Polar Bears Did Fine When Arctic Had No Ice

[Weatherman2020]

Former Vice President Al Gore shocked Americans in “An Inconvenient Truth” when he said polar bears were drowning because global warming was melting Arctic sea ice, but now a new study shows that polar bears did just fine even when there was no ice covering the Arctic.

Scientists with the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and the University of Alaska, Fairbanks released a study claiming the “stratigraphic record of the last 1.5 [million years] indicates that no marine species’ extinction events occurred despite major climate oscillations,” including periods where the Arctic was completely ice-free in summertime.

“Some species thought to be dependent on summer sea ice (e.g., polar bears) survived through these periods,” write Thomas Cronin of the USGS and Matthew Cronin of the University of Alaska in their new study.

“In the case of summer sea-ice-free interglacial periods, the presence of winter sea ice habitat, polar bears’ ability to fast during summer, seals ability to use land areas in the absence of sea ice, and the availability of new prey species shifting ranges into the Arctic may have allowed survival during warm periods,” Cronin and Cronin write.



Read more: ‘No Extinctions’: Polar Bears Survived Periods When The Arctic Had No Ice

 

[Freewill]

My opinion is, if evolution is real then Polar Bears need to adapt to making boats to sail out and find seals.

 

[Eaglewings]

My opinion is, if evolution is real then Polar Bears need to adapt to making boats to sail out and find seals.

Man / pollution / endangerment of the polar bears has nothing to do with evolution .. it is made by man this time around

 

[Slyhunter]

My opinion is, if evolution is real then Polar Bears need to adapt to making boats to sail out and find seals.

What about the poor Seals They're being hunted like animals. We need to protect the Seals. Kill all Polar Bears.

 

[Freewill]

My opinion is, if evolution is real then Polar Bears need to adapt to making boats to sail out and find seals.

Man / pollution / endangerment of the polar bears has nothing to do with evolution .. it is made by man this time around

Polar Bears/climate change/adaptation/= evolution.

 

[Freewill]

When in the hell are white tailed deer going to adapt to being able to cross a road without being killed. I think we eliminated a lot of the more stupid ones in my neck f the woods.

 

[mamooth]

As usual, some deniers are misrepresenting a study.

Biological response to climate change in the Arctic Ocean: the view from the past - Springer

First, nowhere in the paper does it say "Polar bears did just fine". It says they _survived_. Big difference. After all, nobody is proclaiming the extinction of polar bears now. So, the paper pretty much matches the predictions.

Second, the paper is not a statement about projecting polar bear populations. It's meant to talk about the past. It is not meant to describe the present of much faster climate change than happened in the past. Faster is worse, as it doesn't allow enough time for new species to spread into the new climate.

 

[Weatherman2020]

As usual, some deniers are misrepresenting a study.

Biological response to climate change in the Arctic Ocean: the view from the past - Springer

First, nowhere in the paper does it say "Polar bears did just fine". It says they _survived_. Big difference. After all, nobody is proclaiming the extinction of polar bears now. So, the paper pretty much matches the predictions.

Second, the paper is not a statement about projecting polar bear populations. It's meant to talk about the past. It is not meant to describe the present of much faster climate change than happened in the past. Faster is worse, as it doesn't allow enough time for new species to spread into the new climate.

The Environazis are in full spin mode now. No mass extinctions in the polar regions, with ice or with palm trees.

 

[Freewill]

As usual, some deniers are misrepresenting a study.

Biological response to climate change in the Arctic Ocean: the view from the past - Springer

First, nowhere in the paper does it say "Polar bears did just fine". It says they _survived_. Big difference. After all, nobody is proclaiming the extinction of polar bears now. So, the paper pretty much matches the predictions.

Second, the paper is not a statement about projecting polar bear populations. It's meant to talk about the past. It is not meant to describe the present of much faster climate change than happened in the past. Faster is worse, as it doesn't allow enough time for new species to spread into the new climate.

Isn't survival what it is all about? Or did they cancel Polar Bear Bingo?

