Quantcast
 
 
 
Top Story
Sit Back, Relax, Get Ready to Rumble
My Journey to the Top
 
 
Latest News
Person close to talks: Cablevision close to getting Newsday
 
 
expand
CAPITAL SOURCES

Bear Necessities

Washington has to decide whether to protect polar bears under the Endangered Species Act. Inside the politics of the debate.

By Daniel Stone | Newsweek Web Exclusive
May 5, 2008 | Updated: 1:25  p.m. ET May 5, 2008

« Return to Article

 
Discuss
 
Member Comments
  • Posted By: getzel @ 05/09/2008 7:56:20 PM

    Comment: Those green with envy of those who have acquired much green, and who themselves are not green when it comes to con jobs, have set out to exploit the green grain of truth in matters pertaining to greening the environment. Even our Absolut or Mexican friends who come in search of green-go cards recognize that like the greengo, he is in constant pursuit of much green, some for himself and some for those the other side of the non existent border fence, where the grass is not greener. When your green-goes into the thin, carbon taxed, formerly air filled pockets of the not so green green-gos, you will really long for greener pastures in search of the devalued green backs.

    Intelligence analyst: Getzel

    Environ mentalist defined: Individuals that want others to use less energy; almost invariably the Goree truth.

    You can fool some of the people all of the time and those are pretty good odds.

  • Posted By: jeffreycourtney @ 05/09/2008 6:13:20 AM

    Comment: I find it interesting that polar bears have existed for a million years through much warmer periods than now, and what is realistically projected for the next century, yet the crazies and those hijacking this issue for their own self interests, feel that the Alaskan polar bears (the portion of the population the US has some control over) need some protection based on a dubious speculation of a 30% decline in fifty years, when at present the polar bears are thriving, and their numbers are increasing. How is that sound reasoning?! Considering the dire parallel effect on the "global-warming" conversation and severe unnecessary yearly costs to our nation associated with "global-warming", it seems best to put this whole issue on hold for a couple of decades and reduce the current excessive US "global-warming" research costs from $5B back to a sensible $100M or so. This will put a damper on those who seek to exploit this issue for their own gain, by reducing the monetary incentive. Then we can carefully monitor both the climate and polar bear population in a responsible/sensible manner until more actual solid scientific data is developed, and we can step back from the emotion/hysteria seemingly driving us at present.

    • Posted By: d11martin @ 05/09/2008 12:08:31

      Comment: Very good. You nailed this issue. As I've been saying, the Canadian population and others are doing fine.

  • Posted By: amambo @ 05/09/2008 3:36:13 AM

    Comment: unfortunatly the human can not understant that this is the only planet so far that we can use for living, so far.....also for those greedys that think that by the time that the planet get wreck and useless they will be gone
    BAD NEWS; untill today there is not a scientific proof that can admit or denied REENCARNATION as a fact not even live after life I am been death 4 times 3 in a control enviroment 15 minutes the most and one in a hold up I was stoned severaal times by 2 crooks I was death for 2 hours still on the botton line..... it will be a 48% NO. a 52% yes.......the tunnel (a vaccum a lot of supose to be people and animals going back and for ......the light ...etc it could be a brain image of the last seconds to make the traumatic and peinful death a more beareable situation......flying around your death body..yes .....as soon as your hart stops and you heard that silent......them your lungs stop working and you tryed to grasp that last........then you discharge feces and pee and no body can help you..........byeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee//////////.......-----------------you gone!

  • Posted By: dinobooti @ 05/09/2008 12:50:53 AM

    Comment: I am going to laugh hystically if we pass this silly legislation. Then we can buy lawn chairs and watch the rest of the world (Russia, Canada, Norway) extract every last drop of artic oil. Anyone that thinks that's going to happen is as naive as it gets. Remember the Russian flag planted on the North Pole seafloor? No, this will never happen. Cheney and bush are already plotting our entry into this little game. Polar Bears be damned. Polar bears are cute but there crapping on a lot of oil and that makes them as expendable as the
    4,000 Americans, 100,000 IRAIS we've already killed.

  • Posted By: dinobooti @ 05/09/2008 12:44:25 AM

    Comment: I am going to laugh my A** off if we pass this silly legislation. Then we can buy lawn chairs while we watch the rest of the world (Russia, Canada, Norway) extract last drop and fume of artic oil, methane, etc. Anyone that thinks that's going to happen is as naive as it gets. Remember the Russian flag planted on the North Pole seafloor. No, this will never happen. Cheney and bush are already plotting our entry into this little game. Polar Bears be damned.

  • Posted By: dinobooti @ 05/09/2008 12:43:49 AM

    Comment: I am going to laugh my A** off if we pass this silly legislation. Then we can buy lawn chairs while we watch the rest of the world (Russia, Canada, Norway) extract last drop and fume of artic oil, methane, etc. Anyone that thinks that's going to happen is as naive as it gets. Remember the Russian flag planted on the North Pole seafloor. No, this will never happen. Cheney and bush are already plotting our entry into this little game. Polar Bears be damned.

  • Posted By: sharkman @ 05/08/2008 9:36:07 PM

    Comment: CONGRESS GET OFF YOUR ASS AND SHOW THE AMERICAN PEOPLE YOU CAN DO MORE THAN VACATION AND OVERSPEND.

  • Posted By: LIKEITIS @ 05/08/2008 6:21:06 PM

    Comment: SENT TO ALL OF THOSE WHO FEEL THIER LIFE CALLING WAS TO HAVE A BULL HORN ATTACHED TO THIER FACE AND A PICKET SIGN IN ONE HAND, GET A CLUE! IF ALL THE MONEY AND POWERS OF THE WORLD WERE AT YOUR BECK AND CALL, WE WOULD BE NO CLOSER TO ANSWER TO GLOBAL WARNING OF THE LOSS OF A FEW SPECIES.

    FROM THE FIRST HEART BEAT, ALL ANIMALS(INCLUDING HUMANS) ARE TERMINAL. ALL THE CRYING AND HAND WRINGING WILL CHANGE NOTHING.

    4 COUNTRIES IN THE WORLD(OUT OF OVER 100) EVEN TREAT THIER SEWAGE(THE U.S. IS ONE OF THEM). ABOUT 1/4 F THE WORLD POPULATION DRINKS CLORINATED WATER(YEA THE U.S. DOES)
    THE COUNTRIES THAT USE UNLEADED GASOLINE IS LESS THAN 10%(YEA WE STARTED IT).
    7 COUNTRIES DEEM SWAMP LAND TO BE IMPORTANT TO THE ECO CHAIN(OF COURSE US).
    CATALITIC CONVERTERS, AS MANY AS USE UNLEADED GAS.


    SINCE THE BEGINING OF TIME SPIECIES HAVE LIVE AND DIED OUT, AND IF IT IS THE POLAR BEARS TIME, R.I.P..
    OUR TIME WILL COME SOONER THAN LATER, BECAUSE WE (NOT ME, BUT THE SUPPOSED REPRESENTATIVES) DO NOT ANSWER THE TRUE CALLINGS OF NATURE.

