No ice at the North Pole this summer?
June 27th, 2008 at 09:13am Pat Cunningham
I wonder what the global-warming deniers will have to say about THIS.
Here are a few guesses:
”Yeah, well Al Gore didn’t invent the Internet, y’know. And he uses a lot more energy at his house than I do at mine.”
“I know a TV weatherman who says this stuff is a big hoax perpetrated by socialists and other girlymen who want to take away our Hummers and make us ride bicycles.”
“I noticed that it was kind of cool around here this past spring. So much for global warming.”
“We don’t need polar bears, anyway. I mean, what good are they?”
“Helloooo! I get my ice from the fridge, not from the North Pole. Don’t you?”
“This is just a cyclical thing. We’ll have another Ice Age any day now.”
Entry Filed under: North Pole, Al Gore, global warming
7 Comments Add your own
1. Menlo Bob | June 27th, 2008 at 10:44 am
No one disputes a general trend in warming of the globe. However single year events are what we call weather Additionally consider this:
1. global mean temperature hasn’t risen in the last several years.
2. ocean temperatures have fallen recently.
4. even predicting short term events is difficult, as this guy could tell you.
2. Menlo Bob | June 27th, 2008 at 12:13 pm
Oh, and the polar bears are increasing not declining. If polar bears needed ice then the ones we see in zoos would all be dead. Let me know when you want yours delivered.
3. Pat Cunningham | June 27th, 2008 at 12:39 pm
Bob: You apparently didn’t even read the article to which you linked regarding polar bears. The expert interviewed therein says:
“If I thought that there were more bears now than 50 years ago and a reasonable basis to assume this would not change, then no worries. This is not the case…Some populations recovered as harvests were controlled, but have since declined due to climate-related effects…(T)he predictions are very clear that the primary habitat of polar bears is at risk…Climate warming is not under control and I do not see the management changes coming to effect the needed changes in climate change emissions…Yes, conservation groups moved the issue forward for listing under the Endangered Species Act but this was already an issue that was founded on scientific information. The IUCN/SSC Polar Bear Specialist Group was moving on a Vulnerable designation (the same as Threatened under the Endangered Species Act) before anybody heard of actions from environmental groups. Sea ice change and habitat loss is the key driving force…You can distort the issue any way you so desire. At the end of the day, the sea ice is disappearing. Take away the habitat and the species follows shortly thereafter (or before).”
That’s what the dude said. Thanks for the link and for helping me make my case.
4. hokumboy | June 27th, 2008 at 1:09 pm
It looks like those bears are pretty much doomed. One way, or the other.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/sns-ap-polar-bears,0,1044233.story
5. Henry | June 27th, 2008 at 2:55 pm
Ha! Nice post Bob. You might want to read more than the first sentence of a piece, before deciding it supports your belief. Please tell me you did that on purpose. Don’t let facts get in your way of putting forth your slackjawed opinions. Keep up the good work.
6. Menlo Bob | June 27th, 2008 at 3:38 pm
Predictions are merely facts not in evidence. Such PREDICTIONS of polar bear decline fly in the face of ACTUAL increases in the number of polar bears. If predictions are all that needs consideration then why have you ignored that guy in my above link who predicted drought for the midwest this year? What happened to his surefire prediction?
Are we to assume that if Rockford became inhabitable due to flooding that a sizable number of people would remain, or would they move? Since polar bears don’t consume ice–they use it as a perch to find food–do they simple give up or do they relocate? Animals can be expected to adapt. Remember Darwin? If not they do quite well in warm weather zoos without sea ice.
7. SNuss | August 29th, 2008 at 10:37 pm
Actually, I like the British judge who ruled that some of the assertions in Al Gore’s Oscar-winning environmental documentary are not supported by scientific evidence, Source: http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/10/12/britain.gore.ap/index.html
Leave a Comment
Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>
Trackback this post | Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed