Alaska Governor Sarah Palin’s op-ed on polar bears and climate change in the NYT


WOW look at the SIZE of that seal! (photo added by Anthony, not NYT)

Bearing Up

By SARAH PALIN

Published: January 5, 2008,
Juneau, Alaska

ABOUT the closest most Americans will ever get to a polar bear are those cute, cuddly animated images that smiled at us while dancing around, pitching soft drinks on TV and movie screens this holiday season.

This is unfortunate, because polar bears are magnificent animals, not cartoon characters. They are worthy of our utmost efforts to protect them and their Arctic habitat. But adding polar bears to the nation’s list of endangered species, as some are now proposing, should not be part of those efforts.

To help ensure that polar bears are around for centuries to come, Alaska (about a fifth of the world’s 25,000 polar bears roam in and around the state) has conducted research and worked closely with the federal government to protect them. We have a ban on most hunting — only Alaska Native subsistence families can hunt polar bears — and measures to protect denning areas and prevent harassment of the bears. We are also participating in international efforts aimed at preserving polar bear populations worldwide.

This month, the secretary of the interior is expected to rule on whether polar bears should be listed under the Endangered Species Act. I strongly believe that adding them to the list is the wrong move at this time. My decision is based on a comprehensive review by state wildlife officials of scientific information from a broad range of climate, ice and polar bear experts.

The Center for Biological Diversity, an environmental group, has argued that global warming and the reduction of polar ice severely threatens the bears’ habitat and their existence. In fact, there is insufficient evidence that polar bears are in danger of becoming extinct within the foreseeable future — the trigger for protection under the Endangered Species Act. And there is no evidence that polar bears are being mismanaged through existing international agreements and the federal Marine Mammal Protection Act.

The state takes very seriously its job of protecting polar bears and their habitat and is well aware of the problems caused by climate change. But we know our efforts will take more than protecting what we have — we must also learn what we don’t know. That’s why state biologists are studying the health of polar bear populations and their habitat.

As a result of these efforts, polar bears are more numerous now than they were 40 years ago. The polar bear population in the southern Beaufort Sea off Alaska’s North Slope has been relatively stable for 20 years, according to a federal analysis.

We’re not against protecting plants and animals under the Endangered Species Act. Alaska has supported listings of other species, like the Aleutian Canada goose. The law worked as it should — under its protection the population of the geese rebounded so much that they were taken off the list of endangered and threatened species in 2001.

Listing the goose — then taking it off — was based on science. The possible listing of a healthy species like the polar bear would be based on uncertain modeling of possible effects. This is simply not justified.

What is justified is worldwide concern over the proven effects of climate change.

The Center for Biological Diversity, which petitioned for the polar bear to be protected, wants the listing to force the government to either stop or severely limit any public or private action that produces, or even allows, the production of greenhouse gases. But the Endangered Species Act is not the correct tool to address climate change — the act itself actually prohibits any consideration of broader issues.

Such limits should be adopted through an open process in which environmental issues are weighed against economic and social needs, and where scientists debate and present information that policy makers need to make the best decisions.

Americans should become involved in the issue of climate change by offering suggestions for constructive action to their state governments. But listing the polar bear as threatened is the wrong way to get to the right answer.

Sarah Palin, a Republican, is the governor of Alaska.

h/t to L Nettles

About these ads
This entry was posted in Climate_change, Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

104 Responses to Alaska Governor Sarah Palin’s op-ed on polar bears and climate change in the NYT

  1. statePoet1775 says:

    concerning excessive concern for polar bears

    If you ever met a polar bear
    and he hadn’t had his lunch
    the last sound to be heard from you
    would be a hearty “crunch”.

    Things are look up with Sarah Palin.

  2. iceFree says:

    Well I will keep this short, I read about her talking sanely about polar bears and the Endangered Species Act.
    I like her and I think she is a great V.P. choice for McCain.

  3. Ed Scott says:

    Anthony,

    I am surprised that you would post a picture of a Navy submarine destroying Polar Bear habitat.

  4. Matt says:

    Hmm– Sounds like she knows what she may be talking about… might be a good choice for VP….

  5. Well Duh!

    Again, this politician has guts, brains and an inquiring mind. Let’s hope she’s free to use those in the coming months. It’s about time a “common” person was in a position of power. We’ve spent too long in the clutches of those who’ve never dirtied their hands or broken a sweat doing honest work.

  6. Chris Wright says:

    It appears the US may have a climate change skeptic for its next Vice President. In this interview
    http://www.newsmax.com/headlines/sarah_palin_vp/2008/08/29/126139.html
    she is asked about global warming. Her reply:
    “A changing environment will affect Alaska more than any other state, because of our location. I’m not one though who would attribute it to being man-made. ”

    If I were an American she’d have my vote!

    Chris

  7. Leon Brozyna says:

    What a Woman!!
    Brains wrapped in a pleasing on the eyes package.
    Move over governator – you’ve been replaced by Hockey Mom.

    Just stay on message Governor Palin and kick some serious butt.
    I may just watch the VP debate this year.

  8. bucko36 says:

    Thank you for reading my mind John Mccain. “RINO” McCain was not my first choice as candidate for the GOP, however, I decided that I would “hold my nose” and vote for him. The thought of “BO” being President of this great Country was a more repugnant option for me. I no longer will be holding my nose. McCain’s selection of Sarah Palin as GOP VP, has restored my faith in his judgement. Beside that, she will be the best looking VP we have ever had.

  9. nanny_govt_sucks says:

    McCain, step aside. Palin for President. McCain for VP.

  10. DeLyon Getty says:

    Three cheers for a woman with a healthy degree of commonsense.

    She is a breath of fresh air and could possibly seal (pardon the pun) victory in this crazy climate change non-debate.

    A looker with a big heart, five kids, and vision. What a combo !!

    Well done McCain. You will win the White House.

