The mainstream media once again was called on their published claims of doom & gloom, pending end of the world, and one sided support of environmental scare tactics without presenting all of the facts…
Remember back six or seven years ago when the N.Y. Times reported that there was open water and melted ice at the North Pole only to be told the facts by the scientific community?
“This isn't the first time that real science has exposed hyperbole concerning melting ice at the North Pole. In August 2000, the New York Times ran an apocalyptic story that said the pole was free of ice for the first time in 50 million years.”
"It was retracted three weeks later as a barrage of scientists protested that open water is common at or near the pole at the end of summer,"writes environmental scientist Pat Michaels. "Further, it's common knowledge in the scientific community that there has been no net change in Arctic temperatures in the last 70 years."
Those nasty little facts getting in the way of the story again…
The Timesonline website recently reported that Polar Bears are drowning in the ocean due to global warming melting the icebergs they live(?) on. This after four polar bears were found dead from drowning. Now it is unfortunate that these polar bears drowned but example data of four bears probably does not secure a definite trend when you provide all of the facts.
“So how to explain the increase in the polar bear population from 5,000 in 1950 to 25,000 today, as documented by the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service? The alarmists are noticeably quiet. Could it be that the facts don't fit with their campaign of exaggerations, half-truths and outright lies?”
It is safe to say that the global temperature has risen a bit but nothing like the “Scientific models” provided and quoted by some media outlets that promote the Doom & Gloom agenda. Still waiting to see them explain why the temperature on Mars has also risen without a large population of SUV vehicles roaming the martian landscape and how it relates with the increased activity of our shared Sun? Or why has the caribou population increased several times over the years with that nasty oil pipeline running thru their backyard…
19 comments:
Hey, idiot, read the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's reports, they're more worthwhile than your nonsense.
Dignan: Great debating style, you really know how to destroy an argument. Have you read the UN report? Why do you not state what some of the errors you perceive are in the post by Rightside?
It would help if you understood how the process of how UN commissions work, Anyone who thinks that any of the reports generated are not totally infused with politic over science are greatly mistaken. I have had the opportunity to sit in on a technical working group that falls under the WHO, and while science has a significant role in the group, politics always trumped science. Based on my personal experience, how the UN committees work in general, and scientific debate I have read on the issue of global warming, I take the UN report with a big grain of salt. I am much more informed by reading the debates on the issue in the scientific literature and online.
Dignan,
Once again you give me the reason to leave the comment section open and not under “Moderation”. Please cite an example or two from your report that gives definite proof that man has caused the extreme(?) temp increase that your “Progressive” side claims. Better yet how about getting away from the political spin of the governmental report and explain how back in 1970’s we were looking at a coming Ice age and now we are looking at extreme(?) heat wave.
And why is it that nobody from your side, including the Guru Gore Guy, will not explain the temp increase on Mars also and the relation to the suns increased activity?
Kooch is correct in pointing out once the Govt gets involved in the ring the spin always starts up for reasons other then scientific discovery. It was reported yesterday as an example that the United Nations vastly overstated the AIDS problem and in fact the situation has improved but that does not help the U.N. from getting the $$$ needed that they love to control. What happened to the gapping hole in the Ozone layer? And how about the Oil for Food program that the United Nations controlled with Hussein after the first Iraq war? Turns out that lined many pockets in the U.N. and even a man named Rich made a lot of money from that against the sanctions. But its o.k. for President Clinton gave him a pardon the last day he was in office as a parting gift.
Does Dignan’s report explain why the Polar Bear population has increased as reported since 1950’s? Why has the population in ANWR of the Caribou also increased since the oil pipeline and operations started? Don’t believe Guru Gore has touched those issues either.
You're talking to yourselves. You pretend to be informed, but if you were, you would know how ridiculous you sound. The grownups have long moved on. We don't need to reprove gravity to you every day, either, losers.
So please explain the report that the temp has also risen on Mars as well as on Earth with the Suns increased activity?
http://pbsg.npolar.no/new-status.htm
Note the 22% polar bear population reduction in western Hudson Bay from 1987 to 2004. Note the decline in body condition of the bears. Note the observation that climate change most likely accelerated the decline.
The only interesting question is not whether the polar bear population is declining and is threatened with much further decline as a result of climate change (IT IS, YOU MORON), but what deeprooted psychological problems compel you to deny reality.
“Warming rates in western Hudson Bay between 1971 and 2001 ranged from a minimum 0.5°C per decade at Churchill, Manitoba, to 0.8°C per decade at Chesterfield Inlet, Nunavut”
Noted.
