Scientists Debate Moving Polar Bears to Antarctica as Arctic Melts
Why can't they just swim there? On the other hand, if the ice is melting on the North Pole, why wouldn't it be melting on the South Pole? It is GLOBAL warming - no? (Sorry about that. Sometimes my common sense kicks in...)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-34 last
To: Libloather
Real or not, its still a joke.
38 posted on
07/25/2008 7:36:41 PM PDT by
AndyTheBear
(Disastrous social experimentation is the opiate of elitist snobs.)
To: Libloather
The polar bears will do well the first year as they eat every Emperor penguin in sight.
40 posted on
07/25/2008 7:38:15 PM PDT by
TigersEye
(Drill or get off the Hill. ... call Nancy Pelosi @ 202 - 225 - 0100)
To: Libloather
And after we move them can we have ANWR?
42 posted on
07/25/2008 7:43:10 PM PDT by
SouthTexas
(Invert the 5-4 and you have no rights.)
To: Libloather
sounds like a job for Ice Truckers.
44 posted on
07/25/2008 7:59:46 PM PDT by
NormsRevenge
(Semper Fi ... Godspeed ... ICE toll-free tip hotline 1-866-DHS-2-ICE ... 9/11 .. Never FoRget!!!)
To: Libloather
wait till they get a taste for penguins...
46 posted on
07/25/2008 8:08:55 PM PDT by
Chode
(American Hedonist -CTHULHU/NYARLATHOTEP'08 = Nothing LESS!!!)
To: Libloather
***Caught between climate change and human pressure, species are going extinct 100 times faster than at any point in human history.***
Ok, so I can think of maybe the carrier pigeon, the dodo, and good Hollywood movies stars. What else is dying out?
47 posted on
07/25/2008 8:10:24 PM PDT by
irishtenor
(Check out my blog at http://boompa53.blogspot.com/)
To: Libloather
Bussing didn’t work with white kids, why should it work with white bears?
48 posted on
07/25/2008 8:10:50 PM PDT by
Rembrandt
(We would have won Viet Nam w/o Dim interference.)
To: Libloather
While the world still debates whether climate change is even real (eye roll), the scientific community is coming back to an idea that was once considered wrongheaded and dangerous: moving species to new areas of the world as their natural habitats become inhabitable.Probably because the idea is wrongheaded and dangerous.
49 posted on
07/25/2008 8:13:37 PM PDT by
xjcsa
(Has anyone seen my cornballer?)
To: Libloather
The whole idea is bogus. Extinction rates are minimal and the polar bear is flourishing right where it is. The fact is, sadly, journals like Science and Nature have discredited themselves from further serious consideration due to contaminated politicking like this.
To: Libloather
YUM!! Fresh Penguin for dinner every night for 20 years.
To: Libloather
Where is the evidence that polar ice is melting/shrinking?
59 posted on
07/25/2008 8:59:27 PM PDT by
TheBattman
(Vote your conscience, or don't complain about RINOs!)
To: Libloather
Modern enlightened acitvists already know that Polar bears cannot survive without Coke. They won’t drink Pepsi.
63 posted on
07/26/2008 4:39:21 AM PDT by
Darth Hillary
("If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun, Because folks in Philly like a good brawl."B.O.)
To: Libloather
Okay. Should be entertaining to watch them round up 30,000 polar bears.
69 posted on
07/26/2008 4:00:08 PM PDT by
RightWhale
(I will veto each and every beer)
To: Libloather
Are you serious? OK I’ll try to be nice.Why don’t polar bears just swim there? It’s a big deal to swim across from England to France across the English Channel because hardly anybody can do that.Can any living being swim from Alaska’s northern coast to Antarctica?No.Physically impossible. Point number 2)Global warming is only affecting the Antarctic peninsula with barely any melting on the rest of the continent.Ice melting down south is happening MUCH more slowly.In 100 years there may be no ice above the Arctic Circle while Antartica would remain basically unchanged.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-34 last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson