More Polar Non-Science

Guest Essay by Kip Hansen

polar_bear

 

Good Grief!  Enough already with the Polar Bears!

The folks at the American Committee for the Weizmann Institute of Science**,  whose motto, proudly displayed on their website, is “Science for the Benefit of Humanity”, have managed to embarrass themselves with a little ad that appeared in my news feed from the New York Times Science section:

science_times_banner

Down at the bottom, after all the highlights of today’s news, was an advertisement – you know, those ads that Google or someone throws into your emails and web pages – outside of the influence of the email sender  or the website itself.

Here’s the ad as it appeared (I admit, that Weizmann gets a bit of free advertising here…):

weizmann_ad

 

I hope the irony is not wasted on any reading here….that you all know that if this image was not a fake, the photographer would have to be arrested for endangering a child.

Luckily, the image was created by the very talented Per Breiehagen and is sold by Getty Images.

polar_bear_gertty_images_pa

It is also available as a holiday card from Psaris Productions.

The questions that sprung to my mind are these:

How could a group dedicated to science use an image that is not only–not merely–a fake, but is also so ridiculously hypocritical coming from an “institute of science”?

followed by:

How could they think that anyone who might be  interested in supporting science by donating would be taken in by such an image? 

This is what happens when the public outreach from scientific organizations is put into the hands of modern college graduates who have been indoctrinated but not educated.

The true essence of the image [had it been real] would be:

eaten_by_crockford

I recommend Susan Crockford’s book, Eaten, a novel that will set you straight about cuddly polar bears and what they do with little girls.

**CORRECTION:  The first line has been corrected to make it clear that the ad was placed on behalf of the American Committee for the Weizmann Institute of Science, not the Weizmann Institute itself, which is in Israel, whose website states that “The Weizmann Institute is assisted by a network of international associations of friends [of which the American Committee is one]  that secure its future by providing essential financial resources for continuous development and inform their constituencies about the vision and accomplishments of the Weizmann Institute and its scientists.” 1300 hrs Eastern Time, 14 Dec 2016  (h/t Pat Frank)

# # # #

 

Author’s Comment Policy:  Sorry, but I just couldn’t take yet another “cute polar bears” money-pitch from an alleged scientific organization.  I have no prior experience with the Weizmann Institute before seeing this ad.  I can only hope that the ad was produced without their editorial input.

I have no financial interest in Susan Crockford’s book, but I do own a copy and have read it.  I do really recommend it.  It is available from major booksellers online in eBook editions for as little as three bucks.  It is not suitable for children – it contains graphic natural violence.

I do not know much about polar bears but  I do have strong opinions about misusing science and science images for propaganda purposes – including fundraising.

I’d prefer that Climate Warriors fight the Climate Wars in the comments of other posts – there are plenty here at WUWT where it is more appropriate.   I would like to read your examples of non-science being used to raise funds for organizations that ought to know better.

# # # # #

 

 

 

 

0 0 vote
Article Rating
366 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
kim
December 14, 2016 7:21 am

The polar bears very much regret Clinton’s loss. They were looking forward to having some of those half a billion solar panels around to light up the long dark night.
==============

Bryan A
Reply to  kim
December 14, 2016 7:51 am

Just waiting for Oprah to chime in with something like
“Their Giant thinks he won, well Now it is time for our side to take the streets!”

Pop Piasa
Reply to  Bryan A
December 14, 2016 4:58 pm

…”And loot the businesses. Don’t forget to burn the Quick-Trip. Polar Bear lives matter! Just to show that I’m serious, I’m buying this studio audience to take a trip to the melting arctic where they will be able to hug the remaining few miserable remnants of a once burgeoning population of cuddly oafs who enjoy human contact.”

Pop Piasa
Reply to  Bryan A
December 14, 2016 6:12 pm

Should we not have /sarc’d ourselves?

Reply to  kim
December 14, 2016 2:05 pm

Kim, I believe their regret is much greater for all the adventurous climate researchers and eco tourists who won’t be coming up their way anymore. With the AGW industry coming to a halt there goes snack time.

Griff
December 14, 2016 7:23 am

Well, according to posts from last year on Susan Crockford’s website, breeding bears from the Svalbard population need ice to be present around Svalbard by December so they can reach their denning areas…
There isn’t any ice extending to Svalbard so far this year, and it hasn’t quite reached Novaya Zemlya either, another place the Barents sea population dens…
also I learn from Susan about when the Hudson Bay population needs to get out on the ice… but so far less that 20% of Hudson Bay is ice covered.
I’d say the bears are in trouble this year…
BTW: does Susan actually have any qualifications to speak about bear populations?
She does not research or publish (scientifically) about bears, nor is she involved in the biology of arctic populations, so far as I know.
What she says is surely just opinion? any biologist who has read the papers surely has a view just as valid??

ClimateOtter
Reply to  Griff
December 14, 2016 7:28 am

You don’t make much effort to find out anything, do you griff?
I am a zoologist with more than 35 years experience, including published work on the Holocene history of Arctic animals. I am currently an adjunct professor at the University of Victoria, British Columbia and work full time for a private consulting company I co-own with two colleagues, Pacific Identifications Inc.
Crockford 08_21_2011_0056b
Like Ian Stirling, grand-daddy of all polar bear biologists, I earned my undergraduate degree in zoology at the University of British Columbia. Polar bear evolution is one of my professional interests, which I discuss in my 2006 book, Rhythms of Life: Thyroid Hormone and the Origin of Species (based on my Ph.D. dissertation earned in 2004 at the University of Victoria, B.C. Canada), see http://www.rhythmsoflife.ca.
You’ll find a list of my publications (with a brief introduction) further down, after the list of my most popular posts (with links). At the bottom of this page is a brief bio for posting elsewhere.
Zoogeography, paleoecology, archaeozoology and ostemetry papers
**Crockford, S. J. 2012. Annotated map of ancient polar bear remains of the world. Electronic resource, available at http://polarbearscience/references ISBN 978-0-9917966-0-1. https://polarbearscience.com/2012/11/26/ancient-polar-bear-remains-of-the-world/
*Crockford, S.J. 2012. Archaeozoology of Adak Island: 6000 years of subsistence history in the central Aleutians. Pg. 109-145 in D. West, V. Hatfield, E. Wilmerding, L. Gualtieri and C. Lefevre (eds), The People Before: The Geology, Paleoecology and Archaeology of Adak Island, Alaska. British Archaeological Reports International Series, Oxford, pg 109-145. ISBN 978-4073-0905-7
*Nishida, S., West, D., Crockford, S. and Koike, H. 2012. Ancient DNA analysis for the sea otter (Enhydra lutris) from archaeological sites on Adak, Aleutian Islands. Pg. 147-165 in D. West, V. Hatfield, E. Wilmerding, C. Lefèvre, L. Gualtieri (eds.), The People Before: The Geology, Paleoecology and Archaeology of Adak Island, Alaska. Oxford, British Archaeological Reports, International Series 2322, ISBN 978-4073-0905-7.
*Wilson, B.J., Crockford, S.J., Johnson, J.W., Malhi, R.S. and B.M. Kemp. 2011. Genetic and archaeological evidence for a former breeding population of Aleutian Cackling Goose (Branta hutchinsii leucopareia) on Adak Island, central Aleutians, Alaska. Canadian Journal of Zoology 89: 732-743. http://www.nrcresearchpress.com/journal/cjz
**Crockford, S.J. and G. Frederick 2011. Neoglacial sea ice and life history flexibility in ringed and fur seals. pg.65-91 in T. Braje and R. Torrey, eds. Human Impacts on Seals, Sea Lions, and Sea Otters: Integrating Archaeology and Ecology in the Northeast Pacific. U. California Press, LA.
*Baichtal, J.F. and Crockford, S.J. 2011. Possibility of kelp during the LGM in SE Alaska and implications for marine mammals. Poster 5-12, 19th Conference on the Biology of Marine Mammals, Tampa, FL. Nov. 28-Dec.2.
**Crockford, S.J. 2008. Be careful what you ask for: archaeozoological evidence of mid-Holocene climate change in the Bering Sea and implications for the origins of Arctic Thule. Pp. 113-131 in G. Clark, F. Leach and S. O’Connor (eds.), Islands of Inquiry: Colonisation, Seafaring and the Archaeology of Maritime Landscapes. Terra Australis 29 ANU E Press, Canberra. http://epress.anu.edu.au/ta29_citation.html
**Crockford, S. and Frederick, G. 2007. Sea ice expansion in the Bering Sea during the Neoglacial: evidence from archaeozoology. The Holocene 17(6):699-706.
*Crockford, S.J., Frederick, G. & Wigen, R. 2002. The Cape Flattery fur seal: An extinct species of Callorhinus in the eastern north Pacific? Canadian Journal of Archaeology 26(3):152-174. http://www.canadianarchaeology.com/publications.lasso
Martinsson-Wallin, H. & Crockford, S.J. 2001. Early human settlement of Rapa Nui (Easter Island). Asian Perspectives 40(2):244-278. (Includes an analysis of fish remains & a comprehensive list of modern Rapa Nui fishes). http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/asi/
Crockford, S.J. 1997. Archaeological evidence of large northern bluefin tuna, Thunnus thynnus, in coastal waters of British Columbia and northern Washington. Fishery Bulletin 95:11-24. http://fishbull.noaa.gov/
Domestication, speciation and evolution papers
Crockford, S.J. and Kusmin, Y.V. 2012. Comments on Germonpré et al., Journal of Archaeological Science 36, 2009 “Fossil dogs and wolves from Palaeolithic sites in Belgium, the Ukraine and Russia: osteometry, ancient DNA and stable isotopes”, and Germonpré, Lázkičková-Galetová, and Sablin, Journal of Archaeological Science 39, 2012 “Palaeolithic dog skulls at the Gravettian Předmostí site, the Czech Republic.” Journal of Archaeological Science 39:2797-2801. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305440312001537
**Crockford, S.J. 2012. Directionality in polar bear hybridization. Comment (May 1) to Hailer et al. 2012. “Nuclear genomic sequences reveal that polar bears are an old and distinct bear lineage.” Science 336:344-347. Follow link and click on “# comments” under the title http://comments.sciencemag.org/content/10.1126/science.1216424
**Crockford, S.J. 2012. Directionality in polar bear hybridization. Comment, with references (May 1) to Edwards et al. 2011. “Ancient hybridization and an Irish origin for the modern polar bear matriline.” Current Biology 21:1251-1258. to view comments, go through the host website, http://www.Cell.com and find the paper at the Current Biology website. http://www.cell.com/current-biology/abstract/S0960-9822%2811%2900645-2#Comments
Ovodov, N.D., Crockford, S.J., Kuzmin, Y.V., Higham, T.F.G., Hodgins, G.W.L. and van der Plicht, J.. 2011. A 33,000 year old incipient dog from the Altai Mountains of Siberia: Evidence of the earliest domestication disrupted by the Last Glacial Maximum. PLoS One 10.1371/journal.pone.0022821. http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0022821
Crockford, S.J. 2009. Evolutionary roots of iodine and thyroid hormones in cell-cell signaling. Integrative and Comparative Biology 49:155-166.
**Crockford, S.J. 2006. Rhythms of Life: Thyroid Hormone and the Origin of Species. Trafford, Victoria [for a general audience, polar bear evolution discussed];
**Crockford, S.J. 2004. Animal Domestication and Vertebrate Speciation: A Paradigm for the Origin of Species. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Victoria (Canada), Interdisciplinary Studies. [filed at the National Library under Zoology; polar bear evolution discussed] Pdf available, just ask.
**Crockford, S.J. 2003. Thyroid rhythm phenotypes and hominid evolution: a new paradigm implicates pulsatile hormone secretion in speciation and adaptation changes. International Journal of Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology, Part A Vol. 35 (#1, May issue):105-129. http://www.elsevier.com/ [an invited submission; polar bear evolution discussed]
**Crockford, S.J. 2002. Thyroid hormone in Neandertal evolution: A natural or pathological role? Geographical Review 92(1):73-88. http://www.jstor.org/journals/00167428.html [an invited commentary]
**Crockford, S.J. 2002. Animal domestication and heterochronic speciation: the role of thyroid hormone. pg. 122-153. In: N. Minugh-Purvis & K. McNamara (eds.) Human Evolution Through Developmental Change. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore. http://www.press.jhu.edu/press/books/index.htm [polar bear evolution discussed].
Crockford, S.J. 2000. Dog evolution: a role for thyroid hormone in domestication changes. pg. 11-20. In: S. Crockford (ed.), Dogs Through Time: An Archaeological Perspective. Archaeopress S889, Oxford. http://www.archaeopress.com/defaultBar.asp
Crockford, S. J. 2000. A commentary on dog evolution: regional variation, breed development and hybridization with wolves. pg. 295-312. In: S. Crockford (ed.), Dogs Through Time: An Archaeological Perspective. Archaeopress S889, Oxford. http://www.archaeopress.com/defaultBar.asp
Northwest Coast dog studies
Crockford, S.J., Moss, M.L., and Baichtal, J.F. 2012. Pre-contact dogs from the Prince of Wales archipelago, Alaska. Alaska Journal of Anthropology 9(1):49-64.
Crockford, S.J., 2005. Breeds of native dogs in North America before the arrival of European dogs. Proceedings of the World Small Animal Veterinary Congress, Mexico City. [invited lecture] available online at: http://www.vin.com/proceedings/Proceedings.plx?CID=WSAVA2005&PID=11071&O=Generic
Koop, B.F., Burbidge, M., Byun, A., Rink, U, & Crockford, S.J. 2000. Ancient DNA evidence of a separate origin for North American indigenous dogs. pg. 271-285. In: S. Crockford (ed.), Dogs Through Time: An Archaeological Perspective. British Archaeological Reports (B.A.R.), Archaeopress S889, Oxford. http://www.archaeopress.com/defaultBar.asp (collaborative research with Univ. of Victoria (Ben Koop, Biology) & National Science & Engineering Research Council, Canada (NSERC) [first published analysis of ancient dog DNA]
Crockford, S.J. 1997. Osteometry of Makah and Coast Salish Dogs. Archaeology Press, Publication 22, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C. http://www.sfu.ca/archaeology/dept/arcpress/index.htm
[A comprehensive analysis of cranial & postcranial remains of adult dogs from 20 coastal archaeological sites]
Crockford, S.J. & Pye, C.J. 1997. Forensic reconstruction of prehistoric dogs from the Northwest Coast. Canadian Journal of Archaeology 21(2):149-153 [the story of the wool dog/village dog sketches done by RCMP forensic artist CJ Pye] http://www.canadianarchaeology.com/publications.lasso
Seal and sea lion diet studies
Tollit, D.J., Schulze, A., Trites, A.W., Olesiuk, P., Crockford, S.J., Gelatt, T., Ream, R. & Miller, K. 2009. Development and application of DNA techniques for validating and improving pinniped diet estimates based on conventional scat analysis. Ecological Applications 19(4):889-905. [This study compares my bone ID of prey species to DNA analysis] http://www.esajournals.org/doi/abs/10.1890/07-1701.1
Olesiuk, P.F., Bigg, M.A., Ellis, G.M., Crockford, S.J. & Wigen, R.J. 1990. An assessment of the feeding habits of harbour seals (Phoca vitulina) in the Strait of Georgia, British Columbia, based on scat analysis. Canadian Technical Reports on Fisheries & Aquatic Science. 1730.
http://pubs.nrc-cnrc.gc.ca/cgi-bin/rp/rp2_tocs_e?cjfas_cjfasS1-98_55

Ed Moran
Reply to  ClimateOtter
December 14, 2016 7:56 am

Oh! Oh dear! How embarrassing!.
Griff, to use modern English idiom… do one!!! Your presence is no longer required.
Please post an apology to the learned lady and, please, make it your last post.

Latitude
Reply to  ClimateOtter
December 14, 2016 8:01 am

roaring laughing!!…..Thanks Susan!

Caligula Jones
Reply to  ClimateOtter
December 14, 2016 8:13 am

I’m afraid such difficult research is above and beyond Griff’s admittedly awesome cutting and pasting skills.
As I’ve said, the bench strength of the green fanatics is getting a bit thin.

Freedom Monger
Reply to  ClimateOtter
December 14, 2016 8:38 am

I smell Roast Griff.
-or-
“Griff”, it’s what’s for dinner.

Reply to  ClimateOtter
December 14, 2016 8:49 am

C’mon Griff….we are all waiting on the edge of our seats for your response, and (hopefully, though probably not) your apology.

Greg
Reply to  ClimateOtter
December 14, 2016 8:51 am

SLAP DOWN !
Maybe you should have tired to answer your own question before posting it and making a total prat of yourself, Griff. Just saying.

ClimateOtter
Reply to  ClimateOtter
December 14, 2016 8:52 am

Errr, I should have put all of that in quotes. I’m not Susan 😛

Gregory J Suhr
Reply to  ClimateOtter
December 14, 2016 8:56 am

Ironically, you burned Griff so badly that the resulting heat melted all the polar ice and wiped out the polar bears. (I’m being sarcastic….don’t go after me like you did Griff…please.)

oeman50
Reply to  ClimateOtter
December 14, 2016 9:26 am

Don’t feed the troll, I’m just sayin’.

Reply to  ClimateOtter
December 14, 2016 9:31 am

I guess that answers that question. On to the next one: Is Griff actually competent to speak on anything more difficult than how to crack an egg? I have not seen any evidence of it.

catweazle666
Reply to  ClimateOtter
December 14, 2016 9:52 am

“You don’t make much effort to find out anything, do you griff?”
He doesn’t make any effort whatsoever to find out anything at all.
He simply makes stuff up off the top of his head to attack any post that doesn’t adhere to the “Green” agenda in the hope that someone will take him seriously because that’s what he’s paid to do.
Of course, with the exception of one or two of the most egregious sub-bridge-dwelling types, no-one does.

Caligula Jones
Reply to  ClimateOtter
December 14, 2016 9:59 am

Could be the beginning of a new euphemism: Griffed the bed. Griffed himself. Griffed his pants….

Cube
Reply to  ClimateOtter
December 14, 2016 10:24 am

Nice!

It doesn't add up...
Reply to  ClimateOtter
December 14, 2016 12:57 pm

I think Griff is not just pwned, but EATEN.

Gunga Din
Reply to  ClimateOtter
December 14, 2016 1:06 pm

oeman50 December 14, 2016 at 9:26 am
Don’t feed the troll, I’m just sayin’.

The Troll wasn’t fed. It got a smack down by a polar bear claw.
(Which made him, as Caligula Jones put it, “Griff himself”.)

Kaiser Derden
Reply to  ClimateOtter
December 14, 2016 1:16 pm

mic drop !!!

Reply to  ClimateOtter
December 14, 2016 8:31 pm

ClimateOtter, oh that was beautiful! +zillion. 🙂

Reply to  ClimateOtter
December 15, 2016 2:31 am

Did Climate Otter just bring a Nuke to a knife fight? 😀 lol

Griff
Reply to  ClimateOtter
December 15, 2016 4:03 am

Yes, I see a lot of research on arctic populations I was not previously aware of.
I do not see current studies or a history of studies on polar bear populations, field studies etc like the AGU tracking studies.
While an informed zoologist, I submit you are not an active researcher in polar bear populations.
This matters: I am an amateur offering opinions on a blog/website…
you have established yourself as a prominent advocate of a position on climate change based on the prospects of the flagship arctic species.
I think your climate position leads you into error: I know you are the big cheese in this world, but I think even experts must be challenged.
I submit that there is a situation on Svalbard and in Hudson bay up till the last week which by your own account impacts polar bear populations potentially and this is part of a continuing trend which will impact them in the future.
and you are dissembling on this.

catweazle666
Reply to  Griff
December 15, 2016 11:54 am

“This matters: I am an amateur offering opinions on a blog/website…”
No, you are a professional propagandist tasked with attempting to discredit any commenters who your paymasters have identified as being possibly capable of damaging whatever portion of the AGW narrative they are profiting from, by any means whatsoever, including posting unfounded personal attacks on highly qualified individuals such as Dr. Crockford.
And you are a coward, without even the common decency to apologise when your mendacity has been spectacularly exposed.
Worse, you even double down by attempting to justify your unpleasant, untruthful attacks.
All in all, you are a totally unprincipled, dishonourable and dishonest creature, and hopefully, one day you will be called to account for your deceit.

Griff
Reply to  ClimateOtter
December 15, 2016 4:27 am

(additional, now I have another 5 minutes)
I am of course basing my opinions on what polar bear researchers have said of your work/published articles, especially the polar bear experts contacted by the authors of this article:
http://www.carbonbrief.org/polar-bears-and-climate-change-what-does-the-science-say
“The scientists we spoke to tell us Crockford has never led any research on polar bears, nor has she published any papers on the topic. Amstrup tells Carbon Brief:
“[The GWPF report] is a collection of statements [Crockford] has made and conclusions she has drawn without any support from the refereed literature.”
Derocher points out Crockford’s specialism is not, in fact, in the field of polar bears:
“[Crockford’s] expertise is the archaeology of dead dogs and the identification of animal remains â?¦ In general, her views are tainted by a lack of understanding of polar bear ecology, Arctic marine ecosystem, and sea ice.” ”
I would be happy to hear your refutation of these claims of which perhaps you are unaware.

Reply to  ClimateOtter
December 15, 2016 7:14 am

Griff, that carbon brief site is basically wrong. Their map of polar bear populations is a distortion of the Canadian Environmental site. Here is the real one:comment image
Basically, the site uses half-truths and twists those to change reality. For instance, they say,

“As an example, Crockford cites a 2014 study that was the first to collect data on polar bears in the Kara Sea, one of the least studied polar bear habitats. The GWPF report says: ‘A first-ever Kara Sea population estimate completed in late 2014 potentially adds another 3200 or so bears to the global total.’
“The study in question counted polar bears sighted from icebreaker ships between 1997 and 2013. From this, the scientists estimated that the number of bears in the Kara Sea has been between 3,100-3,300 in recent years.
“It’s worth noting the study estimates the number of polar bear in the Kara Sea by scaling up the number of sightings from less than one per cent of the total area. In fact, between April 1997 to May 2013, the scientists in fact only counted 277 individuals.”
The problem is all population estimates are made from sampling the area. Also, prior population estimates listed the Kara Sea as “unkown” and counted that area as zero. Which is Crockford’s point — no matter how many polar bears are in the Kara Sea, any numbers mean that the total population is higher than prior estimates. She doesn’t claim that the Kara Sea is specifically rising because Russia has never provided such information.
The article then goes on to a spate of rote ad hominem attacks which are standard in these circles (she received funding from the Heritage foundation, so she is a liar.)
The article’s conclusion, “There are polar bear populations about which scientists still know very little, and the total number of polar bears worldwide remains uncertain. But the populations for which there is data together clearly point to a species in decline.” Except, this is a bald-faced lie. You can see from the populations, there are only two populations of the eleven studied which are in decline — The Southern Beaufort Sea (SB) and Baffin Bay (BB). While neither of these are well understood, the SB population decline is most likely due to excessively thick spring ice rather than climate change. The newest BB population estimate was due in 2014, but it has not yet been provided. If there is a decline, it is most likely due to hunting by the Nunavit, not climate change.
Either way, the populations which are best understood and are stable include all of the more southern populations. Shouldn’t those be the ones most at risk from climate change?

jorgekafkazar
Reply to  ClimateOtter
December 15, 2016 10:37 am

Griff is merely a troll, and he/she/it succeeded in making you do unnecessary work. If he doesn’t know who Susan Crockford it, he is so abysmally ignorant, and obviously lazy, to boot, that educating him would be like emptying Lake Superior with a teaspoon. Do not feed the troll.