    IS IT RIGHT FOR US TO, FOR MANY GENERATIONS, SUPPLY FOOD TO PEOPLES THAT DUE TO THIER BACKWARDNESS ARE BEING TOLD BY NATURE "YOUR TIME IS UP". NO! THE END RESULT IS A PEOPLE THAT WERE UNABLE TO SUSTAIN THEMSELVES, WHO NOW HAVE FOOD THAT REQUIRED NO LABOR AND NOW INSTEAD OF THE NATURAL REACTION TO FAMINE , WHICH IS THE INABILITY TO REPRODUCE(NATURE KNOWS IT'S STUFF) NOW THEY ARE WELL FED AND READY FOR SEXUAL ENTERTAINMENT AND ADDING TO THE POPULATION OF A GROUP THAT CANNOT TAKE CARE OF IT'S SELF WITH LESS PEOPLE.

    THAT BRINGS ME TO ANOTHER OF THE WARMING TYPE PLEAS', THE MILLENIUM BUG DEBALKLE, I HAVE YET TO SEE ANYONE PUT THIER HAND UP TO CLAIM "MY BAD, I COST THE WORLD SOMETHING AKIN TO THE AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT IT TAKES TO FEED THE ENTIRE WORLD FOR AT LEAST A YEAR..............FOR NOTHING! AND TRUELY ALL WE GOT WAS NOTHING AND A NEW PROMISE TO CRY OUT FOR MORE MONEY "FOR THE CHILDREN" OR WHATEVER.

    IF YOU BELIEVE, PRAY(IDIOTS) IF NOT TAKE THE ONE SHOT YOU GOT AND DON'T LET ANY CHICKEN LITTLE PERSWADE YOU TO JOIN THE SKY IS FALL CLUB!

  • Posted By: d11martin @ 05/08/2008 5:50:41 PM

    Comment: My experience is that the angry and troubled people in this world are those who try to control something they don't understand. Leads to great frustration. The BRAINIACS don't even agree on the whole issue, so why should we throw billions of dollars at it.

    OBTW, my mother is my taxidermist.

  • Posted By: jmaalis @ 05/08/2008 5:35:42 PM

    Comment: I would also love to find out- those of you in denial about this issue, who stands to gain from trying to slow down pollution, extinction, deforestation... you are always saying we are "manipulating facts to achieve our ends"- what do we gain from this, besides a better place to live? No, it won't be easy to cut down on emissions, some things in life that really have to be done are very hard to do.

  • Posted By: d11martin @ 05/08/2008 5:30:28 PM

    Comment: Actually, my experience is that the angry and troubled ones are those who try to change things that are out of their control, i.e., trying to control a system like the earth, the solar system, or the universe. I believe we call them liberals.

    Once again, how do you control a system that "you think" has gone awry, but you are not sure if it has because even the "brainiacs" don't agree. Throwing billion of dollars at it clearly doesn't seem to be the answer.

    Actually, I am quite happy that I will be contributing to the management of the polar bear population even though I don't plan to turn it into a rug. Oh, and my mother is my taxidermist.

    • Posted By: jmaalis @ 05/08/2008 17:39:25

      Comment: Very clever! Is she also a Nazi?

      • Posted By: d11martin @ 05/08/2008 17:55:14

        Comment: You sound angry and troubled to me.

        • Posted By: jmaalis @ 05/08/2008 18:05:36

          Comment: Thats weird- I'm not. I get joy from witnessing nature and can't understand those who would rather destroy it. You are strange to me.

          • Posted By: d11martin @ 05/08/2008 18:34:41

            Comment: Interesting. Actually, hunters enjoy and understand nature more than most. We also know how to survive in it. Hunters generally are better caretakers as well because they understand their environment and don't try to control things they can't.

  • Posted By: jmaalis @ 05/08/2008 5:10:41 PM

    Comment: All of you with the polar bear rug comments, we know you are just angry trobled people and I feel sorry for you. Ask your Mothers this weekend when you see them why they chose to raise you as mean, selfish people.

  • Posted By: LIKEITIS @ 05/08/2008 4:53:44 PM

    Comment: Comment: I can't believe that people are still trying to deny the fact that we are destroying the Earth

    WE ARE NOT SAYING THAT HUMANS HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THE WORLS CLIMATE. WHAT WE ARE SAYING IS THAT THE EARTH HAS BEEN WARMING SINCE THE LAST ICE AGE, AND THAT WE (THE MAJORITY, AS IN DEMOCRACY) ARE NOT WILLING TO WAD UP ALL OUR CASH AND FLING IT TWARDS THOSE PEOPLE ALIGNED WITH CHICKEN LITTLE SAYING "THE SKY IS FALLING"!

    THE SAME PEOPLE THAT ARE MAKING ALL OF THE 100-1000 YEAR PREDICTIONS THAT ARE CLUNG TO BY THE SIERRA CLUB TYPES ARE THE SAME PEOPLE THAT CAN'T MAKE A CLOSE "GUESS" AT HOW THIS YEARS HURRICANE SEASON WILL TURN OUT. MORE TROUBLING IS THAT WHEN ASKED HOW THEY FEEL ABOUT YEARS OF EXTREMELY INACCURATE SCARE TACTICS THEY SAY " NO I'M NOT EMBARASSED BY MY WRONG PREDICTIONS". IF IT IS YOUR MORAL IMPERATIVE, THEN DEVOT YOUR LIFE AND MONIES, I WILL HANG ON TO MY MONEY AND REST COMFORTABLY ON A POLAR BEAR RUG!

  • Posted By: d11martin @ 05/08/2008 4:43:23 PM

    Comment: Agent7125, Thank you for you input. The overall POLAR BEAR population is doing okay. Show me the science that says we are causing this global warming.

    Once again for those of you who don't get this, CANADA manages its POLAR BEAR Population quite well, thank you very much.

    Gas Guzzler: Would be a nice rug, but I'm stuffing it.

  • Posted By: jmaalis @ 05/08/2008 4:39:39 PM

    Comment: Sooooo, polution is good for us all- plants and animals and humans? Where is the artical that tells us we need to stop breathing, I must have missed that one.....

  • Posted By: donovan11 @ 05/08/2008 4:33:06 PM

    Comment: There is not a doubt in my mind after reading this that you are a conservative working for the Republican factor, putting a convenient spin on what is so glaringly obvious. It is even obvious in your replies. Shame on you.

  • Posted By: emsroadie @ 05/08/2008 4:27:08 PM

    Comment: first it was clorofloralcarbons (freon) destroying the ozone, then the spotted owl was the poster child, now it's carbon dioxide and polor bears. we spent billions changing over our air conditioners, billions on changing propellants in paint and hair spray cans. billions spent on saving owl habitats, studying them 'til they no longer had any privacy. now we're supposed to stop breathing, to prevent co2 emmisions. but then, plants NEED co2 to live. so let me get this straight, we stop breathing and die, then the plants stop "breathing" and die, so an unstudied polor bear can live on an ice cube. oh wait a minute, polor bears exhale co2, so they're contributeing to their own demise.
    for those of you that like to site and quote studies ... check out the "real" story of the Great Barrier Reef. over the last 100,000 years, 16 times, the mean sea level has changed 64 feet. the Barrier Reef is Great because the coral only grows at a certain depth and temp range .... so ... as the mean sea level goes up and down, so the coral grows and covers areas that it otherwise couldn't exist on/in. the sea level rises and falls with the locked up, or released water from the ice packs.
    if you can't make it to Australia, drop on down to Florida. Floridians live on an old coral reef, that became a sand bar. where was al gore when fla was flooded?
    instead of thinking humans are grand enough to change the whole world, in just 150 years, we need to think of just how insigificant we are over 10, 20, 50 or 100,000 years. and just think ... 100,000 years doesn't even touch the tip of the ice burg (pun intended) when it comes to good 'ol mother earth.
    as a scientist recently pointed out ... we need to spend our time and money planning on what to do for our costal communities, when the Great Flood comes again. and come it will, with or without our help.

