Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: hmaly who wrote (134759)	3/22/2001 7:11:30 AM
From: stribe30	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1571133

Harrry said: "Didn't you forget to mention that the whales wouldn't be able to breath through the 5000 mile wide oil slick and that Madonna's breasts just might stop lactating because of her concern. I know I am really concerned about that. " I am well aware of your callous disregard for the environment in the name of making money and wasting even more resources for short-term gain.. but this tops all others.. the point is.. there is so much risk in putting an oil platform up there, its not in my opinion worth it... nor a lot of experts. Remember, once an oil rig gets put up there.. it'll be hard to remove, or to stop any environmental disaster that might result because of it, even when found that us "tree-huggers" were right all along. Why take a chance on that? As for the poll #'s and the good of the people of Alaska... I believe they are a part of the USA.. and the USA as a whole has to decide whether or not its for the good of the nation or not. At the moment, the poll #'s show that people in the USA in the majority think this is a bad idea to drill there. Alaska also isnt particularly known as putting environmental interests up front - their fishermen have been accused of overfishing the Pacific Salmon Run; they have caused damage to the Prudhoe Bay area with their oil drilling there.... and now, in the name of profit, they want to drill in an environmentally sensitive area. And so what if their senator supports it? That doesnt surprise me one bit.. most of his major backers are probably the oil cartel.. And again I ask.. is it not intellectually dishonest for a site to claim Americans support oil drilling in Alaska on 5 month poll when new polls show support is now dropping? As for the caribou - there obviously is some conflict in the stories.. as all the other articles I sent TGPT seem to suggest that caribou herds have decreased since Alaska first started to drill there in the other areas.. and that this particular herd would be dramatically affected by this ANWR drilling. As for the federal park and the Mackenzie Delta.. obviously Canada felt that the park area was in a major caribou migration route and particularly sensitive... hence the designation - by a pro-business, pro western government no less. The Mackenzie Delta.. I am not sure why they decided to drill there.. perhaps they felt there wasnt as much threat to the caribou in that area - perhaps they were ignorant at the time and went ahead with it anyways.. I'll certainly try to find some info on the topic and get back to you.