Polar Bears

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the U.S. EPA, and the Arctic Climate Impact Assessment all report on the effect of this climatic change on sea-ice patterns. A recent report notes that there has been a 7% reduction in ice cover in just 25 years and a 40% loss of ice thickness. It also predicts a mostly ice-free arctic summer by 2080 if present trends continue. Many scientists believe that the Arctic will continue to grow warmer as a result of human activity, namely, the introduction into the atmosphere of increasing quantities of carbon dioxide and other “greenhouse gases”. While there is no consensus on whether human activity is the most significant factor, the Arctic has in fact been warming, whatever the cause.
Polar bears depend on a frozen platform from which to hunt seals, the mainstay of their diet. Without ice, the bears are unable to reach their prey. In fact, for the western Hudson Bay population of polar bears (the population near Churchill in the Province of Manitoba, Canada), researchers have correlated earlier melting of spring ice with lower fitness in the bears and lower reproduction success. If the reduced ice coverage results in more open water, cubs and young bears may also not be able to swim the distances required to reach solid ice.
Because polar bears are a top predator in the Arctic, changes in their distribution or numbers could affect the entire arctic ecosystem. There is little doubt that ice-dependent animals such as polar bears will be adversely affected by continued warming in the Arctic. It is therefore crucial that all factors which may affect the well-being of polar bears be carefully analyzed. Conservative precautionary decisions can only be made with a full understanding of the living systems involved.

 

they've also found the ice is breakin up two weeks earlier in Churchhill in the spring now; hence two weeks less food gettin time.

 

at the museum of natural history in nyc, in their aqautic exhibit they had a stuffed polar bear, who was displayed in a very angry, unnatural stance. it made me mad. doesnt have to do with global warming though.

 

"Deny, deny, deny."
-- Colin Thatcher

(Colin Thatcher was convicted of murdering his wife, Joanne Wilson, in 1980 in Regina, Saskatchewan. He was recently giving something like day parole, I don't have the facts. See the book, "Not Above The Law".)

So, the polar bears are dying, or according to some, they're not dying. It seems like every time there's an environmental disaster, there's some guy that comes out of the stacks of the undergraduate library and insists that not only has nothing happened, but things are better than ever. Who signs off the GTA (graduate teaching assistant) allowances for these guys? Some joker from the Japanese Whaling Association, or the Petroleum Club of Canada?

 

I see 468 views on endangered polar bears and 25,908 views on Erotica. Did I miss something? Is there something I don't understand?

Or maybe, I stumbled onto the Hustler magazine channel by mistake, and no one told me.

 

When I saw the movie An Inconvenient Truth tonight, my heart went out to those bears. I don't care if it's not really true or hasn't been proven that more are really dying, the reality is, if things keep happening the way they are, then they eventually will start drowning. My biggest motivational factor is those bears, I don't give a damn if they're vicious, they're still equal to us. (In my eyes)

 

You have no clue what damage is being done, and once we get to the point that it is irreversible, the world is finished. Drastic climate changes, riots, nuclear war, we're heading down the wrong path, and the people intelligent enough to realize what's going on are always down played by the naiive people like yourself, who are going to allow the planet to be destroyed.

[edited out the final paragraph]

 

Sorry, Duncelor. That's not life. That's death. We hairless bipeds have eliminated our prey species and propagated out of control, and now other species are paying our bill for us. And you say, "Deal with it"?

We're trying to deal with it, some of us. Not all of us are putting thirty mile long drift nets in the ocean, or hunting whales, or trapping fur bearing animals such as harp seals for money.

So the question is, are you part of the solution, or part of the problem?

As far as adaptation goes, I think Darwin and his supporters would agree that natural selection of adaptive individuals in a species doesn't take place in 100 or 200 years, but over tens of thousands of years. I certainly don't expect my dog to properly protect himself from car and truck traffic that he can't smell, hear or see adequately. He'd be road kill real quick if I didn't look out for him. Same applies to those wild species we're threatening.

 

that's a good point dog.

some of the deniers use the term 'adaptation' as if a species can adapt immediately, a very short-sighted view of evolution. the fact is that we are changing the environment so quickly that there simply isn't time for evolution to catch up. extinction is accelerating, not adaptation.

what we can read from these comments is that the deniers would like to shift the burden onto nature, rather than see that it is a problem of our creation. this deluded idea that human activity is not enough to affect the planet's eco-system has nothing to do with science, but a desire to not bear the responsibility of caring for the health of the environment.

the deniers also fail to provide an explanation as to why exactly they think pollution, toxins and dirty air are so harmless. last i heard it kind of sucked ass for every living thing. i guess looking outside a system that you're ideologically bound to is too much to ask.