[s1artibartfast]

Yeah, There is something to be said about genuine curiosity, but in the face of a emotionally changed misinformation blizzard the best option is to take a step back.

If you decide you are curious and actually want to care about railroad safety, dont react to the current crisis, "hit the books" and read some actually informative material about past events.

[pathartl]

100%. It's important to note that doing so also doesn't make you complicit. I have a general disdain for the "do your own research" type of people because often they're not trying to seek out actual education, they're just trying to bolster some sort of preconception they have.

[ncr100]

Step 4: Always carry a towel

/s

[thephyber]

> Then I realized that it is always a conspiracy theory until it is too late.

In one lens, what you say is true. But that is because {true, confirmed, and supported} information comes slow from breaking events. And especially when money / harm is at stake, someone is usually willing to lie or hide the truth.

But viewing what you said through another lens, it can be easy to see this as confirmation bias (or other similar cognitive biases) that underweights all of the times you suspected a conspiracy, but where no causality was proven. As the joke goes, economists have predicted nine out of the last five recessions.

Be careful to remain at least as skeptical of social media posts as you are of companies, governments, the wealthy, and those in power.

Belief in multiple conspiracy theories can erode a person’s ability to remain rational. It seems to me that lots of Flat Earthers, for example, base their belief system more around who they chose to reject, than necessarily being accurate about what specific ideas they choose to believe.

I agree with your last paragraph in the sense that we should all be forever curious and we should spend a lot of trouble to reevaluate our errors in belief. That said, “do your own homework” seems to be misinterpreted by many as “reject all information from official sources”, which is a terrible idea.

[ibejoeb]

For real. This looks really bad. Authorities in the area seem to be playing it like "it's safe until we have evidence that it's not," but who wants to volunteer to become the evidence?

If you're in that area, it'd be prudent to get out if you're able. It's systemic contamination. You don't get to go back in time for a mulligan if it turns out to be bad.

It's always played down. Nobody ever says "we really fucked up this time so you ought to fend for yourself." It's been, what, 10 days? There's barely coverage, and there's no transparency.

There's still lead in the water in Michigan...

[Accujack]

That's because someone is pushing very hard for the after effects of the derailing to be believed catastrophic.

There's zero critical thinking being applied because they (whomever they are) have been building up belief leveraging mistrust of the government, mistrust of corporations, mistrust of science (related to the actual chemicals involved) and false information about the facts of the derailing.

It's very similar to the way that Trump and company brainwashed their followers into almost overthrowing the US government. I won't be surprised to find out it's being done by the same people as before.

[smcl]

Are you:

- weary of these getting downplayed (pron. wee-ree = you are tired of it)

- wary of these getting downplayed (pron. way-ray = you are suspicious of it)

[missedthecue]

I think people combine leery and wary in their mind and end up with weary, which they don't intend. I see it a lot.

In the case of the parent comment however, weary does work.

[whamlastxmas]

The rare occasion that it does work both ways

[nerdponx]

And/or they've seen the word "weary" and assume it's pronounced like "wary", so they spell the word "wary" as "weary".

[smcl]

This is it - if you hear the word "wary" and know the verb "to wear" before encountering the written word "weary" it's totally understandable to assume that is how "wary" is written and to mix them up.

What I wanted to do with my comment is show this without coming across as a mean or pedantic - especially since in the context both work ok. I've no idea if I accomplished that, I probably come across as a dick but I hope I don't.

[BalinKing]

Isn’t “grow weary” a common phrase, though?

[ska]

so is "grow wary", which is the potential problem.

[snozolli]

"Grow wary" isn't a thing.

https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=grow+weary%2Cg...

[mkr-hn]

Always remember to mind the y-axis and scale when looking at and thinking about graphs. They can be deceptive even without meaning to.

https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=grow+wary&year...

[snozolli]

I'm not sure what your point is, since you looked at the vanishingly uncommon phrase alone, giving the false impression of popularity.

[danaris]

Even if that's the case, it's very easy to hear "grow weary" and conflate it with the similar word "wary", coming up with "grow wary" as a malapropism.

