The Absurdness of Greenhouse Gases and Associations with Environment

[Chalenge]

I thnk if there were no polar bears at all there would be lots of seals which would then starve more readily and then there would be more food for sharks and killer whales... but if the argument is that the ice isnt forming anymore and the bears cant get to the seals... wont the seals go to shore?

Also I think the reason that most polar bears are seen with scars these days is because there are too many of them and they are territorial animals and fight each other. So yes we should take them off the protected species list and eat a few each year. 

[trax1]

I thnk if there were no polar bears at all there would be lots of seals which would then starve more readily and then there would be more food for sharks and killer whales... but if the argument is that the ice isnt forming anymore and the bears cant get to the seals... wont the seals go to shore?

Also I think the reason that most polar bears are seen with scars these days is because there are too many of them and they are territorial animals and fight each other. So yes we should take them off the protected species list and eat a few each year. 

Well the thing with the ice and the seals is that polar bears get most of their seals by stand near their breathing holes in the ice that they have to come up to to breath, without the ice there's no breathing holes for them to stand by.

As for the territory thing, it's not that there are so many of them that there running into each others territory, it's that with less ice there's less territory.

[Chalenge]

That doesnt explain why the Eskimo (Inuit) are saying that the Polar Bear populations are at an all time high. The 'so-called' experts (American scientific community) have no information on historic numbers and rely heavily on what the people up north can tell them. All the talk about 'rapid sea ice declines' is a bunch of "algore-ism" if you ask me.

[MORAY37]

That doesnt explain why the Eskimo (Inuit) are saying that the Polar Bear populations are at an all time high. The 'so-called' experts (American scientific community) have no information on historic numbers and rely heavily on what the people up north can tell them. All the talk about 'rapid sea ice declines' is a bunch of "algore-ism" if you ask me.

Chalenge, please feel free to discern the difference between "locally abundant" and "abundant".  An endangered species can be "locally abundant" and "critically endangered" at the same time.  The local abundance of polar pears around settlements at this time has a lot to do about where the bears get their food.  Namely, from said settlements, where they scavenge, since they've been pushed back onto land.

Feel free to think for yourself, and not let either science or eskimos tell you what is right.  Critical thinking might help.  Asking yourself, "why are the bears concentrated around habitations?"  might lead you down a different path than "American Science is wrong."

Also, seals calve in the ice floes to keep away from land based predators.  If they haul up on land, most seal species only do it on barren, predator-free islands.  This might be due to the inability of a seal to move with any sense of purpose on land whatsoever. Polar Bears evolved to take advantage of this, and moved out into the ice seasonally, where no other land predators can go.  This is also why the ice is important.

You're right no difference ...    No difference at all.  I mean, they just make up all those differences in ice cover. (Snow cover (WHITE) wasn't analyzed in 1980, BTW)  Murmansk....0% sea ice now.  Closed in 1980.   North Sea completely free now....Norwegian Sea open...
No ice cover in Scandinavia now...Baffin Bay almost closed in 1980.... completely free of ice now. Seriously.   

[33Vortex]

Interesting article:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cif-green/2009/nov/23/global-warming-leaked-email-climate-scientists

The email he write there is fake though, it's a sort of a absurd satirical joke of his to prove that he's a believer.

[gyrene81]

Kill cows!!! Kill the pigs!!! All that belching and farting is a significant contributor to increased greenhouse gases...they're causing global warming all over the globe.

Environmental scientists...useful as a screen door on a submarine.

[Simba]

"The stunts they pull in Britain are stupid."

Ho, hum, there's always some xenophobic plonker out to spoil international relations, eh?

From the country that gave the USA penicillin, the jet engine and the cavity magnetron, I salute you.

 

[Chalenge]

Sorry Moray the numbers are the numbers and concerning this subject I would take the Eskimo opinion over your 'elite snobs of education.' Scientists just recently got busted for fudging the records to push their agendas and gain research money. Guess you didnt get that report. 

Note that no one in America even cared to count polar bears (not pears) until it suited their 'climate change' agenda.

[MORAY37]

Sorry Moray the numbers are the numbers and concerning this subject I would take the Eskimo opinion over your 'elite snobs of education.' Scientists just recently got busted for fudging the records to push their agendas and gain research money. Guess you didnt get that report.  

Note that no one in America even cared to count polar bears (not pears) until it suited their 'climate change' agenda.

There are good scientists and bad ones.  Like good drivers and bad, good pilots and bad... etc ad infinitum.

