New York Times journalist Erica Goode misses a mountain of polar bear research, instead lets herself

[Sunsettommy]

No Tricks Zone

New York Times journalist Erica Goode misses a mountain of polar bear research, instead lets herself get swept up by alarmist polar bear activism.

By P Gosselin on 14. April 2018

EXCERPT:

The New York Times recently published an article penned by Erica Goode on the controversial Harvey et al paper, where 14 scientists (sophomorically) attacked polar bear researcher Susan Crockford and climate science skeptics.

If the Harvey publication makes anything clear, it is that its authors are deeply frustrated by the large share of the public who reject their alarmist climate science. But instead of looking at themselves and the mountain of blunders they have made in the past to see what they could improve, the Harvey scientists chose to lash out and blame their woes on mean-spirited “deniers”. The inconvenient reality, however, is that alarmist climate and polar bear science (and journalism) has not been clean, and at times it’s been outright sloppy, deceptive and shrill. That’s the real big reason skeptics have been so successful.

LINK

Watch how the warmists trip all over this, will make predictable comments about someone and so on......., to make complete fools of themselves.

 

[DGS49]

I find the fact that there are so many "polar bear scientists" in the world and publishing research quite disturbing. Is this the best they can do? Jesus, get a real job - hopefully one that produces something and doesn't suck at the Governments' teats.

 

[Sunsettommy]

I find the fact that there are so many "polar bear scientists" in the world and publishing research quite disturbing. Is this the best they can do? Jesus, get a real job - hopefully one that produces something and doesn't suck at the Governments' teats.

What amazes me is the number of people making fools of themselves in attacking a scientist with slurs, name calling and even personal attacks, for the crime of making data based contrary statements.

 

[DOTR]

 

[Sunsettommy]

It appears warmists are going to stay away from this, maybe because they understand that attacking a qualified scientist with slurs, name calling insults is a bad idea.

 

[Old Rocks]

Survival and breeding of polar bears in the southern Beaufort Sea in relation to sea ice

Summary
1. Observed and predicted declines in Arctic sea ice have raised concerns about marine mammals. In May 2008, the US Fish and Wildlife Service listed polar bears (Ursus maritimus) – one of the most ice‐dependent marine mammals – as threatened under the US Endangered Species Act.

2. We evaluated the effects of sea ice conditions on vital rates (survival and breeding probabilities) for polar bears in the southern Beaufort Sea. Although sea ice declines in this and other regions of the polar basin have been among the greatest in the Arctic, to date population‐level effects of sea ice loss on polar bears have only been identified in western Hudson Bay, near the southern limit of the species’ range.

https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1365-2656.2009.01603.x

A good start to answering you.

 

[Old Rocks]

Variation in the response of an Arctic top predator experiencing habitat loss: feeding and reproductive ecology of two polar bear populations


Abstract
Polar bears (Ursus maritimus) have experienced substantial changes in the seasonal availability of sea ice habitat in parts of their range, including the Beaufort, Chukchi, and Bering Seas. In this study, we compared the body size, condition, and recruitment of polar bears captured in the Chukchi and Bering Seas (CS) between two periods (1986–1994 and 2008–2011) when declines in sea ice habitat occurred. In addition, we compared metrics for the CS population 2008–2011 with those of the adjacent southern Beaufort Sea (SB) population where loss in sea ice habitat has been associated with declines in body condition, size, recruitment, and survival. We evaluated how variation in body condition and recruitment were related to feeding ecology. Comparing habitat conditions between populations, there were twice as many reduced ice days over continental shelf waters per year during 2008–2011 in the SB than in the CS. CS polar bears were larger and in better condition, and appeared to have higher reproduction than SB bears. Although SB and CS bears had similar diets, twice as many bears were fasting in spring in the SB than in the CS. Between 1986–1994 and 2008–2011, body size, condition, and recruitment indices in the CS were not reduced despite a 44‐day increase in the number of reduced ice days. Bears in the CS exhibited large body size, good body condition, and high indices of recruitment compared to most other populations measured to date. Higher biological productivity and prey availability in the CS relative to the SB, and a shorter recent history of reduced sea ice habitat, may explain the maintenance of condition and recruitment of CS bears. Geographic differences in the response of polar bears to climate change are relevant to range‐wide forecasts for this and other ice‐dependent species.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/gcb.12339

Interesting.

 

[Old Rocks]

Climate change and the increasing impact of polar bears on bird populations
Jouke Prop1*,

Jon Aars2,

Bård-Jørgen Bårdsen3, Sveinn A. Hanssen3, Claus Bech4,

Sophie Bourgeon2, Jimmy de Fouw5, Geir W. Gabrielsen2,

Johannes Lang6,7,

Elin Noreen4, Thomas Oudman5,

Benoit Sittler7,8, Lech Stempniewicz9,10, Ingunn Tombre3,

Eva Wolters11 and Børge Moe12

• 1Arctic Centre, University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands
• 2FRAM—High North Research Centre for Climate and the Environment, Norwegian Polar Institute, Tromsø, Norway
• 3Arctic Ecology Department, FRAM—High North Research Centre for Climate and the Environment, Norwegian Institute for Nature Research (NINA), Tromsø, Norway
• 4Department of Biology, Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Trondheim, Norway
• 5Department of Marine Ecology, NIOZ Royal Netherlands Institute for Sea Research, Den Burg, Netherlands
• 6Institute of Animal Ecology and Nature Education, Gonterskirchen, Germany
• 7Groupe de Recherche en Ecologie Arctique, Francheville, France
• 8Chair for Landscape Management, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
• 9Department of Vertebrate Ecology and Zoology, University of Gdansk, Gdansk, Poland
• 10Polish Polar Station Hornsund, Institute of Geophysics, Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw, Poland
• 11Branta Research, Ezinge, Netherlands
• 12Norwegian Institute for Nature Research (NINA), Trondheim, Norway

The Arctic is becoming warmer at a high rate, and contractions in the extent of sea ice are currently changing the habitats of marine top-predators dependent on ice. Polar bears (Ursus maritimus) depend on sea ice for hunting seals. For these top-predators, longer ice-free seasons are hypothesized to force the bears to hunt for alternative terrestrial food, such as eggs from colonial breeding birds. We analyzed time-series of polar bear observations at four locations on Spitsbergen (Svalbard) and one in east Greenland. Summer occurrence of polar bears, measured as the probability of encountering bears and the number of days with bear presence, has increased significantly from the 1970/80s to the present. The shifts in polar bear occurrence coincided with trends for shorter sea ice seasons and less sea ice during the spring in the study area. This resulted in a strong inverse relationship between the probability of bear encounters on land and the length of the sea ice season. Within, 10 years after their first appearance on land, polar bears had advanced their arrival dates by almost 30 days. Direct observations of nest predation showed that polar bears may severely affect reproductive success of the barnacle goose (Branta leucopsis), common eider (Somateria mollissima) and glaucous gull (Larus hyperboreus). Nest predation was strongest in years when the polar bears arrived well before hatch, with more than 90% of all nests being predated. The results are similar to findings from Canada, and large-scale processes, such as climate and subsequent habitat changes, are pinpointed as the most likely drivers in various parts of the Arctic. We suggest that the increasing, earlier appearance of bears on land in summer reflects behavioral adaptations by a small segment of the population to cope with a reduced hunting range on sea ice. This exemplifies how behavioral adaptations may contribute to the cascading effects of climate change.

Climate change and the increasing impact of polar bears on bird populations

Sounds like the bears are not enjoying the warmer world.

 

[Old Rocks]

Reduced body size and cub recruitment in polar bears associated with sea ice decline


Abstract
Rates of reproduction and survival are dependent upon adequate body size and condition of individuals. Declines in size and condition have provided early indicators of population decline in polar bears (Ursus maritimus) near the southern extreme of their range. We tested whether patterns in body size, condition, and cub recruitment of polar bears in the southern Beaufort Sea of Alaska were related to the availability of preferred sea ice habitats and whether these measures and habitat availability exhibited trends over time, between 1982 and 2006. The mean skull size and body length of all polar bears over three years of age declined over time, corresponding with long‐term declines in the spatial and temporal availability of sea ice habitat. Body size of young, growing bears declined over time and was smaller after years when sea ice availability was reduced. Reduced litter mass and numbers of yearlings per female following years with lower availability of optimal sea ice habitat, suggest reduced reproductive output and juvenile survival. These results, based on analysis of a long‐term data set, suggest that declining sea ice is associated with nutritional limitations that reduced body size and reproduction in this population.

https://esajournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1890/08-1036.1

Thus far I have not seen any articles that state that the reduction in polar ice is good for the bears.

 

[Old Rocks]

No Tricks Zone

New York Times journalist Erica Goode misses a mountain of polar bear research, instead lets herself get swept up by alarmist polar bear activism.

By P Gosselin on 14. April 2018

EXCERPT:

The New York Times recently published an article penned by Erica Goode on the controversial Harvey et al paper, where 14 scientists (sophomorically) attacked polar bear researcher Susan Crockford and climate science skeptics.

If the Harvey publication makes anything clear, it is that its authors are deeply frustrated by the large share of the public who reject their alarmist climate science. But instead of looking at themselves and the mountain of blunders they have made in the past to see what they could improve, the Harvey scientists chose to lash out and blame their woes on mean-spirited “deniers”. The inconvenient reality, however, is that alarmist climate and polar bear science (and journalism) has not been clean, and at times it’s been outright sloppy, deceptive and shrill. That’s the real big reason skeptics have been so successful.

LINK

Watch how the warmists trip all over this, will make predictable comments about someone and so on......., to make complete fools of themselves.

Seems you have played the fool here.

 

[Weatherman2020]

No Tricks Zone

New York Times journalist Erica Goode misses a mountain of polar bear research, instead lets herself get swept up by alarmist polar bear activism.

By P Gosselin on 14. April 2018

EXCERPT:

The New York Times recently published an article penned by Erica Goode on the controversial Harvey et al paper, where 14 scientists (sophomorically) attacked polar bear researcher Susan Crockford and climate science skeptics.

If the Harvey publication makes anything clear, it is that its authors are deeply frustrated by the large share of the public who reject their alarmist climate science. But instead of looking at themselves and the mountain of blunders they have made in the past to see what they could improve, the Harvey scientists chose to lash out and blame their woes on mean-spirited “deniers”. The inconvenient reality, however, is that alarmist climate and polar bear science (and journalism) has not been clean, and at times it’s been outright sloppy, deceptive and shrill. That’s the real big reason skeptics have been so successful.

LINK

Watch how the warmists trip all over this, will make predictable comments about someone and so on......., to make complete fools of themselves.

Send her to Canada with bacon in her pocket.

 

[Old Rocks]

Nice dumb ass comment from a renowned dumb ass. I just posted articles from real scientific journals that say that the OP is full of shit.

 

[Weatherman2020]

Nice dumb ass comment from a renowned dumb ass. I just posted articles from real scientific journals that say that the OP is full of shit.

We must save the drowning polar bears!

 

[cnm]

P Gosselin

Jesus.

 

[cnm]

We must save the drowning polar bears!

Luckily rightard dumb fucks appear to be in no danger of population reduction.

 

[Weatherman2020]

We must save the drowning polar bears!

Luckily rightard dumb fucks appear to be in no danger of population reduction.

Save the baby seals!

Global population of polar bears has increased by 2,650-5,700 since 2001