Is the warming due to increased human activity ie: Sport Utility Vehicles, increased Airline activity, expansion in China\India, etc. or is the increase in temperature related to the increased activity of the Sun?
“In some communities, this increase in polar bear sightings has been interpreted as evidence that the size of the WH subpopulation is increasing. Based on this perception, the government of Nunavut in December 2004 increased its quota for the number of polar bears that could be harvested from the WH subpopulation from 55 to 64 polar bears.”
Maybe the increase in the quota is responsible for the decline in Polar Bear population? Poor Body condition is associated with the early break up of the ice but again is that due to human activity or natural cycles? See above post about how the NY Times reported the panic of the North Pole ice break up that has been happening for decades…
“An alternate explanation for the apparent increase in polar bears in the vicinity of human settlements and hunting camps is that, because of declines in body condition associated with the earlier sea ice break-up, polar bears in western Hudson Bay have less time to accumulate the fat reserves that they depend on during the open water season. As polar bears deplete their fat reserves toward the end of the open water season, they are more likely to seek alternative food sources around human settlements to sustain themselves until freeze-up”.
The Florida Keys were once underwater. The glaciers once covered most of Canada. This may happen again but probably not in the next decade or century as claimed by Guru Gore. 35 years ago we were looking at a coming Ice age and in that short time we have gone 180 degrees in the other direction? Natural cycles do not occur? Who has who’s head in the sand?
I love how your blog posting trumpets a polar bear population increase, and then you repeat this in your comment because you apparently find it so persuasive and relevant, and now that you're presented with clear data that the population is decreasing, you change your argument to "well, maybe, but it's not because of global warming." When you start off with misleading arguments, it doesn't really help your credibility when you then switch to alternative arguments. (In addition to your credibility being shot, the case to be made for your intelligence doesn't improve when you demonstrate your lack of understanding as to when to use "whose" and when to use "who's".) Like I said, the grownups have moved on.
Wait!!!
Bring the grownups back into the room and I believe they will find that I was quoting the report that you provided regarding the Western Hudson Bay information. That was the decline in Polar Bear population that I was responding to and perhaps maybe the decline is the result of the increased quota in Polar Bears taken during season.
I believe my credibility is still solid when I provide the overall increase in Polar Bear population since 1950 as provided by the U.S. Fish & Wildlife service and as in that article with link provided. In that article they note “The Alarmists are noticeably Quiet” when the facts do not represent their claims. What about the reports and studies that have shown increased Sun activity while temps increased on both Mars & Earth?
And while we have the Grownups in the room lets ask them about the reports of increased Sun activity and the increased temperatures on Mars and Earth which are documented? How is it possible that 35 years ago we were looking at the coming Ice age but now it is opposite? What about natural weather cycles? What about the recent comments from the lead guy from the Weather Channel that says the Global Warming crisis from manmade effects is nothing but a big scam?
Sorry about the grammar mistake for in a hurry and did not use provided spell\grammar check tool. But when it comes to switching to “alternative arguments” I believe the above shows that I was referring to the Western Hudson Bay report when asking about the increased hunting quotas… Could this increased quota be a factor in the Western Hudson Bay example?
Actually it appears the grown-ups are still in the room and never left. “Progressives” tend to select the data that they want to advance their claims with and ignore the remaining facts and studies that are also out there. V.P. Gore has perfected this tactic in his Global Warming campaign. The declining bear population that Dignan refers to is only a select group and environment located in a specific area (West Hudson Bay). The bears in this area in fact are in poor body condition and their population has declined but the decreased population can be the result of increased hunting quotas. And this select group is only a small part of a larger picture which the Fish & Wildlife people has determined has grown substantially since the 1950’s.
The truth is that the grown-ups are still waiting in the room for the “Progressive” Dignan to address some of the reports noted by Rightsideva in regards to the Suns increased activity. Maybe Dignan can also provide some information about weather cycles and other issues he has been ignoring?
Keep clinging to those talking points. You're STILL insisting that the polar bears' populations are increasing? Nobody's that stupid, you're just a lying jerk. Keep telling people that down is up, no matter how many facts get in your way, just like your lying President. You make me sick.
Talking Points?
Are you disputing the population increase from the 1950's as reported by the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service?
Lying Jerk?
How so?
You show yourself with your comments regarding the President.
Do you acknowledge that the increased activity by the Sun is a possible source of Global warming.
If not how do you explain the same increases temp rise on Mars?
Do you really think by repeating the same irrelevant statistic over and over, you have made any relevant point?
Do you really think that shows that the bear population is increasing? There are also more Betamax machines then there were in the 1950's, does that demonstrate that Betamax machine industry is currently a growing industry? You are a lying jerk by pretending that your lame, irrelevant statistic that you cling to like a baby to its bottle, demonstrates that the polar bear population is increasing, and then you have the unbelievably obnoxious nerve to whine about "the media" twisting facts.
You know that your stupid statistic doesn't actually demonstrate an increasing polar bear population, but you pretend it does, over and over. That is why you are a lying jerk.
Do you really think you've demonstrated anything but your own narrowminded foolishness? You are a joke.
“repeating the same irrelevant statistic”
But yet it is noted that you continue to ignore and not address the question regarding the rise in the Suns activity and increased temperatures on both Mars and Earth.
You also ignore the report from The U.S. Fish & Wildlife regarding the overall population increase of Polar bears from 1950 to present numbers. Is this report flawed and worthless? You instead provided a study that showed a decline in bear population for a select area and one that had a increased hunting quota during that time. Did that report provide a overall status of the world polar bear population or just the Doom & Gloom crisis of a selected area? “Twisting Facts?”
Here is some more information regarding the Sun’s activity and how this information has been ignored by those who wish to “Twist” the facts by not allowing all the facts into the debate. In fact to move past these other studies and facts V.P. Gore has declared the debate closed on Global Warming and calls for immediate changes relying only on his claims.
“It wasn't until 1980, with the aid of NASA satellites, that scientists definitively proved that the sun's brightness - or radiance - varies in intensity, and that these variations occur in predictable cyclical patterns. This was a crucial discovery because the climate models used by greenhouse theory proponents always assumed that the sun's radiance was constant. With that assumption in hand, they could ignore solar influences and focus on other influences, including human“.
“The correlation between major changes in the Earth's temperature and changes in solar radiance is quite compelling. A perfect example is the Little Ice Age that lasted from 1650 to 1850. Temperatures in this era fell to as much as 2° F below today's temperature, causing the glaciers to advance, the canals in Venice to freeze and major crop failures. Interestingly, this dramatic cooling happened in a period when the sun's radiance had fallen to exceptionally low levels. Between 1645 and 1715, the sun was in a stage that scientists refer to as the Maunder Minimum. In this minimum, the sun has few sunspots and low magnetism which automatically indicates a lower radiance level. When the sun began to emerge from the minimum, radiance increased and by 1850 the temperature had warmed up enough for the Little Ice Age to end“.
“Indeed, it could already be happening. Of the 1.5° F in warming the planet experienced over the last 150 years, two-thirds of that increase, or one degree, occurred between 1850 and 1940. In the last 50 years, the planetary temperature increased at a significantly slower rate of 0.5° F - precisely when dramatically increasing amounts of man-made carbon dioxide emissions should have been accelerating warming. Further buttressing the arguments for future cooling is the evidence from NASA satellites that the global temperature has actually fallen 0.04° F since 1979.
Of course, it is impossible to precisely predict when solar radiance will drop and global temperatures will begin falling. But one thing is certain: There is little evidence that mankind is responsible for global warming. There is considerable evidence that the sun causes warming and will most likely stimulate cooling in the not so distant future“.
http://www.nationalcenter.org/NPA203.html
I agree that the Polar Bear population in the study you provided has declined in the Western Hudson area but questioning if this can be the result from the increased quota. Their poor body mass can also be the result of other factors such as disease not necessarily associated to an increased temperature. White Tail deer in the Northeast have been inflicted with a “Wasting” disease also in the past decade is that a result of global warming also? I provided a study that showed the overall increased polar bear population since 1950’s to show that the argument is not limited to selected studies and there are numerous conflicting studies out there.
By ignoring the data and studies regarding the Sun’s increased activity is like claiming “The debate is over” ala Al Gore has done to avoid the other data out there…
I love how you keep changing the subject from the polar brear decline; typical sad attempts to distract from a weak argument.
So you admit that the population declined in Western Hudson Bay, then you accuse me of focusing on a "select" area. (Yet when you focus on an irrelevant population trend fromthe 1950's to the present, you act like that's not "select." Predictable hypocrisy.) Well, the reason the WHB subpopulation is a focus is because WHB is near the southern extreme of polar bear range and has been among the most affected by climate warming so far, and also because this is one of the most detailed and reliable tracking studies of polar bear subpopulations. You would know if you actually read about this stuff (see http://www.doi.gov/news/06_News_Releases/061227faq.html, and http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2006/1337/) instead of reciting talking points like a retarded robot.
