Grizzly Bears are in on the Global Climate Change Conspiracy
Sunnyways @ Sun Dec 15, 2019 7:09 pm
N_Fiddledog N_Fiddledog:
Sunnyways Sunnyways:
That’s probably a difficult question for anybody to answer with our current knowledge and it would be foolish to make dogmatic assertions.
I see and yet you didn't hesitate to make this "dogmatic assertion":
Sunnyways Sunnyways:
Polar bears have few skills to deal with a warming climate
You know that because why?
I don’t know it. I surmise it. I am not an expert in the field and expect nothing I say here to be taken as dogmatic fact, obviously, but it wouldn’t be something I’d regard as all that controversial. An enormous white bear adapted for swimming in the Arctic that eats hardly anything but flesh may not be best suited to a green and brown land environment. Here’s an article to start with:
$1:
https://www.climatechangenews.com/2012/ ... searchers/
New research has found the polar bear to be much older than originally thought, showing it adapted much less rapidly to harsh conditions of the Arctic. Researchers say this questions its ability to adapt to current climate change.
The study, published in Science, found that polar bears may have evolved from their brown bear ancestors as far back as 600,000 years ago, making them five times older than previously recognised.
And if the endangered Arctic species had much more time to adapt to its harsh conditions it could be harder for them to adapt now to the rapid changes brought about by climate change, warn the researchers from German Biodiversity and Climate Research Centre (BiK-F).
Whether polar bears will be able to survive current sea ice melting is still not clear.
With human impacts accelerating the rate of climate change, the Arctic could reach higher temperatures than previous interglacial warm phases.
In addition to this, the scientists believe other human-related issues are threatening the bear today – including Arctic residents killing the bears and increased pollution.
New research has found the polar bear to be much older than originally thought, showing it adapted much less rapidly to harsh conditions of the Arctic. Researchers say this questions its ability to adapt to current climate change.
The study, published in Science, found that polar bears may have evolved from their brown bear ancestors as far back as 600,000 years ago, making them five times older than previously recognised.
And if the endangered Arctic species had much more time to adapt to its harsh conditions it could be harder for them to adapt now to the rapid changes brought about by climate change, warn the researchers from German Biodiversity and Climate Research Centre (BiK-F).
Whether polar bears will be able to survive current sea ice melting is still not clear.
With human impacts accelerating the rate of climate change, the Arctic could reach higher temperatures than previous interglacial warm phases.
In addition to this, the scientists believe other human-related issues are threatening the bear today – including Arctic residents killing the bears and increased pollution.
And another one:
$1:
https://www.nrdc.org/experts/zack-stron ... land-right
Polar bears are highly specialized, both physically and physiologically, for a world of sea, ice, and meat: shorter, stockier claws to better grip prey and ice; smaller, more jagged molars and larger, sharper canines, better serving an almost exclusively carnivorous diet; all-white coats to provide camouflage while stalking prey; larger, thicker bodies to increase the ratio of surface area to body mass, helping the bears conserve energy and body heat; and a more elongated body, skull and nose to enhance streamlining and better enable the bears to thrust their heads through snow and ice into seal denning lairs and breathing holes.
These adaptations, however, become serious impediments in a warmer, terrestrial environment. The bears lack the longer, more dexterous claws needed to uproot plants, rake up berries, or dig up insects or rodents. Their teeth are unsuited to grinding vegetation. Against the greens and browns of the tundra, their white color suddenly exposes, rather than conceals them. Perhaps most fatally, their large size causes them to overheat quickly, preventing them from chasing prey for more than a few seconds, and making it difficult to consume enough calories to meet their energy needs.
There are good reasons why polar bears are confined to northern latitudes.
BeaverFever @ Sun Dec 15, 2019 7:57 pm
N_Fiddledog N_Fiddledog:
WWF are crap. Their quote unquote "studies" are crap. I gave it a quick scan though. They didn't seem to be saying anything that mattered.
Translation: it doesn’t align with your ideology. You believe the earth is flat therefore anything that suggests otherwise is crap and doesn’t say anything that matters. You can’t even explain what’s deficient about it you kust summarily declare it null and void for ideological reasons.
$1:
Now as to deflecting "from the OP about Grizzily Bears." Yeah, let's talk about that OP. First of all you altered the title to sound more hysterical. Shame on you.
The actual title is:
"Grizzly bears move north in High Arctic as climate change expands range"
The actual title is:
"Grizzly bears move north in High Arctic as climate change expands range"
Mine’s funnier. And you’re hilarious when you’re triggered. I give you the link so you can see the real title for yourself, it’s all transparent.
$1:
As we get into the body of the article we discover:
At this point some " associate professor in the school of environment and sustainability" chirps in with 'OMG! Climate Change! Hide your daughters!'
OK, what he actually said was, "“Something pretty big is going on and we don’t know why,”
$1:
Grizzly bears have lost significant habitat to human settlement across North America and continue to struggle in some regions. But they have been expanding their range northward for several years, he said. One area seeing more grizzlies is the west coast of Hudson Bay, including Wapusk National Park near Churchill, Man., best known for its roaming polar bears.
With no southerly source population, it shows that grizzlies aren’t just moving north, they’re moving east and south as well.
With no southerly source population, it shows that grizzlies aren’t just moving north, they’re moving east and south as well.
At this point some " associate professor in the school of environment and sustainability" chirps in with 'OMG! Climate Change! Hide your daughters!'
OK, what he actually said was, "“Something pretty big is going on and we don’t know why,”
$1:
Sunny’s addressed this point nicely. The high arctic id different and if you read the OP it about how the vegetation and ecosystem of the arctic is changing, and becoming more hospitable to southern plants and animals it’s not just about wandering bears. Once again your poor reading comprehension on full display.
Really? You don’t grasp the concept of sustainability?
You really understand so little. But at least you’re not denying that the climate is changing. Well not in the above sentence anyway. I’m sure tomorrow you’ll be back at it.
$1:
Tell you a trick though. As soon as you see the word "sustainability" you know you're being fed BS. It's one of those progressive buzz words like "diversity" they bring out when they're going to feed you a line.
Really? You don’t grasp the concept of sustainability?
$1:
But basically you and the "associate" professor of "sustainability" are frantic that the global warming is going to get the Grizzly bears.
WHY?
Some nice weather and the added plant fertilizer of CO2 have made some tundra space more compatible to wildlife. So what?
WHY?
Some nice weather and the added plant fertilizer of CO2 have made some tundra space more compatible to wildlife. So what?
You really understand so little. But at least you’re not denying that the climate is changing. Well not in the above sentence anyway. I’m sure tomorrow you’ll be back at it.
$1:
Good for the Grizzlies if they can wander up there or into other areas to get away from all the immigrants building housing developments where they used to hunt.
Lmao wtf “immigrants build housing developments”. I don’t even know what that means you must be off your meds.
Sunnyways @ Sun Dec 15, 2019 8:41 pm
Again, I don’t want to be right about this. A world without wild polar bears would be a deeply impoverished place. Perhaps, as a last desperate ploy, we could move some bears to what’s left of the Antarctic but Lord knows what would happen to the ecology down there then.
N_Fiddledog @ Sun Dec 15, 2019 9:56 pm
And maybe a Polar Bear doesn't have to eat bugs and berries to survive a warm period. Let's go back to the original questions.
Sunnyways Sunnyways:
N_Fiddledog N_Fiddledog:
Sunnyways Sunnyways:
Polar bears have few skills to deal with a warming climate and may not be able to adapt their behaviour, esp. diet, quickly enough to avoid extirpation from their southern range.
Really? Then tell me how Polar Bears survived hundreds of thousands of years in their present adaptation to the arctic. How did they survive during the Holocene Maximum for example, when it was warmer than present day?
That’s probably a difficult question for anybody to answer with our current knowledge and it would be foolish to make dogmatic assertions. I would say the rate of warming was less abrupt than now and that polar bears were not subject to all the other anthropogenic pressures on their environment we see today. The fossil record does show that polar bears have disappeared before from coastal Europe as the climate warmed.
