Polar bears resort to cannibalism as Arctic ice shrinks

Page 7 of 8 [ 127 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 Next

Previous topic | Next topic

monty
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 4 Sep 2007
Age: 62
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,741

28 Sep 2008, 11:53 am

Reodor_Felgen wrote:

I've got many more sources backing up my claims:

http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/art ... 1152.shtml
http://www.tysknews.com/Depts/Environment/debunking.htm
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=62598

I don't see the point of posting more links, as the burden of proof is on you.

If he is trying to convince you, then not only does he have the burden of proof on him, he has mission impossible.

On the other hand, he effectively cut up your claims that the atmospheric science community has such a large group of people opposed to the idea of anthropogenic global warming.

Newsmax is not a credible source. The second source you listed was a reprint of something published in the June 2002 issue of the Bulletin of Canadian Petroleum Geology. World Net Daily is not a credible source either - that article is about an essay contest sponsored by a media company.

Both Newsmax and WND were started with funding from Richard Scaife, noted right wing ideologue. If you want screed from Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, and Pat Buchanan, those websites are great. They do not have much of substance when it comes to science.

Magnus
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 24 Jul 2008
Age: 49
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,372
Location: Claremont, California

28 Sep 2008, 12:03 pm

Something is happening. When polar bears start eating each other you have to ask what is going on in the world.

_________________
As long as man continues to be the ruthless destroyer of lower living beings he will never know health or peace. For as long as men massacre animals, they will kill each other.

-Pythagoras

ShawnWilliam
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 Aug 2008
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,462

28 Sep 2008, 1:34 pm

Magnus wrote:

Something is happening. When polar bears start eating each other you have to ask what is going on in the world.

Possibly the same thing that has happened millions of times throughout history.. that bit of news is meant to get an emotional response.

Ishmael
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 7 Jul 2008
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 953
Location: Australia

28 Sep 2008, 1:38 pm

ShawnWilliam wrote:

Magnus wrote:

Something is happening. When polar bears start eating each other you have to ask what is going on in the world.

Possibly the same thing that has happened millions of times throughout history.. that bit of news is meant to get an emotional response.

Polar bears are somewhat cannibalistic. It goes with the territory. The only ones "resorting to" anything are film crews and media outlets trying to make a dishonest buck.

_________________
Oh, well, fancy that! Isn't that neat, eh?

ShawnWilliam
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 Aug 2008
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,462

28 Sep 2008, 1:42 pm

Ishmael wrote:

ShawnWilliam wrote:

Magnus wrote:

Something is happening. When polar bears start eating each other you have to ask what is going on in the world.

Possibly the same thing that has happened millions of times throughout history.. that bit of news is meant to get an emotional response.

Polar bears are somewhat cannibalistic. It goes with the territory. The only ones "resorting to" anything are film crews and media outlets trying to make a dishonest buck.

mmm... well said.

LKL
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Jul 2007
Age: 48
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,402

28 Sep 2008, 2:52 pm

http://www.snopes.com/photos/animals/polardog.asp
yeah, polar bears are just mean, vicious killers, all the time...

http://www.m4gw.com:2005/m4gw/3-lazy-polar-bears.jpg
clearly survival of the fiercest and most vicious, here...

Every fall, adult male and non-pregnant adult female polar bears gather together to wait for the sea-ice to form. Somehow, they have managed to do this for thousands of years without killing each other. Once on the ice, they avoid one another - they do not, in other words, actively hunt each other under normal circumstances.

Ishmael
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 7 Jul 2008
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 953
Location: Australia

28 Sep 2008, 3:00 pm

LKL, don't give me that cuddly polar bear crap... No, of course they don't actively hunt each other! Notice I said "somewhat"? BUT, polar bear - outside of those gathering seasons you try to take as a constant example - if a polar bear comes into contact with another not immediately a member of it's family, they will fight and try to eat each other. Not the only species to do so. Just because selective photo shoots don't show the constant, doesn't mean it isn't there... Next you'll be saying koalas don't try to rip peoples faces off!

_________________
Oh, well, fancy that! Isn't that neat, eh?

LKL
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Jul 2007
Age: 48
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,402

28 Sep 2008, 3:16 pm

Find me some examples *not* from the last five-ten years of polar bears encountering each other on the ice and 'fighting to eat each other.'

