Dazed and Confussed
I just got out of my speech 1050 class (trying to fill that CI requirement). Today we had the assignment of giving a persuasive speech. It was definantly interesting. Of the 40 class members around one third talked about the environment in one way or another. The most interesting was a talk about why we should not drill in ANWR. I was amazed because every fact presented was quoted from the Serria club. Listening to the speech you would have thought that drilling would cause the entire collapse of the ecosystem there. One fact that was mentioned was that we could only get enough oil for the equivalence for one days use in the U.S. I have heard conflicting assessments. The guy who gave the speech is not a hippie tree huger either, he is a yokal cowboy, he seems like a really good, normal guy with no agenda. That is the most disturbing part of the evening. So I guess my question is how are we to make policy that is effective and realistic if the only information that is spread around out there is subjective and only used to persuade people to one side of the debate.? Don't we need objective facts to make decisions? Or maybe the facts that I have are wrong because I got them from Jim Hansen and the Cato institute? I am up for enlightenment.
posted by Anonymous @ 11:18 PM
2 Comments:
Jared,
Drilling in ANWR will have virtually no effect on our economy. I did a research paper on it, and used states from the U.S. Geological Survey. Preparation for drilling (technological, not environmental red tape) would take about 10 years- so it's not a solution to current problems.
Drilling in ANWR would do virtually nothing to offset our dependence on foreign oil and would reduce the price of gas for consumers for only pennies on each gallon.
http://www.kolob.org/anwr.html
Sarah brings up a good point, it sounds better to save polar bears than to drive a car.
Ill use my father as an example, he was a hippy. Not that he believed or cared at all about the 'hippy' cause, he proudly admits he was a hippy solely for the girls. It’s really sounds like such a noble cause.
Its not that people actually look at the evidence (I am not saying in any opinion about Vietnam either way) they are usually after some sort of gratification or acceptance. If you say you don’t care about ANWR and let them build there is just sound good. Saving the environment at the moment is a good noble thing to say. Few will ridicule you, because they really don’t know either. Society at any given moment has certain more acceptable views and right now the ‘Birkenstock’ view is more socially accepted.
Post a Comment
<< Home