Viral 1 hour ago Controversy swirls around viral video of starving polar bear

[Deleted]

This video is not even a proof or evidence, so using it to prove global warming is dishonest and will only give ammunition to global warming deniers, with reason. And the thread is about this video, not about other proofs or evidences.

People may think: If global warming is real, than whats the reason to appeal to emotion in such dishonest way ?



Yeah, just like theres a chance that snowball was formed due to global freezing. /facapalm

Its absurdly arbitrary saying that bear was affected by global warming considering polar bear population is increasing in a rate higher than we expected, and that malnutrition has always been a major cause of death for polar bears.

A myth

[igualitarist]

A myth

https://polarbearscience.com/2017/02...-almost-30000/

[Deleted]

https://polarbearscience.com/2017/02...-almost-30000/

Yes that link has been posted 4x, I provided three different links stating it's a myth

- - - Updated - - -

Here's a 4th link http://grist.org/article/will-polar-...y-2030-part-i/

- - - Updated - - -

And here's a 5th link http://zoonooz.sandiegozoo.org/2017/...isconceptions/

[igualitarist]

Yes that link has been posted 4x, I provided three different links stating it's a myth

Read the link you provided again. Its stuck refuting data from the 60's and 70's.

I am providing studies from this decade.

- - - Updated - - -

Yes that link has been posted 4x, I provided three different links stating it's a myth

- - - Updated - - -

Here's a 4th link http://grist.org/article/will-polar-...y-2030-part-i/

- - - Updated - - -

And here's a 5th link http://zoonooz.sandiegozoo.org/2017/...isconceptions/

Yep, all polar bears will die in 12 years. Sounds legit

I stopped reading after this:

"That’s right — this grim prediction is optimistic, a best-case scenario. In the next post, I’ll examine why polar bears are likely to go extinct by 2030 if not 2020."

I mean, 2020 is right at the corner and they are thriving. What kind of credibility should i give to this study ?

[Deleted]

Sorry but polar bears worldwide aren't increasing

[Hey There Guys its Metro]

Blizz need to buff the spawn rate on fish.

[Krastyn]

And polar bears are not biologically designed to chase down caribou

As linked before:
https://polarbearfacts.net/do-polar-bears-eat-caribou/

They are quite capable of of hunting caribou. It's just easier to eat seal.

[Deleted]

As linked before:
https://polarbearfacts.net/do-polar-bears-eat-caribou/

They are quite capable of of hunting caribou. It's just easier to eat seal.

But it isn't really viable to maintain

[Krastyn]

But it isn't really viable to maintain

Please link the study to back up your opinion. Because I already linked a scientific study that shows yes, it is viable.

So many people talking from their "feels" instead of facts.

[Deleted]

Please link the study to back up your opinion. Because I already linked a scientific study that shows yes, it is viable.

So many people talking from their "feels" instead of facts.

Not every polar bear is within the area

[Celista]

Blizz need to buff the spawn rate on fish.

Haha. In all seriousness though, polar bears mostly eat seals.

[Grapemask]

GenOT should be renamed "posts from climate deniers desperately grasping at straws to rationalize their ideology." Only like 20% of threads wouldn't fit.

[satimy]

My uncle was killed by global warming last week, it’s real guys.

[Krastyn]

Not every polar bear is within the area

Not every animal of a species has the same diet. Does that mean none of them can survive?

- - - Updated - - -

No you linked to some random blog, it's not a "scientific study".

This is a random blog?

Sure looks like a researched and referenced article posted in a scientific journal to me.

[Zervek]

Who cares, there are many more polar bears on the planet. If we look at this from a biblical point of view (I say this because America was founded on Judeo-Christian values), then this really isn't that big of an issue. We are made to be above all animals on this planet; so due to the fact that we are at the top of the food-chain, there is no reason to feel empathy toward a creature that would kill you at first sight.

[Molis]

GenOT should be renamed "posts from climate deniers desperately grasping at straws to rationalize their ideology." Only like 20% of threads wouldn't fit.

I am not denying Climate Change

I am denying that this polar bear died from climate change when polar bears have been dying of starvation for many many years.
Mostly due to the way they hunt and travel long miles to hunt.
It is a fact of living in this harsh environment.

So anybody that is a skeptic or on the fence is turned off by this sort of approach.
Some people in this thread do not bring any science or facts to a conversation, just bring feels about a starving polar bear.

[Deleted]

Who cares, there are many more polar bears on the planet. If we look at this from a biblical point of view (I say this because America was founded on Judeo-Christian values), then this really isn't that big of an issue. We are made to be above all animals on this planet; so due to the fact that we are at the top of the food-chain, there is no reason to feel empathy toward a creature that would kill you at first sight.

Superiority doesn't exclude empathy, imo. It also includes awareness and responsibility.

[igualitarist]

GenOT should be renamed "posts from climate deniers desperately grasping at straws to rationalize their ideology." Only like 20% of threads wouldn't fit.

Well, there are those who deny every evidence global warming is true, and there are those who make every natural event as the ultimate proof that global warming is true.

Both are complete idiots if you ask me.

[Ishayu]

What it says is only certain polar bears (unaffected by global warming) are on the increase whereas the estimate is other polar bears will decline and are. WWF does state some are more vulnerable than others

No, it doesn't say that at all. Read it carefully. It says some groups are doing better, and some are doing worse, and that there's an equal number of groups in both camps, and that they don't know anything about the remaining 14 groups, which are the majority of the groups.

[Geschan]

Why do you say they don't have proof, when they say they have proof? Are you smarter than all the climate scientists?

Im under the impression that all but a few US lobbyists have proven that man-made climate change is very much a reality.

The word "proof" is used pretty loosely when journalists quote any scientists. Groups like Nasa and many more have collected a lot of evidence, that man-made climate change is real(or at least highly highly probable) and a problem. But evidence is not proof. That doesn't mean we shouldn't do anything, don't get me wrong. Reducing CO2 emissions is most definitely something we should probably do.
But the reduction of greenhouse gases is not a cure-all for the problems we are going to face. Forests are still vanishing at an alarming rate. The damage might already be done, and nothing we do now will change the fact, that the climate is already collapsing. A lot of the actions that get discussed right now won't help us in that case.
The problem I have is with the parties discussing the issues. One side simply tries to ignore the problem and hope for the best. They would rather push the economy and improve peoples lives short term. The other side revels in it's god complex and thinks that we can control the earth on a global scale and even reverse climate change, without facing the symptoms.
We are facing a real issue. Politics, Party lines, personal problems should not be part of the discussion. We need a complete solution NOW for both the systemic issue AND the symptoms we are going to face.