It is official Polar Bears are on the endangered species list. Apparently, this is not enough. A fit has been thrown by citizens and elected officials because just putting the bears on the list will not fix WHY they had to be added.
The bears are dying out because the polar ice caps are melting. The melting of the ice caps is making it almost impossible for the bears to hunt, thus starving them or causing them to be lost at sea (and drowning). ** Thank a Discovery Channel special for my vast knowledge on the subject 
Our American Greenies are all up in arms that no one is attempting to fix the issue at hand (greenhouse gases causing ozone melting–I so should have been an environmental biologist).
I think polar bears are great, but I have trouble jumping on the green wagon…I know I live in the wrong town, but times are tough and saving the planet isn’t in my top five yet.
Popularity: 35% [?]
Tagged as: animals, Earth, Environment, global warming, polar bears
Side note about ozone and the melting ice caps. I read that the steps we made to stop destroying the ozone are working, and the hole over Antarctica is healing. However, this is causing the ice caps to melt more quickly because the wind patterns are shifting allowing warmer air to enter the Antarctic region.
Just wanted everyone to know we are screwed no matter what we do.
One would think that Coca Cola would pitch in with this effort, what with them milking the shit out of their image every holiday season.
saving the planet isn’t in my top five yet.
Kinda demands that you tell us the top five, doesn’t it? We’re all
earseyes…The bears are listed as threatened, not endangered. Just one small step along the road to endangered status.
And I think Coke is shifting its marketing weight to the penguins.
B’YO, they are digital. They just fire up a few extra computers and booya, polar bears! Plus, if they aren’t real animals in the future, they can probably copyright them.
What about bipolar bears?
lol, Stanley
Being from the home of polar bears I would like you all to note I have not actually heard one complaint of global warming.
they are digital
Gee, ya think? But if the REAL polar bears die out, then those commercials will just make everybody sad, and everyone knows, sad people don’t enjoy crisp refreshing holiday theme soda.
Well…..not to question our infallible government, but each of the 25,000 of them by my calculation has 277 square miles of ice - ya think they could get by with only 200?
i’m sad all the time, and i still like coke.
a-cola.
i like coca cola.
I find the salty nature of my tears really compliment the acrid sweetness of coca-cola, much as the lame coke thread jack compliments the thinly veiled yet obvious hostility Lu Sid has for the environmental movement.
Well, I’m a HUGE fan of Glenn Beck and as Beck has pointed out:
BECK: They eat people! For the love of Pete, they’re big, angry bears. They eat people. Not that I say we go out and kill all of them, but I mean, it doesn’t seem to be a problem here. Senator, I can’t take the — I can’t take the lies anymore.
See, Beck can prove the polar bear populations are increasing because he has a study by professor J. Scott Armstrong of the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania. Armstrong is a professor of MARKETING, but whatever, I took marketing classes in college and they were very scientific.
Not only that, but as Kevin Hassett of the American Enterprise Institute has pointed out, the problem with the “ruling is that it will likely end all Arctic exploration for oil and gas, at least in the U.S. Given surging world demand for oil, increased supply is the only thing standing between us and $200-a-barrel oil.”
OMG, it’s protection for the polar bears that’s causing high oil prices! it’s not war in the Middle East, instability in US financial markets, or the huge growth in developing nations like India and China that’s causing gas prices to spike. It’s protection for those awful polar bears!
Lu Sid - stay away from that stupid ol’ green wagon! Once you drink that kool-aid, you might find yourself doing things like making coffee at home and drinking it out of a reusable cup or god forbid, you might waste money on CF lightbulbs! See, that’s the problem with being green, it’s sooooooo expensive!
First the Colbert Report has known for some time that bears are the #1 threat.
Secondly the Coca-Cola ads have bothered me for years because they show penguins and polar bears together. Polar bear are from the North Pole; penguins are from the South Pole. This inaccuracy has increased “schlock and ahhh” around the holidays but it has given us a inaccurate world view.
This leads me to the solution- have Coca-Cola pay to have Polar Bears shipped to the South Pole. More accurate marketing and a new habitat for the Polar Bears that is much colder with better ice flows and plenty of delicious penguins and seals.
As I read more into these articles and others posted on-line I am coming to the conclustion that this is all a plot by the Canadian government to claim Alaska as their territory. There is a lot of oil in Alaska that Canada would like to get their hands on and this seems like the beinnning of their efforts.