 

[ScienceRocks]

They were brown bears when the arctic had no ice

 

[jon_berzerk]

View attachment 59751 Former Vice President Al Gore shocked Americans in “An Inconvenient Truth” when he said polar bears were drowning because global warming was melting Arctic sea ice, but now a new study shows that polar bears did just fine even when there was no ice covering the Arctic.

Scientists with the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and the University of Alaska, Fairbanks released a study claiming the “stratigraphic record of the last 1.5 [million years] indicates that no marine species’ extinction events occurred despite major climate oscillations,” including periods where the Arctic was completely ice-free in summertime.

“Some species thought to be dependent on summer sea ice (e.g., polar bears) survived through these periods,” write Thomas Cronin of the USGS and Matthew Cronin of the University of Alaska in their new study.

“In the case of summer sea-ice-free interglacial periods, the presence of winter sea ice habitat, polar bears’ ability to fast during summer, seals ability to use land areas in the absence of sea ice, and the availability of new prey species shifting ranges into the Arctic may have allowed survival during warm periods,” Cronin and Cronin write.



Read more: ‘No Extinctions’: Polar Bears Survived Periods When The Arctic Had No Ice

actually they are like everyone else in that regard

they do better in the warm then in the cold

 

[westwall]

View attachment 59751 Former Vice President Al Gore shocked Americans in “An Inconvenient Truth” when he said polar bears were drowning because global warming was melting Arctic sea ice, but now a new study shows that polar bears did just fine even when there was no ice covering the Arctic.

Scientists with the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and the University of Alaska, Fairbanks released a study claiming the “stratigraphic record of the last 1.5 [million years] indicates that no marine species’ extinction events occurred despite major climate oscillations,” including periods where the Arctic was completely ice-free in summertime.

“Some species thought to be dependent on summer sea ice (e.g., polar bears) survived through these periods,” write Thomas Cronin of the USGS and Matthew Cronin of the University of Alaska in their new study.

“In the case of summer sea-ice-free interglacial periods, the presence of winter sea ice habitat, polar bears’ ability to fast during summer, seals ability to use land areas in the absence of sea ice, and the availability of new prey species shifting ranges into the Arctic may have allowed survival during warm periods,” Cronin and Cronin write.



Read more: ‘No Extinctions’: Polar Bears Survived Periods When The Arctic Had No Ice

Oh stop throwing things like facts out there. They screw up the propaganda!

 

[Care4all]

when did the arctic have no ice?

Also, as Matt mentioned, didn't Polar bears evolve from brown bears/grizzly? Developed web feet to swim and lighter hair to match snow....

 

[jon_berzerk]

when did the arctic have no ice?

Also, as Matt mentioned, didn't Polar bears evolve from brown bears/grizzly? Developed web feet to swim and lighter hair to match snow....

some say the polar bear is a much younger species then the brown bear

 

[Old Rocks]

As usual, some deniers are misrepresenting a study.

Biological response to climate change in the Arctic Ocean: the view from the past - Springer

First, nowhere in the paper does it say "Polar bears did just fine". It says they _survived_. Big difference. After all, nobody is proclaiming the extinction of polar bears now. So, the paper pretty much matches the predictions.

Second, the paper is not a statement about projecting polar bear populations. It's meant to talk about the past. It is not meant to describe the present of much faster climate change than happened in the past. Faster is worse, as it doesn't allow enough time for new species to spread into the new climate.

The Environazis are in full spin mode now. No mass extinctions in the polar regions, with ice or with palm trees.

God, you are one stupid fuck. Such a noisy flap yap with not a hint of any kind of knowledge.

Quaternary extinction event - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Late Pleistocene extinction event saw the extinction of many mammals weighing more than 40 kg.

• In North America around 33 of 45 genera of large mammals became extinct.
• In South America 46 of 58
• In Australia 15 of 16
• In Europe 7 of 23
• In Subsaharan Africa only 2 of 44

The extinctions in the Americas entailed the elimination of all the larger (over 100 kg) mammalian species of South American origin, including those that had migrated north in theGreat American Interchange. Only in North America, South America, and Australia, did the extinction occur at family taxonomic levels or higher.

The period in which most of this occurred was called the Younger Dryas. A very rapid change of climate that tipped into a colder period for a thousand years, with major extinctions going in and coming out. The cause and how it worked is not at all understood.

 

[jon_berzerk]

As usual, some deniers are misrepresenting a study.

Biological response to climate change in the Arctic Ocean: the view from the past - Springer

First, nowhere in the paper does it say "Polar bears did just fine". It says they _survived_. Big difference. After all, nobody is proclaiming the extinction of polar bears now. So, the paper pretty much matches the predictions.

Second, the paper is not a statement about projecting polar bear populations. It's meant to talk about the past. It is not meant to describe the present of much faster climate change than happened in the past. Faster is worse, as it doesn't allow enough time for new species to spread into the new climate.

The Environazis are in full spin mode now. No mass extinctions in the polar regions, with ice or with palm trees.

God, you are one stupid fuck. Such a noisy flap yap with not a hint of any kind of knowledge.

Quaternary extinction event - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Late Pleistocene extinction event saw the extinction of many mammals weighing more than 40 kg.

• In North America around 33 of 45 genera of large mammals became extinct.
• In South America 46 of 58
• In Australia 15 of 16
• In Europe 7 of 23
• In Subsaharan Africa only 2 of 44

The extinctions in the Americas entailed the elimination of all the larger (over 100 kg) mammalian species of South American origin, including those that had migrated north in theGreat American Interchange. Only in North America, South America, and Australia, did the extinction occur at family taxonomic levels or higher.

The period in which most of this occurred was called the Younger Dryas. A very rapid change of climate that tipped into a colder period for a thousand years, with major extinctions going in and coming out. The cause and how it worked is not at all understood.

“The ramifications are that if the polar bear was an independent species for about 1 million years it survived previous cold and warm periods,” Cronin said. “This means the polar bear has been an independent lineage a long time through glacial and interglacial and warm periods.” The last glacial period was at maximum extent about 22,000 years ago, and was preceded by a warm interglacial period about 130,000 years ago. Other warm and cold periods preceded that. Cronin thinks that if polar bears survived previous warm periods in which there was little or no arctic summer sea ice, this should be used in models predicting the species’ response to current climate change. “It seems logical that if polar bears survived previous warm, ice-free periods, they could survive another. This is of course speculation, but so is predicting they will not survive, as the proponents of the endangered species act listing of polar bears have done.”

https://polarbearscience.files.word...-bear-genetics-uaf-press-release_march-11.pdf

 

[Crick]

As usual, some deniers are misrepresenting a study.

Biological response to climate change in the Arctic Ocean: the view from the past - Springer

First, nowhere in the paper does it say "Polar bears did just fine". It says they _survived_. Big difference. After all, nobody is proclaiming the extinction of polar bears now. So, the paper pretty much matches the predictions.

Second, the paper is not a statement about projecting polar bear populations. It's meant to talk about the past. It is not meant to describe the present of much faster climate change than happened in the past. Faster is worse, as it doesn't allow enough time for new species to spread into the new climate.

The Environazis are in full spin mode now. No mass extinctions in the polar regions, with ice or with palm trees.

How long did it take summer sea ice to completely disappear from the Arctic on such occasions in the past and what WAS the effect on polar bear populations (ie, did they go up, down or remain the same)?

The life styles of both polar bears and the ringed seals that make up their primary food source are completely dependent on ice. The alternative food sources available to them on land are NOT adequate to provide the nutritional requirements of individual bears or to feed any but a tiny fraction of the current polar bear population. No polar bears hibernate, though pregnant females will den, give birth and emerge three months later with their young. The idea of fasting over summer is based on "walking hibernation".

