Gasland incorrectly attributes several cases of water well contamination in Colorado to oil and gas development when our investigations determined that the wells in question contained biogenic methane that is not attributable to such development.
Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission
[Gasland was] fundamentally dishonest … a deliberately false presentation for dramatic effect … [T]his movie certainly contributes to more public misunderstanding.
John Hanger - Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection
[A]n overwrought polemic...Gasland II is chock-full of errors and falsehoods…more middling art than serious science.
The American Interest
‘Gasland Part II’ runs longer than the earlier installment, but ultimately it has less to say.
Indiewire
Obviously, Gasland has a lot of pretty dramatic events. I think where I would differ with Josh is his conclusions that those problems are all related to fracking.
Jim Marston - Environmental Defense Fund
[U]nabashed and one-sided bashing of the oil and gas industry... The relatively esoteric issue of fugitive methane gives way to some really outrageous statements.
Alan J. Krupnick - Resources for the Future
‘Gasland’ presents a carefully crafted point of view. Not everything in the film’s narration is precisely accurate. Not all of its subjects are completely credible. Some major components of the story are missing.
Harrisburg (Pa.) Patriot-News
The problem with Gasland is that it is entertainment that actually is ‘science denial’ and thus not fitting as an educational documentary or journalism.
Daily Kos
Mr. Fox works in the first-person style of colorful mudslingers like Michael Moore... The film runs to two hours and its anecdotal, hopscotch style starts to wear.
The New York Times
Whatever your political sympathies, you can’t ignore the evidence that ‘Gasland’ is pure propaganda, not a documentary.
The Washington Examiner
“
‘Gasland’ presents a carefully crafted point of view. Not everything in the film’s narration is precisely accurate. Not all of its subjects are completely credible. Some major components of the story are missing.
Harrisburg (Pa.) Patriot-News
Obviously, Gasland has a lot of pretty dramatic events. I think where I would differ with Josh is his conclusions that those problems are all related to fracking.
Jim Marston - Environmental Defense Fund
The problem with Gasland is that it is entertainment that actually is ‘science denial’ and thus not fitting as an educational documentary or journalism.
Daily Kos
‘Gasland Part II’ runs longer than the earlier installment, but ultimately it has less to say.
Indiewire
[Gasland was] fundamentally dishonest … a deliberately false presentation for dramatic effect … [T]his movie certainly contributes to more public misunderstanding.
John Hanger - Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection
[U]nabashed and one-sided bashing of the oil and gas industry... The relatively esoteric issue of fugitive methane gives way to some really outrageous statements.
Alan J. Krupnick - Resources for the Future
[A]n overwrought polemic...Gasland II is chock-full of errors and falsehoods…more middling art than serious science.
The American Interest
Mr. Fox works in the first-person style of colorful mudslingers like Michael Moore... The film runs to two hours and its anecdotal, hopscotch style starts to wear.
The New York Times
Whatever your political sympathies, you can’t ignore the evidence that ‘Gasland’ is pure propaganda, not a documentary.
The Washington Examiner
Gasland incorrectly attributes several cases of water well contamination in Colorado to oil and gas development when our investigations determined that the wells in question contained biogenic methane that is not attributable to such development.
Gasland tried to scare the public about fracking, but what are the facts? One woman from Pennsylvania decided to find out – for her family, for her community, for herself.