  • Posted By: ConcernedHoo @ 05/08/2008 4:22:29 PM

    Comment: AEI staff and fellows have been frequent critics of the prevailing scientific view of global warming and especially of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the international scientific body tasked to evaluate the risk of climate change caused by human activity.[16][17] In February 2007, a number of sources, including the British newspaper The Guardian, reported that the AEI had sent letters to scientists offering US$10,000 plus travel expenses and additional payments, asking them to critique the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report. The letters alleged that the IPCC was "resistant to reasonable criticism and dissent and prone to summary conclusions that are poorly supported by the analytical work" and asked for essays that "thoughtfully explore the limitations of climate model outputs."[18][19][20] According to the Guardian article, the AEI received $1.6 million in funding from ExxonMobil. The article further notes that former ExxonMobil CEO Lee R. Raymond is the vice-chairman of AEI's board of trustees.

    I believe this article is stilted by the fact that the scientist in question is a key figure at an institution that has clear political ties to neo-conservative interests, and actually accepts funding form Big Oil. At the very least this information should be made clear to the viewing public, or a counter interview should be held with a scientist who has not made a career of trying to disprove global warming. Other wise this article is either the product of irresponsible journalism, or is being used as another tool to discredit a scientific theory that has been accepted by a majority of the scientific community. It is sad that the venerable Newsweek name is associated with either. "Coming up next, we begin our dogmatic assault on the Theory of Evolution."

  • Posted By: treehgr @ 05/08/2008 4:17:51 PM

    Comment: Why would you interview someone from the American Enterprise Intstitute about an issue that includes the ideas of global warming and carbon emmisions? As is obvious in the article, conservatives barely acknoledege the idea of global warming, and won't admit what impact humans are having on this frightening problem. You might as well have interviewed an 8 yr old, because neither of them are able to give a clear answer - they both need 'more time' to be able to know what's really going on - and in the meantime, we're all losing ground (literally).

  • Posted By: treehgr @ 05/08/2008 4:16:02 PM

    Comment: Why would you interview someone from the American Enterprise Intstitute about an issue that includes the ideas of global warming and carbon emmisions? As is obvious in the article, conservatives barely acknoledege the idea of global warming, and won't admit what impact humans are having on this frightening problem. You might as well have interviewed an 8 yr old, because neither of them are able to give a clear answer - they both need 'more time' to be able to know what's really going on - and in the meantime, we're all losing ground (literally).

  • Posted By: odyska @ 05/08/2008 4:15:30 PM

    Comment: I can't believe that people are still trying to deny the fact that we are destroying the Earth, and in so many ways beyond the Arctic and Polar Bears. It's pretty sick that they still tell themselves (and us) that everything is right and just with our relationship with this planet.

    Responsibility people! Damn it - Why can't we just take responsibility for what we have done and continually do - it doesn't even take a Scientist to understand that we are killing everything... Fish, Birds, Polar Bears and soon afterwards, us.

    Take off the rose sunglasses, stop lying and DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT.

    Anyone who disagrees is brain dead and oblivious... or a liar...

  • Posted By: 3kttygal @ 05/08/2008 4:10:39 PM

    Comment: If you believe in religion,you would hopefully think that the almighty created the animals,of which we are a species-wouldnt it also stand to reason that the almighty has entrusted us with their care and survival?
    We are failing him horribly in this regard,choosing instead the power of money and control.They are innocent bystanders who will pay the ultimate price-their lives. It sickens me to see how low humanity has gone-greed,selfishness,cruelty to innocents-the belief that "I am number one" and "its all about me,I dont care about anything else". I would hope I am not alone with believing that this world is going to **** in a handbasket-when is enough enough?

  • Posted By: jmaalis @ 05/08/2008 4:09:14 PM

    Comment: People used to tell us that we would never make a difference by recycling, but I thing it has helped reduce landfill. I am also very optimistic that we are finally moving in the right direction when it comes to animal rights, too. Baby steps are better than nothing- no one is asking you to throw away your plasma tv.

  • Posted By: jmaalis @ 05/08/2008 4:02:28 PM

    Comment: OH LETS JUST BULLDOSE AND PAVE THE ENTIRE PLACE- WHO NEEDS NATURE? I HAVE A TV AND MY COMPUTER, I'M HAPPY AND ANYONE WHOS NOT IS JUST A TREE HUGGIN HIPPY FREAK.

  • Posted By: SpitfireINK @ 05/08/2008 3:51:43 PM

    Comment: One last question I would pose to everyone is:

    Why is it characteristically / stereotypical that the Deniability and Unaccountability of Abuse is fostered by those that are Uneducated?

  • Posted By: agent7125 @ 05/08/2008 3:44:44 PM

    Comment: Polar bear populations are NOT decreasing, unlike the assumption this interviewer has. In fact, they are INCREASING in just as many areas that they are decreasing, in other areas, the population is stable. This is just another example of the environmental movement using lies and distortions to achieve their ends. If they were truthful, Icould support them a lot more: who doesn't like clean air and water? But to use fabrications about disappearing polar bears as a backdoor way to get reductions in greenhouse gasses is just wrong. And have you heard the latest demands by the global warming chicken - littles? Reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 80+ %, or we're all doomed. How will we heat our homes or do anything besides live in a cold, dark cave if we do that? But maybe they're taking into account China, India, and Russia doing nothing, so the entire burden will be on the U.S. and Europe.

  • Posted By: SpitfireINK @ 05/08/2008 3:44:39 PM

    Comment: What I find very disturbing from nearly everyone that has commented on this topic is the lack of accurate information:

    First - Global warming is occurring (fact)
    Second - Yes, there has been a trend of warming and cooling throughout history - verified from Ice core samples. (fact)
    Third - Fossil fuels do contribute to the Greenhouse effect and the depletion of the ozone.

    As corny as it may seem the Biosphere that is our ecosystem encompasses the Globe in its entirety - We can and do affect changes locally and with repeated abuse the entire world. There is no argument that Global warming IS occuring - In the last 150 years since the onset of the Industrial Revolution the Earth has been warming "FASTER" than ever before - also verified through Polar Ice core samples. The argument is simply are We as a species effecting the rate at which the Earth is warming.

    The Earth and all life on it should be viewed as one that exists as a complicated yet, delicately balanced variety of symbiotic relationships. We do have a responsibility to all life on Earth - if for no other reason than it serves our own need for survival. Destroy a single species and it can have a rippling affect upon all life - Three areas that are suffering and will certainly upset the balance of life on Earth are - Polar & Glacier melting - Deforestation (primarliy the Rain Forests) - and lastly the warming of the Oceans and the destruction of Coral reefs (most significantly the Great Barrier Reef).

    The evidence is undeniable people! - Will it happen in our life-time? - Yes! - Most people don't like to deal with issues until it smacks them in the face - Unfortuantely, it may already be too late... This is not an over-dramatization - do some homework - the evidence is all around us.

    One question I would ask everyone - If life is not delicately balanced, why is it that no life on other planets has been found anywhere near our solar system?

    All life on Earth hinges on Water...something to think about.

