Bishop Hill International Polar Bear Day
Feb 27, 2015 Climate: WG2 Today is International Polar Bear Day 2015 and, according to a new GWPF briefing paper, this should be the occasion for considerable quantities of champagne being consumed. This is because polar bears are doing just fine:
On almost every measure, things are looking good for polar bears. Scientists are finding that they are well distributed throughout their range and adapting well to changes in sea ice. Health indicators are good and they are benefiting from abundant prey. It really is time for the doom and gloom about polar bears to stop.
Of course in green circles this success story is brushed under the carpet and what should be a day of celebration becomes a day for morbid calls for action on climate change and, no doubt, the remodelling of the capitalist economy.
But at the end of the day, I think people are going to notice that the bears seem to be doing rather well, and that this represents another failed prediction of the scientivist community.
Reader Comments (34)
That we even here about this is due to the persistent and single minded determination of the author, Susan Crockford who, almost alone, fought against the scientific corruption and deceit consequent on the polar bear being chosen for iconic status by the Global Warming Nomenclature. I take my hat off to her. Also, how, but for the sceptic blogs, would her work ever seen the light of day. I expect University of Victoria BC will soon be getting a letter from Senator Grijalva.
Don't forget Dr. Mitchell Taylor http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/06/27/warmists-deny-copenhagen-access-to-polar-bear-scientist/
The environment persists in getting it wrong, the models clearly show that the Polar Bear is in danger of extinction. Read Matt Briggs recent posts where he is repeating Feynmans famous aphorism, if the data doesn't support the theory then the theory is wrong.
Someone should remind the WWF of this, as they continue to transmit adverts on commercial television lamenting the decline of the polar bear population, and encouraging us to send them money to adopt one, who (or which) will, apparently forward a cuddly model of itself to us, and follow it up with regular reports as to how it's doing.
Section 5 of the paper is especially worth a read. Low levels of summer ice is better for the seals and therefore better for the polar bears.
We really must do something about this woman. She could cost us a fortune!
My apologies for the nit picking diogenese2, but don't give the fool more power than he already thinks he has.
Even the BBC mentioned it on the news, but I can't find anything about it on the BBC website.
Another example of why I think WWF stands for "Waiting for the Wheels to Fall off"
Phillip Bratby
Harrabin busy on another Arctic story:-
UK Arctic ambassador called for by House of Lords
I can think of one or two that might like to go cuddle a bear or three
The Guardian has a nice photo-feature on it, with suitably doom-laden 'expert' comments alongside. No reader comments allowed of course. Just like the article claiming the 'slowdown' (aka Pause) is caused by, wait for it...natural cycles. Gosh, who'd ever of thought?
http://www.theguardian.com/uk/environment
Greenpeace and WWF have made so much money out of false claims, concerning the imminent extinction of the polar bear. Do the Advertising Standards Authority know?
If anyone needs suncream, specially formulated for polar bears, along with puncture proof liferafts,, please contact Greenpeace and WWF. They have large stocks, that are no longer required, due to unforeseen circumstances.
Well if they had not adapted to ice changes or food species distribution they would no longer be with us.
Well done the bears for ignoring climate alarmism.
Expensive money grubbing TV adverts to help save salaries at Greenpeace and WWF, will now feature polar bear plight due to excess cold, and ice that is too thick.
They need special saws for cutting holes through ice, and thermal underwear. Without them, they will all die, as they will not be able to adapt to a rapidly cooling climate.
Send money, or just champagne, pate de fois gras, and caviar, direct to WWF and Greenpeace, so they can enrich their diet.
Of all the millions made by Greenpeace and WWF, does anyone know of a single polar bear that was saved by Greenpeace and WWF?
"Section 5 of the paper is especially worth a read. Low levels of summer ice is better for the seals and therefore better for the polar bears."
Feb 27, 2015 at 9:52 AM | Registered Commenter Mike Jackson
This may interest, an article at the Polar Bear Alley blog which draws attention to the varying Seal populations coupled with ice extent and the impacts on Bear populations during the 90s as a result.
----
"The tricky part is that heavy ice was not necessarily good for seals and the combination of the rain event one year, then heavy ice and a longer hunting season two years later, meant that seals were fairly scarce in the early 1990s. The population did not recover for another ten years.
So, the western Hudson Bay bears were under a bit of pressure in the 1990s, lower seal population plus a cohort of bears that could outcompete bears born in mid-decade. Seal hunting season was shorter than the 1980s but conditions were still okay. Then, the decade finished as it had started, an epic disaster for the western Hudson Bay bears.
In both 1998 and 1999, the bay was pretty much open by the first week of July and the bears were onshore in June, over a month early. Spring is a critical seal hunting season and early breakup of even just one week let alone a whole month can be fatal for some bears, especially the very young and very old. Two consecutive seasons of disaster pushed this population over the edge and after twenty years of relatively stability, this population dropped by almost one quarter over a relatively short period of time.
As nature is wont to do, things kind of balanced themselves out. The increased open water season and decreased numbers of bears seems to have given the ringed seal population a chance to rebound. By the early 2000s, seals were abundant and ice conditions began to stabilize."
http://polarbearalley.com/blog/2015/01/17/polar-bear-blog-the-roaring-nineties/
I've never been able to work out how, by sending £3 to WWF, the polar bears (as opposed to WWF coffers) would actually benefit.
