Dr. Susan Crockford writes:
Regarding: Science self-corrects: bogus study claiming Roundup tolerant GMO corn causes cancer to be retracted
This ratty story reminds me of the polar bear incident I just posted about
this morning at PolarBearScience.
Canadian polar bear researchers Ian Stirling and Nick Lunn gave Suzanne
Goldenberg at The Guardian the results of their new Western Hudson Bay
population estimate, from a study that has not been published anywhere.
There is not even a government report available! This is the first mention
of this new estimate, anywhere, and it’s in The Guardian. Folks have been
waiting for it for years, and it’s reported in The Guardian.
Forget no raw data available – in this case there is no data available
period. How can science self-correct behaviour like this?
Goldenberg’s headline (from Nov. 27): “Polar bear numbers in Hudson Bay of
Canada on verge of collapse.”
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/nov/27/polar-bears-climate-change-canada-hudson-bay
See the post here:
http://polarbearscience.com/2013/11/28/polar-bear-researchers-still-withholding-hudson-bay-data/
All the best,
Susan
Susan J. Crockford, Ph.D. (Zoology/Evolutionary Biology/Archaeozoology)
Adjunct Professor (Anthropology/Graduate Studies)
University of Victoria, British Columbia, Canada
AND Pacific Identifications Inc. (www.pacificid.com)
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
My Grandpappy always said “you believe what newspapers say until they write about something you know about”.
AGW promotion depends on conclusions based on studies with 0 evidence. It is a clear demonstration of the sublime nature of the AGW true believers.
“The heat is hiding in the places where we can’t measure it, right along with the polar bears we can’t count.
It has warmed a lot in Eastern Canada over the last 17 years … if you lived here you would know that. Question is … how long will this last … this years ice looks like its forming faster!”
Now I’m confused. Is the heat hiding in the polar bears or in the ice?
Same page on the guardian website:-
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/nov/27/canada-living-with-polar-bears-climate-change
Seems there are far too many polar bears as well as not enough of them.
Our local paper’s Letter to the Editor this week includes:
With believers such as this pushing the pro-AGW barrow, ‘scientists’ who allow their data-free comments to be published in the MSM are reinforcing the thoughtless acolytes’ adherence to the climate change meme.
Climate alarmist: “Can’t see any polar bears. They must be extinct.”
(one of those “Famous Last Words”)
Polar Bear: “All humans I encounter tend to die very quickly. Humans must be on the brink of extinction. Hey folks, we must eat less seals to save humanity!”
David L. Hagen says:
November 28, 2013 at 4:12 pm
I recommend submitting this to be reproduced in the Journal of Irreproducible Results and for a potential Ignoble Award.
_____________________________
Unfortunately, a majority of modern science could be submitted to that journal.
Back when ClimateGate happened, the defense from the alarmists was to say “this is how science is done.” Sadly, they were right about that.
@artwest. Same here. For those of us that take nothing on belief, the internet provides better access to information than anyone could have ever predicted. This hyper-abundance of information is also why those that take everything on belief find the internet is a source of confusion. “Who can you believe?” they keep asking me. N-O O-N-E, people, no one. There is no reason to believe anyone.
As Mark Twain said:
“There is something fascinating about science. One gets such wholesale returns of conjecture out of such a trifling investment of fact.”
Goldberg version:
http://polarbearscience.com/2012/09/27/critical-evidence-on-polar-bears-in-w-hudson-bay-is-unpublished/
original version:
http://polarbearscience.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/stirling-and-derocher-2012-fig-5-sm.jpg
Spot the difference? Goldberg takes the care to remove the numbers from the graph. This is what scientists often call a “sociologists graph”.
Without the numbered scale there is a rhetorical suggestion that the bottom is zero. The drop looks far more dramatic like that.
Now this is not unintentional. You don’t prepare a graphic like that , publish it in newspaper and then go “opps! I appear to missed the numbers off”.
No , this is deliberate propaganda and Goldberg is a specialist of misrepresenting science.
They are growing gills, now?
The other thing to like about these graphs , they are plotting “mean estimated mess of lone (and thus likely) adult female polar bears…”
So they have not weighed them, have not got close enough to tell whether they ARE pregnant, so what is all this based on? Apparently eye-balling them from a safe distance with binoculars and guessing their body weight.
This must be great, end-of-year game in Churchill. GUESS THE POLAR BEAR’S WEIGHT AND WIN A SNOW EQUIPPED S.U.V. !!!
I bet if they sold loto tickets they could raise lots of money to help fight global warming.
(Mind you if I lived in Churchill I may not be too set against the prospect of a bit of warming).
Kudos to Dr Susan Crockford for highlighting yet more bad practice and propaganda.
The other question this all raises in the total absence of any REAL data, is what are the numbers of sightings used in these estimations?
In view of the last polar bear research fiasco, which apparently was all spun out of the spotting of one dead bear from an aeroplane flight and then spinning it into a projection of arctic wide population decline, we are going to look a bit carefully about any such claims from now on.
Anthony,
Since you mentioned bears, in passing. Did you know that there’s a new subspecies of bear evolving in California, in places like Yosemite and the W shore of Tahoe. It split off from Black Bears, in much the same way that dogs split off from wolves 15k years ago. Both subspecies are better adapted to living near humans than their thoroughly wild parent species. The new bear subspecies is called Ursus Garbagiensus. 🙂
There ought to be a means of prosecuting those who put out or publish press releases containing false information simply to support a personal agenda. We can refute their arguments with true facts as much as we like through these blogs, but in spite of The Guardians lowering standards of journalism, the fact remains that a lot of people still read the paper, and even objective readers will be convinced by the message that the article sends out,no matter how false its contents, and before long we will all be hearing statements from friends and innocent casual observers “but why are the polar bears declining if ther is no global warming” Thus, the false arguments of the AGW nutters are strengthened to the detriment of the well argued sceptic viewpoint.
I thought I would look and see how comments where trending on the article and surprise … They don’t have comments turned on for it. Imagine that.
Wow, most likely Polar Bear scientists saw a far more serious lack off grant money on the horizon as a far more of a threat to their cushy megastar climate scientist lifestyle. I wonder what’s in that green bubble we will all find out when it bursts.
Polar bear populations are easy to determine using this simple formula; count their noses and divide by one. It helps if you put a little dot of fluorescent orange paint on each nose you count to avoid double-counting.
The advantages of this system is that it is very accurate and it requires a large number of polar bear researchers, so there will be plenty of employment opportunities in this field. The only drawback I see is that careers are typically very short.
P.S. If you’re looking for that missing heat, check the polar bears’ pockets. Might as well frisk them for contraband heat as long as you’re painting their nose.
The continuation of these activists existence on the public payroll, says nothing good about our policy makers.
Kleptocracy comes to mind, not sober assessment of the facts and public interest.
CAGW is a creation of bureaucrats.
Betapug
“Bypass the American blockade with a short 1200Km pipeline to Churchill?”
Nice idea, but given the port is only functional for about 1/3-1/4 of the year, it’s not really practical. Grain only ships out of there for about 8 or so weeks, maybe a little more. Part of that is a function of harvest being in late summer (August) but part of it is the danger of ice along the route.
Given the biggest danger to polar bear cubs are adult male polar bears , so to save the cute little ones you have to deal with the 300 pound killing machine which is there only predator.
Anyone who thinks otherwise hates small polar bears , and probable puppy dogs, and are clearly not thinking of the children.
As for Goldenberg , she is another in the line of human reprographics machines of green PR who claim to be journalists , that long ago stop asking any questions,
KNR says:
November 29, 2013 at 10:30 am
Given the biggest danger to polar bear cubs are adult male polar bears ,
==========================================================
Actually the greatest danger to the entire polar bear population was a man with a rifle. Since we have stopped shooting polar bears, they are doing quite well.
Around our house when something disappears we have a standard answer “it’s probably in a safe place” and when they magically reappears weeks later the book was thinner and wallet is empty, sounds alot like this “study” of the Hudson Bay, (hey, but then maybe they were doing a study to discover The Hudson Bay COMPANY, that sadly has disappeared from said area.
In the 1960s I used to read the old Manchester Guardian. It was a fine newspaper. Last FridayI saw a copy of the Guardian that included a replica of the coverage of the assasination of President Kennedy – with excellent articles at the time by Alastair Cooke who was their main US correspondent plus the likes of Norman Shrapnel and Hella Pick.
Today’s Guardian “journalists” are dwarves by comparison. But the Guardian is dangerous – it has a miniscule number of daily purchasers for the paper, but it is the house gospel for the BBC which dominates UK news supply. The BBC and the Guardian are in lock-step in their false coverage of climate issues.
I pray for the day when the BBC and its $6 billion licence tax is cut down to size – and the day when the Guardian finally folds under its heavy financial losses.
“Actually the greatest danger to the entire polar bear population was a man with a rifle. Since we have stopped shooting polar bears, they are doing quite well.”
Polar bears are still hunted in the Arctic!