Walking hibernation? It was once thought that polar bears may reduce body condition losses when food deprived in summer by entering a hibernation-like state. If real, this “walking hibernation” response could help polar bears prolong survival even as global warming-induced sea ice declines progressively reduce foraging opportunities. Recent research, however, suggests that, although polar bears can conserve energy by minimizing activity level, their core body temperature remains well above levels of hibernation. This indicates lower limits on fasting than may have been possible if polar bears could enter a true hibernation like state while food deprived in summer. Polar bears, therefore, apparently have no special physiological escape from continuing sea ice decline. As previously predicted, unabated climate warming and associated sea ice decline will cause declines in body condition of individual bears, and ultimately lead to population reductions throughout the polar bear’s current range.
Hibernating and Denning | Polar Bears International

 

[Crick]

As usual, some deniers are misrepresenting a study.

Biological response to climate change in the Arctic Ocean: the view from the past - Springer

First, nowhere in the paper does it say "Polar bears did just fine". It says they _survived_. Big difference. After all, nobody is proclaiming the extinction of polar bears now. So, the paper pretty much matches the predictions.

Second, the paper is not a statement about projecting polar bear populations. It's meant to talk about the past. It is not meant to describe the present of much faster climate change than happened in the past. Faster is worse, as it doesn't allow enough time for new species to spread into the new climate.

The Environazis are in full spin mode now. No mass extinctions in the polar regions, with ice or with palm trees.

God, you are one stupid fuck. Such a noisy flap yap with not a hint of any kind of knowledge.

Quaternary extinction event - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Late Pleistocene extinction event saw the extinction of many mammals weighing more than 40 kg.

• In North America around 33 of 45 genera of large mammals became extinct.
• In South America 46 of 58
• In Australia 15 of 16
• In Europe 7 of 23
• In Subsaharan Africa only 2 of 44

The extinctions in the Americas entailed the elimination of all the larger (over 100 kg) mammalian species of South American origin, including those that had migrated north in theGreat American Interchange. Only in North America, South America, and Australia, did the extinction occur at family taxonomic levels or higher.

The period in which most of this occurred was called the Younger Dryas. A very rapid change of climate that tipped into a colder period for a thousand years, with major extinctions going in and coming out. The cause and how it worked is not at all understood.

“The ramifications are that if the polar bear was an independent species for about 1 million years it survived previous cold and warm periods,” Cronin said. “This means the polar bear has been an independent lineage a long time through glacial and interglacial and warm periods.” The last glacial period was at maximum extent about 22,000 years ago, and was preceded by a warm interglacial period about 130,000 years ago. Other warm and cold periods preceded that. Cronin thinks that if polar bears survived previous warm periods in which there was little or no arctic summer sea ice, this should be used in models predicting the species’ response to current climate change. “It seems logical that if polar bears survived previous warm, ice-free periods, they could survive another. This is of course speculation, but so is predicting they will not survive, as the proponents of the endangered species act listing of polar bears have done.”

https://polarbearscience.files.word...-bear-genetics-uaf-press-release_march-11.pdf

So, IF all the ice melted during the last interglacial, it took ~108,000 years to do so. We're going to manage to accomplish the feat in something a little less. But none of you deniers seem to think that will affect the level of impact to the population of polar bears, ringed seals or walrus.

 

[Wyatt earp]

As usual, some deniers are misrepresenting a study.

Biological response to climate change in the Arctic Ocean: the view from the past - Springer

First, nowhere in the paper does it say "Polar bears did just fine". It says they _survived_. Big difference. After all, nobody is proclaiming the extinction of polar bears now. So, the paper pretty much matches the predictions.

Second, the paper is not a statement about projecting polar bear populations. It's meant to talk about the past. It is not meant to describe the present of much faster climate change than happened in the past. Faster is worse, as it doesn't allow enough time for new species to spread into the new climate.

What the hell you babbling about to fast?

Where in the world has the weather changed to fast, Compared to the past?

 

[Crick]

Ian appointed me as Grammar Policeman, so I will take this opportunity that in both instances, you should have said "TOO fast"

The entire world's weather has changed too fast. Changes that took thousands or tens or thousands of years or hundreds of thousands of years in the past, humans have accomplished within a single century.