Extensive research along the gulf shore has uncovered a rise in cancer rates directly linked to consumption of seafood contaminated by the deepwater horizon blowout. how are the pro-drilling and anti-drilling arguments affected by this discovery? a) it supports the pro-drilling argument. b) it supports the anti-drilling argument. c) it is impossible to say how this evidence will impact either argument. d) it weakens the anti-drilling argument and weakens the pro-drilling argument.

The correct answer is option (B) It supports the anti-drilling argument.

Deepwater drilling refers to the process of drilling holes in the deep sea, below the seabeds for the purpose of mining petroleum compounds. Deepwater horizon blowout was an explosion causing a huge oil offshore oilspill in the Gulf of Mexico, making it the largest accidental marine oil spill  disaster in the world. It has a numerous negative effects on the marine life.

The toxic oil and its compounds released into the water during the deepwater horizon blowout has contaminated the water and affected the marine life including the phytoplanktons, zooplanktons, invertebrates, fishes and other mammals of the sea. Highly toxic chemical components such as benzene and polycyclic aromatic compounds have even caused DNA damage and mutations in the marine life. Apart from their mortality, it has also been responsible for reduced growth, diseases, impaired reproduction in the sea fauna. Thus, ingestion of such contaminated seafood grown in contaminated water can be held responsible for the rise in cancer rates. Thereby supporting the anti-drilling arguement.

answer: mannn ion even know fam

explanation: just try asking yoo teacher yo parents or just simply another sight

protist eukaryotes that are not plants, animals, or fungi ("misfits")