Analyzing Message in "Why the Scientific Case Against Fracking Keeps Getting Stronger".

In this blog post I will answer questions about the message and purpose of the text as suggested by A Student's Guide to First Year Writing. 

Cupccakes, Raspberri. "Gummy Bear Layer Cake" 4/21/2015 via Flickr.
Attribution-NonCommerical-NoDerivs 2.0 Generic License. 

Relevant 
I think the most relevant bullet points provided in the textbook include  the author trying to: express an idea or opinion and to inform the reader about a topic that is often misunderstood.

The entirety of the text informs the reader of the negative effect that shale fracking causes to the environment. By providing as much information and details as the text does, it is clear that the primary goal of the article is to inform the reader. Also, in the interview from the podcast, the scientist Chris Mooney talks to emphasizes the difference between shale fracking and the other uses of hydraulic fracking.

Irrelevant
Some of the reasons provided in the textbook I believe do not apply to the purpose of my text at all includes: responding to a particular occasion or event.

While the article does use specific examples like the earthquakes in the United States, British Columbia, and England these examples are used as evidence to support the point Mooney is trying to make.

Nuances and Layers 
I feel like there are not nuances and layers that Chris Mooney is trying to present. His argument seems more cut and dry, where he provides scientific fact as evidence. This use of scientific data correlates back to the purpose of the article which is too inform not necessarily to elicit a particular emotion.