Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Global warming sees polar bears stranded on melting ice
Daily Mail (UK) ^ | Feb 1, 2007 | BILL MOULAND

Posted on 02/02/2007 9:50:11 AM PST by ml/nj

They cling precariously to the top of what is left of the ice floe, their fragile grip the perfect symbol of the tragedy of global warming.

Captured on film by Canadian environmentalists, the pair of polar bears look stranded on chunks of broken ice.

Although the magnificent creatures are well adapted to the water, and can swim scores of miles to solid land, the distance is getting ever greater as the Arctic ice diminishes.

(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: bear; climatechange; environment; global; globalwarming; polar; warming
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 141-145 next last
To: cripplecreek
The best. Hands down.


21 posted on 02/02/2007 10:10:12 AM PST by keat (You know who I feel bad for? Arab-Americans who truly want to get into crop-dusting.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: ml/nj

WHY does the media not show this???


22 posted on 02/02/2007 10:10:32 AM PST by Paloma_55 (I may be a hateful bigot, but I still love you)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ml/nj
Evolve or die!
23 posted on 02/02/2007 10:13:14 AM PST by HEY4QDEMS (Sarchasm: The gulf between the author of sarcastic wit and the person who doesn't get it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nathan Zachary
Every study has shown that the 20th century wended with a net GAIN in both area of arctic ice, and net GAIN in glacier area in Greenland.

Do you mean a net gain in arctic ice from 1900 to 2000, and a net gain in Greenland ice for the same period?

24 posted on 02/02/2007 10:14:18 AM PST by secretagent
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: ml/nj
When was this picture taken?


25 posted on 02/02/2007 10:14:54 AM PST by darkwing104 (Let's get dangerous)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: keat

That's looter guy. Always trying to help out.


26 posted on 02/02/2007 10:15:09 AM PST by cripplecreek (Peace without victory is a temporary illusion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: ml/nj

Correct. Icebergs have been seen from the New Zealand coast for the first time in years. The explanation, in the article I read, was that ocean temperatures off New Zealand have cooled in recent years. This has allowed the icebergs to remain intact as they drift farther north rather than to melt as they normally do.


27 posted on 02/02/2007 10:16:19 AM PST by Brad from Tennessee (Anything a politician gives you he has first stolen from you)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ml/nj

"The funny thing about it is that it really indicates that there is global cooling going on. That is, if the distance that the bears have to swim is increasing, that means the icebergs are surviving a longer trip from the land they separated from. This can only be (assuming ocean currents remain the same) that the icebergs start out colder, they start out bigger, and/or the ocean is cooler. All three of these possibilites would indicate colder, not warmer, weather."

No it doesn't. If it were getting cooler the ice wouldn't break off as much or maybe the pieces would be bigger or maybe there wouldn't be so much open water and the ice would reattach to other pieces before it could drift out to sea.

I think the evidence indicates that there has been warming. The key questions are: (1) what is the cause and (2) what to do about it.

There are multiple factors to consider, of which human influence is one. Even if human influence could be eliminated the warming might well go on.

Whether we should attempt to do anything about it is a matter for debate. Warmer might, on balance, be better than cooler. Or it might not. It is by no means clear that stopping the likely global warming would be a net benefit.

If we did decide we should try to stop or reverse global warming the question becomes what method should be used. The left quickly jumps on the idea of reversing industrialization and returning to a "more natural" lifestyle. However, this would cause great hardship and economic decline for the vast majority of humanity. Other methods appear less painful. On the one hand, we could try to offset greenhouse gases by increasing flora that will absorb more carbon dioxide. This is the "plant more trees" option. A potentially useful byproduct would be more forests and more wood products.

A second option would focus on reducing the temperature by deflecting/reflecting more sunlight. This wouldn't reduce the carbon dioxide--thus retaining the beneficial impacts on agriculture of higher CO2 (i.e., crops grow bigger faster). This is both technically feasible and economically less costly than the emissions reduction schemes touted by the Kyoto Treaty.

The temperature of the planet will continue to fluctuate over time. The wealth created by advanced capitalistic economies provides humans with the realistic option to modify natural fluctuations in ways that would be beneficial.