    • Posted By: 3kttygal @ 05/08/2008 16:14:04

      Comment: Thank you.

  • Posted By: GimmeABreak! @ 05/08/2008 3:36:35 PM

    Comment: Sorry....and GOOD LUCK on your trip...I hope you catch yourself a nice rug.

  • Posted By: d11martin @ 05/08/2008 3:34:06 PM

    Comment: Gas Guzzler. I've been planning a polar bear hunting trip for quite some time. I can't shoot one at the zoo. Can you please try to be a little more sensitive to me and my hunting buddies?

  • Posted By: GimmeABreak! @ 05/08/2008 3:29:00 PM

    Comment: Go see Polar Bears at the Zoo.....lets start drilling for oil! My gas Guzzler needs a fill-up.

  • Posted By: GimmeABreak! @ 05/08/2008 3:27:29 PM

    Comment: Go see Polar Bears at the Zoo! Lets start drilling for oil....my gas guzzler needs a fill-up.

  • Posted By: envize @ 05/08/2008 3:12:30 PM

    Comment: As described in the article, there is a lot of science involved. Under the ESA, listing a species is based on that science, much of which is contradicting itself. Most Arctic scientists can agree that they do not know the exact or near exact number of polar bears currently living in the Arctic. "An ???endangered??? species is one that is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range. A ???threatened??? species is one that is likely to become endangered in the foreseeable future." How many bears are there? What is their range? How much of it is threatening the polar bear? And how do you define "threatened"? Too many questions. Not enough solid answers. Yes, there are reports from NOAA, from NASA, from BLM, and they all say many different things. There are reports from the Russians, the French, the British and the Chinese and they all disagree. Let's take the time, figure it out and not spend millions of dollars in litigation where it would be better spent coming up with good science and solid plans. And if you really want to worry about an animal, how about taking some of those now solid numbers on seals and leave the "polar bear poster child" alone.

  • Posted By: d11martin @ 05/08/2008 3:12:22 PM

    Comment: Some of you need to check your information. First, there is no substantiated scientific proof that we (humans) are causing global warming. Does it make sense to spend billions of dollars on unproven ideas. Secondly, if you list the bears, you list the entire world population of polar bears. Canada actually manages its polar bear population quite well. Listing the bears causes a problem for them. It is amazing to me what some of you come up with. Show me the science!!

    • Posted By: sharkman @ 05/08/2008 21:41:18

      Comment: I never realized humans could servive with a I.Q. as low as yours.

    • Posted By: odyska @ 05/08/2008 16:32:19

      Comment: "unproven ideas?" Are you blind sir? Why do you even need someone else to tell you? If you have eyes and a brain, it's obvious that humans and our Industry are destroying the planet. Oh, and there is plenty of science - plenty years worth of research and plenty of respectable scientists that could explain it to you. Or you can read some history books, logic and history can go a long way...

  • Posted By: delfairchild @ 05/08/2008 3:07:50 PM

    Comment: There are many scientists that are now saying the only reason the Polar regions are warming up is a naturally occurring shift in the temperature of the oceans since the last ice age. As the Ocean's water warms up, the flow going towards the poles will melt the ice and then that water getting into the Oceans will cool the Oceans allowing the temperature to drop at the poles again which starts the ice buildup again. This has been happening for hundreds of thousands of years and will not stop because we choose to stop it. We can't. Good ole Mother Nature can pretty much do as she likes without man's interference, thank you.

  • Posted By: Lee Holmes @ 05/08/2008 3:05:57 PM

    Comment: They are all Luddites. This is the reason. [but not Luddites in their own lifestyles. Most of these who are posting to ''save''the polar bear drive vehicles with internal combustion engines,live in homes that are made of wood products,and operate machinery,utilize home products,wear clothing,use electrical and natural/propane gas based heating and cooling sources,use jets [like algore], go on ocean-liner vacations,and otherwise purchase products from the casings of DVDs,the liners of ice cream packaging,the wheels at the base of their computer-desk chairs,the tires on their vehicles,the wiring and plumbing in their homes,and the toys that they purchase for their children that are based in fossil-fuels generation]. Talk,is cheap. Say one thing for those who advocate more oil exploration or the construction of more refineries or nuclear plants, they are not weighted down with Lincolns ''base alloy of hypocrisy''like the rest of these.

  • Posted By: owlspiritwoman @ 05/08/2008 3:04:58 PM

    Comment: One more person recommending one more study to hold up our actually doing something to help the universe. I am sick of money spent on studies when we all know very well that we created the problem. Anything we do to try and help the problem is a step in the right direction. Yes I understand many people don't want to give up their "toys" but with a movement in the right direction we may be able to slow the progression down to where there may just be a planet left for our great grand children. We had an opportunity to move away from fossil fuels 38 years ago and we didn't. Don't you think maybe it is time we tried something new instead of ruining another environment to prolong the disaster.

  • Posted By: emtpstar @ 05/08/2008 2:41:49 PM

    Comment: First, let's get some facts straight. There is not a majority agreement on whether Global Warming is even man-made. We have had ice ages and warming ages long before we started using fossil fuels. Next, wind or solar power will never replace fossil fuel, coal and nuclear energy. Not ever going to be enough of either of them to sustain your lifestyle. Yes, oil is the lifeblood of the world economy. If we would start utilizing our own oil resources, we could start controlling our own destiny instead of counting on the middle east. If you don't want to use fossil fuel, great, stop using it. I would be interested in how many people are willing to give up their cars, microwaves, DVD players, plasma screens, etc. to accomplish this. One more thing, please tell me you were kidding about making manmade floating islands for polar bears!

  • Posted By: emtpstar @ 05/08/2008 2:36:11 PM

    Comment: Please help me to understand. Global Warming is supposed to be this apocalyptic future and the experts can't even agree on whether it is real or not. YES, not everyone thinks it is happening. Al Gore has made hundreds of millions of dollars selling "carbon credits" to the dolts who believe in this scam. Ask the people of South Dakota about Global Warming. They just had a huge snow storm in May. Please people, use your common sense and think for yourselves. If you want to save the world, why don't you be more supportive of a government who is trying to combat terrorism. You are so worried about the polar bear and would spend millions of dollars to save just one but the people of Iraq needed savying and you can say is the war is costing us too much.

  • Posted By: earthlover229 @ 05/08/2008 2:31:04 PM

    Comment: We are still economically shackeled to fossil fuels even though it has been proven that there are other sources of power that are much safer ecologically, such as wind or solar power. I believe that world powers lack the ECONOMIC and political will to change to any source of power that cannot be financially manipulated through our current system of supply and demand. Maybe, just maybe, people will accept responsibility for the damage already done to the earth and set about making positive changes that our children and their children will be able to thank us for.

  • Posted By: Capeangel @ 05/08/2008 2:30:34 PM

    Comment: One more thing..........Global Warming is a crock of Polar Poo.

  • Posted By: RaeRgd @ 05/08/2008 2:28:40 PM

    Comment: The first step is to list polar bears on the endangered list. All other matters concrning climate change can be argued later. The next step would be researching the possibility of creating some type of floating manmade islands to replace the ice flows the bears use to traverse the distance needed to hunt for food. If manmade platforms can be created to drill for oil, human ingenuity should be able to research the bears' movements and devise a method of providing for their survival. If given the opportunity, animals adapt. They only need the ability to try.

  • Posted By: Capeangel @ 05/08/2008 2:27:34 PM

    Comment: I favor humans...I guess I'm weird. You all go and hug a Bear, AtTree...I'll hug a human, thanks verys much.
    From a very happy young woman whose is an Ice Cold Conservative and Proud of it. God BLess America

    • Posted By: NYDEM91101 @ 05/08/2008 14:51:28

      Comment: Enter Your Comment Capeangel, I hope you end up all alone on an ice, cold melt all by your ignorant self.

      • Posted By: Capeangel @ 05/08/2008 15:18:09

        Comment: NYDEM....If the globe is gonna be too hot, how in hell am I gonna be "on an ice, cold melt ". Your the ingnorant one...you believe everthing you see, hear and read. Now, why don't ya run out and buy some "carbon credits" like the rest of the dolts you believe this garbage. Make sure you buy enough...remember, you exale Co2.

        • Posted By: mattk @ 05/08/2008 18:42:25

          Comment: You clearly need to stop listening to Rush Limbaugh, Capeangel. He's not smarter than the scientists like he claims to be... just tucked neatly into the back pocket of big oil. Rush is a mouthpiece, just like Cheney. Can you not see the conflict of interest?

          Make a quick comparison -- what do scientists have to gain if they're right about global warming?

          Secondly: what do the oil-rich conservatives have to lose if global warming is bought into by the general public?

          Is there any debate here?

  • Posted By: rranch @ 05/08/2008 2:26:40 PM

    Comment: The world is heading for disaster that will affect everything on it from human life, animals, plants/trees. If we cant support saving the life of humans/animals then what is our purpose?

  • Posted By: rranch @ 05/08/2008 2:21:10 PM

    Comment: I favor saving Polar Bears, Rain Forest, Green Peace.

  • Posted By: rranch @ 05/08/2008 2:20:05 PM

    Comment: I favor protecting the Pola Bears, Rain Forest , ect..

  • Posted By: excaluber @ 05/08/2008 2:14:16 PM

    Comment: Well global warming or not the Polar Bear has as much right to live as anything else and considering the number of bears that are left, scientist or not, IT'S A NO BRAINER! Thank You

  • Posted By: kayleekatesmom @ 05/08/2008 2:12:18 PM

    Comment: Polar Bears need to be on the endanged list, high priority. Enough said. Get it done!

  • Posted By: lupi73 @ 05/08/2008 2:09:24 PM

    Comment: I wish the media would present the same facts as ligs just said. The global warming caused by humans is mosts BS and true scientist know it. Climate changes and we are still cooler now than we were in the 30's. Carbon Dioxide doesn't cause global warming, global warming actually caused CO2 to be emitted. Earths climate goes thru wamring and cooling trends every 1500 years or so. We are just now warming back up from the last mini-ice age. Our climate is SUPPOSED to be warmer than it is now. We can't stop it. Its going to happpen regardless of what we do. We just need to quit depending on petroleum for transportation because it saves money and the environment in other ways besides GHG emissions. Which, by-the-way, water vapor is also a green house gas.

  • Posted By: HBeach78 @ 05/08/2008 2:07:40 PM

    Comment: I firmly believe that IF the polar bears are truly in danger of becoming extinct, then by all means let's do our part to see that they have a place in this world. We should take more pride and want to make the place we live in a cleaner, more efficient place. We may not be at 100% fault in contributing to the climate changes, but there is no harm done in recycling, and reducing the emmissions, and conserving energy. Seems we (humans) are our own worse enemy in some cases.... Greed gets the better of some of us... At this rate, the human race will drive all other species into extinction and it'll be a case of the last man standing because enough is NEVER enough.

  • Posted By: doctortoxic @ 05/08/2008 2:04:58 PM

    Comment: Hey ligs
    Its even funnier to see how you support this quack of an "environmental scientist" and the lobby group in disguise is the AEI. Nevermind what the largest peer review study in history, the IPCC report on global climate change, has to say. Lets believe one pseudo-scientist because he spouting the same BS that President Bush and his administration has been saying for the last 8 years. Why is the Bush administration censoring its scientists at places like the EPA and other agencies? Maybe because they are right and the information would hurt the bank accounts of the republican fat cats who have raped this planet?
    Bottom line: Don't listen to these money hungry pseudo-scientists that prostitute themselves to the highest bidder. "Doctor" kenneth Green sold away all of his credibility (whihc is the only currency a scientists has) when he began to work for an NGO that is supported by the same industry that caused this problem to begin with. "Doctor" Green has a conflict of interest and should declare that everytime he gives his opinion on something. This way people know his opinion is tainted by money!

  • Posted By: excaluber @ 05/08/2008 2:04:10 PM

    Comment: Well global warming or not the Polar Bear has as much right to live as anything else! And considering the now existing number of bears left, scientist or not , "IT'S A NO BRAINER!" Thank You.

  • Posted By: wwbjr @ 05/08/2008 2:03:21 PM

    Comment: You Al Gore satellites check out the documentary "Fast Frozen Future" by the Learning Channel. Humans advanced across the globe precisely because we are in the most recent of the many warming (and cooling) cycles in the Earths history. Disbelievers note that mankind has only been present on Earth for one of these cycles. Figure it out! What's more, cooling cycles commence much faster than warming ones. It only takes decades to return to an Ice Age based on the studies in the documentary. Oh, and please stop with the protect the Polar Bear hysteria. Mankind can and will protect the Polar Bear if it is really threatened. The Environmentalists just want the Endangered Species Act to come into play so it can be used (unjustly and improperly) to block development of the entire Artic region. Memo to Sierra Club; please tell China and Russia they can't drill in the Artic or disturb the Polar Bear. Yeah, they'll listen. We will be the nation suffering the most for the needless and mindless shackling by the environmental movement. Use the technology we have, drill the Artic, extract the oil and get out, then everyone can be happy.

  • Posted By: wwbjr @ 05/08/2008 1:52:57 PM

    Comment: I can't believe some of the comments here. Some of these folks are feeling guilty for being human. These are the same people that believe arguments contrary to the Global Warming theory advanced by Al Gore are to be dismissed as pure nonsense. What about dialogue and open-mindedness? All you greenies out there check out "Fast Frozen Future", a Learning Channel documentary, now only available on VHS. It scientifically demonstrates and maps the earth's warming and cooling periods. In fact, if it weren't for the current warming cycle, mankind would have not advanced across the planet. Research also shows that the climate can go back to ice age in a matter of decades and not hundreds or thousands of years. The conclusion of the documentary is that we are heading for a colder period than now. This documentary was not produced by any conservative think-tank, but shows the work of scientists trying to find the real story behind climate change. Hurry and get the documentary though, it is very scarce out there. One would think that it is being swept from the store shelves to quiet the Global Warming fanatics.