[OJFord]

Those pronunciation guides confused me a lot before I scanned back, and read the words themselves (trying to ignore the pronunciations I'd already seen!) - so let me proffer:

- weary 'weir[in a river]-(r)ee'

- wary 'wear[clothes]-(r)ee'

Which just goes to demonstrate how weird and multi-sourced English is, doesn't it. And also maybe we just pronounce these very differently (I'm British) - 'way-ray' is way off to me.

I add the '(r)' because being British (and I believe some of the US) an 'r' following a vowel is under-pronounced (in the opinion of some other accent holders), as in 'wear', but not when followed by another (pseudo)vowel, in 'weary' - but that may not be the case for you.

[madaxe_again]

Where do they pronounce wary way-ray? I’ve always said it “where-y”.

[smcl]

Scotland - and the emphasis is on the first syllable ("wea-" is about 1.5-2x longer than "ry", with the "r" short and rolled). But remember mapping pronunciation of spoken-English to Latin characters is a little bit ambiguous due to accents. For example you use the word "where" to help describe how you pronounce "wary", but for me that "wh" in "where" is slightly aspirated.

[stronglikedan]

Both are valid phrases, and both can be true, even at the same time.

[smcl]

They are! That's why I asked which it was.

[anotherman554]

"I've been seeing content on Tiktok where even 100 miles away they're seeing small dead fish which is apparently according to the folks making the videos a massive red flag."

I wouldn't bother watching a Tiktok video unless the video maker is an environmental professional. Otherwise this is just the blind leading the blind.

Here's a legal definition of environmental professional used by developers when they do a environmental assessment, from Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phase_I_environmental_site_ass...:

Someone with:

a current Professional Engineer's or Professional Geologist's license or registration from a state or U.S. territory with 3 years equivalent full-time experience;

or

a Baccalaureate or higher degree from an accredited institution of higher education in a discipline of engineering or science and 5 years equivalent full-time experience;

or

have the equivalent of 10 years full-time experience.

[dendrite9]

There are plenty of other people who you might expect to give a reasonable update on how nature (in general) is dealing with something like a chemical spill. Gardeners, birders, fishers, even some walkers or runners are outside regularly and tend to have a feel for what is going on in the environment around them. There are people I trust when they say the fish are hiding in the afternoon because the river is too hot and they stop fishing to avoid causing too much stress. If one of them told me they were seeing dead fish more often after an event I would file that away as a mostly trustworthy source of information.

[XorNot]

Tiktok is unverified with no reputation attached to it. People can and do fake things happening on Tiktok for views all the time. The parent comment claims "people have been showing" without linking any of the video evidence, which if it exists which makes this 3rd hand rumor already.

[WheatMillington]

"hey look, here's a bunch of dead fish that weren't here yesterday"

"show me your degree"

[rootusrootus]

"Prove it." would be my first respones. Followed by "Why are they dead?" and "Did you kill them yourself?" and "How often have you found dead fish anywhere?" and "How often do you look?" and "What killed these fish specifically?" etc

I guess falling back to "show me your degree" might be an easy way to answer all those questions at once.

[anotherman554]

I wouldn't assume the dead fish weren't there yesterday just because someone on Tiktok says so, for one thing.

Would you believe a random Tiktoker if they told you Elvis came back to life and camped with Aliens at the local park, the other day? If not, why is a video about dead fish more credible?

[op00to]

How do we know they’re dead from something specific? An expert could tell us the evidence for that. Some dipshit who posts a picture of some dead fish on TikTok can’t.

[meltyness]

tears up your degree for your comments being against "professional ethics"

[vkou]

You are correct about that, but it's also worth noting that there's also no point listening to a corporate press release that's telling you everything is fine, either, because we don't put press officers in prison for lying.

[mauvehaus]

We also usually don't have environmental professionals also working as press officers. If the press person even consulted with an environmental professional, the content has been filtered by both their lack of domain knowledge and their desire to put a good spin on things.

[vkou]

I will say the same thing about an environmental professional on the company payroll.

The problem I'm concerned about isn't ignorance, it is cynical CYA-ism and a giant conflict of interest.

You need a culturally-trusted institution to handle this sort of thing. I am not sure Ohio currently has one that can handle this, so I expect to not know anything until the lawsuits settle over the next decade.

[scarecrowbob]

What are your qualifications for making that statement?

[anotherman554]

Anyone with a high school degree should have been introduced to the concept of authoritative sources.