Jump to content
Guests feel free to register and post ×
WELCOME NEW MEMBERS AND GUESTS FEEL FREE TO REGISTER AND POST ×
WELCOME NEW MEMBERS AND GUESTS ×
guests can now post ×
welcome guests . feel free to test the waters. ×

Leaked EPA email tells staff to play up climate denial, ignore actual data


Recommended Posts

45 minutes ago, ClownCrusher said:

Well, it's from your own source.  LOL


No, little fuckwit, it is not from either of the two two sources about polar bears that I cited in my recent post debunking your many lies………but even if that info about polar bear deaths declining in the 1970s & 80s after years of very high death rates had been something I cited….so what, retard? The reason the death rates had been previously high was because the bears were being hunted, both commercially and for sport, they were being shot from helicopters, and trapped in bear traps. Their numbers rebounded somewhat after the hunting and trapping were ended in the late 1960s and early 1970s. That has nothing to do with the current decline in polar bear populations because global warming is melting the ice cap that previously floated on top of the Arctic Ocean and thus is depriving the bears of their natural habitat and hunting grounds. As that National Geographic article confirmed……The species as a whole is decreasing in number, and is listed as vulnerable by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, ClownCrusher said:

Again, Canada and Alaska are not the entire world.  Overall, numbers are increasing.

 

 

sT0b4kZ.jpg

 


More bullshit! That is a fake news site for climate change deniers, funded by the Koch Brothers. You are a gullible moron!

 

Last week, The New York Times reported on a scientific feud between a Canadian zoologist who says the threat to polar bears posed by global warming has been exaggerated and 14 climate scientists and bear experts who say the threat is real. The Arctic is warming twice as fast as the rest of the planet, scientists have reported, raising the possibility that summer sea ice will be gone by 2040. To which Susan Crockford, an adjunct professor in anthropology at the University of Victoria in British Columbia, says baloney. She has not actually formally studied polar bears and sea ice, but she runs a website called PolarBearScience.com which is the go-to source for the bears-are-all-right climate denialists. A group of 14 prominent climate scientists struck back at Crockford in the peer-reviewed journal BioScience. They found that 80 percent of the “polar bears are just fine” websites cite Crockford as a key source. In unusually blunt language for an academic journal, the authors write that “scientists such as Crockford who are described as ‘experts’ on denier blogs in fact typically have little in the way of relevant expertise, and their expertise is often self-manufactured to serve alternative agendas.” In 2010, the environmental group Greenpeace traced the funding for multiple climate denial websites, including those defending the status of the polar bear, to industrialists Charles and David Koch. “Koch-funded groups have developed ‘junk science’ asserting that polar bears are not threatened by climate-induced melting of Arctic sea ice, promoted the notion that climate scientists are suppressing alternative findings, and financed studies that misinform the public on renewable energy benefits,” Greenpeace said. It’s possible to find some isolated polar bear populations doing better than others. The overwhelming consensus among legitimate scientists is that polar bears are doomed.
(source - 
Polar bears: Pick your facts and ignore the science)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ClownCrusher said:

I'm citing NASA, NOAA, peer review,etc.  You cited a polar bear advocacy group.


No, you are not! You are citing unqualified wackos stooging for climate change deniers.

 

I cited a very old and very widely respected, science based environmental protection group.

 

The International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources is a network of environmental organizations founded as the International Union for the Protection of Nature in October 1948 in Fontainebleau, France, to promote nature conservation and the ecologically sustainable use of natural resources. Through its member organizations, the IUCN supports and participates in environmental scientific research; promotes and helps implement national conservation legislation, policies, and practices; and operates or manages thousands of field projects worldwide. The IUCN’s activities are organized into several theme-based programs ranging from business and biodiversity to forest preservation to water and wetlands conservation. In addition, a smaller number of special initiatives draw upon the work of different programs to address specific issues, such as climate change, conservation, and poverty reduction. The volunteer work of more than 10,000 scientists and other experts is coordinated through special commissions on education and communication; environmental, economic, and social policy; environmental law; ecosystem management; species survival; and protected areas. All of the IUCN’s work is guided by a global program, which is adopted by member organizations every four years at the IUCN World Conservation Congress.

(source)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/21/2021 at 3:48 AM, TruePatriot said:


No, little fuckwit, it is not from either of the two two sources about polar bears that I cited in my recent post debunking your many lies

 

 

Exactly.  It was your source about "extreme" weather deaths which actually showed deaths declining.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/21/2021 at 4:18 AM, TruePatriot said:


More bullshit! That is a fake news site for climate change deniers, funded by the Koch Brothers. You are a gullible moron!

