You do know that 'footprint' argument you put forth is misleading as it refers to an unrealistic minimization of the actual size of the area impacted

Nice try, but your 'argument' is based on deception

Take the North Slope development so far

Using your deceptive means of measuring impact, the North Slope development can be said to be only 12,000 acres
But remember, that's a deceptive measure based on a dishonest criteria

The actual North Slope development measures in right around 640,000 acres or 1000 square miles

All you have to do is measure in the rest of the development your 'measure' leaves out

Airports, roads, gravel pits, etc etc etc, all the extraneous development your 'measure' conveniently omitted.

That deceptive bit of dishonesty called the 'small footprint argument' has been around since before Palin and she tried and failed with it too, ….eight or nine years ago.



Those are the footsteps you're following in, ..Sarah Palin, the queen of garbled dishonesty.