Comment of the Day: Clearing the Air Around Clear Lake City

COMMENT OF THE DAY: CLEARING THE AIR AROUND CLEAR LAKE CITY “As a resident of the area, I’m very interested in your comment about ‘knowing what was going on around and within Clear Lake City before Exxon developed it as a community…’ Are you aware of anything specific that might raise concerns, or is this just a baseless consumer scare?” [C.T., commenting on Comment of the Day: Clear Lake City Cleans Up Nicely]

4 Comment

  • My point was not that Clear Lake has lots of environmental issues in common with toxic cesspools like Pasadena, Deer Park, La Porte, and Baytown, etc., and therefore is overvalued.

    It was that Pasadena, Deer Park, La Porte, and Baytown, etc., have lots of environmental issues in common with as nice an area as Clear Lake, and are therefore undervalued.

    You may read into it however you like, of course, but your knee-jerk reaction only goes to further my point that there is a stigma.

  • TheNiche-

    There wasn’t a stigma -at all- until you tried to introduce one by stating that CLC was built on spent oilfields.

    You apologized -grudgingly, of course- for this WHOPPER of an incorrect assertion.

    Now a resident of the area is asking ALL OF US if there is basis for your blanket statement. What’s wrong with that?

    But you just can’t leave it alone. You respond: “…your knee-jerk reaction only goes to further my point…”


    His/her reaction was entirely called-for, given your attack on the truth. I would certainly seek further info, as they did.

    C.T. – Fair question. My answer: It is a baseless consumer scare based only upon the unsupported opinions of a Swamplot poster. No truth – no stigma.

  • Udunno, I presented a portfolio of similarities between CLC and nearby areas that have an environmental-related stigma and concluded that the only reason that the stigma doesn’t also apply to CLC is that the similarities aren’t as aesthetically prominent.

    You showed conclusively that one of those was false, and I made a retraction; I also used your data to point out another problem with CLC that I hadn’t considered before. The correction did not detract from my comparison.

    That you are trying to totally undermine my credibility because I made a single error (it happens!) would be akin to me claiming that you aren’t credible because you just misused the term “blanket statement”.

  • Weak beyond belief….