Extreme weather

[LesPalenik]

The radical left-wing scientists have been bought off by whomever is suppose to be buying off radical left-wing scientists to say that polar bears don't live in Death Valley. Otherwise, their argument that polar bears will go extinct due to climate change falls apart. The people who have been trying to film Sasquatch in the wilds of Canada have given up, and have now set up filming in Death Valley. We should have evidence of polar bears living in Death Valley on YouTube any day now.

Speaking of deaths, wild animals and warm valleys,

More than 200 reindeer have been found dead this summer in the Norwegian archipelago of Svalbard -- and climate change appears to be the killer, researchers say.
The reindeer likely starved to death after being unable to find food to graze on, according to scientists at the Norwegian Polar Institute (NPI), a federal scientific research agency that monitors the wild reindeer population.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/07/29/europe/norway-reindeer-dead-intl-hnk-scli/index.html

[Alan Klein]

Les:  The article states: "The relatively large number of calves born last year exacerbated the problem. The youngest and weakest animals are often the first to die in harsh conditions like these, according to the Institute." 

High offspring rates means that the feeding the previous year was good.  So there was plenty of food then.  MAybe caused by warmer weather and CO2 that grows more food for grazing. There may not have been enough grazing areas the following year which is natural for whitetail deer here in the US as well.  What happens is over a number of good years, the herds expand tremendously.  Hunting doesn't deplete them enough.  Then, the deer suffer deaths with a 50% reduction in one bad winter because the deer can't get to the food or there's not enough to go around.  But this is normal.  It doesn;t mean we're have another ice age. 

Likewise, are the scientists jumping to conclusions about the reindeer?  Similar things could be happening there from time to time.  Populations expand and contract, yes, especially due to changes in the environment and weather.  So what? 

Also, I'd like to know how many deer expanded because the higher CO2 and warmth gave them better grazing in the good years.  The greater population would have set them up for a bad year this year.  Did the scientists investigate that aspect? 

[faberryman]

Les:  The article states: "The relatively large number of calves born last year exacerbated the problem. The youngest and weakest animals are often the first to die in harsh conditions like these, according to the Institute." 

High offspring rates means that the feeding the previous year was good.  So there was plenty of food then.  MAybe caused by warmer weather and CO2 that grows more food for grazing. There may not have been enough grazing areas the following year which is natural for whitetail deer here in the US as well.  What happens is over a number of good years, the herds expand tremendously.  Hunting doesn't deplete them enough.  Then, the deer suffer deaths with a 50% reduction in one bad winter because the deer can't get to the food or there's not enough to go around.  But this is normal.  It doesn;t mean we're have another ice age. 

Likewise, are the scientists jumping to conclusions about the reindeer?  Similar things could be happening there from time to time.  Populations expand and contract, yes, especially due to changes in the environment and weather.  So what? 

Also, I'd like to know how many deer expanded because the higher CO2 and warmth gave them better grazing in the good years.  The greater population would have set them up for a bad year this year.  Did the scientists investigate that aspect?

I guess it is theoretically possible that the scientists overlooked all of those considerations.

[Alan Klein]

I guess it is theoretically possible that the scientists overlooked all of those considerations.

If they didn't include it in their report, then yes, they overlooked them. I didn't read the report.  So the question is did they report on the number of reindeer population for the past few years?  They did mention there was a large birthrate the previous year.  Did they explain what effect that has?  People, yes scientists, are always blaming climate change.  But changes in the weather happen regularly enough to effect huge die offs in animal population. These may or may not have to do with climate change.  Speculating isn't science.  How did they arrive at their conclusions?

[faberryman]

If they didn't include it in their report, then yes, they overlooked them. I didn't read the report.  So the question is did they report on the number of reindeer population for the past few years?  They did mention there was a large birthrate the previous year.  Did they explain what effect that has?  People, yes scientists, are always blaming climate change.  But changes in the weather happen regularly enough to effect huge die offs in animal population. These may or may not have to do with climate change.  Speculating isn't science.  How did they arrive at their conclusions?

You'd have to read the report to find out. In the meantime, just assume they are dishonest, or at least incompetent, scientists.

[LesPalenik]

In the meantime, Trump approved oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. That should improve the living conditions for the polar bears.

[Alan Klein]

I checked another article to get more information. It says there are 22,000 reindeer on Svalbard ISland where the death occurred.  200 dead out of 22,000 is nothing.  Especially because they were the vulnerable old and young.  The article also says:

" The elderly and young are the first to die as the rest continue on to try and find an area to graze. The bodies of over 200 skinny and malnourished reindeer were found by scientists performing an annual census of the wild reindeer population...

The institute believes there are 22,000 reindeer in Svalbard, but that number could start to decline drastically if the temperatures continue to rise."
https://blog.theanimalrescuesite.greatergood.com/200-dead-reindeer/

Another article claims the regular population to be around 10,000.  If true, the 22,000 currently could confirm my point about overpopulation.  There's just too many of them to be supported when the weather changes.  These could be just natural processes happening unrelated to global warming.
https://www.spitsbergen-svalbard.com/spitsbergen-information/wildlife/svalbard-reindeer.html#:~:text=Miscellaneous%3A%20The%20size%20of%20the,designated%20areas%20in%20Nordenski%C3%B6ld%20Land.

[Alan Klein]

You'd have to read the report to find out. In the meantime, just assume they are dishonest, or at least incompetent, scientists.

Maybe the media is pushing the climate change angle in their reports because that's what they do. Instead of reporting and asking the right questions as I have, they focus on climate change because that's what their readers want to read.

[JoeKitchen]

I checked another article to get more information. It says there are 22,000 reindeer on Svalbard ISland where the death occurred.  200 dead out of 22,000 is nothing.  Especially because they were the vulnerable old and young.  The article also says:

" The elderly and young are the first to die as the rest continue on to try and find an area to graze. The bodies of over 200 skinny and malnourished reindeer were found by scientists performing an annual census of the wild reindeer population...

The institute believes there are 22,000 reindeer in Svalbard, but that number could start to decline drastically if the temperatures continue to rise."
https://blog.theanimalrescuesite.greatergood.com/200-dead-reindeer/

Another article claims the regular population to be around 10,000.  If true, the 22,000 currently could confirm my point about overpopulation.  There's just too many of them to be supported when the weather changes.  These could be just natural processes happening unrelated to global warming.
https://www.spitsbergen-svalbard.com/spitsbergen-information/wildlife/svalbard-reindeer.html#:~:text=Miscellaneous%3A%20The%20size%20of%20the,designated%20areas%20in%20Nordenski%C3%B6ld%20Land.

I have been reading up a lot on climate change since the lock down, and I have come to the conclusion that most of the hysteria sold by the left on climate issues are nonsense.  Although it is an issue in some very localized places in the world, most of the time what is attributed to climate change is often the result of other things. 

Another good one is for the left to blame the drastic increase in damage from hurricanes being from climate change making hurricanes stronger.  There has been some pretty great research showing hurricanes have been more or less the same for the last few centuries. 

We are just building drastically more in hurricane prone areas due to the federal government backing flood insurance private insurance companies use to not provide for those areas because of the hurricanes.  This caused a building boom (everyone loves water front property), which in turn causes more damage from hurricanes. 

I was once told by the daughter of a farmer to never buy a house on what use to be a pig farm.  Cows' hooves rot in wet soil, whereas pigs' hooves do not, and that's the only reason to raise pigs when beef sells for so much more.  If you do buy there, dont be surprised when your basement floods.  Same thing here; if you buy a house in an hurrcane prone area dont be surprised when a hurricane destroys your home.  It wasn't climate change, just you being a jack ass. 

[Alan Klein]

In the meantime, Trump approved oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. That should improve the living conditions for the polar bears.

