From Forbes magazine.
Excerpt:
Antarctic sea ice set another record this past week, with the most amount of ice ever recorded on day 256 of the calendar year (September 12 of this leap year). Please, nobody tell the mainstream media or they might have to retract some stories and admit they are misrepresenting scientific data.
Here’s the raw data from UIUC.
Now back to the Forbes article:
National Public Radio (NPR) published an article on its website last month claiming, “Ten years ago, a piece of ice the size of Rhode Island disintegrated and melted in the waters off Antarctica. Two other massive ice shelves along the Antarctic Peninsula had suffered similar fates a few years before. The events became poster children for the effects of global warming. … There’s no question that unusually warm air triggered the final demise of these huge chunks of ice.”
NPR failed to mention anywhere in its article that Antarctic sea ice has been growing since satellites first began measuring the ice 33 years ago and the sea ice has been above the 33-year average throughout 2012.
Indeed, none of the mainstream media are covering this important story. A Google News search of the terms Antarctic, sea ice and record turns up not a single article on the Antarctic sea ice record. Amusingly, page after page of Google News results for Antarctic sea ice record show links to news articles breathlessly spreading fear and warning of calamity because Arctic sea ice recently set a 33-year low.
Sea ice around one pole is shrinking while sea ice around another pole is growing. This sure sounds like a global warming crisis to me.
But that only accounts for “melting” polar ice caps – what about those cute little polar bears who have no ice to stand on and who are in danger of falling into the water and going extinct, because polar bears can’t swim???!!1?!1!ELEVENTY-ONE!?
From the Globe and Mail. (H/T Neil)
Excerpt:
The debate about climate change and its impact on polar bears has intensified with the release of a survey that shows the bear population in a key part of northern Canada is far larger than many scientists thought, and might be growing.
The number of bears along the western shore of Hudson Bay, believed to be among the most threatened bear subpopulations, stands at 1,013 and could be even higher, according to the results of an aerial survey released Wednesday by the Government of Nunavut. That’s 66 per cent higher than estimates by other researchers who forecasted the numbers would fall to as low as 610 because of warming temperatures that melt ice faster and ruin bears’ ability to hunt. The Hudson Bay region, which straddles Nunavut and Manitoba, is critical because it’s considered a bellwether for how polar bears are doing elsewhere in the Arctic.
The study shows that “the bear population is not in crisis as people believed,” said Drikus Gissing, Nunavut’s director of wildlife management. “There is no doom and gloom.”
[…]The debate over the polar-bear population has been raging for years, frequently pitting scientists against Inuit. In 2004, Environment Canada researchers concluded that the numbers in the region had dropped by 22 per cent since 1984, to 935. They also estimated that by 2011, the population would decrease to about 610. That sparked worldwide concern about the future of the bears and prompted the Canadian and American governments to introduce legislation to protect them.
But many Inuit communities said the researchers were wrong. They said the bear population was increasing and they cited reports from hunters who kept seeing more bears.
So the ice isn’t melting on one of the poles, and the polar bears aren’t going extinct from drowning. Hmmmn.
Actually, if this data can be spun as a global cooling crisis, and then the socialists can continue pushing for more government regulation of the free market, more abortions and higher gas prices. All that has to be done is for the media to explain that it was always global cooling that we needed to fear. Like in that George Orwell novel “1984”, with the continuous war in Eastasia or Eurasia. Only this time, it could be real.
Related posts
- New study: Obama’s new automobile regulations will raise car prices by $4,800
- GAO study: EPA regulations will kill coal plant jobs and raise energy prices
- A closer look at the Obama administration’s $525 million loan to Solyndra
- Ohio coal mine closes because of Obama administration environmental policies
- EPA study finds that water in Dimock, PA is safe to drink despite fracking
- New study: Earth is currently in a 2000-year old cooling trend
- Computer models utterly fail to predict climate changes
- New study: global warming skeptics know more about science than alarmists
- EPA administrator boasts about crucifying oil and gas firms
- Canadian government to limit environmentalist obstruction of energy development
- The ten worst energy policies of the Obama administration
- Obama to hand out millions of taxpayer dollars in green energy firm bailouts
- New study shows that the medieval warming extended far and wide
- Did Obama cause gas prices to go up?
- Higher gas prices were caused by Obama’s green energy policies
- A third Obama-subsidized green energy firm is bankrupt after $118.5 million loan
- How Barack Obama used taxpayer dollars to outsource green energy jobs
- Did Obama really create jobs with his green energy and stimulus programs?
- In Canada, a revolt against global warming socialism creates an economic boom
- Another green energy firm goes bankrupt after getting $43 million loan from taxpayers
- Report finds Labor Department’s green jobs program failing
- $737 million green jobs loan given to Nancy Pelosi’s brother-in-law
- This one graph should end the debate on wind and solar energy
- How well did Obama’s green jobs spending work out for taxpayers?
So, for a while, the amount of Antartic ice has been going up, but the amount of Artic ice has been falling.
Sounds a lot like climate change doesn’t it
LikeLike
Your burden of proof is global warming. That was the claim made by the Al Gore crowd.
LikeLike
Since when has climate NOT changed. I was under no impression that the global climate was fixed and unchangeable. So talk of “climate change” is a big “So what?”
The implication of “climate change,” of course, is that the climate is changing due to human influence (which has very little evidence, and that is tenous at best). The other implication is that the climate is changing irreversably and for the worse (a runaway change that will ruin life on the planet), which again has no real evidence.
LikeLike
Know anything abt the ice in the artic or around Greenland?
LikeLike
Funnily enough it was indeed global cooling that we had to fear, before all the global warming nonsense started in the late 80s / early 90s. We’re in an interglacial period, and global cooling is far far worse for mankind than global warming would be. With population being what it is, we are heavily dependent on agriculture. Under a cooling scenario, huge swathes of land are no longer able to provide food in the quantities required, with obvious consequences for man.
LikeLike
WK,
Who ever said anything about polar bears drowning ?
LikeLike
Look here:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2019953/Scientist-claimed-polar-bears-drowning-investigated-scientific-misconduct.html
LikeLike
Just came across this.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/antarctica-gaining-ice.htm
LikeLike
And for Lindsay:
http://www.skepticalscience.com/climate-change-little-ice-age-medieval-warm-period.htm
LikeLike