General discussion


Two reports reporting on polar bears and Global Warming.Which one is right?

By sleepin'dawg ·

Time to separate the wheat from the chaff; which report is right??? they can't both be right nor can both be wrong; so which is it???

Bet we're going to hear the tree huggers, or should I say bear huggers, spewing and sputtering about this one. I wonder what Neil's comments will be?

Dawg ]:)

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

Like all forms

by Michael Jay In reply to Two reports reporting on ...

of life, the polar bears are doomed. As are we all. But for the meantime I think that they will thrive in an environment rich with food and all the need to survive.

There are many more spices that have become extinct than are alive right now.

Which story is right? It is indeed hard to tell.

For me it is enough to try to care for my family and grandkids and not to worry about things out of my control.

That global warming is real is a given, what is the cause? Mans contamination of the earth? Solar warming? Outdoor cooking? Auto raceing? Industry? Power production? Methane from cows? Or is it just that climate changes. I am not smart enough to know any of this stuff.

But while you are waiting for the fallout I just figured I should chime in.

Best to ya Dawg

Collapse -


by TonytheTiger In reply to Like all forms

There are many more spices that have become extinct than are alive right now.

It would take an immensely irresponsible scientist to make such a claim.

Since there are new species still being discovered, it is impossible to know how many there are.

Collapse -

Then Indeed I am an Immensely Irresponsible Scientist

by Michael Jay In reply to Really?

and I know how to spell it.
The earth has been here for more than 4 billion years, life has come and gone in many different configurations. In the future many new life forms will develop.

This is an ever changing ecosystem where they even let TechRebulic members in.

There is no way to determine just how many life forms have previously existed on earth, but I do stand by my statement that as we humans have only been on the planet for a short time clearly we cannot be sure of what has passed before.

But without scientific proof, 4 billion years is a lot of time for many creatures to develop and go extinct.

I do not know, Tony please provide proof positive that there are more living than dead.

Sorry but I cannot provide proof positive that there are more dead than alive.

Best to ya

Collapse -

That's all I was saying

by TonytheTiger In reply to Then Indeed I am an Immen ...

Sorry but I cannot provide proof positive that there are more dead than alive.

Collapse -

No Problem

by Michael Jay In reply to That's all I was saying

We cannot know the unknown.

But yet we strive to know it.

Best to ya

Collapse -

No idea

by Tony Hopkinson In reply to Two reports reporting on ...

If you want to buy me a plane ticket. I'll nip up and count them. However I might not be considered the most unbiased assessor, even though I don't take bear hugging literally.

No seals about, I'll eat this green fing 'ere.

One story sea ice is shrinking therefore polar bear populations are. There's some Mr Miami type logic for you.

The other polar bear populations are expanding, no reasons as to why. Predators need big ranges, to ensure enough of a food supply. If food becomes more abundant, then they don't need as far to walk to find some, is one explanation.

Claims from the innuit have to be taken with one or two grains of salt, the bears compete with them for food, taste nice and make very nice coats. That's like asking coastal fisherman whether they think over fishing limits are a good idea.

Both sides politicising the issue for various agendas with sound byte statistics again.

Proof of global warming is going to be watching your beach chalet float out to sea I think. Hasn't happened yet.

Collapse -

tell that

by Dr Dij In reply to No idea

to those in New Orleans whose houses washed away.

and those on the outer islands in BanglaDesh

and in England are coastal areas that are eroding quickly; a huge guest house was abandoned because cliffs beneath it washed away.

In general, it isn't that simple. the waters won't just rise one night and float the house away. you'll get more erosion 1st, more storms probably; and other factors in some places; in the Miss. delta, screw ups by corps of engineers mean certain areas are getting no new silt deposits, and as the delta is generally slowly sinking as new silt is deposited elsewhere, erosion will take hold; also because of human activities in oil production and released nutrias eating the protective vegetation.

In fact it was kind of stupid of bush admin NOT to approve remedial conservation work for the delta outside new orleans as that work would have protected islands, now washing away, that are good oil producing areas.

Collapse -


by Tony Hopkinson In reply to tell that

I was more referring to the catastrophic predictions of a six meter rise, than the more localised variety.

Still nothing to worry about, all happened in the past.

Lake Missoula, the mediterranean, Albion, not big changes or anything, hardly had an impact at all really.

Collapse -

Neil's comments

by neilb@uk In reply to Two reports reporting on ...

Even in the "Polar Bears are doing OK!" article, we had the interesting line: "Besides, polar bears do live on ice and satellite photos show the sea ice is down 7.7% in the last decade. So something is happening up there."

Well, we have just come to the end of the "warmest Winter on record" down here in the South and I have been spending the weekend walking across the North Downs in the April sunshine three weeks early. Given that I saw a Brimstone Yellow butterfly in early March, I reckon that something is happening down here, too!


p.s. It would seem that it's not unusual to see the Brimstone Yellow in February so ignore my panic...

Collapse -

Have you though about how those numbers were tabulated

by support In reply to Neil's comments

Do you really believe that there were exactly 2400 polar bears in 2007 and that they were 1800 a while ago...

These numbers are statistics (did you know that on average each person on this planet had one testicle!). Also the methods of gathering data have changed. Also who did the report, do you believe everything people say!

Do you think that one report can disclame thousands of other reports that say that the polar bear are endangered!

Related Discussions

Related Forums