That's speculation.  Maybe you're opposed because as a Canadian you'll have more American competition for oil up north.  Of course, if we pump it through piping, it would go through Canada so you would get a fee for that.  Beneficial for both of our countries.

[faberryman]

Maybe the media is pushing the climate change angle in their reports because that's what they do. Instead of reporting and asking the right questions as I have, they focus on climate change because that's what their readers want to read.

Ah yes, the media.

[faberryman]

That's speculation.  Maybe you're opposed because as a Canadian you'll have more American competition for oil up north.

Not sure that would have been my first guess, but it fits a pattern. I'm not sure why the media would post a picture of some healthy polar bears to accompany this story. They must be slipping. I mean wouldn’t they photoshop in some emaciated bears near a drilling rig?

[JoeKitchen]

Ah yes, the media.

Frank, I don't see how you can have any trouble with this.  The media needs to sell headlines, which means sensationalizing stories.  Climate change is an easy target, therefore it gets sensationalized and overblown. 

Trump used to great effect in 2016.  He did act after act that were easy to sensationalize, getting him free press since he knew they would not be able to resist. 

Here's a good review of what Trump does.  How Trump Manipulates The Media

[faberryman]

Frank, I don't see how you can have any trouble with this.  The media needs to sell headlines, which means sensationalizing stories.  Climate change is an easy target, therefore it gets sensationalized and overblown. 

Trump used to great effect in 2016.  He did act after act that were easy to sensationalize, getting him free press since he knew they would not be able to resist. 

Here's a good review of what Trump does.  How Trump Manipulates The Media

It is just that I don't immediately disbelieve everything I read, and attribute dishonesty or incompetence to those involved in the article and its publication. And I am pretty cynical.

For example, my question about the article was not the same as Alan's about dishonesty in the media. When I looked at the picture I asked myself: if the reindeer died of starvation, why would they all die, young and old, at the same place at the same time?

[JoeKitchen]

It is just that I don't immediately disbelieve everything I read, and attribute dishonesty or incompetence to those involved in the article and its publication. And I am pretty cynical.

For example, my question about the article was not the same as Alan's about dishonesty in the media. When I looked at the picture I asked myself: if the reindeer died of starvation, why would they all die, young and old, at the same place at the same time?

Sounds fair.

[TechTalk]

I have been reading up a lot on climate change since the lock down, and I have come to the conclusion that most of the hysteria sold by the left on climate issues are nonsense. 

Please share with us what you've been reading that has led you to that conclusion.

[hogloff]

I guess it is theoretically possible that the scientists overlooked all of those considerations.

Or maybe not after all many of these scientists live and breath this stuff everyday and there are many armchair quarterbacks that think they know better than people who have devoted their lives to this stuff.

[hogloff]

If they didn't include it in their report, then yes, they overlooked them. I didn't read the report.  So the question is did they report on the number of reindeer population for the past few years?  They did mention there was a large birthrate the previous year.  Did they explain what effect that has?  People, yes scientists, are always blaming climate change.  But changes in the weather happen regularly enough to effect huge die offs in animal population. These may or may not have to do with climate change.  Speculating isn't science.  How did they arrive at their conclusions?

Alan...you've made it very clear in numerous posts you don't trust scientist, doctors and financial advisors. But please stop insulting their intelligence over and over again. Many of these scientists have devoted their entire lives to their science and rather than coming down hard on these people that live a meager life...maybe for once you should praise the work they do.

[hogloff]

You'd have to read the report to find out. In the meantime, just assume they are dishonest, or at least incompetent, scientists.

Yes, Alan has issues with experts in their fields.

[hogloff]

That's speculation.  Maybe you're opposed because as a Canadian you'll have more American competition for oil up north.  Of course, if we pump it through piping, it would go through Canada so you would get a fee for that.  Beneficial for both of our countries.

Good luck getting a pipeline approved through any native terrirory...especially if it's totally foreign interests.