NOT so “cuddly” after all…
A brave young father from Arviat on the northwest coast of Hudson Bay was killed yesterday evening by a polar bear while trying to protect his children.
Aaron Gibbons, 31, was the nephew of Gordy Kidlapik, who follows this blog and my twitter account. Gordy has often sent me useful local information and perspectives from Arviat, which is in Nunavut (north of Churchill, Manitoba).
It was heartbreaking to hear this news firsthand from Gordy:
More below and to follow as further details emerge. My sincere condolences to Gordy and his family – what a horrific loss.
Bob Weber, from The Canadian Press, wrote today (4 July 2018…
View original post 818 more words
NO wonder climate catastrophists have switched poles and are picking on Antarctica, for now! Arctic first-year and multi-year sea-ice breaking all sorts of decadel records, wrecking their “Arctic Death Spiral” agenda up there! Lol.
Despite pronouncements from one polar bear specialist that “ice in Hudson Bay is in rapid retreat” a look back in time shows that there is more thick first year ice over the Bay this year for the week of the summer solstice than there was in 2004 – and much less open water than 1998.
Below, 2018, June 18 (the week of the summer solstice):
Compare the above to the same week coverage chart for 2004, below:
Ice coverage for some other recent years are shown below compared to 1998, the year the ice breakup pattern on Hudson Bay changed. Speed and melt sequences vary according to the amount of thick first year ice present, discussed previously here.
PS. If you’re wearing white today, flaunt it! Tell your friends and colleagues that you’re celebrating the success of polar bears despite such low summer sea ice since…
View original post 271 more words
OVER the years, TV naturalist Sir David Attenborough has wowed us all with that mesmerising voice narrating epic visuals of all things nature. Aesthetics aside, and not doubting the man’s intelligence, Attenborough persists in parroting easily demolished propaganda about the threat of ‘climate change’.
IN the BBC1 series on Africa he claimed that the wildlife there was at a “pivotal moment in their history” and “Africa’s climate is certainly changing. Some parts of the continent have become 3.5C hotter in the past 20 years.”
WHEN challenged, the BBC indicated that the claim of a 3.5C rise over 20 years was sourced from a Christian Aid report. The BBC acknowledged that the 3.5C claim, based on that NGO source, had no basis in fact and the statement would be removed when the program was repeated.
GLOBAL warming’s favourite mascot – polar bears – haven’t escaped his misinformed activism. The Oasis Nature Channel, of which Attenborough lent his name and reputation to, presented a series of programs entitled Extinctions, about animals under threat. The first of the series was about polar bears, which they referred to as the canaries in the global-warming coalmine, ignoring the fact that polar bear numbers are actually the highest since records began.
IN his latest eye-rolling rant, Attenborough claims that climate change “stops plants growing” and that global warming will create a “plant-less desert” !
Sir David Attenborough marks the reopening of the Temperate House at Kew Gardens, the largest Victorian glasshouse in the world this evening. He praises conservation work being done at the botanical gardens to preserve plants which otherwise would die, due to climate change. Kew Gardens is currently finding and researching species of plants that can help restore land affected by global warming, instead of letting our landscape become a “plantless desert”.
ASSUMING that climate change aka global warming equates to an increase in carbon dioxide emissions, (I say ‘assuming’, because climate change aka global warming can mean whatever an alarmist wants it to mean depending on their particular eco-grievance of the day) then it would appear our favourite ye-olde botanist has officially exchanged brains for blunts, in claiming that climate change “stops plants growing” !
BACK ON THE ‘BLUE PLANET’, DAVID >> Carbon dioxide = plant food!
CLIMATE change alarmists conveniently ‘deny’ the existence of the 1970’s “global cooling” scare because such panic, a mere 40 years ago, threatens the legitimacy of the current “global warming” scare.
HOWEVER, climate experts and government agencies of the day were indeed warning of impending climate doom and that we must take immediate “action” to avoid catastrophe.
WARMING alarmists rebut the 1970’s global cooling scare with claims that the phenomenon wasn’t “peer-reviewed” or that a “consensus” of “97%” of “scientists” didn’t agree. However, it doesn’t take Einstein to realise that the fashionable eco-scare of the day was indeed very real…
IN 1976 the CIA warned the cooling climate would bring – “drought, starvation, social unrest and political upheaval” :
C.I.A. WARNINGFrom a correspondent in Washington
MAJOR world climate changes were under way that would cause economic and political upheavals “almost beyond comprehension”, an internal report of the Central Intelligence Agency has warned the US Government.
“The new climatic era brings a promise of famine and starvation to many areas of the world”, the report warns.