Reply to  Griff
December 14, 2016 7:34 am

In Canada there is a “voluntary” quota allowing 600 Polar Bears to be hunted by the Inuit and other “natives”.. It probably ends up being more. The pelts end up in Asia.
I bet that if given a choice the Inuit shoot the largest Polar Bears they can find. Not good for genetic diversity.
Griff “I’d say the bears are in trouble this year…”
If Polar Bears are in trouble it is because humans shoot them a lot.

Reply to  sunshinehours1
December 14, 2016 9:25 am

Wouldn’t shooting the alpha male actually increase diversity because the lesser males will now be able to breed the females?

Goldrider
Reply to  sunshinehours1
December 14, 2016 9:58 am

Ads like that are directed at little old cat ladies in trailer parks who “think” with their emotions and write out $20.00 checks in exchange for a calendar. Most people with more information than that are not taken in by the antics of grifter dot-orgs.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  sunshinehours1
December 14, 2016 11:55 am

Reality Check,
Shooting the larger bears might give the smaller bears a better chance at breeding. But, the question really should be, “What characteristics will give the species a better chance for survival?” Genetic diversity tends to be most advantageous when there are changing environmental conditions. Perhaps shooting the bigger bears would result in traits that gave the species more adaptability to changing sea ice conditions. But, it is all speculation.

Reply to  sunshinehours1
December 14, 2016 5:12 pm

“Wouldn’t shooting the alpha male actually increase diversity because the lesser males will now be able to breed the females?”
You are possibly right. Genetic diversity might increase. but maybe polar bears would get smaller.

Javier
Reply to  Griff
December 14, 2016 7:34 am

does Susan actually have any qualifications to speak about bear populations?

She’s got the facts right, which is more than can be said about most people talking on this issue.
Polar bears have been increasing their numbers ever since their hunting was regulated and limited, and at least since the 70’s. So during the entire global warming period they have been doing better, not worse.
Their inclusion in the endangered species list is due exclusively to hypothetical future dangers from a changing environment. That position undermines the credibility of the list, as hypothetical future dangers can affect any species, so the reason for being in the list dilutes.

I’d say the bears are in trouble this year…

I say you have no idea what you are talking about. As usual.

Duncan
Reply to  Javier
December 14, 2016 8:23 am

Absolutely correct, their populations have been increasing since widespread hunting was abolished. There is this older article, while it does contain the usual future climate ‘disclaimers’, it covers the facts in words most people can understand.
The Truth about Polar Bears – Canadian Geographic.
https://www.canadiangeographic.ca/article/truth-about-polar-bears
Except below:
The current scientific consensus places the worldwide polar bear population between 20,000 and 25,000 animals. Prior to the 1973 worldwide restriction on commerical polar bear hunting, that number was dramatically lower, so low that a meeting of polar bear specialists in 1965 concluded that extinction was a real possibility. Some reports even estimated the number of bears as low as 5,000 worldwide. Yet by 1990, Ian Stirling — at the time, the senior research scientist for the Canadian Wildlife Service and a professor of zoology at the University of Alberta; basically, one of the most respected polar bear scientists on the planet — felt comfortable answering the question as to whether polar bears are an endangered species by stating flatly: “They are not.” He went on to say that “the world population of polar bears is certainly greater than 20,000 and could be as high as 40,000 … I am inclined toward the upper end of that range.” Although old studies are sketchy, clearly more polar bears are alive today than there were 50 years ago, an essentially heartening fact that has not managed to pierce the public consciousness.

Reply to  Javier
December 14, 2016 1:43 pm

Keep in mind that the,

“current scientific consensus”

quote and the 20,000-25,000 bears number has been used for over a decade.
Also keep in mind that the consensus opinion has admitted making some of their numbers up, completely.
Just try and name an expedition out to see polar bears, that failed to see bears, all over the Arctic. That amazing example of animal availability over such a huge area implies a very large number of animals.
Perhaps griffiepoo will go count the bears, since gp is so full of polar bear nonsense. He’ll need to spray numbers on the bears to prevent double counting; That is allegedly, griffiepoo is capable of numbers greater than 10.

ddpalmer
Reply to  Griff
December 14, 2016 7:37 am

Well Griff, if you went to her website as your comment indicates you did, you would have easily found out if she has any qualifications to speak about bear populations.
Dr. Susan J. Crockford is a zoologist with more than 35 years experience, including work on the Holocene history of Arctic animals. Susan Crockford earned her undergraduate degree in zoology at the University of British Columbia. She is currently an adjunct professor at the University of Victoria, B.C. Polar bear evolution is one of Dr. Crockford’s professional interests.
BTW: does Griff actually have any qualifications to speak about anything?

MarkW
Reply to  ddpalmer
December 14, 2016 7:44 am

Griff’s qualification are the standard leftwing qualification.
He cares. That’s enough.

Ross King
Reply to  ddpalmer
December 14, 2016 8:23 am

Griff’s highest qualification appears to be Court Jester. For that, I’m grateful to have such a Clown making a continuing fool of himself in the public arena, and I *always* look forward to his next buffoonery to keep me amused.
Keep up the good work, Griff!

Alan the Brit
Reply to  ddpalmer
December 14, 2016 8:28 am

I think he may have a 25 yard Breast Stroke Certificate!

JohnWho
Reply to  ddpalmer
December 14, 2016 8:59 am

ddpalmer December 14, 2016 at 7:37 am

BTW: does Griff actually have any qualifications to speak about anything?

Yes – “Cranial Rectal Syndrome” – although it appears one symptom is that one will not know they have the affliction.
/grin

Cube
Reply to  ddpalmer
December 14, 2016 10:29 am

I’m betting Griff’s qualifications are the checks he recieves from some Soros funded organization to troll sites like WUWT. He probably has a whole slew of different emails and UIDs on different sites and blogs, where he posts his malicious nonesense in an attempt to disrupt the conversation.

Gerry, England
Reply to  ddpalmer
December 14, 2016 1:22 pm

No, he reads the Guardian – a knowledge free zone.

Hot under the collar
Reply to  ddpalmer
December 14, 2016 3:42 pm

“BTW: does Griff actually have any qualifications to speak about anything”
I believe Griff can probably demonstrate he is level headed by dribbling from both sides of his mouth at the same time.
Griff has shown he’s not qualified and too lazy to Google a name before challenging someone on their qualifications and making an arse of himself. ; > )

Griff
Reply to  ddpalmer
December 15, 2016 5:00 am

I should note I am at least as qualified to an opinion on climate -which I endeavour always to back with facts from scientists and observed scientific data – as any on here who tell me that CO2 is not a greenhouse gas, there is no greenhouse effect, etc…
Heck, I bet many of those guys don’t even have a greenhouse…

catweazle666
Reply to  Griff
December 15, 2016 11:31 am

“I should note I am at least as qualified to an opinion on climate “
Still making stuff up, Grifter?
Your mummy will be cross.

MarkW
Reply to  ddpalmer
December 15, 2016 10:31 am

I love it when Griff tries to prove that he’s more sane than an insane person.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  ddpalmer
December 15, 2016 2:42 pm

Griff,
What does owning a greenhouse have to do with anything. I live in a virtual green house. Although my roof is opaque, it prevents loss of heat by convection or lateral wind. The so-called Green House Effect with respect to Earth is a misnomer. Perhaps you didn’t realize that and that is why you feel that owning one somehow gives you special insight on the problem. Have you apologized to Dr. Crockford yet for accusing her of not having any expertise, experience, or credentials?

MarkW
Reply to  Griff
December 14, 2016 7:41 am

Last time I checked, Polar Bears are very good swimmers.

Reply to  MarkW
December 14, 2016 11:45 am

Ursus maritimus Got maritime right in the scientific classification.
I still contend that someone needs to youtube some footage of the cute and cuddly polar bear munching down on the yet cuter and more or less defenseless baby seals for a bit of reality check.
I think it was from Canada where a video went viral of a polar bear patting a dog. Checked the update and apparently a bit later the guy didn’t put out food one night and the bear ate one of the dogs.

MarkW
Reply to  Griff
December 14, 2016 7:42 am

CO, now that’s using a sledgehammer to kill a gnat.

D. J. Hawkins
Reply to  Griff
December 14, 2016 7:43 am

You know, you could have just hit the “About” tab and found out that she is a zoologist with 35 years experience. Undergraduate degree from University of British Columbia, PhD from University of Victoria, B.C. And yes, she has peer-reviewed about polar bears. You are a frick’n idiot.
https://polarbearscience.com/about-2/

renbutler
Reply to  Griff
December 14, 2016 7:45 am

“I’d say the bears are in trouble this year…”
Indeed. They’ve already been eliminated from playoff contention.

John Leggett
Reply to  renbutler
December 14, 2016 8:33 am

thanks I needed that.

Tom in Florida
Reply to  renbutler
December 14, 2016 8:35 am

Most of us eliminated them before the season started.

Curious George
Reply to  Griff
December 14, 2016 7:48 am

Good Grief.

Pop Piasa
Reply to  Curious George
December 14, 2016 6:26 pm

Agreed, he has managed to derail another discussion with a ridiculous fomentation.

Reply to  Griff
December 14, 2016 7:54 am

Griff,
I’ll bet you wish you hadn’t said that 🙂

bazzer1959
Reply to  Griff
December 14, 2016 8:16 am

Griff…brilliant. Susan has made you look a right twat, as we say here in England. If I were you, I would go and boil my head (a Scottish insult, this time). If you want, I could find a Welsh one, too.

phaedo
Reply to  bazzer1959
December 14, 2016 8:41 am

Griff has invented a new insult.

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  bazzer1959
December 14, 2016 7:52 pm

/Griffed

Reply to  bazzer1959
December 15, 2016 12:10 pm

Oh, Oh, Welsh insult please!!!

Reply to  bazzer1959
December 15, 2016 12:13 pm

Welsh insult please!!! with a side of condescending also…

Kamikazedave
Reply to  Griff
December 14, 2016 8:29 am

Griff??? You come to this site and embarrass yourself on almost a daily basis but today’s post from you was one for the record books. Never thought you could out yourself as a gullible ecoloon any further, but you did today. Congratulations.