Here it is… the Canadian government Wildlife Service is claiming that there are less than 1,000 Polar bears in their area, and the numbers are delcining. They desire a moratorium on hunting the bears “until the numbers increase”. However the people who hunt the bears (primarily) are the Inuit people who report that the bears are over populated. US reports have the bears at 25,000 strong, doubling since 1960. A moratorium on bears would threaten the lives of the Inuit people thus eliminating them or causing them to resent the US for authorizing the moratorium on polar bears. With the Inuit people either dead or rallying against the US, Canada then republishes their reports stating that the bear population is acceptable for hunting and that the US has abadoned their Alaska citizens. This will surely turn the remaining native Alaskans against the US to favor Canada. Alaska then cuts off all air traffic and allows only vehicle traffic in and out of the State. Canada then ceases to allow traffic to Alaska claiming it for themselves.
Give it 10 years and then revisit my post. You’ll see what I was talking about.
Mr. Roboto - BRILLIANT!
Plus, with those mean ol’ bears out of the arctic, we can FINALLY tap all of the oil in Alaska and that will surely solve our oil problems!
Fuck the polar bears. They are not cute and cuddly Coke® drinkers. They are ferocious people-eaters. They would eat your Lu Sid ass like a chicken wing and then spit out the red panties.
Well, I’m a HUGE fan of Glenn Beck…
And that is where the fail began. A fail so strong that quietly my sarcastometer started to twitch. By the end of the post I had a pretty solid reading, but the batteries in the damn thing are pretty old, so one never knows. One prays, but one never knows.
17: See, I just thought HOH was trying to out-troll the troll-post.
I think you are right, HOH was clearly using mantis style troll fu. It was a trolly post, and remains completely un defended or explained. I really want to hear Lu’s “top five”!
/ I am all in favor of Roboto’s plan. I think it would rock!
How is my post trolling??? Clearly I’m being sarcastic, not controversial, and I’m very much on topic - I mean, this is a blog post about polar bears right? It’s a topic I care about and I used the opportunity to parrot right wing talking points in a sarcastic way.
As for my last comment to Lu Sid about avoiding the “green wagon” - again, clearly I’m being sarcastic and my point is, folks like Lu Sid think it’s expensive to be on the green wagon? Well, stop driving and you can save money and be green. Stop buying overpriced coffee in paper cups and you know, save money and be green. Use CF light bulbs, they’re pretty cheap these days and in the long run, you save money and you’re being green.
I know those aren’t great examples, but IMO, it’s incorrect to think that it’s expensive to be green.
Again, it’s not trolling to use sarcasm to make a point about the very topic being discussed.
The way I see see it, we’re helping thier per capita population. Dividing by a smaller number gives a bigger number.
They eat baby seals, too. Of course, I do too.
@21: I didn’t think you were trolling.
Belmont Yo- that’s some funny stuff right there - if it had a soundtrack it would be perfect.
@21 I think your getting some sarcastic blow back- kind of like trolling while accusing others of being a troll.
All very droll.
@ 21 I was trying to say that I mistook your sarcasm for sincerity. I thought LuSid’s post was trolly. It took me a while to see that you were using mantis style troll fu in responding to it. Sarcasm is awesome. More please.
The earth hasn’t warmed in ten years.
Are you sure? Feels kinda toasty.
@27 just some solar flares- now just simmer down -
And stop breaking the China !
Hey don’t drag me into this. Im just doing my job.
@22 Went to UVA, but do have a vague notion that “per capita population” likely remains constant whether the earth warms, cools, the bears die or procreate, or the penguins eat them…..
Whatever you do, do not click here
[editor note: GRAPHIC IMAGES]
Hey, sun and earth, why don’t you guys play nice since you are hangin’ in my crib. No fightin’ round these parts! P.S. You swinging by the party next sunday?
@29 Now sun, no one is picking on you. I ‘ve got this book “Everybody Flares” that I want you to read. What you are going though is perfectly normal. All the other stars have gone though the same thing. It’s all a part of going super nova.
And that is why you should not save the polar bears.
/shenanigans out
@30 - oh, right. I guess what I was getting at is the population density goes up. good catch.
@31 I don’t understand, did he pop that polar bears cherry? Is that why they’re BOTH bloody?
