'Extinct' Polar Bears are Thriving, so Woketards Fire Professor who Proved it

[hadit]

Are polar bear populations shrinking or not is the question at hand. A scientist checks to see if that's happening. A true believer asks what the priests say. At one point it was settled science by consensus that the earth was flat.

Actually, no.

All the way back to the Ancient Greeks, scientists knew the world was round. So did most sailors. Your piss-ignorant peasant who never traveled more than 50 miles from where he was born thought it was flat..

We have a lot of evidence that the globe is getting warmer... dying coral reefs, melting permafrost, shrinking glaciers, and so on.

What we have is what credible scientists - 97% of them- realize, and what the Koch Brothers pay for to confuse the issue to prevent serious action from being taken.

Okay, if you don't like the flat Earth idea, there are plenty more. It was settled science by consensus that the Earth was the center of the solar system, that flies sprang spontaneously from rotting meat, and mice from straw. The point is, using "the science is settled by consensus" to silence dissenting voices is not science, it's politics and cult belief.

Again the question is whether polar bear populations are shrinking, growing, or remaining constant. It's not a political issue, it's a measurable one. If the professor is correct that populations are increasing, he not only doesn't suck at his job, he deserves a big payout from a wrongful termination lawsuit.

A professor's job is to pursue truth, not regurgitate orthodoxy.

 

[CWayne]

Thats the entire framework for the "science" of manmade global climate warming change - they silence the skeptic. Pathetic. Absolute polar opposite of science

Yeah, when the skeptic comes in with a bag full of oil money and Koch Brother Cum Stains on his face, we tend to want to silence him.

Is this because you like the taste of Soros cum over Koch?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Thats the entire framework for the "science" of manmade global climate warming change - they silence the skeptic. Pathetic. Absolute polar opposite of science

Yeah, when the skeptic comes in with a bag full of oil money and Koch Brother Cum Stains on his face, we tend to want to silence him.

Because you can't refute with real science

 

[JoeB131]

Okay, if you don't like the flat Earth idea, there are plenty more. It was settled science by consensus that the Earth was the center of the solar system, that flies sprang spontaneously from rotting meat, and mice from straw.

Why do you need to go back centuries to find examples to support your position?

Do you have a modern example of where 97% of Scientists got it wrong?

Didn't think so.

 

[JoeB131]

Because you can't refute with real science

97% of scientists say AGW is real. Done.

 

[SweetSue92]

Woketards cannot tolerate anyone disagreeing with their ideology.

WATCH: Canadian Prof Loses Job for Saying Polar Bears Not Endangered
Crockford’s “crime” was to point out that contrary to environmentalists’ computer projections, polar bear populations have increased, not decreased — despite “global warming”.

“What happened was that in 2007 there was a prediction that when sea ice declined to about 42 per cent below what it would have been in 1979 that two-thirds of the polar bears in the world would be gone. That would be 10 out of the 19 sub populations that exist.

But what has happened, we find from research, is that bear numbers have not gone down but in fact have gone up by at least 16 per cent and probably more. So the bears are thriving despite the fact that sea ice has declined dramatically.”

The “polar bears starving because of melting sea ice” story has been a staple of the green scare narrative.

In 2017, for example, footage of an emaciated polar bear rummaging pitifully through trash cans became a huge international story.

The video for National Geographic attracted over two million views. It was set to tear-jerking music and accompanied by the utterly dishonest and misleading message “This is what climate change looks like.”

In fact, as Crockford explains, this was the purest green #FakeNews.

“Starving is the leading natural cause of death for polar bears. It just happens.”

If the polar bear was starving to death, it was likely the result of its being old or sick — not because of melting summer sea ice.

Crockford says:

“Polar bears do most of their feeding in the spring time, not the summer. Starving polar bears don’t tell us anything about populations.”​

"woketards" is golden and hilarious

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Because you can't refute with real science

97% of scientists say AGW is real. Done.

So you have no lab work, only Flat Earth Consensus.

And we know the "97%" is a bullshit number

 

[hadit]

Okay, if you don't like the flat Earth idea, there are plenty more. It was settled science by consensus that the Earth was the center of the solar system, that flies sprang spontaneously from rotting meat, and mice from straw.

Why do you need to go back centuries to find examples to support your position?

Do you have a modern example of where 97% of Scientists got it wrong?

Didn't think so.

Don't have to. Trying to silence a scientific voice because it says politically inconvenient things is not right, whether it was done centuries ago or today. The bottom line question remains, are polar bear populations increasing, decreasing, or staying the same? I notice that you don't want to talk about that, just want to shut up someone who is saying they are increasing because it's inconvenient to your narrative.

A scientist would look at the situation, realize the models were wrong, figure out where and why, and produce better models. A political hack, that's you in case you were wondering, would look at the situation and scream, "Shut up! Everyone says you're wrong! Just shut up because you suck at your job!"

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Woketards cannot tolerate anyone disagreeing with their ideology.

