Should We Drill in ANWR?

There has been much debate in the past few years over whether or not we should be drilling for oil in ANWR (Arctic National Wildlife Refuge). Many people are oppopsed to it outright for environmental reasons. Other people support it outright for its potential contribution to the economy regardless of cost. However, few people are actually concerned with what impact this would really have.

Ted Stevens of Alaska, the most senior Republican in the Senate, has been fighting to open parts of the refuge to drilling since the early 1980s. Senator Lisa Murkowski, also a republican from Alaska, says, "We need ... to open up the small area of the coastal plain (of the refuge) for oil exploration and development." Their proposed legislation anticipates about $5 billion in federal revenue from oil leases.

According to the Alaskan Wilderness League ANWR is comprised of about 19 million acres. Currently this vast area is protected by the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA), passed in 1980. SEction 1003 states that the “production of oil and gas from the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is prohibited and no leasing or other development leading to production of oil and gas from the [Refuge] shall be undertaken until authorized by an act of Congress.” This sounds like the ban was not meant to be permenant, but is it now the time for drilling to be "authorized by an act of congress"? The Senate did pass a bill allowing ANWR to be drilled in the 90s but it was vetoed by then President Bill clinton.

Critics of the drilling bill offer up alternative methods of energy which could lower our dependence on oil such as wind, solar, hydrogen, and even human feces, however these are not going to impact our oil usage in the immediate future. The main objection to using ANWR for oil is the possible impact to wildlife, such as caribou, which are prevalent in the area. They also point to a U.S. Geological Survey which estimates that the energy that could be gained would be about what the U.S. consumes in six months. They say that only six months worth of oil is not worth it.

Supporters of drilling counter that argument by putting that six months worth of oil in perspective. The six months estimate means all the energy consumed, not just petroleum, so the U.S. Geological Survey is really saying we could get the amount of oil equivalent to about thirty years of imports from Saudi Arabia. That figure is hard to dismiss. They also look to current drilling efforts in Alaska, such as Prudhoe Bay, where the caribou herds have prospered.During debates over the drilling bill Senator Frank Murkowski pointed out in a floor speech that "This area, called ANWR, is pretty big, 19 million acres; 19 million acres is the size of the state of South Carolina... This area [the refuge's coastal plain] is 1.5 million acres out of 19 million acres. The House bill said we could only make a footprint of 2,000 acres. That is what we are asking in the amendment [that] we will offer in this bill – 2,000 acres of 19 million acres. Somebody in South Carolina that has a 2,000-acre farm can relate to that. Gee, only 2,000 acres out of our whole state. The rest of the state will be either a wilderness or a refuge." To put that into perspective the picture to the right shows ANWR as the gray area and the proposed 2000 acres as the red dot in the center.

Everyone agress that we need to diminish our dependence on foreign oil, it is just how to go about it that is up for debate. Perhaps Congress needs to allow a small amount of drilling to take place as a temporary fix and at the same time provide funding so we can actually put into place an alternative form of fuel, not just talk about it happening "some day".

Has the Earth Stopped Wobbling?

An astonishing thing happened on January 8, 2006: The Earth stopped wobbling. At least that is what some people are claiming. Now, this is not something to get freaked out about because even if the wobble has stopped it has little immediate impact on our lives (I'm sure none of you even noticed we weren't wobbling).

During the broadcast of Coast to Coast AM on January 28, 2006, Lloyd Stewart Carpenter said that the Earth's wobble had paused. Agreeing with this theory, Michael Mandeville gives two possible explanations on his website for the cause of this change, but he admits that there is no evidence as of yet to support his theories. A Wikipedia article claims, "This is however completely unfounded speculation as the actual recorded data shows no indication that the wobble has stopped." There is no mention of stopping or pausing on the website of the International Earth Rotation & Reference Systems Service where Michael Mandeville claims to get his data from.