  • Posted By: ligs @ 05/08/2008 1:48:15 PM

    Comment: It's funny to see the irrational, unqualified, non-environmental scientist post comments on here that a rational, qualifed, environmental scientist doesn't know what he is talking about. This article mentions the problem with Global Warming Hysteria, the models predict what will happen. These models are based on a range of assumptions and statistics that may or MAY NOT be accurate. Why would we put our economic future in jeopardy to try and prevent a MODELED environmental crisis. If your financial advisor said: "I have a model based a host of market assumptions and it shows that these factors are increasing. So, if you give me half of your savings and income, I will invest it in these stocks and you will be rich." Would you do it? We don't understand the factors that cause the market to move, and we sure as hell don't understand all the factors that cause the earth to fluctuate in temperature.
    "AEI received $1.6 million in funding from ExxonMobil" Who cares? Nevermind the $100 million it gave to Stanford's Global Climate and Energy Project. Does this discredit all of their research and findings on Global Warming, whether pro or con?
    Al Gore, the deceitful activist who has staked his livlihood on 'Global Warming'. His new $300 million ad campaign doesn't have a monetary agenda. He is doing it because he believes that crap that spews from his mouth. Yeah right. Let us over look the fact that he is chairman and founder of GIM, a firm that invests money from the wealthy and institutions in 'green' technology and companies who want to become environmentally friendly. Good I applaud this effort, we should be more environmentally friendly. Should we discredit what he has said because he stands to gain a fortune from global warming hysteria. Do we disregard the studies that have shown no significant warming since 1998, or that the oceans temperatures haven't really warmed as much as what we thought they would, or that carbon dioxide doesn't have as much of an impact of global warming as what we thought it did, or that in 2007 Antarctic Ice was at its largest since we've been recording it (1979). To me, it's not SO obvious that humans are driving all of the change in climate that has occurred. That's what climate does, it changes.
    By the way, a major problem witht he polar bears is their breeding. The polar bears breeding grounds crosses the breeding grounds of Brown Bears, particularly the Alaskian Brown Bear. They breed and their offspring are sterile. This reduces the number of polar bear that are breeding with polar bears. so it makes sense what Dr. Green said about controlled breeding and releasing them into the wild.

    • Posted By: doctortoxic @ 05/08/2008 14:03:34

      Comment: Its even funnier to see how you support this quack of an "environmental scientist" and the lobby group in disguise is the AEI. Nevermind what the largest peer review study in history, the IPCC report on global climate change, has to say. Lets believe one pseudo-scientist because he spouting the same BS that President Bush and his administration has been saying for the last 8 years. Why is the Bush administration censoring its scientists at places like the EPA and other agencies? Maybe because they are right and the information would hurt the bank accounts of the republican fat cats who have raped this planet?
      Bottom line: Don't listen to these money hungry pseudo-scientists that prostitute themselves to the highest bidder. "Doctor" kenneth Green sold away all of his credibility (whihc is the only currency a scientists has) when he began to work for an NGO that is supported by the same industry that caused this problem to begin with. "Doctor" Green has a conflict of interest and should declare that everytime he gives his opinion on something. This way people know his opinion is tainted by money!

  • Posted By: stellamaris @ 05/08/2008 1:36:12 PM

    Comment: thank you tessa for the educated responses. regardless of what outcome the bush administration should decide, we as a whole population need to seek alternatives and ways to minimize the amount of fossil fuels we consume. we should be ashamed of having already endangered enough species.

  • Posted By: JPauli @ 05/08/2008 1:20:33 PM

    Comment: Need to understand the facts further, or communicatated. The earth's climate has changed from extremes before humans even entered into the picture. Is thsi part of a natural cycle. The polar bears should not be used as a political token in the game of global warming. A good question what is the right number of polar bears what is the real impact, has thier numbers declined? There are many questions that need to be answered with facts, before major policy changes are made. I agree that we (humans) should do what we can to keep their numbers with in sustainable numbers of polar bears. Also understanding that their is non-threatening variability in any animal's population.

  • Posted By: tessas3 @ 05/08/2008 1:19:40 PM

    Comment: Everytime a human is born and a creature dies we are closer to the end. There are too many people and it is driven by consumerism. The human being has destroyed everything he has touched. The ignorant have won. With each extinction of a creature we are closer to extinction ourselves. Pure insanity as to what man has done to this once perfect planet. We al should be ashamed of ourselves. Bless the polar bear, but his days are numbered and ours along with him.

    • Posted By: excaluber @ 05/08/2008 14:41:25

      Comment: Yes, I'm in full agreement with tessas3, our days are numbered because of greed . There is nothing, and I mean absolutely nothing that somebody out there hasn't got a price tag on. Or unfotunately its something that is expendable (to them) so that they can get that almighty buck . Rain forest are at this very moment on the verge of total distruction. Why: For that buck. Rhino's are being slaughtered for their horns and other PARTS - with the rest left to rot. Shamefull! And it go's on and on. And for what- That almighty buck. In the end' that almighty buck won't help anyone, because it is simply going to be "OVER" for everybody and everything! Unless people wake up and realize that their moment of fleeting power and money will do no good when there is nothing left.

  • Posted By: bucknrut @ 05/08/2008 1:15:53 PM

    Comment: Lets stick with the facts which are that the Polar Bear population is at a 40 year high! Imagine that why has this been left out of the article?

  • Posted By: tessas3 @ 05/08/2008 1:12:33 PM

    Comment: The world is getting closer to the end of all wildlife each and every time another human is born and any other creature dies, thus the closer each creature is to extinction the closer we are. It is a crying shame how mankind has destroyed everything he has ever touched. The quality of life for all inhabitants of this planet is getting worse every second. I know of nobody who can stop it. Pure insanity. The ignorant have won.

  • Posted By: zclaire1 @ 05/08/2008 12:56:54 PM

    Comment: Look at his answers- "I'm not saying it's not possible that humans are warming the Arctic, but I also haven't seen convincing evidence that we are." "The thing that nobody's asking is "What's actually earth's right number of polar bears?" " As usual, lobbying by big businesses and fear of losing reelection bids is driving politicians to ignore environmental crises. It is SO obvious that humans are driving, in large part, global warming. Why do they ignore it??

  • Posted By: doctortoxic @ 05/08/2008 12:48:33 PM

    Comment: American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research= conservative think tank.. It is associated with neoconservative domestic and foreign policy views. AEI has emerged as one of the leading architects of the second Bush administration's public policy. AEI received $1.6 million in funding from ExxonMobil.

    So I ask you, should we even care what the so called "Doctor" Kenneth Green says? We is part of the conservative republican agenda that has been interfering in science for way too long.

  • Posted By: doctortoxic @ 05/08/2008 12:48:17 PM

    Comment: American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research= conservative think tank.. It is associated with neoconservative domestic and foreign policy views. AEI has emerged as one of the leading architects of the second Bush administration's public policy. AEI received $1.6 million in funding from ExxonMobil.

    So I ask you, should we even care what the so called "Doctor" Kenneth Green says? We is part of the conservative republican agenda that has been interfering in science for way too long.

  • Posted By: greenvilleSC @ 05/08/2008 12:26:10 PM

    Comment: It never hurts to try !

  • Posted By: getzel @ 05/08/2008 2:18:11 AM

    Comment: Those green with envy of those who have acquired much green, and who themselves are not green when it comes to con jobs, have set out to exploit the green grain of truth in matters pertaining to greening the environment. Even our Absolut or Mexican friends who come in search of green-go cards recognize that like the greengo, he is in constant pursuit of much green, some for himself and some for those the other side of the non existent border fence, where the grass is not greener. When your green-goes into the thin, carbon taxed, formerly air filled pockets of the not so green green-gos, you will really long for greener pastures in search of the devalued green backs.

    Intelligence analyst: Getzel

    Environ mentalist defined: Individuals that want others to use less energy; almost invariably the Goree truth.

    You can fool some of the people all of the time and those are pretty good odds.

  • Posted By: Lee Holmes @ 05/07/2008 2:48:00 PM

    Comment: Where?