WATCH: Canadian Prof Loses Job for Saying Polar Bears Not Endangered
Crockford’s “crime” was to point out that contrary to environmentalists’ computer projections, polar bear populations have increased, not decreased — despite “global warming”.

“What happened was that in 2007 there was a prediction that when sea ice declined to about 42 per cent below what it would have been in 1979 that two-thirds of the polar bears in the world would be gone. That would be 10 out of the 19 sub populations that exist.

But what has happened, we find from research, is that bear numbers have not gone down but in fact have gone up by at least 16 per cent and probably more. So the bears are thriving despite the fact that sea ice has declined dramatically.”

The “polar bears starving because of melting sea ice” story has been a staple of the green scare narrative.

In 2017, for example, footage of an emaciated polar bear rummaging pitifully through trash cans became a huge international story.

The video for National Geographic attracted over two million views. It was set to tear-jerking music and accompanied by the utterly dishonest and misleading message “This is what climate change looks like.”

In fact, as Crockford explains, this was the purest green #FakeNews.

“Starving is the leading natural cause of death for polar bears. It just happens.”

If the polar bear was starving to death, it was likely the result of its being old or sick — not because of melting summer sea ice.

Crockford says:

“Polar bears do most of their feeding in the spring time, not the summer. Starving polar bears don’t tell us anything about populations.”​

Garbage thread for idiots. Plenty of other biologists study polar bears. They haven't been fired. The thread title is a lie, and you deniers are gullible morons.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

So you have no lab work, only Flat Earth Consensus.

Oh shut up Francis. Where is your lab work? No, diddling yourself while reading denier blogs doesn't count.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

So you have no lab work, only Flat Earth Consensus.

Oh shut up Francis. Where is your lab work? No, diddling yourself while reading denier blogs doesn't count.

Consensus and denier are Cult secret handshake words.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

So you have no lab work, only Flat Earth Consensus.

Oh shut up Francis. Where is your lab work? No, diddling yourself while reading denier blogs doesn't count.

How much heat is trapped by increasing CO2 from 280 to 400PPM as show by increase in temperature? What's that? You can't show any temperature increase? Gee, I wonder why

 

[james bond]

97% of scientists say AGW is real. Done.

97% secualr/atheist scientists. They are usually wrong.

Polar bears are eating a lot now and thriving. The climate change alarmists are starving now so they had to fire their only reputable scientist.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Stating the truth is to “suck at your job”?

Except he wasn't stating the truth. The consensus of Scientists is that Polar Bears are threatened.

Polar bear - Wikipedia

Nevertheless, polar bears are listed as "Vulnerable" under criterion A3c, which indicates an expected population decrease of ≥30% over the next three generations (~34.5 years) due to "decline in area of occupancy, extent of occurrence and/or quality of habitat".[2] Risks to the polar bear include climate change, pollution in the form of toxic contaminants, conflicts with shipping, oil and gas exploration and development, and human-bear interactions including harvesting and possible stresses from recreational polar-bear watching.[2]

According to the World Wildlife Fund, the polar bear is important as an indicator of Arctic ecosystem health. Polar bears are studied to gain understanding of what is happening throughout the Arctic, because at-risk polar bears are often a sign of something wrong with the Arctic marine ecosystem.[180]

^^^^^^^

 

[Wyatt earp]

Okay, if you don't like the flat Earth idea, there are plenty more. It was settled science by consensus that the Earth was the center of the solar system, that flies sprang spontaneously from rotting meat, and mice from straw.

Why do you need to go back centuries to find examples to support your position?

Do you have a modern example of where 97% of Scientists got it wrong?

Didn't think so.

Name these 97%



And give us addresses
.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Consensus and denier are Cult secret handshake words.

All words in this topic are secret to you, because you know less than nothong about any of this.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Okay, if you don't like the flat Earth idea, there are plenty more. It was settled science by consensus that the Earth was the center of the solar system, that flies sprang spontaneously from rotting meat, and mice from straw.

Why do you need to go back centuries to find examples to support your position?

Do you have a modern example of where 97% of Scientists got it wrong?

Didn't think so.

Name these 97%



And give us addresses
.

Actually genius, the defintve study is the survey of all published climate science.

Guess what percentage reached a conclusion that contradicts the consensus and the common knowledge?

0%. Zero. None.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

How much heat is trapped by increasing CO2 from 280 to 400PPM as show by increase in temperature?

Whyvare you asking me? What komd of moron goes on political message boards and begs strangers for this info? Go look it up. See what scientists say.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

How much heat is trapped by increasing CO2 from 280 to 400PPM as show by increase in temperature?

Whyvare you asking me? What komd of moron goes on political message boards and begs strangers for this info? Go look it up. See what scientists say.

That's the entire foundation of your Failed, Flawed, never a right prediction "Theory"

If the extra CO2 doesn't raise temperature, where does that leave you

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

That's the entire foundation of your Failed, Flawed, never a right prediction "Theory"

No it isnt. It was a stupid question posed by someone who knows less than nothing about this topic. No Cletus, you aren't presenting an actual challenge to any accepted theory.