 

To which Susan Crockford, an adjunct professor in anthropology at the University of Victoria in British Columbia, says baloney. She has not actually formally studied polar bears and sea ice, 

 

 

She actually has studies polar bears.  Her doctoral dissertation was about polar bears.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/21/2021 at 4:36 AM, TruePatriot said:

 

 

The International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources is a network of environmental organizations founded as the International Union for the Protection of Nature in October 1948 in Fontainebleau, France, to promote nature conservation and the ecologically sustainable use of natural resources. Through its member organizations, the IUCN supports and participates in environmental scientific research; promotes and helps implement national conservation legislation, policies, and practices; and operates or manages thousands of field projects worldwide.

 

That's actually a textbook example of advocacy.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/30/2018 at 3:31 PM, benson13 said:

Nobody runs from you BeaLOSER....you're just another Uneducated redneck republiKlan and not worth the time

2000

Global Warming Expert...

 

"We'll never see snow again"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, ClownCrusher said:

 

 

You can't contest my evidence, so you changed the topic on your own thread!

 

LMFAO, indeed!


Actually, moron, your bogus “evidence” was completely debunked, not just  “contested”. Too bad you are too stupid to grasp that fact. 
 

Here’s another cherry on top…….

Financial Post publishes misleading opinion that misrepresents science of polar bears’ plight

Analysis of "Polar bears keep thriving even as global warming alarmists keep pretending they’re dying"
Published in Financial Post, by Susan Crockford on 27 Feb 2018.  Three scientists analyzed the article and estimate its overall scientific credibility to be 'very low'.  This article in the opinion section of Financial Post, written by Susan Crockford, claims that rather than being threatened by declining Arctic sea ice, polar bears are “thriving”. Three scientists who reviewed the article explained that this article fundamentally misrepresents research on the topic. The author exhibits poor reasoning in arguing that polar bear population loss projected for 2050 should have occurred already if that science was accurate. Researchers do not ignore the evidence Crockford claims they do, but instead incorporate all published research on polar bear populations. Despite the article’s statements to the contrary, research shows that polar bear populations will struggle as ice-free periods (during which they cannot hunt for food) grow longer.

These comments are the overall opinion of scientists on the article, they are substantiated by their knowledge in the field and by the content of the analysis in the annotations on the article.

Andrew Derocher, Professor, University of Alberta:
The article is nonsense and reflects a profound lack of understanding of polar bear ecology, ringed seal ecology, Arctic marine ecosystem, and sea ice.

Cody Dey, Postdoctoral Fellow, University of Windsor:
The article cherry picks scientific results and does not consider the total weight of scientific evidence which clearly indicate that polar bears are negatively affected by sea ice loss.

Steven Amstrup, Chief Scientist, Polar Bears International, and Adjunct Professor University of Wyoming in Laramie:
The article is composed of misstatements. These are either based upon the author’s apparent lack of understanding of the ecological and geophysical situations, or intent to mislead readers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TruePatriot said:


Actually, moron, your bogus “evidence” was completely debunked, not just  “contested”. Too bad you are too stupid to grasp that fact. 
 

Here’s another cherry on top…….

Financial Post publishes misleading opinion that misrepresents science of polar bears’ plight

Analysis of "Polar bears keep thriving even as global warming alarmists keep pretending they’re dying"
Published in Financial Post, by Susan Crockford on 27 Feb 2018.  Three scientists analyzed the article and estimate its overall scientific credibility to be 'very low'.  This article in the opinion section of Financial Post, written by Susan Crockford, claims that rather than being threatened by declining Arctic sea ice, polar bears are “thriving”. Three scientists who reviewed the article explained that this article fundamentally misrepresents research on the topic. The author exhibits poor reasoning in arguing that polar bear population loss projected for 2050 should have occurred already if that science was accurate. Researchers do not ignore the evidence Crockford claims they do, but instead incorporate all published research on polar bear populations. Despite the article’s statements to the contrary, research shows that polar bear populations will struggle as ice-free periods (during which they cannot hunt for food) grow longer.

These comments are the overall opinion of scientists on the article, they are substantiated by their knowledge in the field and by the content of the analysis in the annotations on the article.

Andrew Derocher, Professor, University of Alberta:
The article is nonsense and reflects a profound lack of understanding of polar bear ecology, ringed seal ecology, Arctic marine ecosystem, and sea ice.

Cody Dey, Postdoctoral Fellow, University of Windsor:
The article cherry picks scientific results and does not consider the total weight of scientific evidence which clearly indicate that polar bears are negatively affected by sea ice loss.

Steven Amstrup, Chief Scientist, Polar Bears International, and Adjunct Professor University of Wyoming in Laramie:
The article is composed of misstatements. These are either based upon the author’s apparent lack of understanding of the ecological and geophysical situations, or intent to mislead readers.

Your three scientists never posted any polar bear numbers.  Neither did you.  The only thing they talk about is predictions and something about sea ice.  Post your contemporary polar bear numbers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...