COP27 climate summit

Grrr...

▰▰▰▰▰▰▰▰▰▰ 100%
10,450
2,806
Detroit
Hey dipshit. From YOUR article

Ugarte said his analysis suggests that the decline of sea ice will lead to a decline in the total population of polar bears of about 30 percent by 2050 — but not extinction.

I guess we should just call a 30% die off fine and move on, right doggy boy?

Who's a good bullshitter? Who's a good bullshitter? That's right boy. You are.

Bark. Bark. Bark.
 

Dog 2.0

Super Anarchist
4,035
609
So, you're ignoring the climate issue and how it will affect them, and focusing on the hunting to attempt to deflect the issue.

Bark. Bark. Bark.
It's ironic that the alarmists have used Polar Bears as a symbol in their climate propaganda for years and while doing so the Polar Bear populations have not cooperated becoming an embarrassment. Some Inuit communities have now sought permission to cull the population because they have become such a problem.
 

tybee

Super Anarchist
1,058
353
around the bend
It's ironic that the alarmists have used Polar Bears as a symbol in their climate propaganda for years and while doing so the Polar Bear populations have not cooperated becoming an embarrassment. Some Inuit communities have now sought permission to cull the population because they have become such a problem.
gee, how could polar bears have become a problem? got any data to show us about how that happened?

{edit} got any data from a reputable source? CNS "news" ain't gonna cut it.
 

Dog 2.0

Super Anarchist
4,035
609

tybee

Super Anarchist
1,058
353
around the bend
thanks for your contribution. from your link:

Researchers agree that polar bears represent a growing threat to Inuit communities, but say that is because climate change has pushed them closer to human settlements – not because the bear population is growing.

got any data from a reputable source that backs up your claim of a population increase of bears?
 

Grrr...

▰▰▰▰▰▰▰▰▰▰ 100%
10,450
2,806
Detroit
thanks for your contribution. from your link:

Researchers agree that polar bears represent a growing threat to Inuit communities, but say that is because climate change has pushed them closer to human settlements – not because the bear population is growing.

got any data from a reputable source that backs up your claim of a population increase of bears?
Hahahahahahahaha


Do sealions ever get eaten by polar bears?
Bark. Bark. Bark.
 

Dog 2.0

Super Anarchist
4,035
609
thanks for your contribution. from your link:

Researchers agree that polar bears represent a growing threat to Inuit communities, but say that is because climate change has pushed them closer to human settlements – not because the bear population is growing.

got any data from a reputable source that backs up your claim of a population increase of bears?
But the population is growing.
 

tybee

Super Anarchist
1,058
353
around the bend
:ROFLMAO:

no, a reputable source.

From 2016:

Last month, reporters at the Las Vegas Review-Journal undertook a remarkable investigation into the secret identity of the buyer of their own newspaper. The paper had changed hands in early December for the wildly inflated price of a hundred and forty million dollars; New Media Investment Group (formerly GateHouse Media), which had purchased the paper only months earlier, reported flipping it for an estimated sixty-nine-per-cent profit. Six days after the sale was announced, on December 16th, Review-Journal reporters revealed that the acquiring company, News + Media Capital Group, which had been represented in the sale by an executive named Michael Schroeder, was in fact controlled by members of Sheldon Adelson’s family—and that, as many had suspected, the money had originated with the casino magnate himself. “My money that the children have with which to buy the newspaper is their inheritance,” Adelson told the Macau Daily Times. He said that he wasn’t directly involved with the purchase, and wasn’t interested in owning a newspaper.

I wouldn't call Adelson's family a reputable source of any thing but shit.

try again.
 

giegs

Super Anarchist
1,046
545
You would expect to see shifting population centers and concentrations of predators in a distressed environment. Deer do the same thing, heading into the suburbs when there's a drought.
 

jzk

Super Anarchist
12,972
476
Sure there is. It's called a mass extinction event, already unfolding before our eyes. The planet's ecology undergoes drastic changes in the next 2 or 3 centuries, by which time the planet will not support human life.
Were you able to find any scientific basis at all for your made up bullshit?
 

d'ranger

Super Anarchist
29,915
4,924
Whoever said there is no such thing as a stupid question never met jzk. Hard to believe he is a lawyer, god help anyone if he represents them in court.
 

Bagheera

Member
234
344
Alaska
There has been a slight decline in arctic ice. But polar bear populations are very healthy.
I know from personally witnessing the Arctic on an annual basis for several decades that about 75% of the arctic sea ice has disappeared in the last 30 years alone, I have a hard time to define that as 'slight decline'. My personal observation is consistent with the various organizations that are monitoring sea ice.

Nobody knows how the polar bear is doing, there is not a single expert that even knows how many there are. They are nomadic and can't be counted as 90% of their territory is inaccessible. What we do know is that the ice melts earlier each year and that polar bears need to swim ever larger distances to catch up with the retreating ice edge to go after their seal meat. Many young cubs do not survive the swim. This is resulting in more and more polar bears becoming land mammals instead of sea mammals. Here in Alaska, but also in Canada and Siberia the polar bears are moving south to find more food, while the brown bears (grizzlies) are moving further north for the same reason. Historically they never had overlapping territories, now they do. The can interbreed and it occasionally happens, however, their offsprings are not fertile.

Long story short, the polar bears are certainly impacted by the rapidly disappearing ice, what the result is of that impact is a guess because nobody knows how many polar bears there actually are.
 
Last edited:

Bagheera

Member
234
344
Alaska
It's ironic that the alarmists have used Polar Bears as a symbol in their climate propaganda for years and while doing so the Polar Bear populations have not cooperated becoming an embarrassment. Some Inuit communities have now sought permission to cull the population because they have become such a problem.
You are very poorly informed. NOBODY knows how many polar bears there are. So nobody knows if their population is in decline or increasing. We do know that about 75% of their habitat is gone and that certainly is an impact.

Natives do not need permission to kill polar bears, they always have done that and always will remain killing them. Go to any random village in the Arctic and you'll see fresh polar bear skins strapped up on racks to dry.
The reason that polar bears have become a problem is that they missed the annual ice edge retreat and need to survive on land in stead of on the ice, see also post above this one.
 
Last edited:

jzk

Super Anarchist
12,972
476
I know from personally witnessing the Arctic on an annual basis for several decades that about 75% of the arctic sea ice has disappeared in the last 30 years alone, I have a hard time to define that as 'slight decline'. My personal observation is consistent with the various organizations that are monitoring sea ice.

Nobody knows how the polar bear is doing, there is not a single expert that even knows how many there are. They are nomadic and can't be counted as 90% of their territory is inaccessible. What we do know is that the ice melts earlier each year and that polar bears need to swim ever larger distances to catch up with the retreating ice edge to go after their seal meat. Many young cubs do not survive the swim. This is resulting in more and more polar bears becoming land mammals instead of sea mammals. Here in Alaska, but also in Canada and Siberia the polar bears are moving south to find more food, while the brown bears (grizzlies) are moving further north for the same reason. Historically they never had overlapping territories, now they do. The can interbreed and it occasionally happens, however, their offsprings are not fertile.

Long story short, the polar bears are certainly impacted by the rapidly disappearing ice, what the result is of that impact is a guess because nobody knows how many polar bears there actually are.
So there is only 25% of the arctic ice that there was 30 years ago?

I highlighted 2023, 2022, 1993, which was 30 years ago, and even 1983 which was 40 years ago.
1674779457252.png
 
Top