Morning Examiner: Uh oh! Scientists to concede polar bear numbers are really just guesses

[rangerrebew]

Morning Examiner: Uh oh! Scientists to concede polar bear numbers are really just guesses

 By Mark Tapscott  | June 5, 2014 | 9:18 am



Remember the polar bear floating on the melting chunk of ice? It's among the most enduring symbols of global warming. It's also a statistical crock.

Besides the pervasive TV, web and print ads, the disappearing polar bear claim is taught as an established scientific fact in public schools and on campuses across the country.

Here's how Polar Bears International, which claims to be "the pre-eminent resource for all things polar bear" and which provides widely used teaching materials for schools, puts it:

"Scientists predict that unless we take action to stop climate change, we will lose two-thirds of all polar bears by the middle of the century and all of them by the end of the century."

It's really just a guess

But the chief scientist behind the next edition of the Circumpolar Polar Bear Action Plan plans to include this footnote about its Arctic population estimates for the white giant:

"It is important to realize that this range never has been an estimate of total abundance in a scientific sense, but simply a qualified guess given to satisfy public demand."

In other words, these guys are doing public relations magic tricks with their numbers, not science, according to The Daily Caller's Michael Bastasch, who first reported it.

But wait! There's more!

The forthcoming footnote will also say:

“Consequently, there is either no, or only rudimentary, knowledge, to support guesses about the possible abundance of polar bears in approximately half the areas they occupy.

“Thus, the range given for total global population should be viewed with great caution, as it cannot be used to assess population trend over the long term.” (Emphasis added).

Canadian zoologist and polar bear specialist Susan Crockford disclosed the footnote after receiving word of it from Dr. Dag Vongraven, chairman of the Polar Bear Specialists Group, according to Bastasch.

Another myth bites the dust (or is it the ice?)

The Arctic Polar Bear was the first species listed under the Endangered Species Act as threatened with extinction by global warming.

The rationale for the classification assumed melting Arctic ice would deprive polar bears of sufficient food — mostly seals caught in open water. Degraded health and birth rates would result, eventually resulting in extinction.

But if scientists don't really know how many polar bears there are in the Arctic regions where they are found, what's the real basis for the creatures being placed on the ESA listing?

The answer to that question is "politics." Next question: When will the mainstream media report this? Or should that question be will they report it?

http://washingtonexaminer.com/morning-examiner-uh-oh-scientists-to-concede-polar-bear-numbers-are-really-just-guesses/article/2549347
http://washingtonexaminer.com/morning-examiner-uh-oh-scientists-to-concede-polar-bear-numbers-are-really-just-guesses/article/2549347

[EC]

There is some evidence that polar bears, certainly in North America, are diminishing in numbers.

A few bad years in the late 90's and early 00's pushed a lot of polar bears south. There they met some cousins and got it on like Deliverance.

Meet the Grolar.



Half polar bear, half grizzly bear. Big as hell, stronger and tougher than both it's parental lines, and apparently highly fertile. They can live anywhere, are highly efficient hunters and are expected to slowly crowd out most polar bears and grizzlies in Alaska and the NW Territories within a century or so.

[rangerrebew]

Are you suggesting this mutation was caused by the bears themselves and not global warming?  Oh, the shame.