3 ms·

Ice is and polar bear populations are increasing? I have only read evidence to the contrary. Please provide a citation so I don't think you just made this up.

anamax 17y ago
http://www.intellicast.com/Community/Content.aspx?a=153 http://www.intellicast.com/Community/Content.aspx?a=153 You can look up the polar bears yourself. You'll find that the population now is about 4-5x the population in the 60s. It may be decreasing slightly in the past few years, but that's in the noise compared to the recent increases. There's no reason to suspect temp change has had an effect comparable to direct intervention by humans.
- bballant 17y ago
  Thanks for sharing the article. In looking at the data, one notices a clear cyclic pattern but also a subtle general upward trend in temperature and downward trend in ice cover (i.e. the temperature lows are higher and the highs are higher) over time. But I'm no climate scientist. With respect to the polar bears, I searched around and found many articles which state that the population in the 60's had been diminished because of hunting and that, currently, the plurality of polar bear populations are in decline because of climate change. The one article I found that supports your argument was from Fox News (no bias there ;-)).
  - anamax 17y ago
    > With respect to the polar bears, I searched around and found many articles which state that the population in the 60's had been diminished because of hunting and that, currently, the plurality of polar bear populations are in decline because of climate change. I note that you didn't mention the relative sizes of these changes, the former being >4x while the latter is close to the margin of error. Then again, doing so doesn't fit your beliefs.
    - bballant 17y ago
      First of all, the "margin of error" theory comes from you and not the articles you told me to search out myself. And the hunting definitely adds some perspective to the ">4x increase" so it's worth mentioning. I'm surprised you didn't mention it to begin with. I'm not looking to do battle here. In fact, I thought I was being humorous and polite. Moreover, I'm happy to see that the polar bear situation is not as dire as I thought. I've adjusted the thermostat in my apartment accordingly.
      - anamax 17y ago
        > And the hunting definitely adds some perspective to the ">4x increase" so it's worth mentioning. I'm surprised you didn't mention it to begin with. I did. Hunting is part of "direct intervention by humans". Habitat is another.

anamax 17y ago

http://www.intellicast.com/Community/Content.aspx?a=153 http://www.intellicast.com/Community/Content.aspx?a=153 You can look up the polar bears yourself. You'll find that the population now is about 4-5x the population in the 60s. It may be decreasing slightly in the past few years, but that's in the noise compared to the recent increases. There's no reason to suspect temp change has had an effect comparable to direct intervention by humans.

bballant 17y ago
Thanks for sharing the article. In looking at the data, one notices a clear cyclic pattern but also a subtle general upward trend in temperature and downward trend in ice cover (i.e. the temperature lows are higher and the highs are higher) over time. But I'm no climate scientist. With respect to the polar bears, I searched around and found many articles which state that the population in the 60's had been diminished because of hunting and that, currently, the plurality of polar bear populations are in decline because of climate change. The one article I found that supports your argument was from Fox News (no bias there ;-)).
- anamax 17y ago
  > With respect to the polar bears, I searched around and found many articles which state that the population in the 60's had been diminished because of hunting and that, currently, the plurality of polar bear populations are in decline because of climate change. I note that you didn't mention the relative sizes of these changes, the former being >4x while the latter is close to the margin of error. Then again, doing so doesn't fit your beliefs.
  - bballant 17y ago
    First of all, the "margin of error" theory comes from you and not the articles you told me to search out myself. And the hunting definitely adds some perspective to the ">4x increase" so it's worth mentioning. I'm surprised you didn't mention it to begin with. I'm not looking to do battle here. In fact, I thought I was being humorous and polite. Moreover, I'm happy to see that the polar bear situation is not as dire as I thought. I've adjusted the thermostat in my apartment accordingly.
    - anamax 17y ago
      > And the hunting definitely adds some perspective to the ">4x increase" so it's worth mentioning. I'm surprised you didn't mention it to begin with. I did. Hunting is part of "direct intervention by humans". Habitat is another.