Saturday Stupidity: Epic fail by @ourplanet

If you’re a person who watched Walt Disney on TV as a kid, you probably remember one of the most epic wildlife films ever produced by Disney where a steady stream of lemmings was jumping over a cliff. This was attributed to lemmings just being stupid or having bad eyesight and has become a global meme ever since. The word “lemmings” has become synonymous with jumping over a cliff without thinking.

The problem however with the Disney film is that it wasn’t true; it was all staged by the producers and the camera people. This was found out years later by an investigation done by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation.

From the Alaska Dept. of Fish and Game

The “pack of lemmings” reaches the final precipice. “This is the last chance to turn back,” Hibbler states. “Yet over they go, casting themselves out bodily into space.”

Lemmings are seen flying into the water. The final shot shows the sea awash with dying lemmings.

Certainly, some scenes in nature documentaries are staged. In Sir David Attenborough’s recent documentary, “The Life of Birds,” the close-up footage of a flying duck, filmed razor-sharp from the bird’s wingtip, was shot from a car using a mallard drake trained to fly alongside the car. But faking an entirely mythical event is something else.

Back to the present day, a television program by the name of Our Planet is produced by the BBC and stars Sir David Attenborough the same noted naturalist that staged the flying duck scene. On a recent program they showed walruses falling over a cliff and acting like lemmings themselves attributed this terrible thing to “climate change”, which has become the “universal boogeyman” for lemming like professional journalists.

There’s only one problem, like the Disney story it wasn’t true, and it wasn’t due to climate change.

From the Bishop Hill website, written by Andrew Montford:


My article on walruses appeared behind the paywall at the Spectator Coffee House blog earlier this week. 

Over the weekend, social media and the newspapers were full of stories of Pacific walruses plunging over sea cliffs to their deaths. Heart-wrenching film of the corpses of these magnificent beasts piled up on the shore have been driving many to tears.

This all came about as the result of the latest episode of Our Planet, the new wildlife extravaganza from Netflix. As is normal for such programmes, the story that accompanies the animal eye-candy is told by Sir David Attenborough and, as is positively compulsory, it is spiced with multiple references to the horrors of global warming. In fact, we are told, it is us who should shoulder the blame for the slaughter of the walruses, because shrinking sea ice caused by climate change forces them to haulout – leaving the water to take refuge on the shore instead.

The programme ends with Attenborough directing viewers to a website run by WWF, the co-producers of the series. It is therefore, in essence, an eight-part, multi-million pound fundraiser.

Which is a pity, because there is now considerable evidence emerging that the story is not quite what it seems.

For a start, as the zoologist Susan Crockford has documented for the GWPF, walrus haul out behaviour may not be related to global warming. In her 2014 paper On the Beach, she cites examples as far back as the 1930s, long before global warming. She also explains that there doesn’t appear to be a strong correlation between sea-ice levels and haulout behaviour.

Nor is the phenomenon of walruses falling to their deaths from sea cliffs new. American TV recorded the same phenomenon in 1994 and the New York Times reported 60 deaths in a single incident in 1996. Attempts were made to install a fence at one site, while another employs rangers whose sole job is to keep the walruses away from the cliffs. At the time, scientists explained that the most likely explanation  was overcrowding at the water’s edge.

Crockford thinks that the footage on the Netflix show comes from a well-documented incident that took place in the village of Ryrkaypiy, in eastern Siberia, in October 2017. September and October are the peak period for walrus haulouts, and there are numerous examples, which date back to the 1960s, of the cliff phenomenon taking place on Wrangel Island, a few hundred kilometres to the north.

However in 2017, as the Siberian Times reported, the colony attracted polar bears that frequent – and indeed at the time terrorise – the area. The bears drove several hundred walruses over the cliffs to their deaths, before feasting on the corpses. They continued to frequent the area right through into the winter.

I’ve been able to show that Crockford’s supposition about the geographical origin of the footage is correct: analysis of the rock shapes in the film and in a photo taken by the producer/director both match archive photos of Ryrkaypiy. The photo was taken on 19 September 2017, during the events described by the Siberian Times.

But whereas the Siberian Times and Gizmodo website, which also reported on the 2017 incident, were both quite clear that the walruses were driven over the cliffs by polar bears, Netflix makes no mention of their presence. Similarly, there is no mention of the fact that walrus haulouts are entirely normal. Instead, Attenborough tells his viewers that climate change is forcing the walruses on shore, where their poor eyesight leads them to plunge over the cliffs.