I feel that it is worth noting that many of the websites claiming the Earth has stopped wobbling seem to be related to paranormal discussions in one way or another. The "Coast to Coast AM" program is airing an interview this Friday relating to John Titor, self proclaimed time traveler from the year 2036. He supposedly visited our time between November, 2000 through March, 2001. Unfortunately for him he missed the Time Travel Convention at MIT on May 7, 2005. He probably chose not to come back in 2005 due to the Civil War he said we were going to have...

Whether the Earth's wobble (aka Chandler's Wobble) has paused or not it is interesting to think of what could happen if it does.

The significance of a pause in Chandler's Wobble is that it is tied into claims that the Earth's poles may shift sometime in the near future. Most scientists agree that it is at least possible and that it has happened in the past, but that's hardly a reason to start looking at real estate in Antarctica. Unless of course you're into psychics and the like, in which you case you may want to check out several sites including Edgar Cayce's A.R.E., Ruth Montgomery's 1979 Earth Changes Prophecy, and the best one - Zeta Talk - where aliens (the Zetas) are "assisting this planet and it’s people in the transformation from 3rd to 4th density. This Transformation is happening now, and will be completed sometime after the passage of the 12th Planet, and the resulting Pole Shift that this passage will cause."

There are two ways in which a shift in the Earth's poles could occur:

An axial shift in which the Earth’s crust slides around its molten core. This type of shift would change the location of the planets rotational axis relative to the land masses. It is said that this could happen by a few degrees or by many degrees. The Artic could move to the equator and the Amazon might move to one of the poles. Obviously the effect of such changes would be catastrophic. Aside from sunny beaches becoming frozen tundra, icebergs could melt, and major earthquakes/volcanoes could result.

A shift of the magnetic poles without affecting the rotational axis of the Earth. Contrary to how it's named, the North Pole is not actually magnetic north. This magnetic pole is not fixed and can move. Some scientists feel fairly certain that it has shifted by as much as 180 degrees several times in the past. This type of shift would most likely have much less affect on life on Earth (aside from boyscouts getting lost in the woods), although the homing instincts of some animals could be affected (such as migratory birds).

Of course, there has been no evidence to suggest this will for sure happen, let alone anytime soon, but rather that it is "possible".

Contrary to Public Opinion

Public opinion polls are often referenced in news reports, but not always with specifics. Often times reporters will say things like "public support for the war in Iraq has dropped over the last month," or "prayer in school is bad because it forces the opinion of a few people on the rest." With the disclaimer that surveys have many ways of being done inaccurately and public policy should not be based solely on polling which is often done on a very small sample of the population, here are a few statistics (with numbers!) that contradict what the media would lead you to believe about Americans' beliefs:

In July, 2005 the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press conducted a survey under the direction of Princeton Survey Research Associates International among a nationwide sample of 2,000 adults, 18 years of age or older. In this study they found that 67% of the people polled felt that liberals have gone too far in trying to keep religion out of schools and government, while only 45% felt that conservatives have gone too far in trying to impose their religious values on our country.

In addition, 64% favored teaching Creationism along with evolution in public schools. 62% said that President Bush mentions faith and prayer the right amount and only 26% felt that politicians in general express their views too much. Two-thirds of democrats, independents, and republicans feel that faith-based groups should be allowed to receive government funding to provide social services, and that houses of worship help solve social problems. This same study found that, while not necessarily supporting the Iraq war, 60% of the US believe that we should promote Democracy globally.

A November, 1997 Gallup Poll found that only 10% of Americans believe that God had no part in the creation/development of life, while 44% believe in a "Creation without Evolution" history.

The First Amendment Center and the American Journalism Review released the results of a poll in August, 2003 in which they found that 68% of adults believe that teachers who include "one nation under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance were not violating the principle of separation of church and state, and 73% feel that the pledge, including the "under God" phrase, is "primarily a statement related to the American political tradition." Posting the Ten Commandments in government offices was favored by 60%.

A Fox News/Opinion Poll from November, 2005 found that 59% of Americans feel that Christianity is under attack in the United States today. 83% believe that nativity scenes should be allowed on public property. The motto "In God We Trust" on currency and coins is supported by an overwhelming 93%, and the phrase "under God" in the pledge by 90%.