Oh, I found some comedy gold posted on the NASA website What on Earth is That?
It features a talk by NASA GISS warmist Gavin Schmidt, who apparently took a trip to understand that all important metric of the Arctic climate; polar bears. A video of his talk follows. Apparently, Martha Stewart came along for the ride and made a festive thermometer cozy for Gavin.
Gosh, how did he tear himself away from his taxpayer funded blogging duties at Real Climate while he’s still got hundreds of climate reporting stations in Australia that haven’t been updated since 1992 in the GISTEMP database? Good thing he has his priorities straight.
Somebody at NASA writes on that blog:
You just can’t go wrong with a title to a talk like that. The clip below is from an hour-long talk that Gavin Schmidt gave to colleagues at GISS about his visit to Churchill, a tiny town in Canada that’s known as the polar bear capitol of the world. Yes, Martha Stewart came along as well. The talk doesn’t start until about 1:48, and Schmidt’s interview with Stewart starts at 48:18
And here’s the video:
This note is on the video, presumably from Gavin. This video says it has had 35 views so far, so I expect WUWT readers will make up the bulk of the viewership.
Title: Polar bears, Martha Stewart and me
Abstract:
Polar bears are frequently poster children for climate change issues, but until recently I had very little idea of the details of threat posed by continuing Arctic change on their life-cycle. In this presentation I’ll share what I learned on a recent trip along with some other, perhaps more recognisable, New Yorkers, to Churchill, Manitoba
“Polar Bear Capital of the World”!
And, here’s Gavin’s slide show in PDF form:
http://www.giss.nasa.gov/meetings/lunch/2011a/20110209-Gavin_Schmidt.pdf
UPDATE: For those of you that would like some peer reviewed science to help de-gavinify your friends that fear “global warming” will bring on the demise of the polar bear, here’s this from commenter “Jimbo” who writes:
It seems to me that Polar Bears are more robust than previously thought.
and…
This is the perfect thread to show how vulnerable Polar Bears are.
Estimating the Energetic Contribution of Polar Bear (Ursus maritimus) Summer Diets to the Total Energy Budget
The analysis indicated that it is possible for polar bears to maintain their body mass while on shore by feeding on arctic charr and seal blubber. Polar bears of body masses up to 280 kg could gain sufficient energy from blueberries to match the daily energy loss.
http://www.asmjournals.org/doi/abs/10.1644/08-MAMM-A-103R2.1
We describe an observation of a polar bear cub on its mother’s back while the mother was swimming among ice floes in Svalbard, Norwegian Arctic.
http://www.springerlink.com/content/8051204vu73l320w/
Also:
and…
Polar Bears Thrive While Arctic Warms Up!
A survey of the animals’ numbers in Canada’s eastern Arctic has revealed that they are thriving, not declining, because of mankind’s interference in the environment.
In the Davis Strait area, a 140,000-square kilometre region, the polar bear population has grown from 850 in the mid-1980s to 2,100 today.
Polar bears are distributed throughout the Arctic in 19 populations, comprising an estimated total of 20 000–25 000 bears (Marine Mammal Commission, 2006).
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
What is the purpose of this other than to pointlessly smear an intelligent scientist?
The following comes from the same NASA web-site and has me wondering why a hole in the ozone was a bad thing awhile back.
Where does ozone come from?
Sunlight reacts with certain pollutants – such as nitrogen dioxide, formaldehyde, and other volatile pollutants – in a long chain of reactions to produce ozone. Combustion engines, power plants, gasoline vapors and chemical solvents are key sources of the precursor gases.
I follwed the What on Earth is that? link and found myself looking at the “What is that sound?” question so I listened closely. Without doubt the racket is the sound of Schmidt’s and Hansen’s reputations and credibility hitting rock bottom.
Splutter, gasp …who let him in?
Did I hear him really say .. “people can do really useful things like switch to energy efficient appliances and light bulbs.” …..
Did he really say that …. omg ……. these people have no idea.
Our Gav he’s so cuddly see but I don’t get to see him much these days so the video was a pleasant surprise. He’s so handsome.
Anyways it prompted me to go and visit him and his mates at UnReal Climate where fiction is the main course of the day.
Well I never thought our Gav could be so cruel:-
“In my opinion, this kind of ‘scientific’ sleight-of-hand is far more egregious than Soon’s ability to get funding from coal, oil, and fossil-fueled foundations.”
Gav I says why have you written this have you forgot about “Using Mann’s Trick to Hide the decline.” He looked a bit sheepish and agreed I could edit his intemperate rantings:
“In my opinion, this kind of ‘scientific’ sleight-of-hand is far more egregious than The Fiddlesticks Team’s ability to get funding from environmental lobbying groups, political interests and governments.”
See he’s not a bad boy after all?
Jimbo says:
July 8, 2011 at 5:44 pm
“I have dial up. Don’t ask.”
__________________________________
Hutterite hermit hillbilly hayseed…
(not phrased in the form of a question)
/
So, essentially, “The total polar bear population for the world is probably closer to 20,000 animals than to the lower figures often suggested.”
So it seems the polar bear population has been quite stable for the last 39 years, what with the essential quote being from 1972 from Larsen, T. “Air and ship census of polar bears in Svalbard” in the Journal of Wildlife management 562-570.
In 1967 the worldwide harvest was about 1200, which then was believed to be 5-10% of the total population, so between 12000 and 24000, according to Flyger, V. 1967. “Polar Bear – A Matter for International Concern”.
Maybe they should start to study a larger population rather ‘an 5% of 50% of 50% of the estimated population size that, appear not to have changed for quite some time. But then again models is way more fun in the sun. :p
More worrying than Katla, Etna is closing in on a huge flank eruption every day. Eruptions@bigthink
When Katla does eventually take it past a hiccup it will probably be VEI-4 4+ 5
Katla | Eruptive History
http://www.volcano.si.edu/world/volcano.cfm?vnum=1702-03=&volpage=erupt
Brian said on July 9, 2011 at 3:43 am:
The headliner is Gavin Schmidt, Martha Stewart has a supporting role. Who could you possibly be referring to?
Brian said on July 9, 2011 at 3:43 am:
Martha Stewart, with the help of her assistants, does basic research including field work, documents her methods including equipment used, provides testable statements (“This will be a hit at your party.”), and insists on reproducible results with the strong promoting that others replicate her work using the documentation she’s provided.
Gee, I didn’t think the post was being all that hard on Martha. Oh well, YMMV.
Brian said on July 9, 2011 at 3:43 am:
What is the purpose of this other than to pointlessly smear an intelligent scientist?
Sooo…it seems that the whole reason Schmidt wrote his article on Dr. Soon on the 7th of July was not to pointlessly smear him? LOL…looks like little Gav was jealous of Dr. Soon’s work from where I sit. Dr. Soon was able to get a paper out on polar bears first. So…how about it Gav? Are you going to amaze us with your polar bear models or what? I can’t wait.
Quote:
“Green Sand says:
July 8, 2011 at 6:03 pm
…Whilst we must accept a degree of responsibility, we also claim a degree of mitigation due to the failure of your indigenous North American carnivores.” End Quote
What can we say when even the notoriously indiscriminate Polar Bear didn’t think he looked or smelled tasty. Perhaps when the big G does another junket, maybe he’ll do a penguin or seal watching trip and the Great White Sharks can have a go.
Public servant travel itineraries, receipts and vouchers are supposed to be made available for public scrutiny when requested. I wonder if the tour guide driving that amazing vehicle remembers Gavin’s and Martha’s activities… Like how much effort really went to trying to spot bears and any natives they might have interviewed? And whether any advocacy group representatives might’ve been helpful hosts and how G & M were helped?
Walter said:
The glacier in the photo is in BC, the road is in Alberta. Sorry for the confusion.
Hey all you haters-
Anyone watching the Arctic ice this summer? I know Bastardized made some predictions you all found very plausible. Did they turn out well last summer? Hmmm? How’s it looking now?
Nitpick Larry’s annoying comment of the day. Yes, Polar Bears are robust. Yes, we have Poley fossils that have been dated to the Eemian Interglacial, which was somewhat toastier than the present one. However the Eemian was closer to the branching point, where the Griz and Poley diverged from a common ancestor.
Isn’t it possible that the Eemian Poleys were somewhat less specialized than the modern ones, and that the Griz and Poley niches overlapped more than they do in modern times? If Dr Who were to transport some modern Poleys back in time to Churchill, Manitoba during the Eemian, would they survive as readily as the ‘old school’ Poleys?
dp, did you happen to notice the time frame that marks the beginning of the glacier recession?
Thanes, did you happen to notice the sidebar on the home page for this site? All that info is clearly available right there. You have also unwittingly revealed a complete lack of understanding of this subject. Keep commenting ’cause you’re really helping your cause. Regarding the term “haters”; pot, meet kettle, ……
“Churchill, Manitoba “Polar Bear Capital of the World”!”
It is the Polar Bear Capital of the AGW World because it is the southernmost population in the world. Not at all typical. On the margin of polar bear range. Thus a perfect poster population for the AGW Cherry Picking Team, which is why so much media coverage is about these bears.
dp says:
July 9, 2011 at 11:11 am
Walter said:
“The glacier in the photo is in BC, the road is in Alberta.”
——-
Nice bike, and fine place to being riding it on a nice day.
That glacier is the Stuttfield Glacier, and it is in Alberta too, in Jasper National Park. It is a tongue of the Columbia Icefields which sits on the Continental Divide in both Alberta and British Columbia.
——-
David Ball says:
July 9, 2011 at 6:42 pm
“dp, did you happen to notice the time frame that marks the beginning of the glacier recession?”
The best record of that is further south (up this valley) around the current Icefields Centre where there is photographs back to about 1900 or possibly earlier (Vaux family). The Athabasca Glacier, another tongue of the Columbia Icefields, then extended to and beyond where the Icefields Parkway is now. Early travelers used a trail that went above/east of the valley to go around it. Famous place so ample photo documentation as well as plenty of serious research there since. Should be tons via google. Just tried and found this one for starters, which has a really outstanding image of the whole current Icefield plus ca 1840 boundaries:
http://www.nrcan.gc.ca/com/elements/issues/50/columbia-eng.php
Shrinking since 1840. Hmmm.
David Ball,
I do see the sidebar. I also see that it includes the site RealClimate. I presume, based on the comments made by yourself and others, that although that site is listed as a resource for you and your ilk of haters, you either have never read it or ever understood it. I read, with great enjoyment, Mr Watt’s ‘understanding’ of what Gavin was talking about when he was writing recently about Dr. Soon’s professional and intellectual bankruptcy. Mr Watt feels Gavin made a malicious personal and unjustified attack. It is obvious that Dr Soon is an unpublishable joke who has lost all credibility among scientists, and that Mr Watt is either incapable or unwilling to admit that. But you wouldn’t understand that, even if you read it all day long. Because, even if someone managed to cram some fact into your beleaguered mind based on science, you would still never understand what science was. And you would still never, never ever, be upset at all of those who lie to you.
But anyway, David. How about that ice?
Thanes,
Planet earth is calling you to come home for dinner before twilight and avoid the werewolves on the way home. The thread isn’t about your belief that Soon is a vampire.
Go on then, Thanes, fill me in on the science you are going on about. Tell us about the sea ice, being sure to include ALL known data, all the way back. Sea ice includes the southern hemisphere FYI. We are speaking globally, right? Also, elaborate on how Soon was wrong. Please do not tell me that it is his funding source that makes him wrong, for all that will tell me is your political affiliation. This thread is about the polar bears. Keep on topic, if you can. How come you can post here, but I get deleted every time I try to post something on the now void of traffic RealClimate? I prefer science free of fascism/censorship, thanks. It is why you are allowed to post vitriol here, void of any actual facts. Freedom of speech and all. Or don’t you believe in that?
Thanks Al Gored. I’m certain you knew that I knew the answer when I asked the question. One of the glaciers on the parkway is named after my son ( they name the glacier after any child who happens to be on the tundra bus on the way up the glacier, but I am not going to tell my son until he is older). It is a beautiful place to visit in summer. Desolate and forbidding in winter.