Is it a case of a WWF employee sidling up to a polar bear and whispering: 'Here's three quid, mate - go and buy yourself a nice fish supper...'...?
sherlock1
If you can tell me where to get any sort of fish supper for three quid I'd like to hear from you!
Greenpeace (even if you didn't like their methods, which I didn't) at least used to put their bodies on the line (to their own personal danger on occasion) to draw attention to the plight of wild life.
WWF (the clue is in the name) has always been more about making money than getting their hands dirty.
They are the biggest bunch of environmental hypocrites on earth. At the very time they were starting to bleat about reducing carbon footprints they were busy promoting their Antarctic cruises for the well-heeled. If I recall the details correctly the cost was north of £20K for three weeks, limited to 85 people and with a carbon footprint bigger than 85 average Americans for a year, or some such figure.
OG
"follow it up with regular reports as to how it's doing."
I wonder if the report will include an obituary of the WWF bear-botherer who went to find out..?
My favourite polar bear reaction to the WWF:
"For when a single facepalm isn’t enough"
Thanks Andrew.
Note that as a Canadian, Grijalva has no power over me. The University of Victoria has already told Greenpeace to fish in other waters.
Thanks to those of you who have given me support - all I want is to see the polar bear science without the global warming spin. You know, some straightforward biology.
Susan Crockford
It will be a great relief to the polar bears, not to have to worry about sea ice being smashed up by ice breakers, carrying alarmists on trips, to see the horrors of sea ice breaking up.
Maybe the noise of the icebreakers, breaking ice, was what scared the bears away, leading to the false assumption, by scientists cruising in the Arctic, that the bears were vanishing.
If I was a polar bear, I would have wanted to vanish, and not be seen. I expect those dart guns hurt like hell, but no one has ever thought to ask a polar bear. Shouldn't Greenpeace try them out on themselves? Some of their staff may be able to express an informed opinion on the tranquilising drugs aswell.
According to David Bellamy the polar bears recovered once the Eskimos stopped shooting them.
sherlock 1 and Mike Jackson
Give a polar bear a fish and chip supper, and he may eat for a day.
Give a polar bear a fishing rod, and he can use it as a toothpick afterwards.
Give a polar bear a hunting rifle, and he can eat loads of seals, and live a happy life, without being molested by Greenpeace activists.
Susan Crockford, your work is appreciated. Keep it up.
Thank you!
GC
Sour and heavily inflected reporting of the Times article on the Beeb's Today prog this morning at 6.10am, referencing Susan Crockford and "according to a report from a group which disputes mainstream thinking on climate change":
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b053c3nt
At 10:30 on the counter.
Ah Old Goat, more bears means more individuals to adopt, means more money in the coffers dontcha know!
Those bears are obviously in the pay of Big Oil. :)
Heartfelt thanks to Dr Crockford, who has waged a long and sometimes lonely battle against junk science.
"The University of Victoria has already told Greenpeace to fish in other waters."
That's the most cheerful news I've heard for some time. Thank you, Susan (and for your 'courage under fire').
Susan Crockford (2:31 PM) -
"[A]ll I want is to see the polar bear science without the global warming spin."
Unfortunately, the grass is always greener when fertilized by global warming.
Another green lie nailed.
How many times does this have to happen before our supine "Government" and media wake up to the fact they have and still are being conned by a green mafia?
For those who missed it, or worth repeating, Dr. Susan Crockford has the blog polarbearscience.
"Today’s the day to celebrate the resilience and adaptability of polar bears."
"Not only did the record-breaking sea ice low of 2012 have virtually no effect on the bears but in 2014, only two subpopulations were classified as “declining” or “likely declining” – down from seven in 2010 and four in 2013 (see map below)."
http://polarbearscience.com/2015/02/27/international-polar-bear-day-polar-bears-in-the-news-this-week/
"Twenty good reasons not to worry about polar bears"
http://polarbearscience.com/2015/02/19/twenty-good-reasons-not-to-worry-about-polar-bears/
In recent ads Greepiss has switched to the Svalbard polar bears. Maybe they have found one place that they can lie about and no-one will notice. BUT didn't a student get chewed up on Svalbard last year?
Furthermore, on the Beeb tv News this morning, a piece to the effect that - get ready for this - giant pandas are INCREASING in numbers..!
Cue interview with a guy from WWF - who was OF COURSE at pains to point out that, despite this being good news, the job wasn't done and therefore further contributions to WWF would be gratefully received....
Moment of mild hilarity between the two news 'anchors' after the interview, when they discovered that counting is done by analysing the pandas' - er - 'pellets'...
Anyway - isn't it a bugger when all your carefully- crafted doom-mongering gets blown out of the water by reality..? Any time now we could discover that, despite increasing levels of CO2, global temperatures haven't increased... Oh, that too, eh..?
Dr Susan Crockford,
Thanks for your efforts over the years to allow rationality a chance to survive in the Arctic. An ever-increasing number of the public are sussing the so-called 'environmentalists', whose raison d'etre appears to be gaining funds, whether desreved or not.
More power to your elbow, Madame!