Reply to  Griff
December 14, 2016 8:41 am

Just to add what Susan did not cover — you can take a trip to Svalbard to see the polar bears, as the population has been booming. There is no official count, because all of the Nordic polar bear scientists are in Canada arranging a polar bear week every year in the Hudson Bay. You would think one of them could take the time to study polar bears in their own country.
https://www.naturalworldsafaris.com/polar-regions/svalbard/information/when-is-the-best-time-to-see-polar-bears-in-svalbard
“Over the years, Svalbard has acted almost like a refuge when it comes to polar bears and the populations have increased with numbers now thought to be reaching 3,000! This is a huge positive, not just for the bears as a species, but for specialist operators such as ourselves, as these days we are more than confident in regards to sightings. Some of our trips (on our smaller more specialist vessels) have seen upwards of 20+ polar bears on an individual trip!
“The best time to see polar bears in the wilds of svalbard is between the months of May to September”

catweazle666
Reply to  Griff
December 14, 2016 9:54 am

“She does not research or publish (scientifically) about bears, nor is she involved in the biology of arctic populations, so far as I know.”
What a thoroughly unpleasant, mendacious little creature you are.
Do you have no conscience whatsoever?

jvcstone
Reply to  catweazle666
December 14, 2016 10:23 am

Giff has just demonstrated for all to see that he knows absolutely nothing –quite possibly about anything.

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  catweazle666
December 14, 2016 7:44 pm

“Giff has just demonstrated for all to see that he knows absolutely nothing –quite possibly about anything.”
Sure he does. He knows whatever someone feeds him to post.

tetris
Reply to  Griff
December 14, 2016 11:44 am

You need to make an effort and produce that sucking sound as you extract your head from where the sun don’t shine.
Crockford’s qualifications are a matter of [scientific] record.
So is the fact that in the 1960s the polar bear population was 5000-6000 and the animal was considered threatened. Today polar populations are estimated to be around 30,000 and possibly higher. In trouble?

Reply to  Griff
December 14, 2016 11:55 am

That was just the standard Greenpeace tactic: ad hominem. The likes of Griff are so used to doing it by now they couldn’t stop if they tried.

Paul Penrose
Reply to  Griff
December 14, 2016 12:12 pm

A swing and a Griff!

Another Doug
Reply to  Paul Penrose
December 14, 2016 12:44 pm

Literally LOL

techgm
Reply to  Griff
December 14, 2016 12:57 pm

And let’s not forget the scientific name for polar bears: “Ursus maritimus,” That is, “Sea Bear.”
(They routinely swim non-stop 10s of miles, have often been seen swimming 200 miles from land/ice, and one female has been recorded as having swum 426 miles nonstop.)

Reply to  Griff
December 14, 2016 1:37 pm

Griff’s been on stage too long.
Get the hook…

Javert Chip
Reply to  Griff
December 14, 2016 2:38 pm

Griff
(ha ha tee he)
Yup, Dr Susan Crockford, PhD is qualified to write about polar bears.
(snicker, snicker, yuck, yuck)
The question is: are you qualified to ask polar bear questions…
(ROTFL)
Oh, man: Griff – the gift that keep on giving.

afonzarelli
Reply to  Griff
December 14, 2016 4:03 pm

Griffin, anything you’d like to add?

Reply to  Griff
December 14, 2016 4:22 pm

More like 45% coverage of Hudson Bay today:
http://www.natice.noaa.gov/pub/ims/ims_gif/DATA/cursnow_usa.gif

Louis Hooffstetter
Reply to  Griff
December 14, 2016 5:30 pm

Griff, first you quote Dr. Crockford as an authority, then you question her opinions?
Stupid is as stupid does!

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  Griff
December 14, 2016 7:44 pm

You’ve been pwned!

Eamon Butler
Reply to  Griff
December 15, 2016 10:02 am

Wow, Griff. That’s an Epic FAIL. Return to the bottom of your pond.

ClimateOtter
December 14, 2016 7:25 am

Well, you know, when it comes to climate alarmism they Must bring everything to Bear.

hunter
Reply to  ClimateOtter
December 14, 2016 9:30 pm

lol, thanks so much. Not only for the time you take to share your wisdom and insight. But also for the demonstration of just how dry humor can be served. One of the most dishonest and anti-science tactics of the climate consensus extremists is their refusal to accept that there is a diversity of well qualified opinion that disagree with the consensus. I can only imagine the pressure brought to bear by fanatics like Griff.
Hang tough

Brett Keane
Reply to  ClimateOtter
December 14, 2016 10:08 pm

Anthony (I think) recently wrote that Griff works for Barclays Bank. Check it out!
You could have some fun with that.

December 14, 2016 7:27 am

There are all too many people out there who act as if “Bambi” was a documentary.

ClimateOtter
Reply to  Tom Halla
December 14, 2016 7:29 am

Tell them to read the original. That will set things straight.

Reply to  Tom Halla
December 14, 2016 7:43 am

Bambi vs Godzilla was closer to a documentary. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n-wUdetAAlY

MarkW
Reply to  Tom Halla
December 14, 2016 7:44 am

I love bad puns.

Reply to  Tom Halla
December 14, 2016 9:30 am

Walt Disney was the original destroyer of science.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  Reality check
December 14, 2016 12:16 pm

And I think that Uncle Walt can also take the ‘credit’ for anthropomorphisizing rodents and other lesser creatures.

Reply to  Clyde Spencer
December 14, 2016 1:10 pm

“Peter Rabbit”, “The Wind in the Willows” and “Alice in Wonderland” were Victorian era, rather a bit earlier than Disney. Disney was just rather “good” and shameless in using anthropomorphism.

Monna Manhas
Reply to  Reality check
December 14, 2016 12:46 pm

Thornton W. Burgess did a really good job of anthropomorphisation with his “Green Forest” series of books. Anyone else remember Reddy Fox, Billy Mink and Prickly Porcupine?

Pop Piasa
Reply to  Reality check
December 14, 2016 6:36 pm

Any comments about uncle Remus?

Reply to  Pop Piasa
December 14, 2016 6:48 pm

Disney pulled “Song of the South” from distribution before I ever saw it, and I’m 61.

Reply to  Tom Halla
December 15, 2016 9:47 am

I am 60 and have seen it. But it was a long time ago.

pameladragon
Reply to  philjourdan
December 16, 2016 3:50 pm

Da Nada, modera.
PMK

Tom Yoke
Reply to  Tom Halla
December 14, 2016 2:55 pm

My reaction on seeing the picture was to think of this YouTube clip

Latitude
December 14, 2016 7:28 am

Alan Watt, Climate Denialist Level 7
Reply to  Latitude
December 14, 2016 7:57 am

Anyone can swim with a polar bear — the only variable is whether you survive the experience.

Latitude
Reply to  Alan Watt, Climate Denialist Level 7
December 14, 2016 8:06 am

I think Agee is adorable!

Greg
Reply to  Latitude
December 14, 2016 8:56 am

Obligatory Blue Peter warning: “Viewers are reminded not to try this at home “

Pop Piasa
Reply to  Latitude
December 14, 2016 6:49 pm

I’ll assume this bear was raised in captivity? It acts more like a Labrador retriever.

Terry Burch
December 14, 2016 7:56 am

Griffie:
Do us all a favor and go hug a polar bear. Your empathy will be rewarded – social justice at work.
Just sayin 😉

Paul
Reply to  Terry Burch
December 14, 2016 1:12 pm

“Do us all a favor and go hug a polar bear. Your empathy will be rewarded ”
And don’t forget your GoPro.

MarkW
Reply to  Paul
December 15, 2016 10:34 am

All the GoPro would show, would be the insides of a polar bear.

Gerry, England
Reply to  Terry Burch
December 14, 2016 1:25 pm

Perhaps we could get him one for Christmas? Then he could be proud that he had saved one.

rocketscientist
December 14, 2016 8:02 am

I want to see the image of polar bears hugging penguins. Then we’ll know it’s real for sure!

Freedom Monger
Reply to  rocketscientist
December 14, 2016 9:31 am
DAS
December 14, 2016 8:06 am

Twenty years ago, I was in a bar in a small town in Alaska, a local couple got into a spat and she stormed out. The other men in the bar really got on the guy and made him walk home with her, because there had been a bear spotted in town. They took it very seriously.

Caligula Jones
Reply to  DAS
December 15, 2016 6:24 am

I hope he was wearing running shoes. As the saying goes, he doesn’t have to outrun the bear. He just has to outrun her.

Javier
December 14, 2016 8:07 am

Traditional hunting is just an excuse as those animals end up being hunted by rich international hunters. If it were up to me traditional hunting would only be allowed by the traditional method of handheld spear and large knife. You want traditional you do traditional. Let’s see how many would be up to the task.

D. J. Hawkins
Reply to  Javier
December 14, 2016 9:53 am

“Objection you Honor. Assumes facts not in evidence.”

Javier
Reply to  D. J. Hawkins
December 14, 2016 12:11 pm
Javier
Reply to  D. J. Hawkins
December 14, 2016 12:14 pm

http://www.polarbearhunting.net/images/8.jpg
“Join us on the adventure of a lifetime and thrill to the chase of the Arctic’s greatest trophy animal, the Polar Bear! You can be among the few who have braved Canada’s Northwest Territories in quest of the North’s most spectacular bear.”
http://www.polarbearhunting.net/

D. J. Hawkins
Reply to  D. J. Hawkins
December 15, 2016 3:22 pm

@Javier
Your post clearly implied that some significant fraction of the polar bear hunt was for “rich international hunters”. An advertisement is hardly proof of that assumption. In fact, the web site touts their “very successful season” with a total of 6 bears taken. Egads!! Extinction is just around the corner!

Bryan A
Reply to  D. J. Hawkins
December 15, 2016 7:41 pm

Hmmm
6 bears taken, let’s say 1 male and 5 females. Females aged5 and older can birth 2 or 3 cubs a season. The cubs mature over the next 2 to 3 years and begin the cycle again after 5 years. Presuming all the cubs survive to maturity, the male and 5 females would equate to 10 to 15 bears in the next generation. Those bears would have the potential to create an additional 20 to 30 bears in the next generation. In ten years time, the original 6 bears hunted unnecessarily has eliminated a possible 70 to 100 bears by the third generation

Reply to  Bryan A
December 15, 2016 7:59 pm

I don’t think it’s that simple. While predation by humans might have been the limit on polar bear populations in the past, most alpha predators are so-called “k selected”,where the limit is carrying capacity, not “r selected” where the short term limit is how fast they breed. While most organisms can breed to fill the capacity of the environment, the short term behavior is different. Bad management in the past does not rule out controlled hunting.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  Javier
December 14, 2016 12:25 pm

Javier,
I think that the “traditional hunting” method was shown in Nanuck of the North. The traditional hunter froze the springy skeleton of a fish inside a ball of blubber. The bear would swallow the ball in one gulp. Then, when the blubber melted in the stomach, the skeleton would spring open, piercing the internal organs. The hunter would follow the bear until it collapsed from loss of blood. If he was in a hurry, he might finish it off with a spear. Most modern hunters disavow such a slow, painful death of game animals. They advocate a single, well-placed bullet as a more humane way to kill an animal. Primitive people were pragmatic. They didn’t take risks they didn’t need to take. The spear was for a coupe de grace and the knife was for field dressing the animal.

Bryan A
Reply to  Clyde Spencer
December 16, 2016 10:07 am

And they eat the bear to survive. How many Trophy Hunters are hunting the bear to survive and actually Eat all of the Polar Bear meat? I’ll bet you could probably count the hunter consumed carcases of those afore mentioned 6 bears on one hand with no fingers held up.

Bryan A
Reply to  Clyde Spencer
December 16, 2016 10:11 am

Like hunting:
Elephants for their Tusks
or
Rhino’s for their Horns
or
Sharks for theiir fins
or
Gorillas for their hands
Trophy hunting for trophies is just senseless killing
Granted sharks fins aren’t trophies but shark steaks arent sold in the same market as their fins so that is a true waste

Mumbles McGuirck
December 14, 2016 8:08 am

Maybe the Weizmann Institute ought to change their motto from “”Science for the Benefit of Humanity” to “To Serve Man”.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/To_Serve_Man_(The_Twilight_Zone)

Mumbles McGuirck
December 14, 2016 8:09 am

BTW, is Griff short for Griffter?

Manfred Kintop
Reply to  Mumbles McGuirck
December 14, 2016 10:42 am

I’ve been wondering the same thing for months.

Caligula Jones
Reply to  Manfred Kintop
December 15, 2016 6:27 am

I’m thinking its closer to Bullgriff.

arthur4563
December 14, 2016 8:10 am

I can’t believe that anyone still thinks the polar bears are an endangered species.
I also don’t understand the logic of pushing energy policies which for certain will kill
many humans , again, for certain, against the barest (sorry!) possibility that they will prevent the
extinction of a damn carnivorius, seal-murdering bear. Exterminate the bears and save the seals is my motto. We don’t need no stinking high latitude killers. Polar bear lovers turn out to be the enemy of us humans.

Reply to  arthur4563
December 14, 2016 8:55 am

Seals tend to eat the same fish I happen to enjoy.
PBs keep the seal population down.

Reply to  mikerestin
December 14, 2016 1:50 pm

Herring?
Seals hardly make a dent in the populations of herrings.

MarkW
Reply to  mikerestin
December 15, 2016 10:36 am

Why take the chance?

hunter
Reply to  arthur4563
December 15, 2016 4:37 am

You have just described the pernicious side of the faith embraced by the trolls who infest blog sites like this, and underlies the climate consensus extremist groups in general

Caligula Jones
December 14, 2016 8:11 am

As Kate from the Small Dead Animals blog says, Walt Disney has a lot of blood on his hands…

leafwalker
Reply to  Caligula Jones
December 14, 2016 12:14 pm

A Disney film created the urban myth about lemmings committing mass suicide by running off cliffs:
http://www.adfg.alaska.gov/index.cfm?adfg=wildlifenews.view_article&articles_id=56

Gamecock
December 14, 2016 8:19 am

“Science to benefit polar bears. Screw man.”

December 14, 2016 8:38 am

If someone had been paid $1 million to destroy the credibility of Griff, they could not have done a more effective job than what he just did to himself. Is it really that difficult to do a little research before making oneself out to be a complete fool?
Memo to myself: Completely ignore in the future anything written by Griff.

Reply to  cerescokid
December 14, 2016 8:44 am

Griff, post drivel in other blog places I visit,he is a warmist loon who pounces on bread crumbs,blows into a tortured CAGW narrative,while ignoring lots of posted evidence to the contrary others post in the threads he visits.

MarkW
Reply to  Sunsettommy
December 14, 2016 9:40 am

So that’s where he goes when he isn’t bothering us. I was pretty sure he wasn’t at work.

Reply to  Sunsettommy
December 14, 2016 9:52 am

You can see his current blather here,he is always worried about the Arctic region…….
http://realclimatescience.com/2016/12/hottest-year-ever-6/#comment-31285

Reply to  Sunsettommy
December 14, 2016 9:53 am
catweazle666
Reply to  Sunsettommy
December 14, 2016 10:05 am

I think you’ll find that he IS at work when he’s bothering us, Mark.

Reply to  Sunsettommy
December 14, 2016 10:47 am
Reply to  cerescokid
December 14, 2016 3:07 pm

Griff probably makes enough from his mentors to buy another computer.
And then co-incidentally a new poster will appear.

Phil R
Reply to  cerescokid
December 14, 2016 4:43 pm

cerescokid,
You can’t destroy something you don’t have in the first place.

Reply to  cerescokid
December 14, 2016 11:42 pm

I won’t say that Griff has completely destroyed his credibility forever. That would be mean. But when my wife gets home from her rehearsal I’m going to tell her “If I ever believe anything written by Griff again, take me to a doctor IMMEDIATELY and have me checked for Alzheimer’s.”

Arild
December 14, 2016 8:44 am

Griff, both feet in mouth, head up arse.

RayG
Reply to  Arild
December 14, 2016 11:08 am

I can just imagine what a Josh cartoon depicting Griff in the position that you describe would look like. 😉

MarkW
Reply to  RayG
December 15, 2016 10:37 am

I’m imagining something like a figure 8.

Reply to  MarkW
December 15, 2016 10:52 am

Not a figure 8, but a Klein bottle–imagine a troll’s head so far up his own ass that he sees teeth.

December 14, 2016 8:48 am

Kip, essay No Bodies in my ebook Blowing Smoke contains several examples of the sort you seek, from a wide variety of NGO’s plus the Feds. aelie penguins. american pikas, red wolves, bog turtles, Canadian lynx… and more.

pameladragon
Reply to  ristvan
December 14, 2016 11:12 am

Where can I find your book, restvan? I just got Eaten on B&N, NookBook, $2.99.
PMK

Reply to  pameladragon
December 14, 2016 2:39 pm

Its available at all the usual outlets. IBooks, Amazon Kindle, B&N Nook… Cheapest is Amazon; it sold well enough that they cut the already low price to undercut iBooks. My publisher was not thrilled.

pameladragon
Reply to  ristvan
December 14, 2016 2:47 pm

Got it! I have a Nook eReader because I hate the ads and not a huge fan of Amazon anyway. I paid a higher price, your publisher will rejoice.
PMK

pameladragon
Reply to  Kip Hansen
December 14, 2016 12:15 pm

Obrigada Kip!
PMK

pameladragon
Reply to  Kip Hansen
December 14, 2016 12:28 pm

Portuguese, Porto and environs. I go back January 2. We will retire there in a few years, our favorite European country, dare I say the best? Currently working on a Roadside Geology of Portugal with a dear friend at U of Porto.
Have already downloaded Blowing Smoke and Eaten, lots of reading!
PMK

Reply to  pameladragon
December 15, 2016 7:02 am

Hey! I just learned how Portuguese thank you is reflexive and should be based upon the person issuing. And here you are confirming it! Thank ye kindly, or Obrigado

pameladragon
Reply to  philjourdan
December 16, 2016 3:49 pm

They used to show Song of the South on The Wonderful World of Disney, in the ’60s it was just amusing not hate speech. There may still be a ride at Disney World based on Song of the South but I am now old enough that I no longer have to take kiddos there so haven’t been in over a decade, Praise All Gods Most Fulsomely!

Reply to  pameladragon
December 17, 2016 12:34 pm

Can I get an Amen? AMEN! Except I know I will be taking my grandkids there before too much longer.

pameladragon
Reply to  philjourdan
December 17, 2016 4:43 pm

If you take small kiddos to Disney World don’t let them stray off to any bodies of water, the place is now infested with alligators and they recently took a toddler. People think Disney is all fun and animatronics and those gators are not dangerous. They are very dangerous and fearless.
PMK

pameladragon
Reply to  Kip Hansen
December 14, 2016 3:00 pm

PMK => I really loved Porto….especially the Old City. I loved being 24 too….
I was there in September, after the London conference, took my brother along, his first European vacation, he has not stopped talking about it yet. January is not so nice, rained a lot last year, but we still get good days for field work and eating olives and chourico alongside the Douro…I don’t miss being 24, us Dragons stay young forever….
PMK

Reply to  ristvan
December 14, 2016 12:43 pm

ristvan … is it possible that you sell that ebook in PDF format?

Reply to  Joseph Ratliff
December 14, 2016 2:45 pm

No, publisher won’t allow it. But if you download either free iBook or Kindle readers to any tablet (I have both on my iPad as there are technical and history books Amazon has but iBooks doesn’t) you can downlowd and read the published version. It has hotlinks to footnotes and there are some footnote links to web sources. Plus, with those readers you can bookmark, underline, markup, paste a note… all just like a real book. You cannot easily do all that with a ,pdf.

Reply to  ristvan
December 15, 2016 5:15 am

But you can print a PDF, and get it bound, so you can read it easier (since it’s not avail. in paperback). 🙂 Thanks ristvan.

TD
December 14, 2016 8:48 am

Griff, just cut your feet off

Schrodinger's Cat
December 14, 2016 8:53 am

Well, that was entertaining.

Greg
December 14, 2016 8:59 am

Polar bears are dying of hunger do the selfish humans. Take your child to hug a polar bear: SHOW YOU CARE !!

ClimateOtter
December 14, 2016 8:59 am

*bows*

December 14, 2016 9:01 am

Griffmeister,
This could be the flame of all time. You have distinguished yourself. Wonder if you will ever have the nerve to come back. If you do, I will just reply “Climate Otter” each time until you are gone…

JohnWho
December 14, 2016 9:03 am

Back on topic, I wonder if they will replace that photo with one of a little Dutch girl with her finger in a dyke holding back a “ocean” of CO2?
That just sounds so much more “sciency”, doesn’t it?
/grin

texasjimbrock
December 14, 2016 9:06 am

Okay, Griff. Just post an apology and carry on.

Freedom Monger
December 14, 2016 9:13 am

I wonder if Griff is a kind of masochist.
You gotta admit, it would take a lot of mental fortitude to go into your enemy’s lair, get the crap beat out of you, and come back for more.
I wouldn’t do it.
There is another possibility, however, maybe Griff is just playing the Devil’s Advocate.
A Devil’s Advocate wouldn’t be affected by being criticized because it’s their job.

Ross King
Reply to  Freedom Monger
December 14, 2016 10:02 am

Be nice to Griff, folks! This site wd be a bit too serious (on balance) without his thigh-slapping contributions. And, in this particular case, I’ve learnt of Susan Crockford’s credentials, her book (am off to buy it!) and gleaned a lot more about polar-bear matters — all thanks to Griff!
Even Fools can be useful!

Bubba Cow
December 14, 2016 9:16 am

as an aside, Susan’s book was my go to Christmas present last year for the faithful – sadly few have managed to read it over the year – I still recommend it highly

December 14, 2016 9:20 am

Btw, like Kip I hoghly recommend EATEN. So good it is on par with Michal Creighton. So to her distinguished science credentials must be added wonderful sciency fiction novelist.

Reply to  ristvan
December 14, 2016 12:00 pm

You guys!
I mosey over for a bit of a break from writing to find my writing the topic of conversation??
I have a blog post planned about this but what the heck – here’s my pre-announcement notice for you loyal supporters.
I will shortly be publishing via Amazon (maybe next Monday week?) two polar bear science books of the sort that folks have been requesting for years.
One is a summary suitable for all ages (aged 7 up) and the other is a fully referenced volume for adults.
Both are short and to the point, in full color.
Sorry they won’t quite be ready for Christmas gift-giving but in lieu, perhaps an Amazon gift card and a recommendation would allow the recipient to purchase when it’s out.
Watch my blog for more details – I’ll get on it.
best regards and thanks for your support – all of you.
And Merry Christmas Griff, may the good cheer of the season help change your attitude.
Susan

Paul Penrose
Reply to  susanjcrockford
December 14, 2016 12:30 pm

You are a class act Susan. I don’t have much time to read books, but I have decided to buy your new one when it comes out. I’m sure both my wife and I will enjoy it.

TonyL
Reply to  susanjcrockford
December 14, 2016 12:44 pm

Oh! My! Goodness!
Right when the fur is flying fast and furious, look who stops in for a visit.
I will look forward to your new books with keen interest.
Merry Christmas, Dr. Crockford.

stevekeohane
Reply to  susanjcrockford
December 14, 2016 1:07 pm

Thank you for your honest work. Merry Christmas to you!

Oldseadog
Reply to  susanjcrockford
December 14, 2016 1:52 pm

Susan, any chance of getting the books other than via Amazon?

Reply to  susanjcrockford
December 14, 2016 3:42 pm

Oldseadog,
I also publish ebooks through Smashwords, which distributes through a variety of other outlets and also offers pdf and Apple formats. I will do the Amazon first though, to get the hard copy out.
Susan

Gerald Machnee
Reply to  susanjcrockford
December 14, 2016 6:33 pm

Griff – are you buying the books?
We are waiting for an answer.

Patrick B
December 14, 2016 9:26 am

Guys, I hate to have to say it, but a blog with the quality and history of this blog, with the awards it has, the quality of analysis provided by both the authors and the commentators, a blog like this deserves a better gadfly than Griff. I’m not saying I expect someone with decades of knowledge and experience, but using a 12 year old like Griff as the blog’s gadfly/opposition, someone who has not yet graduated from middle school, is not reflective of this blog’s quality. So it’s time to fire Griff and hire someone a bit more experienced to act as gadfly in the comments section. Please forward resumes of candidates.

ClimateOtter
Reply to  Patrick B
December 14, 2016 9:32 am

gavin schmidt?

Felflames
Reply to  ClimateOtter
December 14, 2016 10:21 am

He wouldn’t agree to allow anyone else to post in his threads, if past performance is any indicator.

Reply to  ClimateOtter
December 14, 2016 3:13 pm

Gavin may be in need of a new job 🙂

MarkW
Reply to  Patrick B
December 14, 2016 9:41 am

Nick?

phaedo
Reply to  Patrick B
December 14, 2016 9:44 am

I think Griff may be Bill Nye.

Alx
Reply to  phaedo
December 14, 2016 2:26 pm

LOL

Reply to  phaedo
December 14, 2016 5:08 pm

Funny story about “deflategate” today: “Roger Goodell owes Tom Brady an apology by Dan Wetzel. He talks about how, in the Steelers/Giants game last weekend, there were under-inflated balls due to the cold weather and the NFL decided it was no big deal.
In the story, they make a number of comments about the ideal gas law (something I learned in Middle School) such as,
—“Footballs lose air pressure in cold weather. The numbers were explained away by science, not cheating. This was nothing. Nothing happened, nothing at all.”
— “{a year ago}, the league scampered down to test {Patriot’s balls} at halftime. League vice president Troy Vincent, who was in charge of such things, later testified he’d never heard of Ideal Gas Law. As such, when the readings started coming in under 12.5, no one spoke up and said, “Those numbers are explainable.” Instead, they thought anything below 12.5 was cheating and something like 11.4 was significant cheating. Ignorance was bliss.”
— “It wasn’t true. Not then and not as a parade of scientists came out screaming that everyone should’ve paid more attention in science class back in high school. Most of the footballs were fine, easily explained away by the weather. … The science is the science. It’s been that way since 1834, when Ideal Gas Law was proven. So, welcome to the 19th Century.”
Long story short, last year Bill Nye made a video about deflategate where he “proved” that Tom Brady cheated. He did the math wrong. That’s right, Bill Nye took a very simple scientific method and got it completely wrong. (Basically, he failed to convert gauge pressure to absolute pressure when he applied the ideal gas law.)
That is the brave scientist of climate change. Don’t let the facts get in the way of a “convenient truth”.

Griff
Reply to  Patrick B
December 15, 2016 3:54 am

I do worry I am the only dissenting, realist voice here.
where indeed are the others?

Alan Robertson
Reply to  Griff
December 15, 2016 7:57 am

Realist voice? The only one here?
You do flatter yourself. Many would say that you would better serve yourself by being honest with yourself. And others.

Freedom Monger
Reply to  Griff
December 15, 2016 9:06 am

Griff,
You are here to do one thing only: spread FEAR. You effectively say, “The Ice is melting! The Ice is melting! Be Afraid! Be Afraid! Do Something! Do Something!” You are ultimately a FEAR MONGER.
But every time you post a comment, I see your notion that we should be Afraid is Soundly Refuted.
As a consequence, I am NOT AFRAID of Climate Change, Global Warming, or an impending Environmental Disaster.
And I will fight your kind to the death because I am a FREEDOM MONGER, and Freedom dictates that the Human Race must never be forced to endure an Oppressive Solution to an Imaginary Problem.

MarkW
Reply to  Griff
December 15, 2016 10:41 am

Only voice?
Griffy, you think way to highly of yourself.
Regardless, the only resemblance to a realist on your part is that you are both breathing. And I’m making an assumption on your part.

catweazle666
Reply to  Griff
December 15, 2016 11:59 am

“I do worry I am the only dissenting, realist voice here.”
No, you are the only full-time propagandist here.

Chimp
Reply to  Griff
December 15, 2016 12:10 pm

Griff,
You must not read many comments here. People who actually work, if that’s the right word, in the climate industry often comment here. Have you really missed their comments?

Reply to  Griff
December 15, 2016 12:19 pm

Ask your other hand.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  Griff
December 15, 2016 2:57 pm

Griff,
It has long been held as a maxim that only the sane question their sanity. The insane are absolutely convinced that they are sane and it is everyone else that has a problem. What does that imply about you believing that you are the only “realist voice here?”

Reply to  Griff
December 16, 2016 1:44 am

I’ve been posting here for ten years or so Griff. Good to have another dissenter, it sort of divides the abuse between two of us so makes it more tolerable, (Actually there are a few more, but you have to be pretty brave to pop your head above the parapet with many of the good ‘ole boys on this site !)

Bryan A
Reply to  Griff
December 16, 2016 2:27 pm

Don’t worry too much about it Griff, you aren’t the only Troll on this board

Pat Frank
December 14, 2016 9:35 am

The actual website of the Weizmann Institute doesn’t say anything about “Science for the Benefit of Humanity.” Instead, it presents a straight-forward exposition of the science that’s going on there.
The link in the head-post is to “The American Committee for the Weizmann Institute of Science,” not the Institute itself. So, the feel-good motto is theirs, not the Weizmann’s.
I did a post-doc at the Wezmann many years ago. Call me biased, but it was a great place, full of hard-working underfunded scientists.

MarkW
Reply to  Pat Frank
December 14, 2016 9:42 am

Isn’t underfunded pretty much part of the definition of scientist?
At least that’s what the scientists I know are always saying.

Alan Watt, Climate Denialist Level 7
Reply to  Kip Hansen
December 14, 2016 10:32 am

They appear to be very closely connected:
About Us:

The American Committee for the Weizmann Institute of Science is a community of dedicated people who share a common vision with the Weizmann Institute in support of our common mission: science for the benefit of humanity. The American Committee partners with individuals, families, foundations, and the business community to develop philanthropic funding for the Institute; educates the American public about the Institute’s research; and represents the Institute’s interests in the U.S. Whether through events such as galas, parlor meetings, and luncheons; meetings with Institute scientists; campaigns to spread the news of research discovery; and more, the American Committee’s nationwide presence helps bring the Weizmann Institute to you, and you to the Weizmann Institute.
On the Weizmann Institute campus in Rehovot, Israel, around 3,800 scientists, graduate students, highly skilled research technicians, and the staff who support them come to work every day with the goal of solving the most challenging problems facing humankind: climate change, world hunger and malnutrition, cancer and other diseases, safety and security, to name just a few. For more than 80 years, the Weizmann Institute’s curiosity-driven scientists have made thousands of landmark breakthroughs, and they continue to strive to make thousands more. These discoveries are moved from the lab to the marketplace via the Yeda Research and Development Company, Inc., the Institute’s technology transfer arm. In addition, the Weizmann Institute’s graduate school is unique in that every student receives financial support, allowing them to focus solely on their research, and each student is immersed in hands-on research in the lab of a renowned scientist from day one.

Our Mission:
Making a Difference – With Your Help
Founded in 1944, the American Committee for the Weizmann Institute of Science has been a driving force throughout the history of the Weizmann Institute – fostering the partnership between science and philanthropy while supporting the Institute’s needs, leading the way in providing resources for continuous development and pioneering projects, and promoting awareness of the vision and accomplishments of its scientists.
The American Committee is not only a national organization, but also a community of dedicated people who share a common mission: advancing the Institute’s goals by becoming partners in the search for answers to the most difficult challenges facing humanity.
The American philanthropic presence is felt wherever you look on the Institute’s campus. Buildings, laboratories, instruments, and educational and research projects owe their existence to the efforts of the American Committee and its loyal supporters. These same donors provide the endowed professorial chairs, scholarships, and other financial assistance that support the scientists, teachers, and students who bring life and meaning to the physical facilities.
All of us—and each of us—must do all that we are able to ensure that the trajectory and pace of modern science never falters. The best of human existence is ahead of us—and science will transport us there. If you would like to receive updates about research breakthroughs at the Weizmann Institute of Science and other news, follow us on Twitter, Like us on Facebook, or sign up to receive e-mails.
So both have been around for quite a while and it appears the “Amierican Committee” is at least a fund-raising arm for the Institute if not more. They list “climate change” as one of the “most challenging problems” facing mankind.
However a quick scan of their achievments in protecting our planet I do not see anything about polar bears.

Weizmann Institute scientists are not only facing current environmental crises head-on, but are solving tomorrow’s threats to our planet today. They are developing mathematical formulas to predict rainfall with greater accuracy; creating crops that can grow in harsh climates and with less need for pesticides; designing nanomaterials that can serve as engine lubricants and thus reduce air pollution; studying ways to protect and conserve water, our most valuable resource; examining the Earth’s movements to forecast volcanoes and earthquakes; growing a forest in a desert to study CO2—these are just some of the ways in which Weizmann researchers are using science to protect our planet, both now and in the future.

It may be this was just a cute image grabbed by a web design consultant and accepted uncritically by the Committee.

Pat Frank
Reply to  Kip Hansen
December 14, 2016 5:22 pm

Thanks, Kip. 🙂

dmacleo
December 14, 2016 10:10 am

if you can hug a tree you can hug a bear.
I advocate all tree huggers do so.
the bear will hug back, honest.

catweazle666
Reply to  dmacleo
December 14, 2016 10:57 am
Mumbles McGuirck
Reply to  dmacleo
December 14, 2016 11:03 am

There was a TV advert about a year ago. It showed a polar bear leaving the Arctic and wandering through the countryside until it came up to a man who owned an electric car. It then reared up on its hind paws and gave him a big hug. The camera did not show what followed, but I’m sure the eco-conscious fellow ended up a No. 2.

pameladragon
Reply to  dmacleo
December 14, 2016 11:04 am

Excellent suggestion, maybe we can get them a special group rate up to Churchill for polar bear love.
PMK

Ross King
December 14, 2016 10:57 am

Troll? Griffter? Time-waster?
Does this point to an Agent-Provocateur whose job it is to discredit ‘our’ website with sh*t-stirring, debase its demeanour, and shift our focus to troll-hunting, rather than more earnest, relevant and better-directed matters at an intellectual level?
I am not sure what coherent, consistent responses this thinking engenders …. maybe a Mod. replying to Griff — for all to read — something like: “Troll-Alert!” and we can all leave it at that? Ignoring him may be the best response.

Groty
December 14, 2016 11:01 am

To me, it is a pretty good ad. The ad agency knows that if you glance at the ad at all they will have your attention for only a couple of seconds. During those two seconds the ad has to persuade you to click through. The ad can’t bog you down in text to read. So it uses 100% emotion to hook you. Who is against protecting the planet to benefit cute little girls and cute polar bears? Not liberal New York Times readers and not the Weizmann Institute.
Seems like an effective way to reach liberal NYT readers who already may be presupposed to believe that the planet, cute little girls, and polar bears need someone to care about them. And this emotional hook might get them to learn more about the Weizmann Institute and ultimately give them some dough.

Alx
Reply to  Groty
December 14, 2016 2:38 pm

Well NYT readers may conclude that polar bears must be saved so little girls can hug them. Others may see the ad and see that the little girl is being offered for lunch.
But if I wanted to really go down the NYT rabbit hole of stupid, I would ask the NYT would anyone be caring about polar bears if they were black? Isn’t there dark toned bears that need saving? Aren’t liberals being racists by focusing only on white bears?
I know, ridiculous questions, but no more ridiculous then the lefts infatuations with polar bears and their fabricated plight.

Javert Chip
Reply to  Alx
December 14, 2016 6:26 pm

Alx
My understanding (pretty much confirmed by a bunch of Google results) is polar bears are black – shave off the insulating white hairs…and you have black skin – just like their lips.

December 14, 2016 11:12 am

Actually a pretty good photoshop. They got the dimensions very close. Polar Bears ARE that big!

December 14, 2016 11:33 am

According to IUCN/SSC Polar bear specialist group there are 19 distinct polar bear populations: 3 are in decline due to lousy neighbors, 1 is increasing, 6 are stable, and 9 covering over half the area lack useful data. The 9 unknown populations are mostly in Russia which hasn’t bought into the CAGW/disappearing sea ice clap trap.
So the glib observation that when Gore was born there were 7,000 polar bears and only 30,000 are left now might not be exact, but the idea is close enough. I guess “saving” the polar bears beats having real jobs.

J Mac
December 14, 2016 11:34 am

Bravo ClimateOtter!
That was one of the best fact based paddlings of a disingenuous, snot nosed troll I have witnessed this year!
Encore! Encore!

Joel Snider
December 14, 2016 12:27 pm

Trust me. NOBODY wants to get a good close look at a polar bear.

Clyde Spencer
December 14, 2016 12:33 pm

All,
I have scrolled through the comments looking for Griff’s apology and couldn’t find it. Surely I just overlooked it! I’d appreciate it if someone could point me to the date and time stamp of his apology.

MarkW
Reply to  Clyde Spencer
December 15, 2016 10:44 am

If you look again, you will find that he is actually claiming to have been vindicated.

Alan Robertson
December 14, 2016 12:46 pm

in re Griff:
Griff has left enough evidence over time for others to build a profile of him and his motives.
1) It is known that most posts from Griff come from a server owned by Barclay’s, during working hours. Rarely does he post during non- working hours (as Griff.)
2) The only conclusions to be drawn from this fact are
a) He is paid for his efforts by his employers at Barclay’s
b) He is a hopelessly inept and clueless time waster on the company’s dime.
If b), then little can be added to his profile. His own words undermine him.
If a), then his/his company’s motives must be examined through several scenarios:
1) Barclay’s is actively interjecting propaganda into the continuing debate.
2) Barclay’s is actively probing for holes in the defenses of skeptic arguments, looking for any warmist rationalization which might still be useful to their agenda.
3) Barclay’s is running a false flag operation, with main intent to discredit the warmist cause, through Griff’s posting of non- stop and indefensible warmist inanities.
With regard to the known agendas of the warmist coalitions, being an increase of power and wealth to the elite statists who are the progenitors and principal supporters of the entire CAGW mythos, then Barclay’s certainly fits the profile for agenda item 1) and probably 2) also, as well as many that this humble peasant hasn’t thought of yet.

Alan Robertson
Reply to  Alan Robertson
December 14, 2016 1:01 pm

Further, examination of “Barclay’s agenda”, another point could be made:
1) Griff rarely engages in debate after one of his posts and when he does engage, it’s usually only to the extent of another warmist copy/past which might support his previous assertions. This behavior is significant, but motive is not clear to me, at least.

Javert Chip
Reply to  Alan Robertson
December 14, 2016 6:31 pm

Alan
Griff IS PAID (that’s his motive). Someone sends him the email of the day with the goofy questions & links.
He does seem to be MIA after today’s stupidity.

Griff
Reply to  Alan Robertson
December 15, 2016 3:51 am

Not paid, no affiliation or involvement in any political party, environmental group, society, or whatever.
all my own ‘amateur’ (in the not paid sense) opinion.
answer with science and observed fact if you please – don’t play the man

catweazle666
Reply to  Griff
December 15, 2016 12:30 pm

“answer with science and observed fact if you please – don’t play the man”
You mean like knowingly stating that a professional scientist with an international reputation had no knowledge of her field when it was clear that you had visited her site and thus were aware she was?

MarkW
Reply to  Alan Robertson
December 15, 2016 10:46 am

“answer with science and observed fact”
You first

Bryan A
Reply to  Alan Robertson
December 16, 2016 2:32 pm

Alan
WRT # 3 above
3) Barclay’s is running a false flag operation, with main intent to discredit the warmist cause, through Griff’s posting of non- stop and indefensible warmist insanities.
fixed it

Griff
Reply to  Alan Robertson
December 15, 2016 3:52 am

Sir, these are attacks of a personal and unfounded nature.
all my remarks are on my own time for my own amusement.
Shame on you!

hunter
Reply to  Griff
December 15, 2016 4:44 am

Griff, you are not actually relevant. Whether paid troll or pathetic true believer doesn’t actually matter much. Examining the aftermath of a the sort petard hoisting you have engaged in is not a personal attack. It is more of a necroscopy.

Caligula Jones
Reply to  Griff
December 15, 2016 8:25 am

…sez the guy who goes to a Climate Sewer to get some ammo to assassinate Susan Crockford’s reputation.

catweazle666
Reply to  Griff
December 15, 2016 12:33 pm

“Sir, these are attacks of a personal and unfounded nature.”
Says the propagandist who attempted to malign the reputation of an internationally recognised scientist by deceitfully claiming she was unqualified in her own field, even asserting that you knew more about it than she did?
What a hypocrite you are.

catweazle666
Reply to  Griff
December 15, 2016 12:34 pm

“Sir, these are attacks of a personal and unfounded nature.”
Says the paid disrupter who attempted to malign the reputation of an internationally recognised scientist by deceitfully claiming she was unqualified in her own field, even asserting that you knew more about it than she did?

Gerald Machnee
Reply to  Griff
December 15, 2016 3:38 pm

Griff,
You should go and amuse yourself elsewhere. You provide no points here.
In your critique of Dr Crockford above you quoted the same error prone pseudo-scientists as yourself.

Joel Snider
Reply to  Griff
December 19, 2016 1:23 pm

You’re entire life is for your own amusement. You’re like a spoiled little sister, baiting her older brother until he hits you.

John in Oz
December 14, 2016 1:24 pm

Griff’s comment includes:

She does not research or publish (scientifically) about bears, nor is she involved in the biology of arctic populations, so far as I know.

.
The use of the words “…so far as I know” encapsulates the entire CAGW industry’s view of the world – that of being in no doubt but often wrong – as they make definitive statements about everything but forget that this is based on “so far as I know” with no regard to what they do not know.
Loved the Griff takedowns – a good laugh to start the morning.
Should we coin a new term for incredulity – “Good Griff!”

tadchem
December 14, 2016 1:37 pm

It was designed to appeal to ‘bleeding hearts’ – people whose cerebral functions occur primarily on an emotional level, devoid of logic. True scientists must function according to the scientific method – objectively and analytically, driven by logic and data rather than emotion.
For years I have suspected that this human dichotomy exists genetically at level comparable to that of subspecies: H. sapiens sapiens v H. sapiens perturbatio.

Phil R
Reply to  tadchem
December 14, 2016 4:59 pm

tadchem,
H. sapiens permasturbatio.
There, FIFY.

TomL
December 14, 2016 1:50 pm

A Texan is being heckled in a local bar in Alaska that he couldn’t pass the test to become an Alaskan
He replies that a Texan can pass any test and asks what he has to do
The local say he needs to do three things. 1 Down a fifth of whiskey 2 make love to an Eskimo woman and 3 kill a polar bear
He promptly downs the fifth and runs out the door of the bar. When he comes back later he is bloody and all torn to shreds and asks “Now where is that Eskimo woman I have to kill?”
do not attempt this at home

Alan Robertson
Reply to  TomL
December 14, 2016 8:48 pm

Kinky Friedman walks into a bar with Commander Cody…

Robert from oz
December 14, 2016 1:53 pm

Every comment that Griff makes now on whatever subject will get the response ” what about those bears “?

Coeur de Lion
December 14, 2016 2:05 pm

There’s this book Arctic Dreams – forget the author – which has a chapter on what Darwin has done to adapt the polar bear for survival. Think about the FEET. Think about the TACTICS. Think about THE BLACK NOSE!! It’s a wonderful read.

Chimp
Reply to  Coeur de Lion
December 14, 2016 4:37 pm

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00D668HB4/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1
I happen to know Barry Lopez. I drive by his house at least once a year.
He’s an environmentalist, but of the kind who likes animals, especially wolves. I’ve never asked him what he thinks about the sacrifice of millions of birds and bats on the altar of “renewable energy”.
Maybe I should.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  Coeur de Lion
December 15, 2016 3:05 pm

Couer,
Are you referring to the story about how polar bears have to walk on three legs while hunting because they have to use one paw to keep their black nose covered so that the seals don’t see them?

Chimp
Reply to  Clyde Spencer
December 15, 2016 3:11 pm

IMO, they cover their noses while still-hunting, ie lying in wait near a seal breathing hole.
Dunno about while walking hunting.

Javert Chip
December 14, 2016 2:32 pm

Her’s an idea:
Anthony posted a picture from “concerned scientists” at the AGU conference in San Francisco (including at least 1 drunk…).
Couldn’t we get those guys to pose with the cuddly polar bear?
Just a suggestion…

Alx
December 14, 2016 2:48 pm

Doesn’t matter if it is the Weizmann Institute or the Committee for the Weizmann Institute. In either case the ad is about the Weizmann Institute in order to garner support for the Weizmann Institute.
That being the case this ad embarrasses the Weizmann Institute.
But who knows this may be a trend. Next astronomers will be drumming up support by showing a little girl picking flowers on the moon. Or biologists asking for support with little girls on unicorns.
Or maybe the Weizmann Institute could stop the madness and denounce this scientifically unsound and overtly political ad.

Pat Frank
Reply to  Alx
December 14, 2016 5:30 pm

Why not email them and ask?

u.k(us)
December 14, 2016 4:19 pm

I bought and read Susan Crockford”s book, and I’ll tell ya that she didn’t pull any punches.

Patrick PEAKE
Reply to  u.k(us)
December 15, 2016 4:55 am

Yes it sure scared me. I daren’t open the fridge now in case there’s one hiding inside

December 14, 2016 4:30 pm

Griff,
Maybe this is why there aren’t as many Polar bears around.
That’s a big incentive to reduce the population…

John F. Hultquist
Reply to  dbstealey
December 14, 2016 6:43 pm

Oops! Since rational hunting laws were adopted there are many more Polar Bears.
Please don’t encourage Griff.

Bryan A
Reply to  dbstealey
December 16, 2016 2:35 pm

But what a cute widdle baby that first bear was.

old construction worker
December 14, 2016 4:32 pm

Someone may mistake that propaganda poster as real news. Fake news is the new term for propaganda.

MarkW
Reply to  old construction worker
December 15, 2016 10:50 am

Bet this is one piece of fake news that Facebook won’t suppress.

Robert from oz
December 14, 2016 4:57 pm

Notice Griff has gone quiet , do we really need to kick a man when he’s down ? Well in some cases more so when there’s no apology.
I respect anyone who makes a mistake and owns up even possibly in this case .

Phil R
Reply to  Robert from oz
December 14, 2016 5:05 pm

Robert from oz,
A mistake is generally a one-time event (and decent people do apologize). A pattern of behavior indicates purposeful intent.

Chimp
Reply to  Phil R
December 14, 2016 5:11 pm

Can Griff really be so dense as not to realize that in mere seconds a normal human being could find the good doctor’s scientific qualifications? Just because he’s a lazy slug troll doesn’t mean that other commenters here are too. The fool must have known how easy it would be to show him up for the ueber fool he has the shame and ignominy to be.
Maybe the jejune imbecile really is that dense.

Griff
Reply to  Phil R
December 15, 2016 5:06 am

chimp:
http://www.carbonbrief.org/polar-bears-and-climate-change-what-does-the-science-say
“The scientists we spoke to tell us Crockford has never led any research on polar bears, nor has she published any papers on the topic. Amstrup tells Carbon Brief:
“[The GWPF report] is a collection of statements [Crockford] has made and conclusions she has drawn without any support from the refereed literature.”
Derocher points out Crockford’s specialism is not, in fact, in the field of polar bears:
“[Crockford’s] expertise is the archaeology of dead dogs and the identification of animal remains â?¦ In general, her views are tainted by a lack of understanding of polar bear ecology, Arctic marine ecosystem, and sea ice.” “

Alan Robertson
Reply to  Phil R
December 15, 2016 7:46 am

Griff, your answer to Chimp certainly fits your profile. We’ve repeatedly seen you fall back on ad hominem attacks as your last line of defense. You never have a leg to stand on with any point you make and you know it. Relentless propaganda is your stock in trade.

Gerald Machnee
Reply to  Phil R
December 15, 2016 3:44 pm

Griff.
You and Amstrup and Derocher are the problem. You asked the problem people for a comment. Dr Crocker has pointed out the problems in their “science”. You went to the wolves den. Similar to going to Realclimate.
You criticized her knowing NOTHING about her and knowing NOTHING about polar bears.
Time for you to apologize to DR. Crockford, then disappear.

Alan Robertson
Reply to  Robert from oz
December 14, 2016 6:25 pm

He’s off the clock.

Reply to  Alan Robertson
December 14, 2016 6:31 pm

If he’s in the UK, he is probably asleep.

Griff
Reply to  Robert from oz
December 15, 2016 3:49 am

Hey, I can only spend a little time in a couple of coffee breaks here…

Gerald Machnee
Reply to  Griff
December 15, 2016 3:45 pm

Even that little time is too much.

Joel Snider
Reply to  Robert from oz
December 19, 2016 1:22 pm

I wouldn’t call him a ‘man’.

Michael of Oz
December 14, 2016 6:55 pm

R.I.P. Griff.

Griff
Reply to  Michael of Oz
December 15, 2016 3:48 am

‘Reports of my death have been greatly exaggerated’

hunter
Reply to  Griff
December 15, 2016 4:46 am

Griff, no one cares.

MarkW
Reply to  Griff
December 15, 2016 10:51 am

Is there a scientific consensus on that?

John F. Hultquist
December 14, 2016 6:57 pm

I came face to face with a bear, you can see it here on Jo’s site:
http://joannenova.com.au/2016/09/uk-government-cuts-electric-car-subsidies-by-half-sales-mysteriously-fall-75/#comment-1839429
It is a cinnamon colored Black Bear. We greeted each other suspiciously and parted amicably.

tony mcleod
December 14, 2016 7:16 pm

I agree with pretty well everything Griff posts. The guy has more guts than most of you brave keyboard warriors put together, few of whom would dare to be so brave to his face.
Yeah, it’s a funny faux pas but sheesh, some of you guys are so bitter.
Chimp, would you really walk up to a complete stranger and slap them with the sort of abuse you’ve posted above? No, of course you wouldn’t. But here you’re part of a really tough, anonymous gang, I get that. You can be as courageous as you like. Good for you, hope it makes you feel better.
To bring it back to polar science here is a snapshot.comment image
and globally:comment image
Thanks for your time, let you get back to Griff.

Alan Robertson
Reply to  tony mcleod
December 14, 2016 7:31 pm

“Warmest year on record…”
———————
So what? Warmest since 100 a.d.? 1000 a.d.? Warmest since the Holocene optimum?
In a word,no. Last year was neither the warmest in the proxy record, nor in recorded human history.
Were Arctic temps inthe past 2 years outside the range of natural variation for the past 10,000 years?
No.
What is your point again, tony mcleod?

tony mcleod
Reply to  Alan Robertson
December 14, 2016 9:47 pm

Point is the rate of change.

Robert from oz
Reply to  Alan Robertson
December 14, 2016 10:49 pm

Warmest year on record can be as little as 10 years depending on the information and the source , it means nothing .

hunter
Reply to  Alan Robertson
December 15, 2016 4:51 am

tony, the rate of change is insignificant and irrelevant climatologically
Now for climate extremists and true believers it is everything. But you believe in an irrational faith system so discussing with you is kind of a waste of time. Ciao.

MarkW
Reply to  Alan Robertson
December 15, 2016 10:53 am

Rate of change depends entirely on the years you choose to cherry pick.

Ross King
Reply to  tony mcleod
December 14, 2016 9:24 pm

So much for Tony McLeod! Post-Griff, the next Troll?

tony mcleod
Reply to  Ross King
December 14, 2016 9:54 pm

WUWT that global sea-ice drop-off Ross?

John F. Hultquist
Reply to  tony mcleod
December 14, 2016 10:00 pm

With all that warming going on North America, especially the north part of the USA and adjacent Canada, will soon be producing so much grain, oil seeds, oranges, sugar cane, bananas, and …

Chris Hanley
Reply to  tony mcleod
December 14, 2016 10:36 pm

“Arctic had warmest year on record …”.
===================
Not necessarily, not according to HadCRUT4:
http://climate4you.com/images/70-90N%20MonthlyAnomaly%20Since1920.gif

catweazle666
Reply to  Chris Hanley
December 15, 2016 12:24 pm

“For what should I apologise?”
Specifically, for deceitfully and maliciously attempting to damage the reputation of a professional scientist of international standing by claiming that she was unqualified in her field, despite having demonstrated you had even been to her site and were aware of her qualifications, which also casts doubt on either your sobriety or mental capacity.
Generally, for being a serial poster of untruths, even though it has been demonstrated to you over an over again that many of them were totally inaccurate.

Robert from oz
Reply to  tony mcleod
December 14, 2016 10:50 pm

If Griff had guts he would apologise.

Griff
Reply to  Robert from oz
December 15, 2016 3:47 am

For what should I apologise?

MarkW
Reply to  Robert from oz
December 15, 2016 10:53 am

For being an idiot.

catweazle666
Reply to  Robert from oz
December 15, 2016 12:17 pm

“If Griff had guts he would apologise.”
He’s a Lefty Guardianista.
Of course he has no guts, nor a conscience either come to that.

Chimp
Reply to  Robert from oz
December 15, 2016 12:22 pm

Besides being an idiot, also for libeling Dr. Crockford, when it would have taken any normal person above the age of seven about three seconds to find her bona fides.

Robert from oz
Reply to  tony mcleod
December 15, 2016 12:44 am

Tony , Griff whatever you’re real name is the graph from NOAA has some unusual stats , thanks for showing it . Can anyone else see periods when global temps were up but Arctic temps were down? Surely this can’t be a tortured NOAA graph they would have corrected that just before the year 2000 .
And correct me if wrong but is that the El Niño spike at the end ? your NSIDC graph doesn’t quite match some of the other graphs they produce .

MarkW
Reply to  tony mcleod
December 15, 2016 10:52 am

Idiots stick together.
Nobody else would have them.

Chimp
Reply to  tony mcleod
December 15, 2016 3:05 pm

tony mcleod
December 14, 2016 at 7:16 pm
Yes, after the stranger spouted such garbage for so long, attacking his intellectual and moral betters without the least justification and out of total ignorance.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  tony mcleod
December 15, 2016 3:31 pm

Tony,
Because of the climatologist’s fascination with anomalies, we don’t have any information in your graphics about the actual air temperatures. As I recollect, sea water freezes at about 28 deg F. That implies that the air temperature has to be above 28 deg F if ice isn’t forming. With a maximum anomaly of about 11 deg F, that suggests the typical temperatures would be about 17 deg F. Considering that it is forecast to be considerably below that tonight here in southern Ohio, I’d be surprised to discover that the air temperatures were that high. . We are approaching the Winter Solstice, meaning that here is no sunlight to warm the oceans at the localities showing the maximum anomalies. Something is happening, obviously. But, I suspect that it is either warm water moving into the Arctic Basin, or turbulence in the Jet Stream sucking in warm low-latitude air. The role of CO2 or “dark water” (no sunlight!) can be ruled out with such high temperatures. Somebody who gets paid to understand this needs to start thinking outside the CO2 box and look for alternative explanations.

tony mcleod
Reply to  Clyde Spencer
December 15, 2016 8:52 pm

“Something is happening, obviously. But, I suspect that it is either warm water moving into the Arctic Basin, or turbulence in the Jet Stream sucking in warm low-latitude air.”
These would appear to be the likely causes and the postulation is that Jet Stream turbulence might in part be caused by reducing north-south temperature gradient – a feedback.

Ross King
December 14, 2016 9:17 pm

GRIFF is someone we shd IGNORE as a Troll.
After *this* ‘Black-Eye’, one might expect him/her/it to change name to [Whatever] and continue bugging us.
Let’s IGNORE HIM/HER/IT AS THE TOTAL IRRELEVANCE SHE-IT IS.
SHE-IT indeed.
ENOUGH!!

tony mcleod
Reply to  Ross King
December 14, 2016 9:53 pm

Shouting doesn’t make you more persuasive. If it wasn’t for Griff and few others this site would run the risk of being an un-scientific echo chamber and outlet for ignorant rants.

Robert from oz
Reply to  tony mcleod
December 14, 2016 10:46 pm

Errrr is it Tony or Griff I’m posting to ? Same baloney different name .
(Griff) Tony if you read his only post on this thread and you can defend it with real science such as how much different the Arctic is today rather than 100 years ago or even better emperical evidence as to how we’re all wrong that would be great .
Not withstanding the fact he owes that scientist an apology .

Brett Keane
Reply to  tony mcleod
December 14, 2016 11:26 pm

It is not likely that Tony/gri