image creditPolar bears are the top predator in the arctic marine ecosystem. But thanks to mankind, these magnificent animals are headed for extinction. 20,000-25,000 Polar bears live in the Arctic, yet if the Arctic continues to warm at twice the rate as the rest of the world, will there be any polar bears around for our grandchildren to enjoy?
10 comment(s):
Mmmm.. Very good..
It's all Al Gore's fault for inventing "global warming".
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/p-j-gladnick/2009/06/28/polar-bear-testimony-suppressed-due-inconvenient-truths
In reality over 38,000 polar bears. The ice cap was at its greatest extent in 50 years last year and is expected to be even greater this year with one of the coldest winters in recen history in the northern hemisphere. How can you push this junk science in your otherwise wonderful blog?
Thanks
Dan
Presurfer, I know you quoted the text in the publication where you got this image from for your post. So this is not your opinion. But it kind of makes it look like this is your opinion as well.
Anyway, bears have been around for millions of years and have adapted well to change in climate. It's known that the polar bear is one of the fastest adapting species there are in the Ursus Family. How do you think they survive in every climate change in the past? And not only that but how did they evolve to be POLAR, if they wouldn't have been afected in the past by warmer periods? Which they have.
I have to say that the more I read about it, the more I think this man-made GW is just a load of BS. The data just doesn't add up.
However, I do think we have to stop polluting water, air and earth, and take care of the environment respecting all living beings. Polar bears included.
Great blog!
Yeah, I agree with these other guys. I was surprised to see this post, given all that's come out about the "total bogusosity" of all the AGW fake science, fake temperatures, fake hockey sticks, etc. etc.
a good text. thansk for article and share.
will there be any polar bears around for our grandchildren to enjoy.
YES.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0503/p13s01-wogi.html?page=1
But global warming is not killing the polar bears of Canada's eastern Arctic, according to one ongoing study. Scheduled for release next year, it says the number of polar bears in the Davis Strait area of Canada's eastern Arctic – one of 19 polar bear populations worldwide – has grown to 2,100, up from 850 in the mid-1980s
http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=1ea8233f-14da-4a44-b839-b71a9e5df868
The petition admits that there is only evidence for deleterious effects from climate change for one polar bear population (Western Hudson Bay [WH]) at the southernmost extreme of polar bear range (Fig. 1). The petition argues that the likelihood of change in other areas is reason enough to find that polar bears should be regarded as a species at risk of imminent extinction. I hope the review considers the precedent set by accepting this argument. Climate change will affect all species to some extent, including humans. If the likelihood of change is regarded as sufficient cause to designate a species or population as “threatened,” then all species around the world are “threatened.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/5664069/Polar-bear-expert-barred-by-global-warmists.html
Dr Mitchell Taylor has been researching the status and management of polar bears in Canada and around the Arctic Circle for 30 years, as both an academic and a government employee. More than once since 2006 he has made headlines by insisting that polar bear numbers, far from decreasing, are much higher than they were 30 years ago. Of the 19 different bear populations, almost all are increasing or at optimum levels, only two have for local reasons modestly declined.
I too must lodge my complaint about this post. While I support the idea that mankind needs to provide better stewardship of our planet (i.e. reducing pollution), I do not subscribe to this lunacy of man-made Global Warming. We should encourage environmentalism by making it economically sound, technologically advanced, and incredibly efficient.
For Global Warming proponents, their case is not helped when they use junk science, falsify the data (or through it out!), or try to persuade us using dishonest methods.
As much as I support the idea of responsible stewardship and reducing pollution, I can not in good conscience support the "Halt Global Warming or Climate Change" Movements. The article this thread linked to is exactly the kind of persuasive marketing based upon flawed or dishonest information intended to promote an ECONOMIC change, rather than an environmental one. Instead of forcing environmentalism on the world through subsidies for the greedy and heavy taxation of the wealthy, why not work with technology to make environmentalism economically viable, cost-effective, and efficient? Already these initiatives are springing up everywhere! Encourage them and leave the Al Gore style self-serving alarmism to those few who falsify the inconvenient truths about Global Warming in order to serve their own personal goals.
As cute as the polar bears were, this article was not worthy to be linked too via the Presurfer.
Post a Comment