I submitted an recent piece from Volume 52 of The Bonehead Compendium (
Arctic Drilling: The Pros) to the web forum
The Skeptics Circle, which was hosted by PZ Myers at
Pharyngula. In this piece I took issue with assertions made by ANWR pro-drilling advocates, Neal Boortz and Noel Ward, who claimed that drilling in the Section 1002 of ANRW would cause no environmental damage and, in Ward's opinion, the wildlife in Alaska actually respond well to human development.
Fellow Skeptic's Circle participant Dean Esmay ridiculed the environmental position that damage would be done and, even if it did happen, the north coastal plain of ANWR is such an inhospitable and barren place that no one should be concerned anyway. He proceeded to claim the intellectual high ground by asserting that an anti-drilling stance is simply the reactionary position of "enviro-demagogues" who, in his opinion, know nothing about the region in question.
The original BHC piece did not explicitly assume an anti-drilling position but, rather, the piece sarcastically pointed out that pro-drilling statements made by Boortz and Ward were self-evidently incorrect. Mr. Esmay's position is, of course, an echo of pro-drilling advocates in general, but while believing he occupied a superior position, he cited not one source that might have supported his assertions. I detail these assertions and the confounding evidence that Mr. Esmay appears to be either unaware of, or choses to wilfully ignore.
This is an extensive article. To continue reading, please click over to
The ANWR Debate