The report, which contends that the Climate changes began in 1960, is based on a study by Mr Reid Bryson of the University of Wisconsin.
Its basic premise is that the world’s climate is cooling and will revert to conditions prevalent between 1600 and 1850 — when the earth’s population was less than 1,000 million and its rural, pre-industrial era civilisations were largely capable of feeding themselves.
The report, which- was concerned with possible political and economic threats the United States could expect from such drastic events, said the starvation and famine would lead to social unrest and global migration of populations.
“Goudie points to one post he saw recently from National Geographic that showed what appeared to be a starving polar bear, but in reality was an animal that was sick.”
NAT Geo pops up again with another blatant falsehood designed to deceive its audience. 100+ years building a publication of reputation and integrity only to have it destroyed in as little as a decade thanks to a religious zeal to the doctrine of CAGW.
REAFFIRMS the old adage that reputation takes a long time to build but can be destroyed overnight.
RIP Nat Geo. Viva La Polar Bears!
Inconvenient rebound in polar bear numbers.
Polar bears not starving, says Nunatsiavut wildlife manager
Geoff Bartlett · CBC News
One of the people who oversees an Indigenous hunt of polar bears says the population is doing well, despite heart-wrenching photos online suggesting some bears are starving.
Every year, the Nunatsiavut government awards polar bear licences to Inuit hunters living in the northern Labrador settlement area.
The Inuit set a quota of 12 polar bears this winter. Nunatsiavut wildlife manager Jim Goudie said all 12 were taken within the first seven days of the season.
Goudie said it’s just the latest evidence that polar bears are on the rebound in northern Canada — a trend he said officials have been recording for years.
“There are lots of signs of bears,” he told CBC Radio’s Labrador Morning. “Lots of bears and a continuation of what we’ve seen over the last three or four years.”
The Nunatsiavut hunt takes place over an area stretching from Cape…
View original post 151 more words
“Bottom line: Barents Sea polar bears are loyal to this region because the eastern portion has the habitat they require to thrive even when sea ice cover in the western portion essentially disappears for thousands of years at a time.”
RATHER ‘inconvenient’ research that would, no doubt, come as very unwelcome news to the polar bear catastrophists … Harvey et al.!
Svalbard in the western Barents Sea has recently had less sea ice extent than it had in the 1980s, especially in the west and north, but this is not unprecedented.
New evidence from clams and mussels with temperature-sensitive habitat requirements confirm that warmer temperatures and less sea ice than today existed during the early Holocene period about 10.2–9.2 thousand years ago and between 8.2 and 6.0 thousand years ago (based on radio carbon dates) around Svalbard. Barents Sea polar bears almost certainly survived those previous low-ice periods, as they are doing today, by staying close to the Franz Josef Land Archipelago in the eastern half of the region where sea ice is more persistent.
As this sea ice chart for 18 April 2018 shows, ice this month has been virtually absent from the west and north coasts of the Svalbard Archipelago, while Franz Josef Land to the east is surrounded…
View original post 1,130 more words
Superbly written Donna.
ERICA Goode’s unhinged attack on Dr. Crockford in the NY Times is further evidence of the totalitarian and authoritarian underpinnings that have corrupted the field of climate ‘science’. – Question the preferred wisdom of the day at your own peril! – Obey, or be persecuted and have your reputation trashed! This isn’t science, this is religion. “Belief” and “Denial” are the words of zealots, not scientists.
WHAT would it take for activists Goode and Co. to be happy? A Polar Bear population back to 1960’s extinction levels? Sadly, I believe the answer is yes! How dare their scared ‘cow’ and mascot of climate catastrophe have grown in population from some 5,000 in the 1960’s to 25,000-30,000 at present, despite rising CO2 and diminished sea-ice extent?
INCREASING polar bear numbers, directly threaten the power of activists and their lucrative climate change scare. We can’t have that now can we Erica?
SPOTLIGHT: Journalistic professionalism evaporates in front of our eyes.
BIG PICTURE: When historians document the demise of the mainstream media, an article published this week by the New York Times will make an excellent case study. Titled “Climate Change Denialists Say Polar Bears Are Fine. Scientists Are Pushing Back,” it’s written by Erica Goode who isn’t just any journalist. She’s a former Environment Editor of the Times. In 2009, she “founded and led a cluster of reporters dedicated to environmental reporting.” Currently, she’s a visiting professor at Syracuse University.
Out here in the real world, a debate exists about polar bears. Will they be adversely affected by climate change or will they continue to adapt as they have historically?
Since the future hasn’t yet arrived, it’s impossible to know whose opinions will turn out to be correct. But rather than presenting a range of perspectives…
View original post 865 more words