Yes, they may fight each other, and yes, they may eat each other - if one is clearly injured and/or weak enough for the other to kill easily. When your life depends on the ability to catch and kill other animals, you don't deliberately go out and look for the toughest animals out there (members of your own species) to eat. If they encounter one another, they're far more likely to deliberately part ways because neither can afford to be injured in a fight. The exception is when they are starving, and have no other choice.

I'm not claiming that polar bears are pacifists, but the fact is that injurious intraspecies combat, even between males, is the exception rather than the rule in nature.

Ishmael
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 7 Jul 2008
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 953
Location: Australia

28 Sep 2008, 3:26 pm

As I said, goes with the territory. Food is seasonal; after all, they rely only on meat. When their food supply has it's mating season, their main food supply, some start to starve. Always happens that way. By taking seasonal events out of context to promote this man-made global warming story is very dishonest, or at least poorly understood.

_________________
Oh, well, fancy that! Isn't that neat, eh?

monty
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 4 Sep 2007
Age: 62
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,741

28 Sep 2008, 3:44 pm

Ishmael wrote:

By taking seasonal events out of context to promote this man-made global warming story is very dishonest, or at least poorly understood.

The original point that was made is that the medium to long term trend in temperatures is mucking up the normal seasonal variation - polar bears have less time to hunt because for an increasing period the coasts are becoming ice-free. It is you that either doesn't understand what was said, or are distorting it.

The US Government declared polar bears to be an endangered species earlier this year:

Quote:

WASHINGTON, D.C. - Secretary of the Interior Dirk Kempthorne today announced that he is accepting the recommendation of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Director Dale Hall to list the polar bear as a threatened species under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). The listing is based on the best available science, which shows that loss of sea ice threatens and will likely continue to threaten polar bear habitat. This loss of habitat puts polar bears at risk of becoming endangered in the foreseeable future, the standard established by the ESA for designating a threatened species.

http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/polit ... endan.html

Last edited by monty on 28 Sep 2008, 4:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Magnus
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 24 Jul 2008
Age: 49
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,372
Location: Claremont, California

28 Sep 2008, 3:56 pm

They have been studying these polar bears for 26 years and have seen this cannibalism happen in the last two years.

What about the bees?

What about the frogs?

Notice more natural disasters?

Something is changing in the environment.

Take a look around and think for yourself instead of relying on "experts" who are paid by who knows what special interest group to do the thinking for you. I don't have all the answers but I will acknowledge that there is a pink elephant in the room if I see that there is one even if all the top paid experts tell me that there is none. Think for yourself and question authority.

jrknothead
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 3 Aug 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,423

28 Sep 2008, 5:14 pm

I remember readint that the bee mystery had been solved... it was a combination of a virus and a parasite... the bees that had either the virus or the parasite survived, but the bees who had both didn't, and died off in large numbers...

Don't know whats up with the frogs...

Natural disasters have always happened in the past, it's just that lately they've been occurring in more populated areas, so we notice them more...

Something's always been changing in the environment, it's the way of the world... every so often people get the notion that the environment has changed too drastically to be anything but the work of displeased gods.

This is one of those times, only instead of blaming displeased gods, we're blaming an unhappy planet... a few good years of good weather, and people forget all about it...

Global warming has a postitve side... places once unsuitable for farming or human habitation will become more desirable, and places once desirable will become uninhabitable, as has happened on this planet since the beginning...

Quatermass
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 27 Apr 2006
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 18,779
Location: Right behind you...

28 Sep 2008, 5:27 pm

ShawnWilliam wrote:

Ishmael wrote:

ShawnWilliam wrote:

Magnus wrote:

Something is happening. When polar bears start eating each other you have to ask what is going on in the world.

Possibly the same thing that has happened millions of times throughout history.. that bit of news is meant to get an emotional response.

Polar bears are somewhat cannibalistic. It goes with the territory. The only ones "resorting to" anything are film crews and media outlets trying to make a dishonest buck.

mmm... well said.

QFT.

_________________
(No longer a mod)

On sabbatical...

twoshots
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 Nov 2007
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,731
Location: Boötes void

28 Sep 2008, 7:48 pm

Reodor_Felgen wrote:

twoshots wrote:

Reodor_Felgen wrote:

twoshots wrote:

Not exactly a scholarly source. :roll:

Real climate gives the impression of being a decent source of information that does things like, y'know, provide citations.

The site I linked to does state some of it's sources. Amoung them is The Oregon Petition, which is signed by 18,000 professional scientists.

