Trading Polar Bears for More Oil and Gas Times Colonist It surprises me to learn that there are people who oppose the U.S. government's designation of the polar bear as a "threatened" species because it might curb the production of oil. Isn't that the stuff that, because it squirts CO2 into the air when used as fuel, most scientists say is threatening every species, including ours?
Threatened Polar Bear Is Actually Flourishing Morning News Global polar bear populations have been rising for decades, even as temperatures have recovered from the end of the Little Ice Age 100 years ago.
Polar Bear Ruling to Bring Wave of Lawsuits Bloomberg As expected, the U.S. Department of the Interior added the polar bear to the list of threatened species under the Endangered Species Act last week. Even with the Bush administration's attempt to render the ruling toothless, this action will almost surely go down in history as the turning point in the global warming debate.
Two years later Pluto's demotion is still touching nerves. Now, there's real debate in the scientific community to see if they made the right decision.
May 22, 2008
You may have noticed that the polar bear (ursus maritimus) was recently added to the Threatened Species List. The news brought the usual responses from the usual precincts.
The left said it was long overdue, and still might not save the polar bear. The right said the listing -- along with most every other piece of environmental legislation that comes down the pike -- was pure "poppycock."
"What if they're wrong?" is a common lament from the right side of the political aisle.
I never thought I'd be writing this, but when it comes to the environment, I'm with Bill O'Reilly (yes, that Bill O'Reilly).
When his conservative guests rise to refute claims of man-made global warming or complain about the latest green initiative, he simply says, "What's the harm?"
(I'm paraphrasing)
"Who could be against cleaner air, cleaner water, and making the planet a better place to live?"
I couldn't agree more.
What O'Reilly has managed to do -- and should be lauded for -- is block out the din from the left and the right and keep his eye on what's important: Taking care of the planet. He hasn't allowed himself (on this issue, at least) to get caught up with who's right and who's wrong.
The truth is, no one knows for sure who's right and who's wrong on most of these environmental issues. Greenpeace and Polar Bears International often show this video, which allegedly shows polar bears drowning in the Arctic Sea. They claim there's not enough polar ice left for them to float on and hunt their favorite meal, Arctic Seals (which are also protected).
The Cato Institute and other global-warming critics are quick to respond that the polar ice cap is a living, breathing thing (which it is), which was expanding and contracting long before man learned to walk upright (which it was). They also like to point out that at the turn of the 20th century, man had, indeed, hunted polar bears nearly to extinction. At their ebb, there were but an estimated 5,000 polar bears left. Today, estimates range as high as 25,000.
Of course, we've heard this seesaw argument of my-facts-are-better-than-your-facts before. And it isn't just limited to the environment. Pick a topic: guns, the economy, the rainforest. It all devolves into the same he said-she said spat, broadcast in high-definition across the land by media outlets that have themselves arguably chosen sides and only present "the facts" that support their side of the argument.
I'm not sure who's responsible for global warming. Is it man-made, or just the planet going through another of its natural cycles? I don't know and I don't care.
What I do care about is having fresh air to breath and clean water to drink.
To paraphrase Mr. O'Reilly, "Who could be against that?"
Share the Eye:
Is Driving Your Car Killing Polar Bears? The Daily Green The administration's argument is that the incremental buildup of greehouse gas pollution in the atmosphere cannot be considered a "taking" of a polar bear.
Bush Grants Secret Service Protection to Polar Bears crystalair.com Boxed into a corner by the courts and its own scientists, the Bush administration agreed last week to place the polar bear under the protection of the Secret Service.
Biggest Threat to Polar Bears Exempt from New Law MinnPost.com It appears the only effect of the listing, therefore, is to prohibit the importation of bear carcasses and parts by hunters or collectors.
still thinking about today...
Man is responsible for what percentage of global warming?
26% 9% 35% 30%
I, too, care about fresh air and clean water to drink. I, too, don't know and don't care whether global warming is man-made or just another cycle. My guess is it's another cycle made a little worse in some places by man. We adapt over time because we are a part of nature, I think nature will adapt over time, also.
60 million years ago the earth was supposedly struck by a giant asteroid that destroyed the dinosaurs and probably caused massive climate change. The earth's atmosphere has undergone massive changes, albeit over millions and millions of years. The earth adapted and we are now here. I don't think humans could possibly have the effect on the earth of that asteroid.
A few billion or trillion years in the future the earth will undergo a terminal case of global warming when the sun goes supernova. I don't think I'm too concerned.
What I do think is that the polar bears are worth saving. The loss of one family of creatures can unbalance the entire eco-sphere. Do we really know the consequences of that unbalancing? I'm sure nature will balance itself out if the polar bears become extinct. It's often said the earth would continue if humans became extinct. I'm sure a few polar bears won't be missed. But why should we allow that to happen? We, and we alone, are the only creature on earth that can help another creature survive.
So we should save the polar bears if for no other reason than they are fellow creatures. Same goes for elephants, seals, and my beloved silk worms. Afterall, you all might think the world can survive without silk ties, but that's your opinion; reality is something else!