One description of Polar Bears surviving in habitats warmer than today and how they did it can be see here:
Less Svalbard polar bear habitat during the early Holocene than now
$1:
New evidence from clams and mussels with temperature-sensitive habitat requirements confirm that warmer temperatures and less sea ice than today existed during the early Holocene period about 10.2–9.2 thousand years ago and between 8.2 and 6.0 thousand years ago (based on radio carbon dates) around Svalbard. Barents Sea polar bears almost certainly survived those previous low-ice periods, as they are doing today, by staying close to the Franz Josef Land Archipelago in the eastern half of the region where sea ice is more persistent.
The transition from Younger Dryas cold to Holocene Thermal Maximum warm conditions took place very rapidly, according to records from nearby Greenland (Taylor et al. 1997), warming in “steps” of about five years each over a period of about 40 years. This was at least as fast, if not faster than, recent Arctic warming between the 1980s and 2015. And since polar bears of the Barents Sea and adjacent Arctic areas appear to have survived this change to Holocence Thermal Maximum conditions, it challenges the notion that recent warming has been (or will be) too fast to allow polar bears to survive without huge changes in their present distribution (Amstrup et al. 2007).
Survival of Barents Sea polar bears during low-ice years does not require emigration to another sea ice ecoregion or even another subpopulation area. The eastern Barents Sea (located in Russian territory), as defined by the Polar Bear Specialist Group (see map below), provides ample habitat for polar bears to thrive despite extended fluctuations in seasonal sea ice cover in the western portion. Although it must be frustrating for Norwegian researchers and their colleagues to see “their” bears abandoning Svalbard for Franz Josef Land because of recent low ice levels, they are not witnessing a biological catastrophe.
Bottom line: Barents Sea polar bears are loyal to this region because the eastern portion has the habitat they require to thrive even when sea ice cover in the western portion essentially disappears for thousands of years at a time.
The transition from Younger Dryas cold to Holocene Thermal Maximum warm conditions took place very rapidly, according to records from nearby Greenland (Taylor et al. 1997), warming in “steps” of about five years each over a period of about 40 years. This was at least as fast, if not faster than, recent Arctic warming between the 1980s and 2015. And since polar bears of the Barents Sea and adjacent Arctic areas appear to have survived this change to Holocence Thermal Maximum conditions, it challenges the notion that recent warming has been (or will be) too fast to allow polar bears to survive without huge changes in their present distribution (Amstrup et al. 2007).
Survival of Barents Sea polar bears during low-ice years does not require emigration to another sea ice ecoregion or even another subpopulation area. The eastern Barents Sea (located in Russian territory), as defined by the Polar Bear Specialist Group (see map below), provides ample habitat for polar bears to thrive despite extended fluctuations in seasonal sea ice cover in the western portion. Although it must be frustrating for Norwegian researchers and their colleagues to see “their” bears abandoning Svalbard for Franz Josef Land because of recent low ice levels, they are not witnessing a biological catastrophe.
Bottom line: Barents Sea polar bears are loyal to this region because the eastern portion has the habitat they require to thrive even when sea ice cover in the western portion essentially disappears for thousands of years at a time.
And again I stress this was during a time that was warmer today.
N_Fiddledog @ Sun Dec 15, 2019 10:01 pm
This polar bear scare pushed by Global Warmiacs below wasn't happening during the warmer Holocene Maximum and it isn't happening today.
Overall the Polar Bear population is growing during this short warm period so far.
N_Fiddledog @ Sun Dec 15, 2019 10:23 pm
And again Beave I actually did scan read your WWF link. I just didn't see anything there that mattered to the conversation even if it was credible (which I doubt.) But if I could do that with something I consider nonsense you can read this:
$1:
A new paper that combines paleoclimatology data for the last 56 million years with molecular genetic evidence concludes there were no biological extinctions over the last 1.5M years despite profound Arctic sea ice changes that included ice-free summers: polar bears, seals, walrus and other species successfully adapted to habitat changes that exceeded those predicted by USGS and US Fish and Wildlife polar bear biologists over the next 100 years.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/01/10/ ... e-summers/
CharlesAnthony @ Mon Dec 16, 2019 6:28 am
N_Fiddledog N_Fiddledog:
This polar bear scare pushed by Global Warmiacs below wasn't happening during the warmer Holocene Maximum and it isn't happening today.
Admittedly, the CGI is good.