1) So, you were unable to prove her claim false that a small minority were opposed to fracking, right? Clearly the poll you reference spells out that it is a minority. Whether it is small or large is a value judgment. You argue it is large, she argues it is small. It all depends what you are comparing it to. Regardless, to say that she is dishonest based on her claim is, well, dishonest.
You also were unable to prove that the statement that a majority of people want the benefits fracking can provide. No surprise there, as it is an absolutely valid statement and there is no proof that people do not want these benefits.
2) Finally. You have admitted that your second claim is false. If you go back to your original claim where Ms. Engel represented that industry had objected to the limits, you had this to say about her claim, "She does seem a bit loose with the facts (to put it kindly)." You have changed your tune now. You admit "...because there is no evidence that they did or did not object." That's the point, Refracktion, you don't know if they objected or not so you cannot call Ms. Engel a liar when you have zero proof to support it.
AJL Price at posting:
14.0¢ Sentiment: Buy Disclosure: Not Held
(20min delay)