Polar bears drown as ice shelf melts

The Sunday Times ^ | December 18, 2005 | Will Iredale

[ATOMIC_PUNK]

SCIENTISTS have for the first time found evidence that polar bears are drowning because climate change is melting the Arctic ice shelf.

The researchers were startled to find bears having to swim up to 60 miles across open sea to find food. They are being forced into the long voyages because the ice floes from which they feed are melting, becoming smaller and drifting farther apart.

Although polar bears are strong swimmers, they are adapted for swimming close to the shore. Their sea journeys leave them them vulnerable to exhaustion, hypothermia or being swamped by waves

*Snip*

[traviskicks]

This reminds me of how people were so appalled when they found out the taliban/al qaeda was testing chemical weapons on animals.

They could kill all the people they wanted, but animals, now that was serious stuff!

[firebrand]

The disagreement is not only about whether human activities ADD to climatic change. There is also a possibility that there is no long-term natural climate change and all of the recent change that is worth remarking about is caused by humans.

[gedeon3]

'I'm sure in the millions of years the Earth has been around there have been many climate changes. How we deal with this one is up to us.

And of course, I'm sure you feel that implementing the Kyoto, will be a step in the right direction; right?

[firebrand]

You said you were leaving the thread, but I would like to say anyway that Communism proposes distributing wealth so that everyone's wealth is equal, in the name of some kind of "equality." I was saying something quite different: that when environmental changes affect the survival of everyone, it makes sense to let abundance-in-my-own-country and abundance-in-my-own-lifetime take second priority to survival.

All of our greatness as a nation has been achieved as a result of standing on the moral high ground, and the sacrifices for the next generations of those who came before us are what have made it possible for us to have the blessings that we have today.

A second point is that there are plenty of ways to accomplish this without sacrificing any conservative principles, and in fact consevative principles, properly applied, are the best way to fight our environmental problems.

[redboiling]

Hm.. I'm fairly sure I've seen graphs dating back thousands of years, to when there were hardly any humans on the planet, and there was still climate variation before people could have had much of an effect at all.

[Reeses]

The idea that we can change the climate, whether for the warmer or the cooler, is nonsense.

Ski resorts can make their own snow, and lots of it. It can't be too difficult to make clouds to cool the oceans. There are thousands of viable ideas to make the climate whatever we want, it's just a matter of finding the cost effective technologies.

We have more than enough climate scientists living off taxpayer money. What we really need now are climate engineers and a blueprint of what climate is optimal for quality of life. I bet it will call for a warmer climate at 45 degrees latitude and cooler at the equator and poles.

The UN should stop attacking the US, take this productive position and lead the way.

[JRios1968]

Fishing for salmon that native-born polar bears won't fish for.

And not to mention the as-yet untapped Nigerian Polar Bear scheme!

[firebrand]

Well, I did say "worth remarking about." This thread would not exist if we were in the midst of one of those gradual climate changes you are talking about. Of course the ice ages were not caused by humans.

[TheDon]

Their ancestors survived the last meltings just fine. And yes, many drowned back then too.

[redboiling]

but it really doesn't sit well with me to see so many shirking personal responsibility for the effects of human activities on the climate that do go beyond the normal ancient patterns. This earth is, above all, God's kingdom. Destroying this gift from God little by little and refusing to accept any personal responsibility for continued destruction, after it is known what the effects of these gases are, shows a lack of moral values. What do people in this country want, the government to step in and order people to clean up after themselves? NO thanks! So it's time for people to take some personal responsibility for their actions. and if you own a company that puts out these gases, better stop filthing up the air with your known problems and waiting for the government to force you to do what's right like some kind of communist.

[Old Student]

"It is called Greenland for a reason. From NASA observations over the years, Mars is warming as rapidly or more so than Earth. How are we effecting another planet? Haliburton?"

IIRC, it was called Greenland to encourage settlers to move there, instead of to Iceland...

As for who's doing it, well, it sure ain't us. Must be the Martians. They're warming the sun so Mars will have an atmosphere again, so they can attack us! ;) Or it could just be a natural cycle, in which case, we must adapt or die, or move, as I said before.

[Rebelbase]

"but it really doesn't sit well with me to see so many shirking personal responsibility for the effects of human activities on the climate that do go beyond the normal ancient patterns."

How about some examples of what you're referencing?

"This earth is, above all, God's kingdom. Destroying this gift from God little by little and refusing to accept any personal responsibility for continued destruction, after it is known what the effects of these gases are, shows a lack of moral values"

You must mean volcanos and belching cows are immoral?

"What do people in this country want, the government to step in and order people to clean up after themselves?"

How so? anti-litter laws? Or charcoal lighter fluid bans? Maybe we could get rid of all cars and force people to us mass transportation?

[Old Student]

"During the Medieval Maximum period of Global Warming Europeans and Eskimos simultaneously reached Greenland via separate routes. When the Earth got colder the Europe and died out the Eskimos did not. Adapt or die."

IIRC, the Europeans didn't actually die out, although many of them did die, but adopted Eskimo ways, as those were suitable for survival in that climate, where the European ways were not. They also intermarried with the Eskimo, so it's kind of hard to tell who has or has not got European ancestry without DNA tests.

[Windsong]

Rummy's fault.

[slowhandluke]

I'm afraid it does "logically" follow--it just hasn't been indubitably proved yet. We're spewing out CO2 and cutting down the forests that soak it back up. CO2 is increasing. CO2 acts as a greenhouse. The temperature has gone up. Thus . . .

It not a logical conclusion, unless the CO2 increase precedes the warming, but historically, it follows. See:http://www.grida.no/climate/vital/graphics/large/2.jpg

[Walkingfeather]

exactly, isnt it the same people that sayd that animals adapt to their environment? We should see polor bears turning color any day...

[stocksthatgoup]

Nice correlation - But does the Co2 rise first or the temperature? Seems to me the Temp goes up and the CO2 concentrations follow.

[Old Professer]

That's silly; if we don't know for sure we caused we can't possibly know what course of action we should take to correct it.

Maybe we should just airlift some food to the polar bears.

[Mike Darancette]

They also intermarried with the Eskimo

I think I read that somewhere too. The European style of life really went out the window though.

[Texas Eagle]

Although polar bears are strong swimmers, they are adapted for swimming close to the shore.

Well, I guess they'll just have to evolve.