Bush can't even pronounce polar bear let alone muster any concern about them.

That last paragraph cannot be denied:

     THE fear is....

            ....GOVERNMENT scientists  think....

                ....a NEW INTERNATIONAL study says....

All incorruptible and undeniable.  Especially THE  fear (set your alarm clock to find out what THE fear is tomorrow morning).

...new sucker born every day...

 

                       

 

Congratulations on your new child, Lemoc.I don't think it's fair to think he/she will be that much of a chip off the ol' blockhead, but just in case, don't home school.

LOL... You're accusing someone of fear mongering? Look in the White House if you want to find the master of fear mongering. And John McCain is a chip off the old blockhead.

Sure smart boy.  Polar Bears are endangered?  How?

Today, there are an estimated 22-25,000 Polar Bears depending on who you talk to about this.  This is an increase from the estimated 5,000-18,000 bears when the 5 signatories to International Agreement on the Conservation of Polar Bears, estimated their population in 1972.  The population has been stable at the current level for the last 10 years.  So how is it Polar Bears are threatened?

There is only one peer-reviewed paper on polar bear population forecasting that has been accepted for publication in an academic journal.  It condemns the government's forecasting methods which predict the Bear population will decline.

There is no legitimate scientific basis for placing the Polar Bear on the endagered species list.  this is purely a political move by Global Warming activists who seek to achieve through the courts that which they have been unable to achieve by any other means.

"A series of new studies by the United States Geological Survey (USGS) forecast that two thirds of the world’s Polar bears will disappear by the middle of this century. While alarming, the studies’ conclusions – which predict the loss of all Polar bears found in Alaska - are nonetheless considered conservative since they are based on moderate projections that estimate ice-loss in response to future climate warming scenarios."

link to article

Precisely the studies [not peer-reviewed, BTW] that are discredited.

The Bears are not now endangered.  There is no credible proof the Bears will become endangered under the current hunting restrictions.  Adding an animal to the endangered species list which is not demonstrated to be endangered is unprecedented.   Doing so based on dubious projections about future populations which cannot be supported by the present conditions is sheer idiocy.

There is nothing credible about your post.

Well if you can't trust a marketing professor on the issue , who can you trust. NoLogic207, I may have missed it, but your link refers to Armstrong's paper as "peer reviewed". Anything to back that up?

Apparently you didn't read it.  The paper itself indicates that it is peer-reviewed.  But beyond that, you could easily do the research for yourself.  Google turns up this article which says: 

"It is scheduled to appear in the September/October issue of the INFORMS journal Interfaces"

and further contains:

"The authors examined nine U.S. Geological Survey Administrative Reports. The studies include “Forecasting the Wide-Range Status of Polar Bears at Selected Times in the 21st Century” by Steven C. Amstrup et. al. and “Polar Bears in the Southern Beaufort Sea II: Demography and Population Growth in Relation to Sea Ice Conditions” by Christine M. Hunter et al.

Prof. Armstrong and his colleagues concluded that the most relevant study, Amstrup et al. properly applied only 15% of relevant forecasting principles and that the second study, Hunter et al. only 10%, while 46% were clearly contravened and 23% were apparently contravened.

Further, they write, the Geologic Survey reports do not adequately substantiate the authors’ assumptions about changes to sea ice and polar bears’ ability to adapt that are key to the recommendations.

Therefore, the authors write, a key feature of the U.S. Geological Survey reports is not scientifically supported."

As for your criticisms about the author's credentials, who better to examine census taking and forecasting methodology than an Economist?  This is exactly the subject matter being discussed here:  Dubious claims that a population which is presently INCREASING is going to decline sufficently in the near future to threaten its very viability. 

It would seem to any impartial or intelligent observer that the burden of such proof would have to be upon the forecasters in light of the current facts, yet the government has acted under the goad of partisan lawsuits as if just the opposite were the case.

If you had read the Colonel's link, you'd know that you've been busted for junk science along with your professor Armstrong. I suggest you read his link carefully this time and stop repeating your horseshit.

"Armstrong's claims regarding the increasing polar bear population have been debunked again and again (which doesn't stop Inhofe and others from repeating the claims, of course)."

Hi Mary,

In NL207's defense, I think the paper he linked to is actually classified as "peer reviewed", but I'd seen some articles about the different standards of peer review applied to it. I was just messing with him a bit, seeing if he would actually come up with some backup besides "because it says so".

It's easy to be baffled by all of the contradictory papers and studies on the various controversial issues, and I sure don't claim to understand many of them. I just get a laugh out of the wingnuts who find a paid "expert" who supports their conservative agenda, and use their testimony for that "case closed" sort of argument.

Col Lefty, quit messing around, hear! ;-)

"peer review" for these guys: Armstrong read the paper to his right wing friends at their local pub.

You know, extintin' species is hard work for our Fearless Leader

Bush hates Polar Bears.

...and why shouldn't he?  All bears are a very threat to the fabric of freedom that is vital to the liberty of the American people. 

Those entitled bears need to start paying their share of taxes!  After all, they are squatting on OUR soil.  If they refuse, we should deport them to the 3rd world nations from which they came, such as Antarctica.

I thought Bush thought the bears were working with Al-qeida.

Was Yogi Bear Hindu? Just wondering...  ;>)

Don't know, but Boo Boo was definitely an islamo fascist terrorist.

Yogi was a Liberal, always taking hard working Americans picnic baskets. Boo Boo was a Conservative, always trying to stop him, believing those hard working Americans should be able to hold on to their own picnic baskets.

At least that's what I've heard ;-)

Liberal is synonymous with petty thief?

Conservative is synonymous with stopping petty theft?

if boo boo was a conservative, doesn't he want to eat a picnic basket for free, and put it on the national basket debt for the next generation of bears?

Come on Pete.

I was using "picnic basket" as an analogy to "our own money". Not perfect, wasn't meant to be. Just getting into the whole "bear" thing here.

Libs want to take more of our picnic baskets [money] for taxes, while Cons want us to keep more of our money instead of paying higher taxes. Another words letting us keep our picnic baskets.

Geez. Relax.

Boo Boo was never successful at anything, was he? Makes sense, he's today's textbook conservative! ;)

I don't know Snoop here's what Wikipedia has to say about Boo Boo:

Boo Boo Bear is a Hanna-Barbera cartoon character, an anthropomorphic bear cub in a bow tie, who is Yogi Bear's best friend, and often acts as his conscience; he tries (usually unsuccessfully) to keep Yogi from doing things he shouldn't do, and also to keep Yogi from getting into trouble with Ranger Smith. Often he would say "But Yogi, Ranger Smith's not going to like that" or some other variation.

So...you're saying Boo Boo was kinda like Condi Rice, correct?  ;>) 

Ha!! Yes!!! Oh man that was perfect!

Ok it's settled:

Boo Boo=Condi Rice.

 

Wait a minute. It clearly states that BooBoo had a conscience.

If Condi ever had one, she must have misplaced it.

That would eliminate most public figures from any comparisons to the little guy.

LOL!

Jeter, think about it:

Boo Boo Bear is a Hanna-Barbera cartoon character, an anthropomorphic bear cub in a bow tie, who is Yogi Bear's best friend, and often acts as his conscience; he tries (usually unsuccessfully) to keep Yogi from doing things he shouldn't do, and also to keep Yogi from getting into trouble with Ranger Smith. Often he would say "But Yogi, Ranger Smith's not going to like that" or some other variation.

You just described Tucker Carlson!

Alrighty...

Boo Boo looks like Tucker, acts like Condi.

Hey aren't we supposed to be discussing polar bears ;-)

In the Harvey Birdman, Attorney at Law episode "Death By Chocolate" (2002), Boo Boo (voiced by Tom Kenny) was suspected of being a terrorist known as the Unabooboo

Aha! I knew there was something fishy about that bear!

I think you are right except boo boo knows more about middle east diplomacy.

; )

Boo Boo was never successful at anything, was he? Makes sense, he's today's textbook conservative! ;)- snoopy

Not successful? He got Yogi to do all the dirty work, while he took the moral high ground, and probably didn't turn down anything out of that picnic basket.Boo Boo probably had a "Support the Picnic Basket Liberators" sticker on his ...whatever little bears drive.

If you people aren't willing to share your picnic baskets with others, you shouldn't be allowed to use publicly funded National Parks such as Jellystone.  You also shouldn't be allowed to drive to Jellystone using the roads that were paid for with public funds.  You also shouldn't enjoy the protection of park rangers and park security, who are paid by the government.

Just sayin'

The analogy would have worked a little better if Yogi took the picnic baskets and distributed the contents evenly amongst all the less-fortunate picnickers who spent all their money on gasoline just getting to the park and have no picnic basket of their own.  ;-)

Yeah I know, like I said it wasn't a perfect analogy.

Anyway Irony & Snoop have come up with a few better ideas for Boo Boo [see above]

;-)

Also, Boo Boo had incredible arrogance and hubris, and an insatiable thirst for the blood of innocents and foreigners.  He must have been a neo-con.

Shouldn't we waterboard them first?

Bush thought the Polar Bears were all gainfully employed by Coca-Cola.

Darn those bears!  Stealing jobs from red-blooded Americans! 

Next thing, they'll want to MARRY each other. Yuuuuch...!

I believe that's in the bible, too:

Leviticus 20:13

If a bear lies with another bear as a man lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put on the endangered species list; or else they should all be put to death.

We're here!  We're queer!  We don't want any more bears! :)

Catchy. Did you get that from the moustache man march?

Simpsons...

I know. "Moustache man march" was a line from the same episode.

And those Care Bears are socialist!

They're shiftless and lazy, too. Check this out...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qSpveNffrbY&feature=related

To quote Col. Sanders, God made Adam and Eve, not Yogi and Boo-boo.

Well, I've heard some rumors about Boo Boo and Baba Booey...

Good point, RT. Just lay off of the Berenstain Bears, or the anti-semitism coal mine canaries will be all over you.

Secular Jew Bears? Call Michael Savage immediately...  ;>)

Another reason to blame the Bush Administration for high oil prices.

 

DRILL NOW 

You're blaming Bush???  I believe you are misguided, sir.  Bears are the direct cause of our oil shortage, as they think they are entitled to use land that is the sole property of the United States of America - to ravage as we see fit. 

Thus, bears are indirectly responsible for the Iraq war, as well. 

Why do they hate freedom?

Ever see a bear wearing a flag pin? I haven't either...

Ever see a bear wearing a flag pin? I haven't either... - IRONY 101 / Friday May 16, 2008 4:03:21 PM EDT

 

Maybe a Soviet flag pin.

F#ckin' bears, man...that's what's wrong with this country.  ;>)

We've got a bear on our state flag, along with a RED STAR, just like them Chinese commie hats.What the hell? No wonder we're being forced to gay-marry by activist judges.

F#ckin' bears...

Somebody's got to stop these GODLESS, COMMIE, GAY, ELITIST, FLIPFLOPPING, ACTIVIST, TAX HAPPY, HOLLYWOOD, UNION POLAR BEARS!!!

Damn right! F#ckin' bears...   ;>)

Nuke the Bears!

Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb the Bears

Someone described the Cal State flag as showing a bear baiting a tree.

No halfway measures here,NUC THE UNBORN GAY WELKS!!!!!

Then wait ~15 years. Receive 1-3 cents reward for 2-4 years. Shake well. Blather as usual. Ignore any option offerred that might really help. This is blasphemy to those who maintain this dying meme. Demonstrate aligence to oil companies. Offer first born male son as ornament to the first drill bit used in ANWR. Raise new lump on head to make an attractive patern with the old ones.

Don't know what you mean by aligence, but your allegience to economic illiteracy is certainly steadfast.

We have to develop all energy options forthwith, including drilling Anwar and offshore, nuclear, wind, solar, and all coal options.  We can do it cleanly and we will.

Twenty-five million Canadians know what to do with their resource (oil sands), and they are prosperous because of it--prosperous enough to buy good medical procedures down here.

DRILL NOW. DO IT ALL NOW, and our prices will still be high.  We've waited too long.

they have yet to establish the critical habitat, so presently nothing will change.

the lawsuit didn't prompt it, it prompted the study that led to the decision.

twenty years ago the polar bear population was 5000.  now it is 20-25000.

boy are they endangered.

I saw a stuffed polar bear in an alaska airport.  so huge.  must be a real rush to bring one of them down.

I'll let an expert in the field debunk your comment.

Do you ever get tired of being made a fool of here?  Is that why you keep changing screen names?  Or are you just a masochist?   

I see you are bring your usual intellectual vinegar and Walter Mitty bloodthurst to the board. 

Good show, continue spreading blight till the cries of survivors echo world wide. Myanmar is hiring sadist's. Good pay and benifits.

you know, a guy could forget how to spell on this board.  bloodthirst.  sadists does not need an apostrophe.

the number of polar bears comes from an editorial today in the wsj.  of course, you folks don't read papers, or at least not the wsj,  so you would not know that. 

interestingly, you have not commented on my first post related to critical habitat.  i guess it's beyond your ken.

Did you get a chance to read my reply to your post?  It turns out the WSJ is misleading you (shocker).  

What kind of response are you looking for regarding your habitat comment?  My guess is that it'll take another lawsuit funded by caring, decent, moral people who donate their hard-earned money to environmental advocacy groups to force Bush to do his job.  Again, big shocker.  

You forgot the word gullible  to include with caring and moral.  You shut-ins are easy prey for nature-faker groups classifying themselves as environmental advocates, when in fact they are primarily slick fund-raising professionals who know an easy mark:  YOU.  The last one they played you for was the spotted owl (never endangered, but you like to think it was).

Would logic suggest that the bears have adapted and survived every ice acreage fluctuation over eons?  Guess not, for you Jethros.

DRILL NOW to save the retirement funds of the anti-drilling nuts on this site, who are too dense to realize THEY are OWNERS of eeeville Big Oil.

Wow, brilliant analysis.  I guess if I left my house I would notice that th environment is a-ok, right?  I guess if I did some more research, I would realize that I just imagined groups like the Nature Conservancy, Defenders of Wildlife, the Audobon Society, and the National Wildlife Federation, and hundreds of other groups, doing amazing things to protect the environment every day.  They even want ignorant blowhards like you to be able to enjoy the beauty and diversity of nature.  Hopefully one day you'll learn to appreciate and love it.  

As I said before, you're an easy mark for professional fund-raisers.  And you are, essentially, shut-in.  The population and culture is increasingly urbanized and relatively provincial, and  people know little about their own state of residence;  they just see it on the news.  Furthermore, they really don't care that much. 

I will say this for Nature Conservancy and The Trust for Public Lands:  they both raise money to BUY property, rather than just advocating for the theft of it.

 

Oh....

Save the Whales and DRILL ANWAR NOW.  The Arctic Titmouse will never know the difference (except for an enhanced sex life), and neither will you (except for better energy independence).

How much better energy independence?

1) 2 to 4 cents per gallon for a few years energy independence?

2) No plans beyond continuing dependence on a limited and increasingly expensive energy source independence.

3) Denigrate, redicule, and arrouse suspicion of all who see the real threats and work against them energy indepenence?

4) Trust the administration and business leaders to bestow a viable energy future to its grateful citizens energy independence?

5) Shut up and god bless the oil companies energy independence?

Please clarify, in the mean time.

GO GEOTHERMAL!

Go geothermal as well.  Energy prices, due to worldwide demand, will remain high so as to support most alternatives we are looking at now.

When geothermal gets big, as it will, will you villainize it too?

With suffient evidence I will villainize persons, and small groups of people. Beyond 100 people, what you got is stupidity in the large. Nations societies and inanimate objects or forces get a pass.

You have not clarified your position beyond the most harm for the most people. That sustains your villian status 3rd class in my book. Keep at it and I predict you can make it to no class.

reallly, how are you going to run a truck on geothermal.  you'd have a better chance with lng.  but the enviros won't let us build the terminals necessary.

Plug-in technology allows electric energy created from geothermal to power electric/hybrid cars and trucks to increase petroleum efficiency.

You still ain't answering much. I got time. Transportation um, LNG is not a solution. Alcohol powered fuel cells is an possible intermediary. Very efficient, still puts out some co2. There's nearly an electric motorcycle out. 80 hp and torque from the word go. Hydrogen based transport has all but two bug worked out. Storing the hydrogen on board, nano tubes is the current favorite. The infrastructure to support the use of hydrogen is the other. Hydrogen itself can be produced at the cost of gasoline, at year ago prices.

As to envirenmentalists single handedly stopping a LNP distribution system. Well as I've noted you ain't much when it comes to answering questions, but give it a shot, Howed they do it all by themselves?

OK, I get it now.  You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.  You are one  of those people who pull things out of their ass and think they made a great point.  

Environmental protection is one of those issues that the vast majority of people are in favor of.  One reason is because they realize that we are destroying it with disastrous consequences.  Another reason is because they realize that human health and welfare and the condition of the ecosystems around us are closely tied.  Finally, most people enjoy wild areas for their recreational and aesthetic value.  So, keep trying to push your loser, ignorant argument that we shouldn't be responsible members of our environment.  

Furthermore, you are apparently completely clueless about all the positive  things being done by hundreds of environmental non-profit groups.  I'm not sure what you mean by stealing land, but I'm sure Rush was making a highly intelligent point when you heard it from him.  

Finally, as others have pointed out, if you think we would be one inch closer to energy independence by opening up to drilling here, you really need to go educate yourself before spouting off.  You're embarrassing yourself.    

As I said, you're the standard townbound, starry-eyed  idealist who populates the choir here.  You hiked the John Muir Trail (10 miles of it) or whatever one time so you know all about wilderness.  What you don't know you will buy hook, line and sinker from hucksters who put "non-profit" behind their names (just a bare subsistence, dontchaknow).  Riotously funny.

Somebody has to save your dumb ass from your own foolishness.  We have to use ALL energy opportunities NOW.  You've been conditioned against the use of "fossil" fuels and the technologies that make them practical and increasingly clean; you drink that Utopian koolaid that villainizes fossil fuel use.

Fine.  Stop using it.  Mount an additional propeller on your beanie, and tell the Canadians what a waste of time and resources it is to develop the Athabasca Tar Sands.  It's an excercise in futility, according to you, and you have no right to withhold your wisdom and scholarship from your brothers to the North.

VOTE LIBERTARIAN, and come back to Earth.

You have no idea who I am or what my experience and education are.  Just for your info, I have a BS in zoology, a MS in Natural Resource Management, and 10 years experience in environmental science.  I've worked with government agencies and NGO's.  What have you done to gain that apparently vast wealth of knowledge in this subject?  

You've brought nothing to this discussion besides idiotic talking points and childish assumptions and biases.   If you don't have anything substantial to bring to the discussion, stay out of it and let the adults talk.  

He's spotting typos and punctuation mistakes. That's usually the death rattle before deciding to tarnish a brand new screen name.

According to BriWi, Bush has seen the light.

Reality?  NOT!

But the Oil company cheerleaders seem convinced that everybody else is suckers for conservation fund-raisers.Amazing.

Maybe if they're visited by Bi-Polar bears in their sleep....

Maybe thats what Rick S (ex R sexualpathologic) was really trying to warn us about.

Reminds me of a horrible joke concerning a Bra Scootish lad. Who eventually set up house keeping with a great she bear.