Associated Press
A polar bear mother and her two cubs are shown in Wapusk National Park
on the shore of Hudson Bay near Churchill, Manitoba, Canada in this
Nov. 6, 2007 file photo.
Posted on 02/03/2008 12:41:10 PM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach
Associated Press
A polar bear mother and her two cubs are shown in Wapusk National Park
on the shore of Hudson Bay near Churchill, Manitoba, Canada in this
Nov. 6, 2007 file photo.
**********************************************
The Bush administration is nearing a decision that would officially acknowledge the environmental damage of global warming, and name its first potential victim: the polar bear.
The Interior Department may act as soon as this week on its year-old proposal to make the polar bear the first species to be listed as threatened with extinction because of melting ice due to a warming planet.
Both sides agree that conservationists finally have the poster species they have sought to use the Endangered Species Act as a lever to force federal limits on the greenhouse gases linked to global warming, and possibly to battle smokestack industry projects far from the Arctic.
"All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others," said Kassie Siegel, an attorney with the nonprofit Center for Biological Diversity. "And then there is the polar bear."
Even Frank Luntz, the political consultant who advised President Bush six years ago to focus on discrediting the science of global warming and refer to it as "climate change," has recognized the bear's potency. In an interview on the environmental website Grist.org, he said the public has a "soft side" for the bear.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
Polar bear nonsense.
Click on POGW graphic for full GW rundown
New!!: Dr. John Ray's
GREENIE WATCH
Ping me if you find one I've missed.
Am I the only person who doesn’t give a rat’s ass whether the polar bears live or die?
Why is less ice bad for them?
Do they eat the ice?
ROFL!.....
Oh brother. I keep hoping that people will wake up to the fact that Global Warming is a political agenda to cajole the sheeple into acepting socialism. Sigh.
****************************
Hint....Read the Article...
LOL! There is even a polar bear pilot in the chopper!
I’d hate to be the frigid researcher who goes out and counts ‘em, but according to this source, it doesn’t look like a declining population to me:
http://www.animalinfo.org/species/carnivor/ursumari.htm
Genetic analysis of polar bears from all over the Arctic has not shown any significant variations between populations from different areas (Stirling 1998).
Population Estimates:
[Note: Figures given are for wild populations only.]
WORLD
1965: About 10,000 (IUCN 1966)
1967: About 10,000 (Schuhmacher 1967)
1972: Roughly estimated at 20,000 (DeMaster & Stirling 1981)
1983: Perhaps 20,000 (Nowak & Paradiso 1983)
1996: 20,000 - 30,000 (Watson 1996)
1997: 22,000 - 27,000 (Garner 1997)
1998: 22,130 - 27,030 (Truett & Johnson 2002)
2001: At least 22,000 (Schliebe 2001)
2002: 21,500 - 25,000 (Lunn et al. 2002)
2005: 20,000 - 25,000 (Polar Bear Spec. Gr. 2005)
2006: 20,000 - 25,000 (IUCN 2006)
It then continues to page 14,...and has several more photos and Graphs regarding the decline of the ice pack over the last thirty years,...and shows the various regions of the Arctic with current counts of the estimated Polar Bears and then shows a projection of the population in 2050....
Over here! Maybe it's full of liberals and we can have them for dinner...
They get hypothermia if they are in the water too long....
Now that is an amazing picture....
Black bear: "Look, I got feelings for all bears, ya know, but let's get real. Why it only the white bears you worried about? I got people hunting my family every day. You can just buy a bear license. Ain't for no polar bear though, no! I can live anywhere from Canada to Florida. It ain't my fault they think they gotta live on ice. Damn arctic like some kinda gated community. Come back when you start counting black bears, OK?"
Grizzly: "I have friends that are polar bears, and they're OK. A little pale and strange, but OK. Frankly I don't see all the fuss though. You think the world's running outta ice? Just head that direction and let me know what you see for the next few thousand miles. Ain't nobody worried that grizzlies might be in danger. All you send us is these skinny meals with bells and pepper. How about a nice holstein now and then? Taco Bell with no lettuce or tomato? You wanna get all teary-eyed about my homies up north, go ahead. They're laughing all the way to the seal hole."
I’m not a scientist, correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t all this “endangered species” stuff now completely a moot point?
There are NO LONGER ANY “ENDANGERED” SPECIES if we apply to them the same science were using on humans, to wit:
cloning, test tube babies, freezing embryos, sperm banks, harvesting ovums, fertilizing in vitro, etc.
Just get some polar bear sperm and eggs and a little lab going, and voila, endless polar bears (or any other species).
Why is this sort of experimentation on humans being pushed as cutting edge science for the good of humanity, but yet, they don’t think to apply the same technology where there would be no moral objections and possibly scientific discoveries?
Just another government scam to screw over the taxpayers and keep the “grants” flowing to the enviroloonies.
In Colorado & Wyoming, the Prebles Meadow Jumping Mouse is possibly going off the list due the fact that the DNA is the same as any meadow mouse...same with many other “endangered” species.
I sincerely believe that Bush has lost his mind.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