    Right here. The Argonne Nuclear Integral Reactor. One would think that only Greens have been coming up with new ideas for energy conservation. Not so. Scientists at UC Berkeley are on the cutting edge of removing long-life radioactive componants from waste by recycling it and reusing it as fuel. Critics operate typically in the 1970s ''China Syndrome''mindset. Plant technology has quantumly leaped from its Three Mile Island period [which even the Russians never caught up to],creating vastly smaller plants that could,with IR technology,remove the need for waste materials. Again,such benefits continue to be debated,and yet continue to be worth exploring in a rapidly growing world.

  • Posted By: Moniks @ 05/07/2008 2:18:30 PM

    Comment: The thing that nobody's asking is "What's actually earth's right number of polar bears?"
    Well...well... Let's change that question a bit and ask this so called expert " What's actually earth's right number of humans?"
    We have been the most disastrous for this planet. Let's hope a more intelligent species evolves!!

  • Posted By: Lee Holmes @ 05/07/2008 10:24:10 AM

    Comment: And ''this guy''was supposed to be replaced by whom? Someone more to your ideological liking? Thats not a democratic discussion,it is one-sided totalitarianism. Indeed,the root of this word is ''totality'',which is the means by which global warming advocates frame the debate[Appearing before the press in Knoxville Tennessee in 2006,Gore went as far as saying that even the press should be ''silenced''in daring to question the veracity of His Imperial No Controlling Authority Highness on the subject of global warming immedately before he jumped on a LEAR Lodestar jet and took off to Cannes,burning more fuel in that trip than an American family of four consumes in a year].
    The problem with the debate is that it is being framed by fanatics and hypocrites. Everyone of normal intelligence wants to do their part to consume less energy ,saving money,and achieving a measure of help for the environment. What they dislike is true-believers politicizing the debate,and worse,those who chant these mantras hiding behind the shields of hypocrisy.[we have already explored where allegedly ''Green''rocker and Tinseltown mavens,scolding the rest of us on the error of our ways,packed up their show of hundreds of roadies,diesel-burning mega-wattage generators,caterers with countless bottles of propane gas,the press,hangers-on,family members, groupies,jets to get them to South America and aircraft to get them to their destination, to head for Antarctica,one of the most demonstrably environmentally sensitive regions on earth in order to ''Save''it].
    No-body knows whats going on. Peer-reviewed scientists appearing in this months NATURE Magazine,from Canada and Great Britain who were a portion of the global warming scientific bloc under the auspices of the UN now say that changes in the El Nino which are a normal occurance over the millinia are going to lead to colder climates in the western hemisphere. This last winter was cold enough to be entered into the record books of several states,and lower-than normal temperatures can still be found west of the Mississippi for this time of year.[with its attendant cloud covers of weeks on end nullifying any benefit to be gained by the use of solar power]. Whether or not either warming or cooling becomes a trend,it is still to early to say,thus engendering debate which is the bedrock of all democratic societies up to and including our own,as Thomas Jefferson,John Adams,and Alexander Hamilton could have instantly told you.

  • Posted By: andy30tx @ 05/07/2008 8:57:58 AM

    Comment: This guy is a well-known climate change denier from a well-known conservative think tank. The AEI is as neoconservative outfit that has fought the conventional wisdom of global warming and climate change consistently. Interviewing one of their members is dishonest as they are going to stick to the Republican party line of less regulation, global warming wasn't caused by humans, and there's nothing we can do about it.

    • Posted By: pennsymodeler @ 05/07/2008 10:09:42

      Comment: The Republican party line just happens to be the truth. CO2 emissions have continued to increase since 1998, yet 1998 was the high water mark for global temperatures. In addition 2007 set a record for one of the coldest years since records have been kept. If man-made CO2 was the cause of global warming, 2007 would have been warmer than 1998, not colder. In addition, NASA reports that Mars and the other planets in the solar system showed evidence of global warming during the same period of global warming on Earth. Finally, the Earth is over 4.5 billion years old and our global temperature data comes form satellites, which have only been in use for the past 40 years or so. Not exactly the kind of evidence you can rely upon to prove the planet is actually geting warmer on a global scale.

  • Posted By: getzel @ 05/07/2008 5:59:42 AM

    Comment: Those green with envy of those who have acquired much green, and who themselves are not green when it comes to con jobs, have set out to exploit the green grain of truth in matters pertaining to greening the environment. Even our Absolut or Mexican friends who come in search of green-go cards recognize that like the greengo, he is in constant pursuit of much green, some for himself and some for those the other side of the non existent border fence, where the grass is not greener. When your green-goes into the thin, carbon taxed, formerly air filled pockets of the not so green green-gos, you will really long for greener pastures in search of the devalued green backs.

    Intelligence analyst: Getzel

    Environ mentalist defined: Individuals that want others to use less energy; almost invariably the Goree truth.

    You can fool some of the people all of the time and those are pretty good odds.

  • Posted By: ne2cents @ 05/06/2008 5:34:07 PM

    Comment: Newton's third law of motion: "To every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction." While this is a law of Physics, it can be applied to this scenario as well - both the verbal diatribe and the planet's global climate change. It makes one wonder if we can fix anything anymore with our endless bickering and inability to compromise. If you posit one theory, there will always be someone on the other side arguing their theory. All data can be manipulated by the dishonest, or misinterpreted by the honest. If you pollute the Earth constantly, eventually the pollution will come back to you ??? think asthma, cancer, e-coli and dysentery just to name a few. How much more do we need to destroy before we figure it out? If we continue on our present course, how bad will the economic collapse be if we can???t wean ourselves off fossil fuels now? Why not believe we can create a sustainable, clean future for ourselves and our species?? I???m 44 now, so I probably won???t see the worst of climate change, if it happens, but my kids and possible grandkids will.
    We Americans pride ourselves on being up to a challenge ??? well, here it is folks . . . I???m not sure I understand how any one (whether they agree with the science of climate change or not), can fault the logic behind taking care of our planet ??? if you let your home go or your car go and don???t take care of either, how long do you expect them to last??? Same goes for Nature ??? think of a bell curve . . . on the way up we???re using all our resources, then we plateau for a little bit thinking all is well and then we start down the slippery slope of resource depletion on the other side until we crash . . . hmmm, I???m no rocket scientist, but I think I???d rather err on the side of caution on this one . . . SAVE THE POLAR BEARS!!!!! The worst that can happen is the air, water and land will be cleaner and we???ll have a nicer place to live, hopefully with polar bears :-)

  • Posted By: Lee Holmes @ 05/06/2008 3:15:22 PM

    Comment: Indeed,''market forces''are already at work. The Detroit Daily News yesterday observes that these forces are doing what government cannot. People are self-mandating their own solutions by the increasing purchase of four-cylinder vehicles. Therein lay the crux. The enviros demand government intervention and rule,creating a breakdown in free market forces that would be detrimental to our economy,creating more bloated bureaucracies,and enhancing poverty and wider gulfs between haves and have-nots,while other global warming culprits,the Russians,Chinese and Indians,see their economies thrive at our expense[Think that Ivan is going to just drop all he is doing in the Arctic just to save fuzzy bears? Not on a bet. The worlds largest oil and gas exploration bonanza is now taking place in the Russian Arctic zone]. Arrogantly,these believe that they can do for Americans what these cannot do for themselves. And hypocritically,they will have absolutely none of the ''sacrifice'' that they demand of others.