If you think that changes with a PhD, you aren't as good a judge of the human experience as you might think.

I haven't gone over what manipulations they forced into their data sets, or even if they did at all.  I honestly wouldn't be surprised in either direction.  It happens, I won't deny it.  Sometimes smoothing the points makes a better, more understood "picture" of the data set.  Other times, there is a predetermined agenda, like Big Tobacco's "science" push in the 80's.

The funny thing about it, if true, is that they had to mess with the initial raw data, otherwise every peer-reviewed paper they had would have been thrown in their face.  The worst thing about scientists, is that we stab each other in the back over "bad methodology".  Your first bad paper gets laughed at.  Your second, and you're cleaning tanks at the public aquarium.  

I've seen careers ruined with one bad paragraph in one peer-reviewed paper. 

[Chalenge]

Actually Im a pretty good judge of character and I can smell snake a mile away. Most of the talks about 'large numbers near settlements are just as disingenuous as the discrediting of the Scientific Journal done just to put forward the climate change agenda. Of course Polar Bear populations are going to thrive where food is readily available and Polar Bears of course are scarce on the ice which (when it forms) is the one place they can get food. In warmer times the land animals normally in that climate are readily available and not buried many feet underground where they would normally be burrowed. So yes the hunting of seals on sea ice might decline when there is no ice but also the Polar Bear does not have to go there to find food. In the remote regions Polar Bears have always been scarce because the very food they need is scarce and the presence of man in that environment only helps the animal become more numerous.

The climate change debate is a huge farce and you know it.

[E25280]

(Image removed from quote.)

So, where is your picture from 1990?  1970?  1960?  The years in between?

How about during the 1930s?  During the Medieval warming period?

Last ice age?

When Dinosaurs roamed the earth?


Point being, polar ice expands and contracts, shifts and moves, all the time, and has done so throughout history.  Just because we finally have some satelites in a position to capture this fact doesn't mean it hasn't happened before, or that it won't happen again, or that there is anything that can or should be done about it.

[MORAY37]

Note that no one in America even cared to count polar bears (not pears) until it suited their 'climate change' agenda.

That's funny.  The "1994 Conservation Plan for the Polar Bear in Alaska" says absolutely nothing about climate change.  And it makes only a single offhanded reference to "global warming" under habitat degradation.

Seems someone was counting the bears without an agenda.

Also, these guys were doing a lot of work. All publications long before "climate change".... and there's a few hundred more.

 

Parovschikov 1964, 1968; Uspenskii
1965; Vibe 1967; Lentfer 1974a, 1983; Stirling and Smith 1975;Lentfer 1982;Lono 1970;Harington 1968; Jonkel et al. 1972; Lentfer and Hensel 1980;Lono 1970; Stirling and Smith
1975; Lentfer et al. 1980; Ramsay and Stirling 1982; Kolenosky and Prevett 1983).

http://alaska.fws.gov/fisheries/mmm/polarbear/pdf/THEFINALplan.pdf

[Chalenge]

Moray the whole point Im trying to get you to see isnt the need of the bear itself to have a clean or 'excellent' habitat but the 'need' of a management group to have an agency funded and provided for when there is no need for the group! In fact the bear would be better off eating the group than anything the group will ever do for the bear. I would be willing to bet the bears fare worse under management than they would under natural selection and yet it will cost millions for us to slowly kill them by committee instead of just shooting them and enjoying the meat like REAL MEN should.

[stroker71]

So, where is your picture from 1990?  1970?  1960?  The years in between?

How about during the 1930s?  During the Medieval warming period?

Last ice age?

When Dinosaurs roamed the earth?


Point being, polar ice expands and contracts, shifts and moves, all the time, and has done so throughout history.  Just because we finally have some satelites in a position to capture this fact doesn't mean it hasn't happened before, or that it won't happen again, or that there is anything that can or should be done about it.

QFT!  Humans are but a blink in the history of this planet.  Recorded history is a very very small fraction of that history.  I am sure we impact the environment but not the only factor.  Besides 99% of all species that started out on this planet are extinct! 

[straffo]

So, where is your picture from 1990?  1970?  1960?  The years in between?

How about during the 1930s?  During the Medieval warming period?

Last ice age?

When Dinosaurs roamed the earth?


Point being, polar ice expands and contracts, shifts and moves, all the time, and has done so throughout history.  Just because we finally have some satelites in a position to capture this fact doesn't mean it hasn't happened before, or that it won't happen again, or that there is anything that can or should be done about it.

It look we have lost the 1930 and medieval pictures .