@35 that was sorta my point @10 - if there not advanced enough along the evolutionary trail to survive in 200 square miles each, then extinction just might be their destiny - they get the hammer! -Thor, any inclination that way?
31 & 34 = So much fail.
That may be why you should not go camping where polar bears live, especially if you can be considered their prey.
Further, I have been attacked by a dog twice… so what about all those puppies at the spca that cause you to foam at the mouth? Should we just leave em to hang?
@ 3& 20: The top five things I am concerned/care about (in no particular order):
-An American depression of epic proportion
-My family
-My job
-Hilary Clinton becoming president
-A cure for those on kidney dialysis
@21: I am not avoiding the green wagon for money’s sake. I just know how people can be. Maybe my neighbor recycles cans, but he drives off to work every morning in an SUV. People depend on many of the things that are claimed to be bad for the earth. Some things just aren’t going change–whether I am on board or not. I also know that the earth NATURALLY goes through ice ages and earth warming. It has happened before — it will happen again. Despite what we do — I honestly believe nature has a lot of its own course. I do think it is necessary to clean a park, throw away your trash, shut off the water when you brush your teeth, and build well insulated housing to conserve energy, but I refuse to live whatever time I have here collecting plastic from the neighbors and biking to work in the snow.
PS - What the heck is TROLLY?
@31: got that achille’s heel, eh?
ouch.
What the heck is TROLLY?
Look, Lu Sid, I like your posts. I think you post interesting conversation pieces, and you’re funny and fun.
[Semicolon However Comma]
This post was trolling the blog, in the sense that you posted a purposefully vapid take on global warming, ostensibly in the interest of starting a discussion about global warming.
But your post is so flippant about, and so dismissive of, global warming—even in the face of overwhelming scientific agreement about the issue—that the post itself becomes a parody of itself, frankly, unworthy of comment; an echo in an echo chamber; feedback in a feedback loop.
It’s not helpful to the grand project of Talking About Shit.
Go Stanley!
Stanley, I like you a little less this morning. I did post this with the intent of starting conversation on global warming, saving animals, etc. I also put my opinion (which has no bearing on anything) in the post. I knew it would not go over that well with everyone, but why would I shut up? I have always written my opinion on other’s posts why would I refrain now? I also encourage all of you to write whatever you ACTUALLY feel about each topic and post. I never promote sugar coating or censorship.
I also understand there is an overwhelming agreement on global warming issues. There are also overwhelming disagreements. Just check out the comment above that mentions the repairing of the ozone. Do think everyone’s research agrees with that? I don’t care what evidence is out there — there is always more evidence contradicting it. Just ask Exxon scientists. When I wrote papers in college I had 50 books with conflicting opinions, “facts”, and research. Agreement is rare. Thus the beauty of this site.
But see, that’s not science, that’s economics with a dash of PR.
there is an overwhelming agreement on global warming issues… There are also overwhelming disagreements
Well if there are both, I can hardly see how either would be overwhelming the other.
I don’t care what evidence is out there
Ahhh. I see.
there is always more evidence contradicting it
Ooooor, there is someone out there with a degree willing to create a contradicting opinion for a fast buck. See also: pharmaceuticals, agribusiness, global politics…
Science is an empirical model. Facts are facts. Its the conclusions drawn from the facts that vary so much. Unfortunately, most scientific inquiries are of sufficient complexity that it is easy to foist predetermined conclusions on the less educated. So what are pinheads like me and you supposed to do? Follow the money.
Sorry, the first line was responding to : Just ask Exxon scientists
I cant wait for global warming to make it warm enough here for me to have my very own orange grove! oh boy oh boy oh boy! and maybe pineapples, as long as im wishing. and papaya.
@38: Really? Just saying that they are killers not some feeble endangered species. I think you fail with your inane comment about puppies at the SPCA making one foam at the mouth. That don’t make no damn sense.
Every ecosystem needs predators though. That’s how it works, just because they’re dangerous animals doesn’t mean they aren’t necessary to help keep other populations under control. It’s not just a matter of save the polar bear because they’re kinda cute and it would be nice to have them around. An entire species going extinct (I know we’re kinda far away from that since they’re threatened, not endangered) has a much larger effect on it’s surrounding areas.
Someone had Logic-Os for breakfast.
Yeah the phrase “foaming at the mouth” was a bit of fail of the overstatement flavor, but you did get rather passionate about saving those lil’ furballs out at the SPCA in the charity thread. Nuf respect for that, but the point I was trying to make was that it doesn’t matter how big or vicious the bears are, as they are not fighting another living thing, they are being killed off by environmental changes. Its not the WWF WWF (World Wildlife Fund World Wrestling Fed). No fang can save ‘em if they have no ice to stand on.
I am just curious if your compassion for living things only extended to domesticated animals, and if so why?.
No, I love animals but that doesn’t mean I wanna hang out with things that will eat me. I was responding to the “polar bears are so cute, let’s save them” opinion when they are actually predators. I don’t think they should all die though, I was just messing around. Now go back to keeping my beverages cold.
@48 that’s mostly true. Hawaii has very few predators and it’s a fine ecosystem.Many of eco systems have few predators. They simply adjust to food supplies- kind of like locust or lemmings.
mountain lions were eradicate in the east about 100 years ago- how’s our ecosystem. We now have a lot of deer that would have been eaten by them. Perhaps we should now view cars as predators.
Yeah, we have an overpopulation of deer which can result in spread of disease (lyme disease) and destruction of habitat for other smaller animals plus the problems with road safety….and they eat peoples gardens…pesky deer
Too many or too few of any animal just causes problems in general I guess…
Dear Mr. Ro-butt-o, Hawaii is NOT a “fine ecosystem”. It’s totally overrun by exotic (as in non-native) species. At least 50 species of birds, many that were found only in the Hawaiian islands have gone extinct in the last 100 years due to the totally fucked-up ecosystem. There are no large predators because there were no large prey animals. (Still aren’t, unless you count the non-native deer and all the escaped pigs that went feral and destroy hundreds of acres of delicate vegetation every year.)
Nothin’ personal Mr Butt-o, just wanted to casually point out the fact that in this particular case you don’t know what you are talking about.
Go Bears! I love it when they eat people! Back on the main topic (sort of) I think that anyone who looks at the facts objectively and independently has to acknowledge the fact that global warming is a crock. But we still ought to pollute less on general principles.
And I for one am always very pleased when a polar bear, a mountain lion or a crocodile eats somebody. It’s even more fun if they eat a bratty little kid. When you get right down to it, what gives a human animal more rights than any other animal. Go Bears!
Fight species-ism!
@54 look head cheese- I not talk just about the island of Oahu but the Island of Hawaii, Kauaʻi, Kahoʻolawe, and others . Species become extinct under normal condition. I said fine not pristine.Even volcanic activity has hurt some species. You can’t stop that.
Did pigs and rats screw stuff up, yep. Does that make it totally screwed- no. Does it need protection, damn right. Does it have apex land predators no. That makes the crux of my claim accurate.
As for the birds I didn’t see 100 extinct species here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Hawaii_birds
and Hawaiian honeycreepers look to be the most effect.
at least hawaii doesn’t have any snakes.
@54 yo head cheese I used the word fine and not pristine, Has there been damage to Oahu and Hawaii sure but other islands have fared much better. according to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Hawaii_birds the most extinct species have come from Hawaiian honeycreepers but the majority are still doing fine. It’s one of the reasons that planes from Guam are searched to prevent the entry of the brown snake from entering Hawaii.
If you want to see a screwed up eco-system go to Guam and look to see how many birds have disappeared there
@41 Stanley - THANKS for expressing that so darn clearly! It’s not the first time I’ve read a blog from Lu Sid and felt the same way.
Guys, to be fair there is a lot of debate, money and politics on either side of the “global warming” debate. Al Gore wants your vote and Hollywood money, Exxon wants you to spend more money on petroleum products and us little ants are left in the middle of this.
I don’t think Lu Sid was trying to vapidly troll the site. I think it’s fair for her to have an opinion which may be against the norm, but let’s try not to attack each other. Play nice, ok?
to quote Thor: ATTACK ATTACK ATTACK
@ Highly Opinionatedly High - I am pretty sure I have told you before and now I will tell you again. You are welcome to write your own post anytime. In fact I would LOVE it. I would get a break and I would get to comment with MY OPINION, which you seem to hate so much.
For the record I do like to get people talking on the site. Everything I write has intensity, passion, and my honest opinion-whether I want people to comment or not. I could not careless if you or anyone else agrees with it. Again, that is the beauty of this site.
I know this thread was a month ago, but it seems appropriate.