You desperately cling to any alternate explanation for the decline ("disease not necessarily associated to an extreme temperature"???), yet you offer no explanation as to why you magically chose these alternate explanations over the EXPLICIT STATEMENT in the study that there was a significant correlation between the timing of sea ice break-up and the body condition that is consistent with other devlines in polar bear life history parameters due to LONG-TERM WARMING.
You are a joke, you are ridiculously wrong, and you are not even a good arguer.
Ah, but yet it was you who sidetracked from the original post and the information provided on the overall Polar Bear population increase provided by the U.S. Fish & Wildlife service report. Is this report wrong? And as you continue to ignore that report and return to the report on the select Western Hudson Bay area you will find that I did comment on your provided report and asked the question of the possibility decline resulting from the increased hunting quota. Have you addressed that question yet or are you avoiding that and the question about the association of increased sun activity and the increased temps on Mars & Earth?
Just like your Guru Gore it seems you avoid the original question and follow up posts with claiming provided information as nothing but “Talking Points” by a “Retarded Robot”.
I have read several of the reports provided and at no time did I claim them “Talking Points” as you have but Rightside has provided alternative studies and facts that both you and Gore ignore. Al Gore has been requested numerous times to respond to debate requests with scientist presenting other documented reasons for increased global warming but he refuses to participate. Maybe its because he knows he will not be able to respond to their data for it does not fit into his agenda. A lot like you avoiding the question of the Sun’s increased activity and the increased temps on Mars and Earth…
Suggestion of declined body mass resulting from disease not associated with Temp increase was\is a possible reason for their condition. White Tail deer along the Northeast have been suffering from a wasting disease for sometime now and should we assume that to is also the result of global warming?
As in the original post it was described the panic reporting of open water at the North pole by the mainstream media only to be retracted at a later date when it was shown that this is a common occurrence. Unfortunately this evidence was not fortunate for people like Gore who strives to provide his Doom & Gloom warming claims…
Another fact that you and Guru Gore avoid is the fact that in the 1970’s it was the cooling crisis which has since gone away. If we have gone from one extreme to the other in such a short period without it being a natural cycle what hope is there of preventing the total meltdown Gore predicts?
Simple questions but yet still avoided by you and your buddy…
Keep riddling your longwinded responses with different topics, nobody cares. I explained on multiple occasions above how the polar bear increase stat from the 1950's to the present that you obsessively crow about is irrelevant. Of course you falsely accuse me of being "sidetracked" from this; the whole focus of every one of my comments is how this stat is irrelevant, and that you childlishly ignore the relevant statistics and ocnclusions of the scientific community. Learn how to read. Your pathetic clinging to the same irrelevant statistic would be funny if it weren't so sad.
Dignan has responded with “the whole focus of every one of my comments is how this stat is irrelevant, and that you childlishly ignore the relevant statistics and ocnclusions of the scientific community“. but yet he will not explain or discuss documented data provided the same way Al Gore will not debate the global warming issue with scientist who provide data that does not agree with his agenda.
Simple. There are numerous reports that show a correlation between increased Sun activity and the changing temperature on Earth and other planets. Are these reports false or wrong? Are they being ignored because they do not fit the agenda and in fact provide alternate reasons for the increased temperature we are experiencing? Simple question but one that both Al Gore and Dignan will not address after repeated requests.
Instead Dignan has continued to attack Rightside and other commentators with claims that we are clinging to false reports and date but does not provide decisive information to disprove the reports\data. Dignan has also used insults and verbal attacks to sidetrack the issues at hand. These attacks and name calling towards Rightside have been allowed to show visitors to Rightside the integrity and actions of Dignan in his responses and statements. I will not allow these attacks towards other people commenting to Rightside just as I have asked people who have emailed me asking to “Give Dignan the same thing back” not to do so. By allowing Dignan to verbally attack Rightside and avoid the two questions asked, numerous times, shows readers to Rightside the integrity, maturity, and worth of Dignans replies to the subject at hand…
Blah, blah, blah, just keep trying to change the subject from how you tried to mislead people about the threat to polar bears from global warming. And no, I'm not going to explain for the umpteenth time how you "misled", learn to read the prior comments. Please, show your ignorance one more time and (1) change the subject from the polar bears; (2) ask how you were misleading again, even though it's been pointed out numerous times; or (and this is my favorite) (3) cite your favorite irrelevant statistic about the polar population in the 1950's. What a hack.
Post a Comment