  • Posted By: Lee Holmes @ 05/06/2008 2:54:22 PM

    Comment: America is not ''parts of Europe''. You forget that Europes biggest nations,including Poland and France are no larger than the singular Nebraska or Kansas here in America. You also fail to observe that commerce in this nation comes as a result of the traffic between and among a 50-state nation. [Thus a trucker hauling vegetables from a Nevada Reno to a Salt Lake City,Utah,only one state distant,covers the same distance as that between London and Berlin.Continue to Denver,and you have gone from London to the Russian border. In no way can European geography and economic movement be compared to that of the US. Pass to ''science''and we see that Orangedudes ''scientists''are already having it out amongst themselves as to the cooler trends now effecting the globe,and if they will be sustained,or uptick in the next few years. Thus your take is as alarmist as it is inaccurate. Dart-throwing,is in fact,the order of the climateology day. [MSNBC,commenting on its news portion of the polar bear ''crisis'',didnt help matters any when it ran,as a portion of its Arctic segment ,film clips of polar bears and penguins,which as anyone with any knowlage in biology knows,exist only at the South Pole regions]. It had not ocurred to anyone that timber wildfires may be more deadly dues to forest policies eschewing second-growth clearing that have been in place for two decades fully allowing tinderbox undergrowths to flourish. Then too,''more people''demand solutions that move beyond windfarms and solar panels that will benefit none but a handful of Americans,and that these selfsame solutions are being already fought by enviros themselves,whose ''scorched earth''policies are a matter of public record,as it is these who demand that America return to a place that it will never go back to. Not in a nation closing in on a half-billion peoples. Since ''scientists''only comprise a miniscule portion of the voting electorate,it is not they who will have the final say on Americas energy future.[then too,we observe that while Europe pays high fuel costs,it also has a vast number of nuclear plants denied us here]. Again,get gas up to a 10.00$ per gallon region,and there will be unmitigated hell to pay. It thus becomes long past time to kick the Luddites to the curb,as well as the ''drill at all costs,a nuke plant in every yard'',and compromise on solutions that allow both technologies to thrive. The ''scientists''be damned,except that they assist in the crafting of this compromise.

  • Posted By: alaskaprofessor @ 05/06/2008 1:23:02 PM

    Comment: That sounds like a scorched earth policy, Lee, and a terrible situation to pass along to our kids and grandkids. Right now up here global warming and ecosystem effects are being felt now, in shoreline erosion, fisheries, more intense forest fires, etc....and those are the problems studied by the "radicals" in the Natural Resource Management profession. Arctic warming is more pronounced than down where you are, but it will eventually reach everyone, some places will become more habitable, many less so. Warming is not the only change going on, but it's acting together with more development, more people, more burning of fuels, etc. to make environmental change more intense. The global food crisis is just one of these "perfect storms" of a bunch of factors working together to make a bad situation worse. Same with the climate. But, on a positive note, parts of Europe have $11/gallon gas and their economies and communities haven't collapsed. In Alaska, there is now a frantic hunt for alternative energy projects as electricity rates have skyrocketed. Hopefully, with the $300 million our state just appropriated for energy efficiency and alt. production, we will get some relief from at least price volatility, if not the cost itself.

    • Posted By: pennsymodeler @ 05/06/2008 14:35:45

      Comment: I agree with Lee. As far as your evidence, shore line erosion has been going on for as long as there have been shore lines; forest fires are more intense because environmental laws prohibiting clearing brush and deadfalls, and efforts to "control" forest fires result in more fuel to be burned when a forest fire erupts. As far as Europe, with the exception of Ireland and Great Britain, most European countries are experiencing high inflation and double digit unemployment. They also live in a much smaller geographic area as compared to the U.S. You cannot compare us to them. One of the principle reasons the U.S. became the principle economic engine for the world was due to our investment in transportation resources starting with canals and then moving to trains and later the interstate highway system. Transportation is the key to economic growth or shrinkage. Right now, transportation requires oil. Therefore, the politicians will eventually approve more drilling. This will reduce energy costs by increasing supply. There is certainly no harm in researching ways to reduce oil use, but that will only occur due to market forces, not government action or inaction.

  • Posted By: Lee Holmes @ 05/06/2008 1:21:10 PM

    Comment: orangedude: The ignorance is your own. You forget that scientists do not struggle to make ends meet in a multi-job family,struggle to pay bills,and watch helplessly as food and energy prices continue their rise. Worse for the position of the GW scientists,their predictions that the 2006 and 2007 hurricane seasons would prove devastating in the wake of Katrina were wrong.Further,that in several sections of the nation,this last winter was one of the strongest in over a decade.[even your own ''scientists''acknowlage this fact]. Thus,these rightly appear as mere dart-throwers on a board that either sustains or refutes their convictions depending upon the accuracy of the throw.
    But for ordinary consumers,the reality is much more differant and stark. Hence,the very reasons why as NEWSWEEK itself pointed out in last weeks article on the subject,the next president will ''not be Green''. He,or she,and Congress,will act accordingly to the rancour and alarm of citizens now coping with stratospheric energy prices. Further,in the sluggish movement by main greenhouse gas emitting nations to adopt their own standards,especially China and India,there is no way that America will allow itself to be guilttripped into massive poverty by a pack of hairshirt-wearing Luddites who are base hypocrites themselves [as the sheer energy usage of [universally wealthy] activists own homes,their jetsetting to Cannes for the film festival,the use by the SIERRA CLUB of gas-guzzling SUVs,and the amount of energy used in the ''Save the Earth''concerts has already proven]. Make no mistake. We are going to drill.

    • Posted By: orangedude @ 05/06/2008 13:58:39

      Comment: What kind of BS logic is that? Since scientists aren't struggling to make a living they must be wrong about climate change? Complete self-delusion and ignorance.

      Year to year seasons cannot be accurately predicted, but the longer trend is there. Either way it doesn't matter, because no amount of proof will convince people like you who are willfully ignorant to the truth.

      Furthermore, the selfish mindset you hold is unbelievable. Just because some people are struggling with their lives, the next generation should have to suffer even more for our actions? Unbelievably selfish.

      • Posted By: jpooch00 @ 05/06/2008 18:46:02

        Comment: What those other guys said!

  • Posted By: AngelRaye @ 05/06/2008 12:55:22 PM

    Comment: I definately believe they should be placed on the list of endangered species. Seriously, whats the hold up?

  • Posted By: AngelRaye @ 05/06/2008 12:55:13 PM

    Comment: I definately believe they should be placed on the list of endangered species. Seriously, whats the hold up?

  • Posted By: AngelRaye @ 05/06/2008 12:54:16 PM

    Comment: Definately should place them on the endagered species list. What's the hold-up?

  • Posted By: Lee Holmes @ 05/06/2008 11:45:05 AM

    Comment: I take it then,Orangedude,that you would have had no problems had this been a Brookings fellow,in that such a choice would have been more in line with your ideological thinking. Yet another person,say a Blue dude,or a Reddude,would have pointed out that Brookings is a creature of the left,and based his dismissals accordingly.
    In actuality,the mess that got us to this pass is the mess whose voice has been tightly controlled by the environmental movement for over three decades. Hence,no new refineries in that period. No new exploration. Over 25 million new illegal aliens who are huge energy consumers. The end of Americas timber dominance. No nukes. and at times,not even the very solutions they frequently carp about as a solution,as we see from competing lawsuits filed in Cali