I challenge Mickey McVay's assertion in his Feb. 17 Gazette letter ("An 'oily' response") that I impugned his character because of my statement that he could possibly be biased in favor of a new type of gas drilling because he worked in the oil/gas field for 48 years.
I think McVay should ask himself if he showed his own bias by using words such as "greenie weenies," "ilk" and "elitist petroleum experts" to describe environmentalists. And with respect to impugning ones character, I would ask McVay if that was his intention when he made the statement that my accusations are not supported by the facts.
With respect to McVay's assertion that diesel-type fuels are safe, I would direct him to the literally hundreds of peer-reviewed publications in the scientific literature on the toxicity and carcinogenicity of diesel-type fuels and other petroleum distillates. As to his assertion that less than a half a percent of gas wells use diesel-type fuels in the process, I would ask him to check with his friends about the use of "petroleum distillates," which are basically the same thing.
As to McVay's equivocating and leaving open the possibility that the Environmental Protection Agency has not made a final conclusion about the safety of high-volume fracking, I applaud this intent as I was referring to his previous statement about the EPA "has deemed hydraulic fracturing safe." I respect McVay's passion on these issues, and I would like to challenge him to a public debate on the pros and cons of horizontal drilling/high-volume fracking. Since we are both Edmond residents, I am sure a proper venue for such a debate can be found.