First off, let's knock down that "professional scientists" figure. The basic requirements, as far as I can tell, would allow me to sign the petition in the not so distant future when I finish my BSc, and I haven't got a thing in the world that would make my opinion particularly qualified in climate science. Never mind who knows how accurate there methods are. When we start factoring out (of there current 31K signatures) people who are trained in fields not related to climate science, we drop down to 3,697 signatures in people claiming to be in "Atmosphere, earth, & environmental" sciences. You could safely enough shave of another 2148 from that number because earth scientists aren't specialists in that field either, leaving us with 1549 possible candidates worth looking at. I'm not in the mood to take a serious look at it, but I'll wager you can knock out a decent chunk of those who don't have a PHD, leaving us with even fewer people who can really be called "professional scientists in the field".

Most of the websites I'm coming across are pretty dismissive, so I'm making do with what I can get. Scientific American had this to say about it.

Quote:

Scientific American took a sample of 30 of the 1,400 signatories claiming to hold a PhD in a climate-related science. Of the 26 we were able to identify in various databases, 11 said they still agreed with the petition — one was an active climate researcher, two others had relevant expertise, and eight signed based on an informal evaluation. Six said they would not sign the petition today, three did not remember any such petition, one had died, and five did not answer repeated messages. Crudely extrapolating, the petition supporters include a core of about 200 climate researchers – a respectable number, though rather a small fraction of the climatological community

Now, honestly, given the wealth of information out there and the fact that the near totality of published peer reviewed articles agree with anthropogenic global warming, I don't think I really need to go any further into this. This isn't taken seriously even.

How on earth is the burden of proof on me? Do you have any experience with the subject beyond the sensationalist reporting of popular media?

Quote:

The drafting of such reports and statements involves many opportunities for comment, criticism, and revision, and it is not likely that they would diverge greatly from the opinions of the societies' members. Nevertheless, they might downplay legitimate dissenting opinions. That hypothesis was tested by analyzing 928 abstracts, published in refereed scientific journals between 1993 and 2003, and listed in the ISI database with the keywords "climate change" (9).

The 928 papers were divided into six categories: explicit endorsement of the consensus position, evaluation of impacts, mitigation proposals, methods, paleoclimate analysis, and rejection of the consensus position. Of all the papers, 75% fell into the first three categories, either explicitly or implicitly accepting the consensus view; 25% dealt with methods or paleoclimate, taking no position on current anthropogenic climate change. Remarkably, none of the papers disagreed with the consensus position.

Admittedly, authors evaluating impacts, developing methods, or studying paleoclimatic change might believe that current climate change is natural. However, none of these papers argued that point.

This analysis shows that scientists publishing in the peer-reviewed literature agree with IPCC, the National Academy of Sciences, and the public statements of their professional societies. Politicians, economists, journalists, and others may have the impression of confusion, disagreement, or discord among climate scientists, but that impression is incorrect.

Oreskes, Naomi. Beyond the ivory tower: The scientific consensus on climate change. Science 3 December 2004 p.1686

In reference to the IPCC statment.

Quote:

IPCC is not alone in its conclusions. In recent years, all major scientific bodies in the United States whose members' expertise bears directly on the matter have issued similar statements.

Now, would you kindly stop cherry picking your sources?

_________________
* here for the nachos.

Magnus
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 24 Jul 2008
Age: 49
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,372
Location: Claremont, California

28 Sep 2008, 7:58 pm

Bees: Take another look. They are getting lost.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2 ... nvironment

http://inthesenewtimes.com/2008/05/15/t ... radiation/

Okay, I'm done here. Move along! There is nothing to see here folks! :lol:

Sorry for getting off the subject.

Reodor_Felgen
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 28 Sep 2007
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,300

29 Sep 2008, 9:56 am

twoshots wrote:

How on earth is the burden of proof on me? Do you have any experience with the subject beyond the sensationalist reporting of popular media?

The burden of proof is on you, because you're saying that it's man-made. According to Occam's razor, the man-made climate changes is non-existant until someone can prove their existence. Debunking BS like global waming isn't something people do because they have to, but because they're critical to mass hysteria in general. One can't prove a negative, and believers of the man-made global warming myth will often use the negative proof fallacy to their advantage.

_________________
WP doesn't have a working first amendment.

Fuck. This will override the swear word filter.

Page 7 of 8 [ 127 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 Next

Jump to:

Polar bears resort to cannibalism as Arctic ice shrinks Post Reply New Topic

Polar bears resort to cannibalism as Arctic ice shrinks