Polar bears are at risk, we’ve been told repeatedly, because man-made global warming is causing sea ice to disappear. But too much ice is also a problem, as some Alaskan polar bears might soon find out.
Polar bears, those cute and cuddly poster creatures for the climate change alarmists — recall the fraud behind the famous photograph of that unfortunate polar bear floating on an ice floe? — need sea ice. They use it to hunt for meals and to breed. In short, polar bears spend much of their lives on sea ice.
That life-giving bond, though, is allegedly in jeopardy. Since 2008, polar bears have been listed as a threatened species under the Endangered Species Act, a decision that was based — of course! — on the specious assumption that man-made global warming is reducing sea ice.
Given that polar bears depend on sea ice, it would seem that more of it in a world without global warming would be better.
But apparently not.
An evolutionary biologist who has studied polar bears during her 35-year career says that thicker ice in the Southern Beaufort Sea along Alaska’s Arctic coast is a threat to the big carnivores.
The additional ice can force the seals that polar bears feed on to move elsewhere because it’s too deep for them to burrow breathing holes through.
“When those bears come out of their dens in the spring, they need to find seals right away because they will have gone six months without eating,” biologist Susan J. Crockford told CNS News.
“If there are no seals, they have to go further out, where there’s thinner ice.”
Similar thick sea ice in 2004 and 2006 thinned the polar bear population in those years and resulted in low bear counts, said Crockford. It turns out that this thick spring ice condition that’s so in conflict with global warming was “one of the pieces of evidence used to have the bears listed as ‘threatened’ in the U.S.”
Truth has been the first casualty in the war to save the planet and the environmentalists’ tale of polar bear woe has become a featured, though fallacious, argument.
But the myth was drilled so deeply into Americans’ minds that the actual facts — which the media simply refuse to cover — get little traction.
Meanwhile, some observers are arguing that polar bear populations are thriving, not declining. That’s debatable, but no more so than the entire global warming/climate change claim.
Oh, and one more thing:
“…the damage to our economy the climate change lobby is now costing us is infinitely more destructive to the livelihoods of our grand-children. Indeed, we grand-parents are finding it increasingly expensive just to keep warm as a consequence of the idiotic decisions our politicians have taken in recent years about the green production of electricity.”
Woodcock’s revelations come shortly after Patrick Moore, ecologist and founder of Greenpeace, offered these thoughts:
There is no scientific proof that human emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) are the dominant cause of the minor warming of the Earth’s atmosphere over the past 100 years. If there were such a proof it would be written down for all to see. No actual proof, as it is understood in science, exists. [Moore’s emphasis]
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) states: “It is extremely likely that human influence has been the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-20th century. “Extremely likely” is not a scientific term but rather a judgment, as in a court of law. The IPCC defines “extremely likely” as a “95–100% probability.” But upon further examination it is clear that these numbers are not the result of any mathematical calculation or statistical analysis. They have been “invented” as a construct within the IPCC report to express “expert judgment,” as determined by the IPCC contributors. [Moore’s emphasis]
For such damage to be done in the name of such a fallacious non-existent “problem” is truly unconscionable, especially when you consider no one outside of the wacko green movement itself cares:
The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change issued a new report this week warning of the existing and potentially severe adverse future impact of climate change, yet most Americans continue to express low levels of concern about the phenomenon. A little more than a third say they worry “a great deal” about climate change or about global warming, putting these concerns at the bottom of a list of eight environmental issues.
George Will pegged it when he said that global warming was simply back door Socialism. But we’ll have much more on the radical environmentalist movement as time goes on…
There’s my two cents.