  11. Dee Norris says:

    Consider this –

    It was a VP that got these US into the AGW mess. It might be a VP who gets us out.

    She is also a proponent of State’s Rights or was at least thus so for Alaska.

    FWIW, Palin majored in Journalism.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarah_Palin

  12. Dee Norris says:

    Consider this –

    It was a VP that got these US into the AGW mess. It might be a VP who gets us out.

    She is also a proponent of State’s Rights or was at least thus so for Alaska.

    FWIW, Palin majored in Journalism.

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarah_Palin

  13. Bill Illis says:

    If you have seen the picture of a drowning bear recently which was distributed with the “9 bears seen swimming in open ocean” news story, that is clearly another “cropped” picture of a bear who was clearly standing in shallow water.

    I am tired of this propaganda.

    Have you ever seen the documentary “In the land of the polar bears” by Nova. In this documentary, polar bears swim 85 miles to an island off the coast of Siberia to hunt 2,000 lb Walruses.

    The scene showing a 500 lb polar bear wading his way into a herd of fifty 2,000 lb male Walruses with 2 foot long tusks is unbelievable. The bear finally attacks one of the smaller 1,500 lb Walruses and kills it and drags it away from the herd while the bigger ones are trying to attack the bear back. Nah, it was no contest for the giant Walruses against the bear.

    They can swim 85 miles and then kill a giant Walrus 3 times their size with 2 foot long tusks no problem.

  14. Buffoon says:

    “McCain, step aside. Palin for President. McCain for VP.”
    _____ I was thinking about this earlier, let’s hope she doesn’t become a distraction… I am tinkled pink about her though…

  15. Bill in Vigo says:

    I believe that we have the first breath of fresh air this election season. Up until this point the political process has been so corrupt this cycle that I have refrained from watching any of the process. I have today watched more that the last month. I will now enjoy watching the liberals and the warmists jump through hoops to try to trip this very nice “Lady with a capitol L” . She judging from her past performance and what I have heard of her is very intelligent and has no fear and no skeleton in her closet. This just might get interesting. And to think she believes in real science.

    Bill Derryberry

  16. Brute says:

    Funny, Palin sold the Alaska “State” jetliner on E-Bay when she took office. I wonder if Al Gore will rise to the occasion and fly commercial like the rest of us.

    Governor’s jet to be sold on eBay
    http://dwb.adn.com/front/story/8489684p-8383460c.html

  17. I recognized her name, because I saw an interview by Glen Beck with her a while back.
    This one about the prize of oil and on the politics of Alaskan oil production.

    Is McCain preparing to make a u-turn on global warming and Cap and Trade?
    Made listening to “climate skeptics”?

  18. Joy says:

    Buffoon:
    “tinkled pink” about her?

  19. Bernie says:

    I saw the Glen Beck video. She speaks very well – clear, direct, concrete and with a touch of humor.

    Check the video out — it was earlier in the summer.

    Go Sarah!!

  20. statePoet1775 says:

    I know they’re cute and cuddly
    but this unwelcome fact:
    if you meet a hungry polar bear
    you’ll end up polar scat.

  21. Ray Reynolds says:

    Bill Illis, “If you have seen the picture of a drowning bear recently which was distributed with the “9 bears seen swimming in open ocean” news story, that is clearly another “cropped” picture of a bear who was clearly standing in shallow water.”

    If its the picture of the bear rearing away from chopper prop wash I agree….the water is dirty from the shallows close beneath. Also its rightly considered a sin to harrass wildlife. Well unless you need to cram a chopper into a polar bears life to create a shrill photo op.

    I too am excited about Palin…in a very moderately wholesome way.

  22. Lucy says:

    “but we know our efforts will take more than protecting what we have — we must also learn what we don’t know. That’s why state biologists are studying the health of polar bear populations and their habitat.”

    I have a theory about polar bears… if they are in any danger, it’s almost certainly due to researchers drugging every single one of them on a very regular basis to “study their health”, a la the Simpsons on ‘the Island’.

  23. Jeff Alberts says:

    To help ensure that polar bears are around for centuries to come, Alaska (about a fifth of the world’s 25,000 polar bears roam in and around the state) has conducted research and worked closely with the federal government to protect them. We have a ban on most hunting — only Alaska Native subsistence families can hunt polar bears — and measures to protect denning areas and prevent harassment of the bears. We are also participating in international efforts aimed at preserving polar bear populations worldwide.

    I think those “Alaska Native subsistence families”, whatever that means, should be required to hunt with stone age tools. Since they don’t HAVE to be “Alaska Native subsistence families”, except by some warped sense of tradition. If they want to maintain tradition, then hunt with the tools used before modern technology came along.

  24. springwaterkate says:

    I have a lot of family that lives in Alaska. My sister actually worked on Sarah Palin’s campaign for governor. In less than two years as governor, Ms. Palin has accomplished more positive things for the citizens of her state than most politicians do in decades. I wish my state had someone like her…

    I don’t agree with her on every issue, but I respect her and trust that she has Alaskans (and now Americans) best interests at heart and will put them before special interests or entrenched political pressures.

    I read an interview with her (maybe it was in Alaska magazine?) a while back and her parents/husband/older children give her a ton of support and help with the younger children… it’s great to see a dynamic woman in politics who is backed by a functional and cohesive family.

    I like that her problem solving is pragmatic and that she evaluates and engages with people based on their merits rather than their party affiliation.
    When it comes to science, she strikes me as a person with an inquiring mind who is eager to learn.

    So, as a conservative/free-thinking/libertarian/environmentalist/
    non-believer in AGW, I will now seriously consider voting for the McCain-Palin ticket!

  25. old construction worker says:

    If she and McCain are elected, the boys at the Department of Interior could be on the hot seat for putting polar bears on the watch list.
    “These studies are meant to inform the US Fish and Wildlife Service about listing the polar bear as endangered. After careful examination, my co-authors and I were unable to find any references to works providing evidence that the forecasting methods used in the reports had been previously validated. In essence, they give no scientific basis for deciding one way or the other about the polar bear.”
    http://www.informs.org/article.php?id=1383
    Sarah Palin pushed to have this study done and is fighting in court to have polar bears taken off the watch list.

  26. statePoet1775 says:

    “If they want to maintain tradition, then hunt with the tools used before modern technology came along.” Jeff Alberts

    One of those tools was a curled-up sharpened whalebone tied with sinew and placed in some meat. When the bear ate the meat, the sinew would dissolve, and the bone spring open in the bears gut.
    Nope, a 30-06 to the head is much less cruel. Perhaps game limits is the better way to go.

  27. evanjones says:

    JA: Re. the Inuits. It’s moot. If you are going to allow a “way of life”, you can’t carve it in stone or dictate it from the outside. Either you allow the concept or you don’t and you “include” a group IN or you include it OUT.

    It goes back to reservation status. I had an ancestor who walked the Trail of Tears and eventually left the reservation. (She had to reject the old ways and was not permitted back once having left.) But the point is that the reservations were autonomous and made their own rules.

    I could come up with arguments for and arguments against the whole concept.

    I’ll add that I agree that some of those “stone tools” could be pretty cruel by modern standards and sensibilities.

    (The Canadians, IIRC, make the same allowances.)

    P.S., I am now helping moderate posts; jeez is setting up regular schedules for me, him, and a couple of others, helping to take the load off the Rev. So keep it civil and clean, folks (which you have been doing pretty well).

  28. Jeff Alberts says:

    I really don’t care if their way of life is allowed or not. I just think it’s silly. They wear modern clothing and use snowmobiles, and are somehow maintaining a “traditional lifestyle”. And if they’re so “in touch with nature” as we’re always told about “native peoples”, why would they hunt something that was endangered in the first place, like whales? We once had a rich tradition of whale hunting, but we stopped. Traditions which are destructive or counter-productive really should be abandoned.

  29. Jeff Alberts says:

    Thank you for reading my mind John Mccain. “RINO” McCain was not my first choice as candidate for the GOP, however, I decided that I would “hold my nose” and vote for him. The thought of “BO” being President of this great Country was a more repugnant option for me. I no longer will be holding my nose. McCain’s selection of Sarah Palin as GOP VP, has restored my faith in his judgement. Beside that, she will be the best looking VP we have ever had.

    Since endorsing Falwell’s Liberty U, McCain hasn’t had any sound judgement.

  30. Jeff Alberts says:

    One of those tools was a curled-up sharpened whalebone tied with sinew and placed in some meat. When the bear ate the meat, the sinew would dissolve, and the bone spring open in the bears gut.
    Nope, a 30-06 to the head is much less cruel. Perhaps game limits is the better way to go.

    I’m not talking about cruelty, I’m talking about tradition, which is why they do it. Don’t use a 30-06 and call it tradition. They’re deluding themselves.

  31. Jeff Alberts says:

    I am [pleased] about her though…

    Lol, you ARE going to clean that up, right? ;)

    [Sigh . . . My first act of BigBrotherhood. E]

  32. evanjones says:

    He’s sound on taxes, sound on the war, and rapidly coming around on energy issues. Those are my big three considerations. I don’t happen to agree with him on a number of social issues. For me there is no perfect choice. Oh, well.

    But I don’t think we should let the best be the enemy of the good. We need to consider the alternative.

    The “in touch with nature” bit I never bought in the first place. And it’s not an issue of aesthetics. It’s autonomy, plain and simple. It has its good points and its bad points.

  33. evanjones says:

    I’m not talking about cruelty, I’m talking about tradition, which is why they do it. Don’t use a 30-06 and call it tradition. They’re deluding themselves.

    If they have autonomy, they can decide among themselves what is and is not traditional. (One might even argue that the Inuits would never have rejected such capabilities, if available, and to reject them would not have been traditional, in and of itself.)

  34. deadwood says:

    I would venture to say that the use of rifles for over 100 years constitutes a tradition. As did using a whale bone harpoon for untold generations before they discovered (or more likely were introduced to) the rifle.

    I would also say that living north of the arctic circle in insulted wood-frame houses for the last 80 or so years now constitutes their new tradition.

    In a similar way we might think that driving a car is now the traditional mode for most of us to get to work. Different traditions might have held sway 100 years ago.

  35. bucko36 says:

    Jeff Alberts (20:51:07) :
    “Since endorsing Falwell’s Liberty U, McCain hasn’t had any sound judgement.”

    In the eye’s of the beholder.

    Jeff, that’s what makes this country so great, everyone can use their individual voting right, as they wish, in accordance with their opinions/beliefs. Not so everywhere on this earth. Be thankful for your “right to live/vote here”. Please, just don’t “abuse it blindly”.

  36. anna v says:

    statePoet1775 (19:40:06) :

    Since you publish poems,get corrections :)

    yous said:
    “I know they’re cute and cuddly
    but this unwelcome fact:
    if you meet a hungry polar bear
    you’ll end up polar scat.”

    Polar Bear

    I know they’re cute and cuddly
    but for this unwelcome fact:
    if you meet a hungry bear
    you’ll end up as polar scat.

  37. Jeff Alberts says:

    I would venture to say that the use of rifles for over 100 years constitutes a tradition. As did using a whale bone harpoon for untold generations before they discovered (or more likely were introduced to) the rifle.

    I would also say that living north of the arctic circle in insulted wood-frame houses for the last 80 or so years now constitutes their new tradition.

    Ah, so it’s a “new” tradition, for the sake of autonomy. Sorry, not buying it.

  38. evanjones says:

    My argument would be that under the current rulings the Inuit get to decide. Is it an Inuit custom that bears be killed by method X or merely that they be hunted by most efficient means? Autonomy means autonomy. (I assume there are limits, but this does not seem to press heavily upon them.)