However, without fresh air and clean water life is less than pleasant. Why would we wish that kind of pollution on the innocent: our children, the less fortunate, polar bears, seals, elephants, and even silk worms?
Notice I did not say anything about saving politicians.......
To: LaDonna,
Good morning! Have the best and the most creative day you could ever imagine.
I found this news clip to be very interesting, please note that this is only part of the story:
Bush Grants Secret Service Protection To Polar Bear
WASHINGTON, D.C. (CAP) - Boxed into a corner by the courts and its own scientists, the Bush administration agreed last week to place the polar bear under the protection of the Secret Service. In making the announcement, President Bush said he was sensitive to the concerns of environmentalists and wants to see a thriving polar bear population as much as anyone.
"Believe me, I don't want anything to happen that would keep America's polar bears from being able to share their little bottles of Coca-Cola with the penguins, or anyone else they come across up there in Alaska, or wherever they are," he said.
"The experts say the polar bears need protection," continued Bush, "and nobody gives protection like these Secret Service guys, lemme tell ya. For one thing, they always make sure to take your keys away if you're tanked."
To: ExPat, You are a very nice way to start the day.
ExPat, please do not under-estimate the beauty and comfort of really fine wool ties!
To: LaDonna,,
Thank you. Knowing you read my comments is a nice way for me to start my day.
To: DreadPirateroberts,
I promise I'll try a wool tie. But, if I like them, will I have to stop my efforts to "save the moths"?
Wyocowgirl said...
I totally agree with ExPat - clean air and clean water are really nice to have. Many parts of the world have neither. And as a fiber artist, silk is my favorite fabric to work with, so saving silk worms is pretty important. I believe that if it is in our power to help a species survive, we should do so, regardless of whether or not we are the cause of it's decline. As to whether or not humans are the cause of global warming... in some places that is probably true, as in the Amazon where the rain forest is steadily dissappearing because of humans. But are we the total cause? Probably not. Some people believe that cows are the major cause of global warming because of the methane that they produce. How much methane did dinasaurs produce? There were many herbivore dinasaurs, and they were many times larger than cows. Did they kill themselves because of the methane they produced, thus changing the global climate? Or would they have if the asteroid hadn't hit? We'll probably never know the answer to any of these questions, but I see nothing wrong with trying to leave our planet in better shape when we leave it than it was when we arrived.
To: Wyocowgirl,
There's hope for those silk worms, after all.
You're right about the Rain Forest and the Dinosaurs.
We have another "so-called water crisis" in California. The L.A. mayor's plan is to recycle human waste water. I think the only people happy about this are the ones who won't be drinking it.
One answer is water de-salination. We have the biggest water supply in the world, the Pacific Ocean. Among the people who oppose such a plan are a few silly rich people living in Malibu who don't like the idea of having their view of the ocean obstructed by the de-salination plants. What's really interesting, these are the same people who oppose off-shore oill drilling for the same reasons. More interesting is the fact that so many of these silly rich people are Hollywood actors, many of whom are Canadians and Brits who are not even U.S. citizens. These same actors are "environmentalists" who want me to drive a small hybrid or ride a bicycle to work so they'll have more room on the road for their Hummers. Go figure!
These same people have bottled water delivered and probably have a fridge full of exotic imported waters. i'm sure they drink these while they write a check to support the mayor's human wwaste water plan.
Hypocracy knows no limits.
Cows have gas probably in large part due to being confined in feed lots and forced to eat grains they weren't designed to eat. So there's one way man has contributed to global warming. Another is from all the hot air spewed by pundits and politicians. I don't know who is really to blame for this mess, but humans should have the brain capacity to figure out what it can do to lessen the damage.
Run for the hills! I feel a rant coming on!
First and foremost, I already know in my heart of hearts that I could not express my feelings on this issue anywhere near as eloquently as our forum’s host already has. If it hasn’t been obvious from previous posts, as far as this topic is concerned, I totally agree with him.
Secondly, my greatest concern has been that nobody has put “common sense†on the endangered species list (a mixed metaphor for sure) because it’s been disappearing before our very eyes for several decades now. I personally believe that it may be the victim of the only truly bipartisan action taken by the Democrats and Republicans ever.
If something “not good†seems to be happening, diagnose it and fix it. Period. Point fingers and affix blame later. If something could be done to provide cleaner air, potable water, solid ice for the polar bears, what’s the harm in doing it. The way this topic is often approached is like driving your car with the “check engine†light flashing and all you do is cover it up with a Post-it note so it won’t bother you.
It was usually my experience during my career that the more time and effort needed to be expended to defend a position or defend attacking a position, the higher the probability that position was wrong. When it comes to the environment, I’m experiencing “déjà vu all over againâ€. In the mean time, I’m going to have someone diagnose my “check engine†light even though it could be a moot point if another asteroid hits us.
Now for that double shot of espresso.
I'm in agreement with Expat ~
"My guess is it's another cycle made a little worse in some places by man. We adapt over time because we are a part of nature, I think nature will adapt over time, also"
Religious beliefs aside ~ the real question should be can anyone REALLY know what really is the natural progression for the earth/universe?
"What's the harm"
IMHO really is the correct answer to this question though ~ What is the harm in protecting the Cute Cuddly Polar Bears? ~
Do I really believe the claims from enviromental groups that more of them are drowning while gathering food becaue there's not enough ice? Not really I feel it's most likely the Survival of the Fittest at work & that becuase of today's advanced technology we have more accurate information than from previous decades.
Clean, Air, Clean Water, Saving polar bears & silkworms It's not wrong to want & most likely won't harm too much of the public to do so.
South-Side John ~ we're do I sign the petition for listing Common Sense as endangered?
I hope everyone has enjoyed their AM Coffee :)
Later,
Rings.
P.S. Aside from the ties has anyone even though about how Victoria Secret's would ever survive without silk?
Spinner said...
Here, here, again for SSJ! Just another reason to vote for him for Pres. I, too, felt a rant coming on, but then I read all the previous rants and felt that we are all in agreement here. How come there is this mess in understanding the true nature of what is going on if we here all agree? Oh, yes, now I remember. We, and we alone, are that wonderful consortium of the greatest minds of the 21st century brought together by J. Peterman. Maybe the Laboulaye Project should also take on the educating of the public as well as the scientific community as to the correct approach to global warming.
If there wasn't a past period of warming with the polar ice cap melting, we wouldn't be here in the New World. Then where would we be? Once again, "Now and ever more shall be, world without end" is the basic "truth" and any change that would mean some adapting by the biological world is "wrong". Yes, I join the chorus that says that we should do all we can to preserve the air, water, and not purposefully change the eco-system balance, but change happens and happened long before man had anything to do with it. This change has been the catalyst behind that evil word, "Evil-ution". And now the English climate is becoming very good for the development of vineyards... how 'bout that, ExPat? Is that such a bad thing? We would love to have an orange tree in our back yard here in KY. Oops, I said Kentucky. Well, after Tuesday, I guess you all think we are ALL uneducated racists here. Well, Lord knows, I tried. But that is another topic I don't care to get into.
Nov.4, 2008 .... the popular vote is in and the results are: Clinton 33.33333%, Obama 33,33333%, McCain 33,33333 and SSJ .00000000000000000003%. SSJ's were unfortuantely disqualified when it was discovered that both of his votes were cast by Spinner. However, in an amazing turn of events, due to some little known bylaw regulating the Electoral College, SSJ has been declared the winner. He was last seen driving like a bat out of hell towards Canada.
Spinner said...
But my 2 votes on Tuesday didn't seem to have the same effect as to who won...
To: Spinner,
Even though I don't drink, I'm all for England being able to grow wine grapes. Wine grapes were cultivated in England centuries ago. I'm sure the French are not keen on the idea, but........ (who cares).
I'll cast my vote for placing common sense on the endangered species list, just as long as the President doesn't put common sense under the protection of the Secret Service.
I'll cast my two votes for SSJ. Be sure to vote, and to vote often in the election.
I'll cast my two votes for SSJ!
I'm all for England being able to grow wine grapes. Wine grapes were cultivated in England centuries ago. I'm sure the French are not keen on the idea, but........ (who cares).
Interesting Expat should mention that as it was I think about 2 weeks ago in the Showtime show The Tudors (shamefully it's my Guilty Pleasure) Henry VIII was entertaining one of the Ministers of France & the servant came around & asked the Minister if he would ike Wine. The Ministered asked which region in France it was from, Henry states it's English Wine they also can grow & ferment grapes.... So that would've been in the mid 1500's....
Spinner said...
Yes. There was a warming period during that time. That was toward the end of it, as a matter of fact. It allowed Eric the Red and the vikings to get to Greenland a bit earlier with relative ease and find tillable land.
Spinner, La Donna and ExPat,
Based on your "vote, and vote often" philosophy, I hereby bestow upon you the status of "Honorary South-Side Chicagoans", and give you the key to the city. The same city where even the victims of the Great Chicago Fire, including Mrs. O'leary's cow, still vote in every election.
Spinner said...
I accept with pride!
I am honored! For that, I'll even vote again!
Ladies, it's an honor and a privilege for me to have made your acquaintance.
To: South-Side John,
I, too, am honored. To be an honorary Chicagoan, Wow!.
I'm going to get some of my dead relatives to vote. Some are dead and buried in Ireland, Wales and England. (My Irish relatives had to die somewhere, so don't hold England against them Ha!Ha!) I'm sure their votes will be acceptable. My Irish grandfather had a favorite cow on his farm in Wales....she'll vote, too! She might've been related to Mrs. O'Leary's prize heffer.
Chicago...my new home town....thank you!
With all of these votes in our pockets we shall wield considerable clout in this and all future elections in the Windy City!