Anatomy

Debate Wrap-up Questions

1. When you first read the article did you agree with any part(s) of it? If so which part? The part that I agree with the most is that we need to look for alternative resources, we need renewable energy sources.

2. What part(s) of the article did you not agree with? I completely disagree with the statement of drilling oil not have an impact on the wildlife being minimal. We would be destroying habitats.

3. Were you pro, con or undecided from the beginning of this activity? What was your reasoning for choosing your viewpoint? I was on the con side, the reason I choose this side is that we need to find renewable energy sources, to drill in ANWR would be destroying an untouched land and to me the little oil we would find is not worth that cost.

4. Did you change your viewpoint during the class debate? If so, from which viewpoint to what viewpoint? Why? If not, why? No, I did not change my viewpoint, I was not even swayed in the slightest to change views.

5. What was the most significant point discussed during the debate that supported? In our class debate there was only con and undecided sides. In the article the strongest argument is that we have new methods to remove the oil with less damage to the environment.

6. Will this debate affect the way you view this topic in your life in the future? Yes, if I was able to vote for drilling or against drilling in ANWR, I would vote against.

7. What point posed by the other side(s) of the debate did you feel made an impact on the debate? Why? The simple fact is, drilling is inherently incompatible with wilderness. The roar alone of road building, trucks, drilling, and generators would pollute the wild music of the Arctic, and be as out of place there as it would be in the heart of Yellowstone or the Grand Canyon." This is one of the points posted from the undecided side, to me this is just showing why you should be against oil drilling.

8. What did you read in the article that you were...