  39. bucko36 says:

    anna v (21:51:50): I loved it!
    Had to laugh at this one. I had an English teacher HS in 1952, just like you! Of course, that was back when it was required to teach English in US public schools. “Go girl keep us honest”.

    Re: statePoet1775 (19:40:06): ” Poet she got you!”

    Go Sarah!!!!

  40. AKD says:

    When a native and an endangered species, somewhere in America a liberal’s head explodes.

  41. Thortung says:

    Bears: Not tinned food again!

  42. Jim says:

    Are you people dense. Sarah Palin just wnats to keep the polar bear off the list so she can drill for oil in ANWR You people need to wake up and see that the Oil men in the white house are robbing this country for everything we have and they have turned Mccain and now Sarah Palin is there pick to open up Alaska for Trillions of dollars in profits to the Oil companies and more money for Bush, Chaney and now Mccain and Palin WAKE UP PEOPLE!!!

    Don’t be so dense wake up sake up wake up wake up

    I can’t believe how dumb we as Americans have become.

  43. Dee Norris says:

    Another interesting note –

    Palin’s father was a science teacher back in the day when science was actually taught in the school systems.

  44. Dee Norris says:

    The more I read about Palin, the more I like –

    http://www.newsmax.com/headlines/sarah_palin_vp/2008/08/29/126139.html

    Speaking of energy, how much oil and gas does America really have?

    We have billions and billions of barrels of oil and trillions of feet of natural gas. We have so much potential from tapping our resources here in Alaska. And we can do this with minimum environmental impact. We have a very pro-development president in President Bush, and yet he failed to push for opening up parts of Alaska to drilling through Congress — and a Republican-controlled Congress, I might add.

    I thought when we hit $100 a barrel for oil it would have been a psychological barrier that would have caused Congress to reconsider, but they didn’t. Now we are approaching $200 a barrel. It’s nonsense not to tap a safe domestic source of oil. I think Americans need to hold Congress accountable on this one.

    What is your take on global warming and how is it affecting our country?

    A changing environment will affect Alaska more than any other state, because of our location. I’m not one though who would attribute it to being man-made.

  45. old construction worker says:

    Jim (01:20:29)
    No jim it’s [snip] robbing this country by not allowing for real energy policy as $700,000,000,00 / year of our tax based flows to other governments.
    So you would put the polar bear on the endanger list reguardless of the science just to stop oil production? The end justifies the means. [This gives] science and enviromentalist a bad name.

    [REPLY: Now, now, be nice! E.]

  46. statePoet1775 says:

    anna v and buck036,

    poetic license of course.

  47. Smokey says:

    Jim

    “Sarah Palin just wnats to keep the polar bear off the list so she can drill for oil in ANWR You people need to wake up and see that the Oil men in the white house are robbing this country for everything we have and… blah, bla, blah…I can’t believe how dumb we as Americans have become.”

    You’re speaking for yourself, right? Because you’re certainly not speaking for me, or for most Americans.

    I lay the blame for $4/gal gas, rolling blackouts [we just had one yesterday in Northern California], high utility bills, dependence on foreign oil, etc., etc., directly at the feet of the environmental lobbyists and their string puppets in Congress. These problems are their doing.

    How is it ‘robbing this country’ to use our own resources instead of funneling $trillions into the Middle East, Venezuela, etc.? Can you explain that?

    I did enjoy your comments, though. They reek of desperation. When the Left starts screeching about polar bears and a woman with some common sense, to me that is a Good Thing.

    My advice: take an aspirin and lie down. Everything is going to be OK.

  48. Tom in Florida says:

    Jim:”Are you people dense. Sarah Palin just wnats to keep the polar bear off the list so she can drill for oil in ANWR You people need to wake up and see that the Oil men in the white house are robbing this country for everything we have and they have turned Mccain and now Sarah Palin is there pick to open up Alaska for Trillions of dollars in profits to the Oil companies and more money for Bush, Chaney and now Mccain and Palin WAKE UP PEOPLE!!!”

    Jimmy, Jimmy, Jimmy…

    Are you aware that Palin has established a trust fund from oil tax profits that goes back to each and every Alaskan each year? You need to do some open minded research on her instead of trumpeting old and tired far left BS.

    Once a species gets listed on the Endangered Species list all kind of government control takes over. We have similar issues here in Florida with the Gopher Tortoise and the Scrub Jay. They have acutally considered restrictions on any land that MIGHT be able to sustain either of these animals. Their greed for control never stops. If you hate Washington so much, why would you want them to control more things?

  49. Tom in Florida says:

    Dee Norris: ” Now we are approaching $200 a barrel”

    Did i miss the morning news? When has oil ever approached $200 per barrel?
    As I predicted, as soon as the government simply started seriously talking about drilling, the day trader investors left the market and the price came down. Now they are coming back in as it looks like liberals may stay in control of things.

  50. statePoet1775 says:

    anna v, buck036

    I left those words out for the sake of the meter. But notice that you got the meaning anyway after a little thought :)

    Thanks for the feedback.

  51. Bruce Cobb says:

    “What is justified is worldwide concern over the proven effects of climate change.” So, at least in the above article, the warming alarmism to Palin is justified, so it’s difficult to see her skepticism there. Does she just change the message to suit her audience? I find her other political views, at least what I’ve seen so far abhorrent, and in any case, it is idiot McCain who would be president. We’ve had an idiot president for the past 8.

  52. Bernie says:

    Jim:
    What kind of argument is that? Are or are there not 5000 Polar Bears in Alaska? Are there or are there not limits on the number of Polar Bears that can be killed in Alaska? Polar Bears are simply not endangered.
    Don’t you realize that you people want to put polar bears on the list to stop drilling for fossil fuels! Under what conditions would you allow drilling for oil in Alaska? Do you know what conditions she is pushing for?
    Your extreme position is going to lose especially if heating oil is $4 to $5 a gallon in NE, NW and Mid-West. It would be best to push for realistic protection rather than flat prohibitions. But don’t tell me, you live in California or somewhere where it never sits below 0C for 20 or 30 days in a row.

  53. statePoet1775 says:

    I met a hungry polar bear,
    the meeting short and fatal.
    He killed me dead;
    I don’t deny.
    But to digest?
    Not able!

  54. bob gregg says:

    Jeff; Alaskan natives do hunt whales. Called belugas.

  55. Bruce Cobb says:

    I can’t believe how dumb we as Americans have become.
    Speak for yourself, Jim. Like it or not, we do need oil. Our reliance on imported oil, when we have huge reserves available here in the U.S. certainly strikes me as dumb.

  56. MattN says:

    This is either:

    A) An absolutely BRILLIANT political strategy.
    B) An absolutely STUPID political strategy.

    I can’t tell which right now.

  57. MattN says:

    “Now we are approaching $200 a barrel.”

    BTW, have you checked the price of oil in the last month?

  58. Jack Simmons says:

    Sarah “Plain and Tall” Palin?

  59. Pete says:

    Bruce Cobb (04:47:22) :

    ““What is justified is worldwide concern over the proven effects of climate change.” So, at least in the above article, the warming alarmism to Palin is justified, so it’s difficult to see her skepticism there. ”

    Notice that she didn’t say “Anthropogenic CO2 Induced Climate Change”. I don’t think anyone disagrees that the world should be concerned about any negative effects of non-Co2 anthropogenic or of natural changes to climate.

    My understanding is that she has reviewed the science and made the 98% most likely interpretation (nothing can be 100%) that Anthropogenic CO2 is not a concern beyond perhaps a 1 degree of warming (which would probably be beneficial BTW).

    Also, I believe that she was focusing on the Polar Bear listing issue, and didn’t want to pollute the focus by raising the ire of the A-CO2-GW church and it’s followers. Her statement appears to be very careful and logical. Think about it, she said “…the proven effects of climate change.” Anyone who wants to come back on her and try to say “gotcha” will probably have to explain what effects are actually proven and she”ll probably eat their lunch on that.

    And if they go too far, don’t forget that not unlike the Polar bear, a Barracuda is also carnivore.

  60. Johnnyb says:

    For what it’s worth, selling the State’s Jetliner was a silly political move. Alaska is a big state with few roads, that’s a long way from the lower 48. I can see a real need for a state like the to own a jet.

    As far as, the eskimo way of life goes, Jeff, understand that the Native Americans are supposed to be treated as a depent nation with in the United States, although our government’s track record of leaving them alone has been exceptionally poor. Understand that a nation is something separate than the government or State and something different than the country. Up until the 1860s only whites were considered American Citizens, then only blacks and whites were considered citizens up until the 1940s. It really was not until after WW2, that other ethnic groups were given citizenship status in the United States. Not even American Indians were considered citizens until the 20th century. Even today, when you drive through Oklahoma or Arizona, you will see signs on the highway, “Now entering X-tribe Nation.”

    I, for one, do not wish to molest other cultures and bring the entire world into one uniform standard of being. On the same token, I wish, the multi-culturalists would leave my culture alone and quite trying to change western civilization to be some sort of indistinct degenerate corporation of many different people. Perhaps, I am stuck in the 21st century with a 19th century mindset, but honestly believe that everyone would be much better off if cultural engineers did not exist at all.

  61. retired engineer says:

    I met Sarah Palin a couple of years back, on a trip to Fairbanks. I was most impressed. I don’t agree with her on everything, but she has done a reasonable job as governor. (with a 90% approval rating)

    While she doesn’t have a lot of experience, she did enter politics about 5 years before Mr. Obama. Her conservative credentials should endear her to that side of the Republican party.

    If she expresses any doubts about AGW theology, that’s a big improvement.

  62. edcon says:

    A video podcast of Sarah Palin speaking to Maria Bartiromo of CNBC about the North Slope and ANWR is available at: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2008/08/great_sarah_palin_interview.html

  63. Rich G says:

    Sarah seems to have a level head. She advocates using science and common sense to make decisions rather than scare tactics and imposing taxes and fees in the name of global warming. In the future, I think we’ll see that she does not run off at the mouth in an emotional tantrum when things don’t go her way. I’d rather have her making big decisions than those other two boobs.

  64. Jeff Alberts,,,

    Do you really believe the nonsense you post about the Inuit people?

    Go up North and spend some time with this people and see the traditional ways and the new ways blended together, they are proud and strong people living in some of the harshest conditions on the planet.

    Their sense of tradition and community is a matter of survival as is the basic need to hunt and fish the ocean, streams , ice and land, they harvest whales and seals and polar bears and caribou, they as tradition dictates waste nothing and know better about sustainability than any of us who pop into the food store, everyday if we want.

    So are you mad at the status as indigenous people they enjoy, the concessions given to them for self government or that they live a simplier life than you could and thrive in an environment that would surely claim most of us?

  65. David Segesta says:

    “McCain, step aside. Palin for President. McCain for VP.”
    That sounds like an improvement to me.

    BTW regarding her lack of experience; The so-called experienced ones created a $9 trillion national debt and $45 trillion in unfunded future liabilities and got us into a war there was no reason to fight, against a country that did nothing to us.
    I’m glad she has no experience in doing such things.

    However there is much to be learned about her before I would consider her a worthy candidate. And I would only support this ticket on the presumption that she might one day be president. I don’t support McCain.

  66. David Segesta says:

    I just watched the video edcon linked to at http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2008/08/great_sarah_palin_interview.html

    Wow a politician who is articulate, intelligent and makes reasoned and logical arguments. I must be dreaming.

  67. Henry says:

    Are you guys McCain supporters in drag?
    Hillary got over you a long time ago

  68. doazic says:

    And where exactly do you propose we get our succulent bear meat from?

  69. Eric Adler says:

    The arctic sea ice is their habitat. It will soon be gone in the summertime.
    The extent of arctic sea ice was the smallest since observations began, and this years is at least the second smallest and has a slight chance of becoming the smallest.
    http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/
    Numbers have increased temporarily because mass slaughter of their prey has been stopped. The experts at the department of the Interior believe they are endangered and made the recommendation that they be put on the list.
    Sarah Palin is not interested in the science of anything. For her ideological beliefs and religion are more important guides to public policy than science and law. She believes that a religious belief creationism should be taught alongside the theory of evolution.
    http://dwb.adn.com/news/politics/elections/story/8347904p-8243554c.html

  70. Carl Yee says:

    Eric Adler (13:07:52) wrote

    “The arctic sea ice is their habitat. It will soon be gone in the summertime.
    The extent of arctic sea ice was the smallest since observations began, and this years is at least the second smallest and has a slight chance of becoming the smallest.”

    Eric before you post here, you would do well to read the abundant info on the historical trends in arctic sea-ice variability. Your statements are either taken out of context or some of Jim Hansen’s NOAA exaggerations and distortions. And BTW, it ain’t going to happen this year considering the current state of arctic sea ice.

    Further, “Numbers have increased temporarily because mass slaughter of their prey has been stopped. ” Do you know how long the Marine Mammals Act has been around? No one has been slaughtering seals, sea lions and walruses for decades now. And doing better than a 400% increase in population and having 13 of the 15 DPSs of Polar bears being way up in the last 20+years is hardly a temporary aberration.

  71. Jeff Alberts says:

    So are you mad at the status as indigenous people they enjoy, the concessions given to them for self government or that they live a simplier life than you could and thrive in an environment that would surely claim most of us?

    All I’m saying is that for them to hunt with methods introduced by European settlers and modern society, and then call it tradition, is a sham.

    Why aren’t the enviro nuts attacking them for what they do, of the species they’re hunting are truly endangered. Whatever happened to save the wales?

  72. I’m with Ed Scott, “I am surprised that you would post a picture of a Navy submarine destroying Polar Bear habitat.”

    haha Good catch, Ed.

    Cheers,

    Tom
    morningcupofcoffee.com

  73. Pamela Gray says:

    I sadly think this will bite McCain in the butt. She has three strikes against her (whether or not she is at fault for them).

    One, she is under investigation for pulling an old boys trick on someone she didn’t like anymore. That makes her part of the old Republican bad boys club.

    Two, she is against full fledged family planning as a private right of US citizens (and I believe families worldwide), and will campaign to end those rights.

    Three, she is tangled up in religiosity and matter of law, thinking the two can and should mix, and will campaign to bring that mix about.

    Otherwise I think her common sense approach for Alaska on other issues fits right in with the way many people think. And I think she could fill out the remainder of a presidential term should something incapacitate McCain. Bidon wouldn’t need as much help but she could muddle through and she is bitchy enough to tell overbearing advisors to put it where the Sun don’t shine.

  74. McGrats says:

    Pamela Gray (14:19:41) wrote: ” One, she is under investigation for pulling an old boys trick on someone she didn’t like anymore. ”

    Let’s see now, because she’s under investigation for an ALLEGED incident, she’s part of the “Old Boy’s Club”?

    First of all, what is she allegedly being investigated for? This is the first of it.

    Pamela also wrot: Two, she is against full fledged family planning as a private right of US citizens (and I believe families worldwide), and will campaign to end those rights.”

    Granted she’s pro-life, but in the Untited States, we all have our own individual positions. But isn’t it quite a stretch to say “she is against full fledged family planning”? Is there any source for that info… or is it just something you heard.

    Finally Pamela wrote” “Three, she is tangled up in religiosity and matter of law, thinking the two can and should mix, and will campaign to bring that mix about.”

    Any source on that claim? Quite fraknly, all three seem to be talking points right from the Obama playbook!

    Jack Koenig, VERY Independent Voter

  75. Ed Scott says:

    Governor Palin makes herself “bearly” comfortable in her office in Anchorage. Lunch is on the coffee table.
    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/30/us/politics/30palin.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

  76. Ric Werme says:

    evanjones (20:44:03) :

    P.S., I am now helping moderate posts; jeez is setting up regular schedules for me, him, and a couple of others, helping to take the load off the Rev. So keep it civil and clean, folks (which you have been doing pretty well).

    Oh good, we needed an Eastern timezone moderator. And one in Europe.

    Let’s see, for now, the PDT folks read until 1 AM, then you take over as it will be 4 AM EDT and and 0900 UT?. Maybe we don’t need someone in Europe. :-)

  77. Pingback: Top Posts « WordPress.com

  78. Leon Brozyna says:

    The Big Oil mantra is so old and stale that it’s time to throw it out.

    In the last quarterly report on AGW’s favorite target of blame, Exxon/Mobil, they had pre-tax revenue of approx $44 billion. After taxes that number went down to $11.6 billion profit; the rest ($32.4 billion) went to taxes. That’s a 74% quarterly tax rate. Any one of you out there want to pay taxes at a 74% rate? I thought not.

    So, what happens if we take an intelligent course and start allowing for drilling wherever possible and start pumping serious amounts of oil out of the ground?

    • The cost of a barrel of crude will drop big time.
    • The profits of oil companies that drill & explore will also plunge, especially for those spending billions on off-shore drilling platforms.
    • Tax revenues will rise on the increase in oil production.
    • U.S. revenue from leasing would also increase. Sounds like win/win for most everyone except for –
    • Less U.S. dollars will be sent to such stalwart believers in freedom and representative government as Saudi Arabia.

    All this happened before, after the last oil scare, when oil prices had jumped after OPEC blocked oil exports to the West & the U.S. Drilling went into high gear and prices plunged. The only other major roadblock to lower prices at the pump then is the blocking actions of environmental groups to the construction of new refineries.

    Maybe Governor Palin can help knock some sense into Congressional idiocy.

  79. tazlmo says:

    With all her other less than redeeming qualaties and she hates polar bears, too! “)

  80. QuakerDave says:

    Like I needed yet another reason not to vote for her.

  81. statePoet1775 says:

    Since this thread is almost dead and my poetry seldom read:

    If you ever met a polar bear
    and he hadn’t had his lunch
    the last sound to be heard from you
    would be a hearty “crunch”.

    I know they’re cute and cuddly
    but this unwelcome fact:
    if you meet a hungry polar bear
    you’ll end up polar scat.

    I met a hungry polar bear,
    the meeting short and fatal.
    He killed me dead;
    I don’t deny.
    But to digest?
    Unable!

    And now we’re friends in heaven above;
    we wrestle and we tussle.
    I suggest, my friend,
    you wait till then
    to test a polar bear’s muscle.

  82. McGrats says:

    Jack Wrote: Finally Pamela (Gray) wrote” “Three, she is tangled up in religiosity and matter of law, thinking the two can and should mix, and will campaign to bring that mix about.”

    Any source on that claim? Quite fraknly, all three seem to be talking points right from the Obama playbook!”

    Apparently Pamela can’t back up her claims.

    Jack Koenig, VERY Independent Voter

  83. Gary Gulrud says:

    tazlmo & QuakerDave:

    http://www.hillaryis44.org/?p=723#comments

    D’oh!

    We have about 10% of the voters uncommitted in a close contest. Your 15 min. are over.

  84. T.Baker says:

    McCain didn’t pick her – he picked Joe Lieberman! It was his GOP puppet masters who told him NO WAY and made him go with another choice.

    Way to go Maverick! – give in to the pressures of the ultra right wingers that you supposedly fight against. Election First …. ermmm.. I mean, Country First!

  85. Ed Scott says:

    To old construction worker,

    The 700 billions dollars that flows to other governments – Canada, Mexico, Venezuela, Saudi – is in exchange for 700 billion dollars worth(maybe) of petroleum. It is not quite like T. Boone implies, that we are indiscriminately scattering money hither and yon. That’s what we do with foreign aid and support for the UN. T. Boone is a capitalist and sees a potentially profitable niche in the energy independence panic.

    On the topic of Polar Bears, has anyone considered the damage that would be done to the bear population by exploiting a 2,000 acre plot in 20,000,000 acre ANWR? I have difficulty believing, that protected or not, the Polar Bears would be facing extinction. The workers would probably have to be protected from the Polar Bears as indicated by the three Polar Bears attacking a Navy submarine in the picture posted by Anthony.

  86. bucko36 says:

    T.Baker (10:35:47) :
    “McCain didn’t pick her – he picked Joe Lieberman! It was his GOP puppet masters who told him NO WAY and made him go with another choice.”

    “Maybe”, but “whomever did”, we should all thank them, from the bottom of our heart’s. They were certainly “right”.

  87. Pamela Gray says:

    Re: backing up statements. Even Fox News reports her views on family planning ( she opposes abortion, which is part of family planning), her goal to include creationism alongside evolution instruction in public schools, and her possible involvement with firing a government employee for personal reasons. But please don’t take more from those statements about my views. I didn’t say I didn’t like her. But those are her weak points and they will be exploited by the democratic machine.

    The weakest issue is that by picking her, she makes the appearance of being picked for one purpose, to win disaffected Hillary voters. That does not make her VP material. And certainly does not make her presidential material. That does not mean she hasn’t got those qualities (but trust me, the other side will bring this point out: that she is a token ticket female). I don’t know her other than what news media and her own bio says (and any conservative should know her views on abortion, gay and lesbian rights, creationism, etc). But since she hasn’t gone through the rigors of campaigning at the National level, lets see what she’s got. Can you vote for someone who has served at the state level for only 18 months and has only two months to show presidential skills? Too bad she didn’t run for president. That can test the mettle of anyone.

  88. bucko36 says:

    I would have to say, that she has “far greater qualifications and experience” to be VP than BO does to be President. IMHO!!!

  89. Mike Bryant says:

    I would rather have someone with zero experience than a socialist.

  90. statePoet1775 says:

    “Can you vote for someone who has served at the state level for only 18 months and has only two months to show presidential skills?” Pam

    Yes, we have barely survived GWB so far. I would trust what so far seems to be a tough woman with a good heart.

  91. Jeff Coatney says:

    I’ve noticed several comments about Sara Palin’s belief in Intelligent Design (ID).
    As a business person and non-scientist I suspect that there may be some serious deficiencies in my understanding of the issue so it is with trepidation that I pose the following:

    Selection is a term that implies discrimination. When dice are rolled they don’t choose or “select” the number to be displayed when they come to rest. If nature is engaged in a volitional exercise wouldn’t it be guilty of Intelligent Design?

    If it is possible, I hope someone will respond with a non-technical answer.
    (Personal attacks will not be appreciated.)

    [intelligent design discussions, whether proponents consider them creationism or not, are not allowed. this is the last word. Further attempts to discuss will be censored~charles the moderator]

  92. Mr B says:

    The accomplishments of McCain create a no contest comparison for Obama the Junior Senator.

    When you look at Biden, a Washington insider, and compare him to Palin it is also a no contest. She’s authentic, beautiful, articulate, and principled; all of which the average American can relate. She’s exactly what we were waiting for; not Hillary.

    It impressed the heck out of me that Palin bit the hand that appointed her with her ethics whistleblowing; against established Republican’s in Alaska. Way to take on the good ol boys Governor.

    There is a reason she has such a high approval rating.

    The left is frightened of her and what she represents.

  93. Bill P says:

    Charles the Moderator:

    You may want to resist the impulse to censor all discussion on ID, in so far as it definitely relates to the candidate’s positions and qualifications for taking office. That office, of VP, will most certainly affect all concerned in education, the US at large, and those concerned with science on this site. I don’t suggest the issue of ID be debated here, but merely whether one who promulgates such policies for public education is good for this country. There is an open debate going on about Palin, and her suitability for office. I’m trying to keep an open mind about her in spite of a belief that I find (on a policy level) to be personally repugnant. I think this site might allow some light to be shed as it comes out.

  94. FatBigot says:

    “We are also participating in international efforts aimed at preserving polar bear populations worldwide.”

    Before heading off to my favourite colony I sent a letter to all my neighbours imploring them not to harm any polar bears they may see in England.

  95. statePoet1775 says:

    “Before heading off to my favourite colony” FB

    We already have a king unfortunately, George the [self-snip].

    chance encounters of a fatal kind

    A polar bear and a chubby man
    chanced to meet one day.
    The path they trod was narrow
    but neither would give way.
    To end this story quickly
    and without much more ado,
    we bid farewell to a polar bear
    and the late Mr. Magoo.

  96. evanjones says:

    WARNING: Entirely OT.

    George the [self-snip]/cite>

    Well, from a historian’s view, he’d be George W III.
    There was his father, George (H) W II [1989-1992]
    And then there was George W (Ashington) [1793-1800]

    I will be going away for a week, as of tomorrow. I’ll try to check in, but I can’t promise. However, I am confident y’all will be here when I get back.

  97. statePoet1775 says:

    evan,

    Have fun and take care. You are my favorite Yankee besides Pam (and that is because I’m firmly Hetro, despite being a sensitive sort)

  98. Ed Scott says:

    Palin Fought Against Listing Growing Polar Bear Population as Threatened

    “The State recognizes that a recent warming trend in portions of the Arctic is occurring, but the causes and effects are more diverse, complex and scientifically debated than is recognized in the USGS reports,” her office said in a statement. “As a result, the link between projected warming and the polar bear population in 50 years is highly speculative and questionable. Polar bears survived prior warming periods greater than the current one. The State notes that numerous respected scientists around the world question the forecasting methodologies used to project impacts to polar bears.”

    http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=34907

  99. Barbara Voloshen says:

    You have my support as John McCain’s VP choice and as you campaign please stick to the issues and do not do any mud slinging. If the other party wants to act like that let them it will be their loss. The American people want to know what you can do to clean up our government and make it work for the American people. Thank you.

  100. Ralop Raeb says:

    For those of you who believe in the words of Sarah Palin, I encourage you to re-educate yourself especially in terms of the true cause of global warming and the effects it is undoubtedly having on the habitat of the Polar Bears and the rest of the world. Judging by those comments in support of Mrs. Palin, it is obvious that many of you have little knowledge of truth and seem to instead rely on the simplicity of the spoken word rather than factual information. To put it simply, in words you can all understand, Sarah Palin is an idiot and seems so very clueless on the facts. Having said this, it doesn’t speak highly for those of you who continue to follow in her thoughts. Should you be questioning why I have not laid out the facts before you, the answer is simple. I am not here to educate you on the facts, but rather encourage you to seek them out yourself rather then simply accepting what I or anybody else has said. Seek the truth, the facts and you shall see for yourself.

  101. garron says:

    Ralop Raeb (18:21:21) : “Sarah Palin is an idiot and seems so very clueless on the facts. Having said this, it doesn’t speak highly for those of you who continue to follow in her thoughts.”

    You need a refresher course in trolling. Maybe not.
    You got through moderation but,
    you shouldn’t have.

  102. Ralop Raeb says:

    garron (19:42:02) : “You need a refresher course in trolling. Maybe not.
    You got through moderation but, you shouldn’t have.”

    Because I have a viewpoint that fails to meet your approval – one which fails to agree with your principals of an online forum discussion? One universal shared view is not a discussion. As it says just below the title of this forum “Commentary on puzzling things in life…” Your most recent comment, as well as many of those written in this forum, are quite puzzling. Just as puzzling are those in support of Palin for VP.

    However, I do kindly appreciate your response and do hope that you actually thought about what I said with some significance. Perhaps you may ask yourself: What really makes one qualified to be VP, or even President? It’s definitely NOT looks as some in this forum have mentioned as being a sort of plus to her supposed overall qualifications.

    Lastly, I offer my sincere appreciation to the moderator of this forum for allowing my comments to be posted here. I understand that they do not agree with many of the viewpoints here.

    Thank you,
    Ralop Raeb

    Reply – I am sorry I missed your original post, but I took the time to search back to review it. Most here are skeptics not because they agree with the politics of Sarah Palin, but because they understand or try to understand the failings of the science behind AGW and have made up their own minds. Think if it this way – It is not that skeptics believe the words of Sarah Palin but it is Sarah Palin who believes our words. Those of us who are politically inclined may feel that having a candidate in office who agrees with the AGW skeptical position (regardless of that candidate’s ability to understand the science) is desirable and no different that any other political hot issue like abortion, capital punishment, welfare, gun control, etc… That being said, I believe you owe many here an apology for your accusations and suggest you take the time to read I am a Skeptic for a better understanding of the importance of skepticism in both general science and the AGW debate before you post again. Thank you. – Dee Norris

  103. Ralop Raeb says:

    Dee Norris: “I believe you owe many here an apology for your accusations…”

    You are correct. And for that I would like to offer all of you here my sincerest apologies not only for my accusations, but for my lack of understanding as well. I shall refrain from posting here again and greatly apologize for disrupting the order of things.

    In closing, may the most qualified candidate win, and good luck to us all.

    Sincerely,
    Ralop Raeb

    Reply - Feel free to post all you wish, but please understand that everyone here is not a conservative or a liberal, we are for the most part, people have an interest in discussing and understanding the science of AGW and climate change as well as other ” puzzling things in life, nature, science, technology, and recent news” in a somewhat civilized environment. All are welcome who share that desire. – Dee Norris

Comments are closed.