makes sense is if you accept the premise josh is putting forward, that it is new and unregulated and scotsic. hydrolic fracturing has not to do with drilling. it is post drilling. we are talking about something that takes place for 72 hours or a week. it's been done 1.1 million times, and the epa has looked at 0h is over a half times in 200 had, the late '90s, and 2010 when pai folks came to the senate and asked are you familiar with a single indense in which it hydrolic fracturing was proven to contaminate ground water, and the answer was, no, no. we support the idea of in new study. if it is science based and peer reviewed, it will prove it's a safe pros tess. >> you have a tough uphill