Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
The_Patriot2016

Polar Bears and global warming

13 posts in this topic

Often people pushing the global warming agenda-use polar bears to push their agenda, suggesting they are becoming endangered due to warmer temperatures melting the ice. Problem is, they have absolutly no evidence to support this claim.

 

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2014/05/the-settled-science-of-polar-bears.php

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Often people pushing the global warming agenda-use polar bears to push their agenda, suggesting they are becoming endangered due to warmer temperatures melting the ice. Problem is, they have absolutly no evidence to support this claim.

 

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2014/05/the-settled-science-of-polar-bears.php

 

I personally believe that it's all a con. Only God controls the climate.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You might have a little fun in my of propaganda, myth, junk science etc, for the footnote about that very picture of the polar bear in that article.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I read an article while we were on vacation that the bears now are having a problem that the ice is too thick and the other animals are having trouble getting air holes made in the ice so the bears are not able to catch them coming up for air and the bears are going hungry.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Often people pushing the global warming agenda-use polar bears to push their agenda, suggesting they are becoming endangered due to warmer temperatures melting the ice. Problem is, they have absolutly no evidence to support this claim ...

"This may come as a shocker to some, but scientists are not always right — especially when under intense public pressure for answers.

"Researchers with the IUCN Polar Bear Specialist Group (PBSG) recently admitted to experienced zoologist and polar bear specialist Susan Crockford that the estimate given for the total number of polar bars in the Arctic was 'simply a qualified guess given to satisfy public demand'" ...

http://nation.foxnews.com/2014/06/01/scientists-admit-polar-bear-numbers-were-made

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You might have a little fun in my of propaganda, myth, junk science etc, for the footnote about that very picture of the polar bear in that article.

 

I read it. I thought the picture looked familiar.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In addition to the fact that global warming is a scam, even if the temperatures were getting warmer, there is no proof it has anything to do with anything mankind is doing.  The idea that we are causing the planet to warm is junk science, and it is being used to scare people into accepting more re-distribution of wealth through carbon emissions taxes.  Thankfully, most people have come to see global warming for the lie it is.  Not to be deterred, now they are calling it "climate change."  That means that regardless of the weather, if it varies at all, mankind gets the blame.  Those of us that lived through the ice age nonsense of the 70s and the global warming since then will remain skeptical, but you can never tell about future generations.  They can't help but notice that the weather changes.  Temperatures will continue to rise and fall, and there will be the occasional natural disaster.  Liberal scientists will blame it on capitalism, and will eventually scare them into accepting more taxes so they won't die. 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In addition to the fact that global warming is a scam, even if the temperatures were getting warmer, there is no proof it has anything to do with anything mankind is doing.  The idea that we are causing the planet to warm is junk science, and it is being used to scare people into accepting more re-distribution of wealth through carbon emissions taxes.  Thankfully, most people have come to see global warming for the lie it is.  Not to be deterred, now they are calling it "climate change."  That means that regardless of the weather, if it varies at all, mankind gets the blame.  Those of us that lived through the ice age nonsense of the 70s and the global warming since then will remain skeptical, but you can never tell about future generations.  They can't help but notice that the weather changes.  Temperatures will continue to rise and fall, and there will be the occasional natural disaster.  Liberal scientists will blame it on capitalism, and will eventually scare them into accepting more taxes so they won't die. 

 

They're just false prophets, no different to the Harold Campings of this World. They promised us Global Warming - floods, rising sea levels, melted ice caps, mass humanitarian disaster, higher temperatures, and it just didn't happen.

In Britain we were told that our drizzly, cool climate would be transformed - that the Highlands of Scotland would be like England, that the south coast of England would have a Mediterranean climate like the South of France and the South of France would be desert. It didn't happen and nothing remotely like it happened.

Once a prophet has been proven wrong then he becomes a false prophet. Only the deniers would continue to follow his teachings.

The giveaway sign was when they changed their tack from 'Global Warming' to 'Climate Change'. This is a safe bet, so no matter what happens they can claim that they were right.

 

The Global Warmists belong to a religion and Climate Change is a false religion. It's all about worshiping Gaia.

Unfortunately we all have to pay a tithe to their 'church' whether we are believers or not.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Often people pushing the global warming agenda-use polar bears to push their agenda, suggesting they are becoming endangered due to warmer temperatures melting the ice. Problem is, they have absolutly no evidence to support this claim.

 

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2014/05/the-settled-science-of-polar-bears.php

Yeah, I think you are right.

  • Is climate changing in an unusual way?
  • If so, is it warming, or switching back and forth?
  • If it is warming, is it man caused or naturally caused, or a combination?
  • If it is warming, is that all that bad, or might the world be better off?
  • Do polar bears even need ice anyway?

There are lots of questions that could be asked, that I do not think have been answered definitively or convincingly, and least, not to my satisfaction. I have wondered from time to time, why tis seems to be a political issue to the degree that it is, Isn't the fate of the planet, a concern equally to those on the positions of the political spectrum? 

 

Surely no rational person believes that those on the right desire to ruin the planet for their children and grand children. Anyone who thinks that conservatives and/or small government advocates want to ruin our home, is so unhinged and their judgement is so bad, that no one should take them seriously. It appears to me, that global warming alarmists fall into one or more of several categories:

 

  • They hate capitalism and financial success, for individuals and/or societies, unless that success comes from some mostly low value activity like entertainment and poverty pimping
  • They have a distaste of financial inequality and feel that it is preferable to have everyone in poverty, than to have some people or societies well off, and believe that punishing success is a legitimate way to level the playing field
  • They are gullible and prone to scare tactics, and readily believe what they hear (especially if the news is scary) without putting in the effort to examine the facts
  • They like joining causes so they can feel good about helping fix things by voicing an opinion that agrees with some consensus or sounds compassionate
  • They enjoy government grant money
  • They get their information from people on who tend toward the political left, regardless of intellectual of educational qualification - entertainers, educators, politicians of certain specific political parties or organizations
  • etc

 

O.K, I have exposed some of my own predjudices, and I realize that some of the above can more or less just reversed to form an accusation or criticism of myself and those who think like me. You may do that if you wish (though those who have responded to this thread so far seem to be climate change skeptics - AKA deniers) but what I would like to know is:

 

What is there, other than an appeal to the worn out concept that "most scientists agree that the planet is warming and that it is caused by the activities of mankind". Actually, I would not mind even that line of thinking, if the assumptions that most scientists (and I mean here qualified scientists) actually do agree and have objective reasons for believing as they do, could be convincingly documented.

 

All right, I will stop now as I am losing focus and even boring myself.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0