28 posted on 02/02/2007 10:17:23 AM PST by John Semmens
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nathan Zachary
A pic of a bear riding on ice flows says NOTHING, except that most people haven't a clue about how these bears act in their enviroment, and are completely gullable towards the BS they are being sold by these eviro-nut activists.They are up there as high as they can be to better survey where their next meal is coming from. Those bears are well fed and not stranded.
29 posted on 02/02/2007 10:19:38 AM PST by cpdiii (Oil Field Trash and proud of it, Geologist, Pilot, Pharmacist, Iconoclast)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: ml/nj

I have a question. How can anyone believe we can dump pounds and pounds of carbon monoxide and god knows what into the atmosphere without ANY negative effect? Even if you dont believe in global warming you must admit that pollution is a BAD thing right?


30 posted on 02/02/2007 10:20:08 AM PST by LiberalGunNut
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

OMG! LOL


31 posted on 02/02/2007 10:20:56 AM PST by Fawn (Vista stinks)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Nathan Zachary
A pic of a bear riding on ice flows says NOTHING, except that most people haven't a clue about how these bears act in their enviroment, and are completely gullable towards the BS they are being sold by these eviro-nut activists.

They are up there as high as they can be to better survey where their next meal is coming from. Those bears are well fed and not stranded.

32 posted on 02/02/2007 10:22:06 AM PST by cpdiii (Oil Field Trash and proud of it, Geologist, Pilot, Pharmacist, Iconoclast)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: John Semmens

"The left quickly jumps on the idea of reversing industrialization and returning to a "more natural" lifestyle."

Didn't Mao or Pol Pot try this? Back to the land at the point of a gun?


33 posted on 02/02/2007 10:24:59 AM PST by listenhillary (You can lead a man to reason, but you can't make him think)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Brad from Tennessee
It's also a fact that the South pole has seen a gain of total ice mass and area over the last century, which is causing more and thicker ice to break off. Studies

They sure are pushing this global warming BS though, and it's no wonder why. On the news just now, they are talking about conpensating poor countries unable to afford to make changes due to "global warming".

Gee, I wonder which way the "scientists" from those countries voted on the question of global warming, and if it is a concern.

34 posted on 02/02/2007 10:26:16 AM PST by Nathan Zachary
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: SF Republican
Would like to see a wide shot photo to get an idea of how stranded this pair is.

Me, too, and for the same reasons. That was my first thought when I saw the picture - what did they crop to get the shot they wanted?

35 posted on 02/02/2007 10:26:22 AM PST by DustyMoment (FloriDUH - proud inventors of pregnant/hanging chads and judicide!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek
Image and video hosting by TinyPic
36 posted on 02/02/2007 10:26:41 AM PST by Fawn (Vista stinks)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: ml/nj

Where, oh where, will the polar bears give birth and raise their young?

They do that on dry land?

Never mind.


37 posted on 02/02/2007 10:27:07 AM PST by siunevada (If we learn nothing from history, what's the point of having one? - Peggy Hill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LiberalGunNut

Air trends 'amplifying' warming
By Richard Black
Environment Correspondent, BBC News website, in Vienna

Martin Wild
Reduced air pollution and increased water evaporation appear to be adding to man-made global warming.

Research presented at a major European science meeting adds to other evidence that cleaner air is letting more solar energy through to the Earth's surface

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4880328.stm


38 posted on 02/02/2007 10:27:31 AM PST by listenhillary (You can lead a man to reason, but you can't make him think)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Nathan Zachary

Here's a link on the New Zealand icebergs:

http://climatesci.colorado.edu/2006/11/18/iceberg-spotted-from-new-zealand-shore/


39 posted on 02/02/2007 10:28:04 AM PST by Brad from Tennessee (Anything a politician gives you he has first stolen from you)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: LiberalGunNut

It's carbon dioxide not carbon monoxide. That would be funny if they said carbon monoxide in the Kyoto Treaty. Most of them wouldn't know the difference.


40 posted on 02/02/2007 10:29:41 AM PST by RightWhale (300 miles north of Big Wild Life)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 141-145 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson