American Elephants

The State of the Polar Bear, 2018 by The Elephant's Child

The State of the Polar Bear report was published on the 27th by the Global Warming Policy Foundation. It confirms that polar bears are continuing to thrive, in spite of recent reductions in sea ice levels. This finding contradicts the claims by environmentalists and some scientists that decreased levels of sea ice would wipe out declining bear populations.

The report’s author, Dr. Susan Crockford, is a world renowned expert on polar bears. She says there is now very little evidence to support the idea that the  polar bear is threatened with extinction because of climate change.

“We now know that polar bears are very resourceful creatures. They have made it through warm periods in the past and they seem to be taking the current warming in their stride too”. 

It appears now that it is the residents of the Arctic Circle who have the most to worry about. Increasing numbers of bears all year around, have meant reports of people being threatened, and even mauled, particularly from Nunavut in the far North of Canada.

Dr, Crockford explains:

The people of Nunavut are not seeing starving, desperate bears – quite the opposite. Yet polar bear specialists are saying these bears are causing problems because they don’t have enough sea ice to feed properly. The facts on the ground make their claims look silly, including the abundance of fat bears. Residents are pushing their government for a management policy that makes protection of human life the priority.”

Polar bear numbers have continued to increase slightly since 2005, although sea ice levels have been at a low level.  The predicted decline in polar bear numbers just did not happen.

  • • Despite marked declines in summer sea ice, Chukchi Sea polar bears continue to thrive: reports from the first population-size estimate for the region, performed in 2016, show bears in the region are abundant (almost 3000 individuals), healthy and reproducing well.
  • National Geographic received such a profound backlash from its widely viewed ‘this is what climate change looks like ’ starving polar bear video, released in late 2017, that in 2018 it made a formal public apology for spreading misinformation
  • .• In Canada, where perhaps two-thirds of the world’s polar bears live, the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife (COSEWIC) decided in 2018 to continue to list the polar bear as a species of ‘Special concern’ rather than upgrade to ‘Threatened.’
  • • Polar bear attacks made headlines in 2018: two fatal attacks in Nunavut, Canada and a narrowly averted death-by-mauling in northern Svalbard caught the world by surprise. Despite the folks parading around in polar bear costumes at climate marches, we need to remember that the bears are wild animals and dangerous.

The report is available here.

Yoo Hoo! New Congressperson Ocasio-Cortez! by The Elephant's Child


“Polar Vortex” New term for many people. I did a  brief search, and all the major media sources were talking about the “polar vortex.” NBC News “2019 polar vortex. Here’s how the brutal cold impacted the U.S.” HuffPost “How to Help Homeless People Amid the Freezing Cold Polar Vortex” Washington Post “Making sense of the polar vortex and record cold on a feverish planet” “Videos of Polar Vortex” where, how long, how cold.  There’s lots more, but you get the idea.

Back in the nation’s capitol, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez was making speeches about the horrors of global warming, and how we were all going to die in just 15 years, or was it 12? Others mentioned an estimated $94 trillion cost, and Kamala Harris said we’d just have to pay it, which may have eliminated her as a candidate. Voters are interested in the subject of climate change only as long as it doesn’t cost them anything, according to the large polling companies, like Rasmussen. Seems to be  bit of a disconnect here. Disastrous warming and Polar Vortex don’t exactly go together. But then Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s solution of vastly more wind turbines doesn’t work either, because it would take an acreage the size of the state of California to produce enough wind to power the United States.

To top that off, we just learned that “Wind Didn’t Work During Polar Vortex“– from the Midcontinent Independent Systems Operator (MISO) who just released a report stating the wind didn’t work during the polar vortex that swept Minnesota on January 29 and 30. Electricity output from wind plummeted due to low wind speeds and because it was “too cold” for the wind turbines to operate.”

Well, AOC.  Back to the drawing board.  How about some nice modern nuclear reactors instead?

%d bloggers like this: