6 ms·

Only the BBC's deliberately emotive headline to this story suggests that 'penguin chicks have died'. The facts behind it are that BAS scientists have reported t

by Wyndtroy2012 7y ago

Only the BBC's deliberately emotive headline to this story suggests that 'penguin chicks have died'. The facts behind it are that BAS scientists have reported that one colony site has been abandoned and that another nearby has increased in size. The probability is that the abandoned site had become vulnerable to storm damage and the colony moved to a less risky location. No panic, no disaster.

jeffwass 7y ago
From the article’s first paragraph, which was in bold: “Thousands of emperor penguin chicks drowned when the sea-ice on which they were being raised was destroyed in severe weather.” And for some context on what ‘thousands’ means relative to the global population of emperor penguins : “But the Brunt population, which had sustained an average of 14,000 to 25,000 breeding pairs for several decades (5-9% of the global population), essentially disappeared overnight.”
zamazingo 7y ago
How do you skip the very first paragraph that was also in bold? Is the self-denial that strong, or did you simply comment on the title only?
- sokoloff 7y ago
  From news.yc guidelines: Please don't insinuate that someone hasn't read an article. "Did you even read the article? It mentions that" can be shortened to "The article mentions that."
  - Veen 7y ago
    This is a useful rule, but sometimes the best response to a comment is to point out that that an assertion is refuted by the linked content. That's especially true when the comment being responded to is a commentary on the rhetoric and content of the linked article.
    - sokoloff 7y ago
      First half of GGP comment was fine. Second half not needed/actively negative, IMO.
abalone 7y ago
> No panic, no disaster. “Research suggests the species might lose anywhere between 50% and 70% of its global population by the end of this century, if sea-ice is reduced to the extent that computer models envisage.”
- cletus 7y ago
  So I take issue with the GP's assertion that is overly "emotive", the implication being that the BBC is biased about blowing things out of proportion that suits its agenda. The article seems quite factual to me. But I do take issue with the claim that we "might lose between 50% and 70% of the global population" because of reduced sea ice as overly simplistic extrapolation [1]. As much as birds (like many animals) seem to return to the same place (typically where they themselves were born)--and, on a side note, I would love to know how they do this--they also seem capable of adapting. It seems relatively likely that a good number of them have moved to the nearby colony mentioned just based on numbers. So even if sea ice does reduce dramatically by the end of the century, it doesn't automatically follow that penguin populations will similarly decline. Stability of ice (April-December) is important but declining sea ice just moves that further south (to a point). Proximity to food sources is also key. I actually kind of wish we'd just stop with "computer modeling". Part of the reason we have so many climate change deniers (IMHO) is just how bad climate model predictions have been. [1] https://xkcd.com/605/ https://xkcd.com/605/
  - misnome 7y ago
    > Part of the reason we have so many climate change deniers (IMHO) is just how bad climate model predictions have been. Sources? You seem to have read the number and automatically assumed it's a straight line extrapolation. As far as I'm aware the climate models have been fine and - corrected, but not majorly disproven; it's the reporting on them that looks at the most extreme extrapolations to whip up hysteria (and so it gets ignored and so the extreme cases become more likely).
    - soperj 7y ago
      >As far as I'm aware the climate models have been fine Sources? because they really really haven't.

jeffwass 7y ago

From the article’s first paragraph, which was in bold: “Thousands of emperor penguin chicks drowned when the sea-ice on which they were being raised was destroyed in severe weather.” And for some context on what ‘thousands’ means relative to the global population of emperor penguins : “But the Brunt population, which had sustained an average of 14,000 to 25,000 breeding pairs for several decades (5-9% of the global population), essentially disappeared overnight.”

zamazingo 7y ago

How do you skip the very first paragraph that was also in bold? Is the self-denial that strong, or did you simply comment on the title only?

sokoloff 7y ago
From news.yc guidelines: Please don't insinuate that someone hasn't read an article. "Did you even read the article? It mentions that" can be shortened to "The article mentions that."
- Veen 7y ago
  This is a useful rule, but sometimes the best response to a comment is to point out that that an assertion is refuted by the linked content. That's especially true when the comment being responded to is a commentary on the rhetoric and content of the linked article.
  - sokoloff 7y ago
    First half of GGP comment was fine. Second half not needed/actively negative, IMO.

abalone 7y ago

> No panic, no disaster. “Research suggests the species might lose anywhere between 50% and 70% of its global population by the end of this century, if sea-ice is reduced to the extent that computer models envisage.”

cletus 7y ago
So I take issue with the GP's assertion that is overly "emotive", the implication being that the BBC is biased about blowing things out of proportion that suits its agenda. The article seems quite factual to me. But I do take issue with the claim that we "might lose between 50% and 70% of the global population" because of reduced sea ice as overly simplistic extrapolation [1]. As much as birds (like many animals) seem to return to the same place (typically where they themselves were born)--and, on a side note, I would love to know how they do this--they also seem capable of adapting. It seems relatively likely that a good number of them have moved to the nearby colony mentioned just based on numbers. So even if sea ice does reduce dramatically by the end of the century, it doesn't automatically follow that penguin populations will similarly decline. Stability of ice (April-December) is important but declining sea ice just moves that further south (to a point). Proximity to food sources is also key. I actually kind of wish we'd just stop with "computer modeling". Part of the reason we have so many climate change deniers (IMHO) is just how bad climate model predictions have been. [1] https://xkcd.com/605/ https://xkcd.com/605/
- misnome 7y ago
  > Part of the reason we have so many climate change deniers (IMHO) is just how bad climate model predictions have been. Sources? You seem to have read the number and automatically assumed it's a straight line extrapolation. As far as I'm aware the climate models have been fine and - corrected, but not majorly disproven; it's the reporting on them that looks at the most extreme extrapolations to whip up hysteria (and so it gets ignored and so the extreme cases become more likely).
  - soperj 7y ago
    >As far as I'm aware the climate models have been fine Sources? because they really really haven't.