Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Skeptimistic
Mountain climber
La Mancha
|
|
|
May 21, 2013 - 05:23pm PT
|
Hmm... I wonder if the "increase" in the number of bears in a defined area is possibly due to the decrease in habitable areas elsewhere...?
|
|
mountainlion
Trad climber
California
|
|
|
May 21, 2013 - 05:24pm PT
|
yeah Ron...I am a bleeding heart...here is a documented tale of a mother polar bear (with cubs) setting the continuous swimming record (she was tagged) and swam for NINE STRAIGHT DAYS :0 lost 22 percent of her body weight and her cub drowned...
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2011/07/110720-polar-bears-global-warming-sea-ice-science-environment/
Do I believe there is evidence of a polar bear recovery??? Show me the documented evidence and I will take a look at it and it's source---if the source is credible and the research documenting the polar bear population is sound I will stand corrected...but I will still care about the polar bear!!
|
|
Norton
Social climber
the Wastelands
|
|
|
May 21, 2013 - 05:24pm PT
|
Alaska
Global Warming skeptics win $318,500 for guessing the Tanana River ice
off date of May 20, 2013 rather than in the usual break up times in the middle of April.
yeah, tell em Dave!
that proves beyond doubt that 97% of the world's very best scientist are WRONG about the earth geting warmer
and all those record high temps set just in the last couple of years are LIES
what are you, 15?
|
|
crunch
Social climber
CO
|
|
|
May 21, 2013 - 05:28pm PT
|
Ron, what's the clue, in the first two words of your funnyman's graph, that it was not drawn by any scientist?
hey, that's a fine graph...damn straight...oh wait....
|
|
Chiloe
Trad climber
Lee, NH
|
|
|
May 21, 2013 - 05:31pm PT
|
Hmm... I wonder if the "increase" in the number of bears in a defined area is possibly due to the decrease in habitable areas elsewhere...?
Skep, that is something biologists have learned may happen when scientific surveys and resident accounts of bear contacts suggest opposite trends. It's possible for a population to be declining even while contacts with humans are increasing, if that's where hungry bears come looking for food.
|
|
Chiloe
Trad climber
Lee, NH
|
|
|
May 21, 2013 - 05:35pm PT
|
chiloe,, i havent a clue..
True dat.
now answer mine: how did polar bears survive higher CO2 levels in the past?
Tell me more about this time, Ron. When was it that polar bears were surviving higher CO2 levels?
|
|
Chiloe
Trad climber
Lee, NH
|
|
|
May 21, 2013 - 05:38pm PT
|
hey, that's a fine graph...damn straight...oh wait....
+1 for crunch
|
|
mountainlion
Trad climber
California
|
|
|
May 21, 2013 - 05:41pm PT
|
Ron your losing credibility with me (probably everybody but I can't speak for anyone else)...You won't provide links to the documented studies that show polar bear populations are increasing...what am I supposed to BELIEVE you had a conversation with somebody (no name given by you) and they SAID the bear population was increasing---sounds a little fishy are you sure you weren't talking to one of your stuffed animals while high on formaldahyde??
|
|
mechrist
Gym climber
South of Heaven
|
|
|
May 21, 2013 - 05:42pm PT
|
They more than likely evovled from lower brown bear forms and could easily do the reverse of needed.
Ron, what do you think the time scale is for evolution from a lower brown bear to a polar bear or vice versa? Hint, it is far greater than a few generations... which is about how long humans have been pumping massive amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere, increasing the concentration by over 40%.
CO2 concentrations induced by natural factors (increased volcanism, orbital irregularities, etc) change over much MUCH longer time scales than a 40% increase in a few decades... MUCH longer.
Bears aren't the issue anyway. The UNPRECEDENTED rate of increasing CO2 from anthropogenic sources IS THE ISSUE. You have fully admitted that. The only question that remains is... do we ignore it and hope everything turns out just fine, or do we pull our heads out of our asses and start doing something about it despite Big Oil and the morans who lap up the bullshit they spew?
|
|
Chiloe
Trad climber
Lee, NH
|
|
|
May 21, 2013 - 05:43pm PT
|
Nice googling and quick switch to another funnyman's graph, but in haste you must have forgotten to answer my question, again. I'll repeat:
Tell me more about this time, Ron. When was it that polar bears were surviving higher CO2 levels?
|
|
Norton
Social climber
the Wastelands
|
|
|
May 21, 2013 - 05:45pm PT
|
Ron asked?
how did polar bears survive higher CO2 levels in the past?
I did not know that CO2 levels were higher at any time in history than now
so ok Ron, since you know all about this stuff....
WHEN were CO2 levels higher in the past, you know for them bears to survive and all?
|
|
Chiloe
Trad climber
Lee, NH
|
|
|
May 21, 2013 - 05:49pm PT
|
guess ill ask again,, how did the polar bear survive higher CO2 content?
You really do not have a clue, do you? Why do you think I asked you when it was, that polar bears survived higher CO2? I must have had some reason.
|
|
Chiloe
Trad climber
Lee, NH
|
|
|
May 21, 2013 - 06:02pm PT
|
And while we're on polar bears, the poor critters suffer from very high contaminant levels (including heavy metals and pesticides) as a result of being such high-level predators in the Arctic. There has been a lot written about that, but I just came across a new study with notes on how climate change can worsen the contamination trouble.
Global change effects on the long-term feeding ecology and contaminant exposures of East Greenland polar bears
McKinney et al., Global Change Biology (2013)
Rapid climate changes are occurring in the Arctic, with substantial repercussions for arctic ecosystems. It is challenging to assess ecosystem changes in remote polar environments, but one successful approach has entailed monitoring the diets of upper trophic level consumers. Quantitative fatty acid signature analysis (QFASA) and fatty acid carbon isotope (δ13C-FA) patterns were used to assess diets of East Greenland (EG) polar bears (Ursus maritimus) (n = 310) over the past three decades. QFASA-generated diet estimates indicated that, on average, EG bears mainly consumed arctic ringed seals (47.5 ± 2.1%) and migratory subarctic harp (30.6 ± 1.5%) and hooded (16.7 ± 1.3%) seals and rarely, if ever, consumed bearded seals, narwhals or walruses. Ringed seal consumption declined by 14%/decade over 28 years (90.1 ± 2.5% in 1984 to 33.9 ± 11.1% in 2011). Hooded seal consumption increased by 9.5%/decade (0.0 ± 0.0% in 1984 to 25.9 ± 9.1% in 2011). This increase may include harp seal, since hooded and harp seal FA signatures were not as well differentiated relative to other prey species. Declining δ13C-FA ratios supported shifts from more nearshore/benthic/ice-associated prey to more offshore/pelagic/open-water-associated prey, consistent with diet estimates. Increased hooded seal and decreased ringed seal consumption occurred during years when the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO) was lower. Thus, periods with warmer temperatures and less sea ice were associated with more subarctic and less arctic seal species consumption. These changes in the relative abundance, accessibility, or distribution of arctic and subarctic marine mammals may have health consequences for EG polar bears. For example, the diet change resulted in consistently slower temporal declines in adipose levels of legacy persistent organic pollutants, as the subarctic seals have higher contaminant burdens than arctic seals. Overall, considerable changes are occurring in the East Greenland marine ecosystem, with consequences for contaminant dynamics.
|
|
Chiloe
Trad climber
Lee, NH
|
|
|
May 21, 2013 - 06:05pm PT
|
The other implication of Dr. Meier’s statement is that a warmer, ice free Arctic occurred when CO2 levels were less than 290 ppm. This implies that there is no long term correlation between CO2 and Arctic temperatures.
You still don't have a clue. And yet you're so sure that you do!
|
|
dave729
Trad climber
Western America
|
|
|
May 21, 2013 - 06:12pm PT
|
norton - trying to show respect to you oldsters specially when age makes you susceptible to repeated senile outbursts.
The tiny temperature change they are trying to scare us with are ridiculous. As noted earlier air and water pollution is where the focus must be.
But note CO2 is not a pollutant.
|
|
mechrist
Gym climber
South of Heaven
|
|
|
May 21, 2013 - 06:16pm PT
|
The other implication of Dr. Meier’s statement is that a warmer, ice free Arctic occurred when CO2 levels were less than 290 ppm. This implies that there is no long term correlation between CO2 and Arctic temperatures.
No, this implies CO2 concentrations did not cause that ice free period in the Arctic. Remember all those other potential causes of the current warming you were so eager to accept in lieu of the WAY more obvious CO2 mechanism... the ones that CANNOT POSSIBLY explain the current observations, but nicely explain past observations?
If the Arctic was ice free at 290 ppm CO2 and we KNOW CO2 is a potent greenhouse gas, what effect do you think a concentration of 400 ppm is likely to have?
You seriously need some logic bud.
Dave, CO2 is ABSOLUTELY A POLLUTANT.
A pollutant is a substance or energy introduced into the environment that has undesired effects, or adversely affects the usefulness of a resource.
|
|
mountainlion
Trad climber
California
|
|
|
May 21, 2013 - 06:17pm PT
|
I like your saying under your avatar Ron "trad climber soon to be a nipple sucking liberal"---have you seen the thread "chicks dig climbers"? I predict you won't have as much time to "play with your gun" once you have fully come over from the dark side (right wingnut land)...note most of those wingnut types have flipped out due to a lack of female affection (this condition affects right wingers more than the average man...and alot more than us liberal types)...it will give a hole new meaning to stuffing a bird's a$$
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!