This is all very troubling as it raises the possibility that Netflix and the WWF are, innocently or otherwise, party to a deception of the public. Exactly who was aware of the presence of polar bears remains unclear, but it seems doubtful that no one at the WWF and the production team was unaware. And given that one of the prime objectives of the show seems to have been to raise funds for WWF, that seems… problematic.


Josh has his take on it:

CartoonsbyJosh.com

83 thoughts on “Saturday Stupidity: Epic fail by @ourplanet

    • The storyline that Our Planet crew were alerted that walruses were falling off a cliff, and they “rushed” a film crew that arrived a couple weeks later to record it, and by gosh, the walruses were still plummeting, sounds like a stretch.

      Hearing a story of polar bears terrorizing walruses the previous year, causing them to move back, and reach the cliff edge, and be pushed over, and using footage taken from the incident makes more sense.

      Changing the narrative from “Voracious polar bears attack walruses, causing panic leading to terrorized walruses trying to escape, and falling off a cliff, as they run out of room to run,” to “Global warming drives walruses to insanity, causing them to commit suicide,” makes sense to leftists.

      • The allegation is that the film crew were at a much larger haulout just down the coast, but were alerted to events by WWF Russia, who have been organising polar bear protection and clean up of walrus corpses for some years. No long distance trip from Bristol required.

    • I’m shocked…..said no one

      Incorrect, Captain Renault said it best:
      I’m shocked, shocked to find that gambling deception is going on in here!

  1. Typical propaganda bomb where once it’s dropped the damage is done. Especially when attempts to tell the truth are stonewalled by the media.

    • The walrus leads the leaps, then bleeds, then leads the headlines. The WWF has become a fundraising monster which spreads misconceptions to get money. You can call it fake news.

      That media’s morality is so low is no news. It was said that a man bites a dog is news, today it is really so that a wolf bites a person and it is a ‘singular case’, unnews, but when a man shoots a wolf it is a tendency and news.

      Polar bear killing walruses is unnews, a ‘singular case’, not an event of notability, so by framing it man-made the climatariat can put the blame so weirdly on white cismen (so called majority, I guess less than 10% of the world population, but a leftist ‘moral majority’ can be a real minority) and then it becomes news. I’m so sick and tired I’m gonna self identify as a gender blender nonamerican ethnic Yule season swinephile. Eat that, Fauxahontas.

  2. Once a long time ago I had great respect for Sir David Attenborough. I have on DVD’s just about all of his documentaries, and they are good.

    But now for reasons that I do not understand he has become just a part of the very successful Propaganda machine which keeps this gigantic and very expensive hoax going.

    Our only hope is President Trump, with his backing and cash, that he can expose this climate nonsense for what it s, just a load of rubbish, with a long term desire for World Government run by the likes of the United Nations top brass.

    Lets call it what it is, Communism Mark two.

    MJE VK5ELL

    • Here is an email I sent to Guardian this week after a pathetically uncritical piece where Attenborough’s nonsense was quoted without any fact checking.

      Dear readers’ editor,

      https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/apr/11/expect-even-greater-migration-from-africa-says-attenborough-imf-global-warming

      Attenborough, who was publicising the Netflix series Our Planet, said: “I find it hard to exaggerate the peril. This is the new extinction and we are half way through it.

      Really? Half the species on Earth are already extinct ? I must have missed that paper !

      Noting that “70% of bird species have gone”, he said: “We have time now, 10 years, perhaps 20 years, to do something about it.

      The link under the words “bird species have gone” take us to an earlier article reporting EIGHT avian extinctions in a decade. Nowhere in that article does the figure 70% appear.

      Apparently dotard Attenborough has no trouble at all exaggerating the “peril” and is just making shit up. Why does this kind of fanciful claim get reported without comment or rigorous comment from a biologist who has studied avian extinction. Attenborough is a film maker not a scientist and he seems to have gone into some senile fantasy land in recent years.

      Indeed your link to an article which shows it is complete garbage, so your writer was aware, yet he reports these stupid, unfounded claims without question in the article.

      Asked by the IMF managing director, Christine Lagarde, whether there was a link between migration and climate change, Attenborough said: “It is happening in Europe. People are coming from Africa because they can’t live where they are.”

      Again this is so far from the truth as to be obscene. Refugees are not leaving Africa because of “climate change” they are fleeing for their lives because of regional conflict, much of it stoked by outside interference. I have a Syrian refugee family as neighbours, they have never mentioned “climate change” as being why they fled the country !!

      If your climate crusade needs to descend into such stupid and dishonest claims in order to make the case for “action” , you need to find a new bandwagon to jump onto. The wheels have seriously come off your current ride.

      Please stop publishing such biased and untruthful misinformation. Putting his silly claims in as quotations does not excuse this unless you quote reliable, factual sources in the same article to show how off the wall he is.

      I grew up on Attenboroughs nature documentaries and loved his work. That does not mean his current delusional claims should be unquestionably presented as fact.

      Best regards, Greg Goodman.

      • Nice…apart from the ”best regards” part. The Guardian should be regarded as a rag fit for wrapping dead fish at best.

          • Still, there’s something fishy about every one of their stories that show up here.
            Virtual fish wrappings seems to be all they can offer.

        • The Guardian should be regarded as a rag fit for wrapping dead fish at best.

          Even dead fish deserve better.

      • >>Why does this kind of fanciful claim get reported without
        >>comment or rigorous comment from a biologist

        Because the biologist who would have corrected Attenborough was David Bellamy – but Bellamy told the truth so often the BBC sacked him, and he has never worked again since.

        (Back in 2008 or so, Bellamy said AGW was nonsense and wind turbines were stupid, and he disappeared. Some did wonder if he had been shipped off to the Gulags. Certainly the BBC would have liked to have done so…..)

        Ralph

        P.S. Why can we not show images here anymore….?
        .

    • “……..for reasons that I do not understand……..”
      Here’s some contenders:
      Excessive adulation, causing
      excessive ego, resulting from
      confusion between fact and fantasy, and believing own PR, and
      being well over 90 years old (with the likely cognitive erosion attendant to that.)

  3. Gee, it is a wonder they haven’t found some way to attribute the annual wildebeest migration in east Africa to “climate change” by showing the animals plunging into rivers and being torn apart by crocodiles. And sometimes the wildebeest fall down steep cliffs and get injured or killed before the crocs ever get a chance at them. Guess they’ve never heard of a stampede. Granted, in the case of the walruses, it was a very slow moving one, but a stampede none the less to escape predators.

  4. Attenborough should know better than to be used like this. At least he should announce publicly that he wasn’t part of the deception. He’s entitled to his opinion on GW, but not to being part of a dishonest scam that can damage his reputation as a scientist.

      • Its worse than that Jim !
        Having been for years on the board of the BBC, he will be aware of increasing public reticence regarding increases in the licence fee, and the need to be expanding the Corporations sources of income. Hence the tie up with Netflix, and the headlining of a red in tooth and claw natural event in order to get attention.

        The upside of this is that I can now add the WWF to the list of organisations to which I should never give a brass razoo. Needless to say, the BBC made the list some years back 🙂

  5. The producer of the show has flat out said there were no polar bears in the area. Does anyone know if this comment has been challenged? It’s important to get these things right. We can’t assume she is lying even if it most likely is.

    • It could have been the documentary crew and/or their boats. that cause the panic which lead to some the walrus going over the cliff.

      • The camera crew gave the walruses iPhones to play with, knowing full well they would try to take selfies on the edge of the cliffs.

        All that just to make a film, how low can you get ?

      • Indeed it could. Walrus are easily spooked into a stampede, so you have to be very careful near a haulout. Even on flat ground females and young can be killed during a stampede.

    • And the producer informed us of the location where the great cataract of walruses occurred, right? So we can verify the event.

    • In that case it was almost certainly the film crew that were to blame. Walrus are easily spooked, but they don’t stampede unless they have been frightened by something.

  6. I have to presume Attenborough is a voice for hire. The deception is perpetrated by the WWF who contracted the piece.

    Is anyone surprised? I am not. They have changed. Once was a time they would have demanded fraudulent and misrepresentative video be taken down and replaced to correctly present Nature.

    • WWF aren’t really interested in wildlife any more. All they care about is global warming/climate change

    • “Filmmakers” should be sued if they are publishing footage fraudulently misrepresented as something it is not. This is becoming a larger problem as “deepfaking,” PhotoShopping, etc. are now walking around in everyone’s hand. This is beyond “fake news”–it’s FICTION.

  7. Perhaps a more significant Attenborough Faux pas than might be initially thought.

    A scandal too far for the irrepressibly Teflon shouldered Sir David?

    It’s not the first time he’s been caught casually lying, not to influence the cause of climate change, but to line his own pockets with the filthy lucre.

    And whilst with the BBC his credentials, and public acceptance, were beyond reproach thanks to the rabidly left wing, Politically Correct and climate change conditioned Common Purpose influences from within, Netflix no longer offers that cover.

    The BBC is the British public broadcaster paid for by the TV licence fee. A requirement if one wants to watch live TV in the UK without risking criminal prosecution.

    Sir David has lost his establishment cover by crossing over to the dark side of commercialisation.

    The BBC won’t act as cover as it’s not in their interest.

    I suspect we have heard the last of the man.

    • ‘a television program by the name of Our Planet is produced by the BBC and stars Sir David Attenborough’
      Does the BBC have anything to do with this programme, or is it just Netflix?

  8. Actually, the only that have a lemming behavior are the gullibles that demonstrate in the streets and strike in front of high schools against a non existent AGW.

  9. The thirty- something producer said that there were observers some distance away to make sure that the film crew were safe from polar bears. So they must have known that there were polar bears in the vicinity, if not in the immediate vicinity.

    Perhaps she should have seen this short video of walruses jumping to heir deaths in Alaska in 2014 before she jumping to her conclusion that the deaths to which her walruses had been driven was a result of climate change. But if she had not included that supposition, David “Windmill” Attenborough would probably not have provided the voice over.

    • interesting to see they scavenged the tusks for sale to raise funds. someone was smarter than a walrus;-)

  10. Walruses have poor vision? I propose the “Glasses for Walruses Initiative”. Now where’s my grant?

    • They have very poor vision and hearing, but a very keen sense of smell. If you move slowly and quietly against the wind you can get to within a few meters without being noticed.

      And they are easy to spook into a stampede, so you need to be very careful. Even on flat ground females and young can be crushed in a stampede.

  11. I read the report and the comments and watched the video from Solomon. Walt Disney? I remember the lemmings bit from when I was young. The lasting impact of all this propaganda is that children are being brain-washed in the grand style of communists. This whole Anthropogenic Global Warming scam certainly has legs, and that is not good news for a whole generation. Think AOC for the next 30 years. I need a drink.

    • Ron Long

      Walt Disney? I remember the lemmings bit from when I was young.

      AS I recall, there seven Disney “nature” films. The lemmings “legend” was shown in the third or fourth. (If you see six, the seventh movie was free.)

  12. A sort of lemming is frequently found in the financial markets.
    As in:
    “Come on in. It feels good. All the lemmings are doing it!”
    Guidance is provided by attractive ladies “Rosy Scenario” and the always irresistible “Lady Bountiful”.
    Then Mother Nature and Mister Margin are there to turn them into:
    “Lame Ducks”

  13. For years there was a remote spot in BC east of Hope where drivers stopped to take a pee and mysteriously disappeared. Only after someone survived the fall was the mystery solved. Climate change or Sasquatch?

  14. The WWF, like any other such organization, is devoted more to its own continuation than it is to its former more laudable goals.

    We’ve been through this many times. The temperance campaigns that led to prohibition come to mind. Only one side of the argument is presented and it is exaggerated beyond belief. It gives the self-righteous a chance to lord it over the rest of us. link

    Environmentalism and CAGW are just the latest of a long string of moral campaigns that, in the end, produce no good result. It’s hubris at its worst and, apparently, we don’t learn from past mistakes.

  15. Walrus have always hauled out on land.

    For example, there was once a walrus colony on Sable Island, where there is no ice at all in Summer.

    And the haulout on Moffen Island in Svalbard was first mentioned in 1723. That colony was exterminated during the nineteenth century, but was re-established c. 1973, probably by animals from Nordaustlandet.

    https://polarresearch.net/index.php/polar/article/download/2533/5784/

    As a matter of fact it might be argued that it is haulouts on ice that are exceptional, and due to excessive hunting having exterminated colonies that hauled out on land (like Moffen and Sable Island).

    And during the Viking Period walrus even occurred in northern Norway, where there isn’t any sea-ice even in winter.

  16. Walruses throwing themselves off cliffs… why does this feel like a Monty Python short?

  17. Wall St Bankers and stockbrokers seem to be jumping off high rise buildings in large numbers.
    I’m waiting for the headline: “Alpha Males suicide rather than face climate Armageddon”.

  18. If filmmakers are using tax money to defraud the public, isn’t there a law against that? Asking as an American; I really don’t know.

  19. What is the best kept secret in Climate Science? (Part 2)
    ========================================

    Climate scientists want people to know how much they have warmed by.

    But they don’t want people to know what real absolute temperature they live at.

    Why would that be?

    Real absolute temperatures are more fundamental than temperature anomalies.

    Climate scientists have to use real absolute temperatures, to calculate temperature anomalies.

    But the real absolute temperatures are never shown to the public.

    Why would that be?

    Could it be, that real absolute temperatures make global warming look less catastrophic?

    Will many people discover that they actually live in cold countries? And that global warming might make their country nicer?

    That couldn’t possibly be true, could it?

    There is only one way to find out. Read the second part of my series of articles on RATS – Real Absolute Temperatures:

    https://agree-to-disagree.com/rats-north-winter-south-summer

  20. “Walrus on the verge of a nervous breakdown over the claim that the world will end in 12 years decide to take matters into their own hands , or flippers, preferring to end AOC’s un -Bearable psychological trauma .

  21. I was unable to watch the film because of the certainty that at some stage I would be ambushed by a reference to climate change . Sad for the old walrus Attenborough.

  22. The pdf report only makes a couple of passing references to ‘substantial changes in the seasonal availability of sea-ice’. It makes it quite clear that mass haulouts are a longstanding phenomenon and that stampeding has always been a risk. The only difference is that when sea ice is reduced the females and young are more likely to come ashore and to become more vulnerable.

  23. Let me get this straight. There is absolutely no evidence that polar bears were present. All that there is is
    an unsubstantiated claim that the incident on film might be the same as one in 2017 where polar bears
    caused walruses to stampede and fall to their deaths. As I understand it the producers have not stated where
    or when the incident took place. If the people here were as critical about skeptic’s claims as they are about
    global warming this article would be widely panned as an unsubstantial attack piece.

    • And the fact that the programme lied about this walrus activity being new and unusual.
      That is the key point.
      The programme said this was a new thing that must be related to climate change and loss of ice. When it is an old thing for which climate change and ice changes are not implicated.

      The documentary is fraudulent. The dialogue at least was a distortion of the truth.

    • I think it is unfortunate to focus on the bears. It is clear that walruses have been dying at this location – due to the unfortunate, probably unique, geography – for a long time. There was clearly an incident where bears were involved, but it happens anyway. It’s nothing to do with climate change/sea ice levels. Just a walrus navigable slope leading to a cliff – they are very dumb animals. In summer the males have formed enormous shore haul outs here since ‘records began’. There were reports of mass ‘suicides’ from 1994 and 1996 when summer sea ice minimums were high. These deaths in no way threaten the species survival, indeed the fact that there are 100,000+ male walruses in one location (after the severe decline mid last century) is an enormous conservation (hunting restrictions) success story. The numbers are limited by what the clam beds can support and it is likely there are/have been too many in recent years.

    • I probably have more field experience of walrus than you have. They don’t stampede unless they have been frightened by something.

      If Polar Bears weren’t present, then they were probably frightened by humans. There really isn’t much else that they need to be afraid of. They have very bad sight and hearing out of water but a very keen sense of smell, so they can be spooked by humans or bears quite far off if they are upwind.

      • In some of their come backs the production team has both denied and admitted the presence of bears.

        On a short clip ‘behind the scenes’ on youtube they have an aerial panning shot directly over and approaching from the landward side of the cliff that could only be from a drone or helicopter.

        But again, it’s all pretty irrelevant, it is clearly just one of natures freak occurrences, they fall off regardless.

  24. In connection with “disappearing ice” it might be worth mentioning that Ryrkapyi was formerly known as Mys Shmidta, and that the only reason the town exists is that the airfield there was once a major staging base for Soviet strategic bombers. It was actually so important that the very first successful satellite photograph ever taken on August 18 1960 by Discoverer 14 covered Mys Shmidta. It shows that the area was completely ice-free:

    https://airandspace.si.edu/exhibitions/space-race/online/sec400img/420l6p6.jpg

    So the there is nowhere in the World where “the satellite record” is as long as there. The cliff is on the seaward side of the small island off the cape.

    • Not true. The town and airbase called Cape Schmidt are on the Eastern side, South of the headland and narrow spit that leads to the haulout location. Ryrkaypii is to the West on Northerly facing coast. The name is old, and much older than the airbase. Best translation is walrus rookery.

      A Neolithic site of ancient marine hunters was found on the shore of Cape Schmidt. There are remains of ancient huts at the foot of the cliffs on the western side and there was an ancient Chukchi fortification at the top.[3]

      The local name of the landhead was Il-Kappeya, meaning “Walrus constipation” in the Chukchi language. James Cook named the headland “Cape North” in 1778 when he sailed through the Bering Strait and into the Chukchi Sea,[4] demonstrating to people in Europe and North America that Russia and Alaska were separated.[5] The cape was renamed after Soviet scientist and first head of the Chief Directorate of the Northern Sea Route, Otto Schmidt in 1934.

  25. I assume the observations of this going back to the 60s, does not mean they just began a ”new craze” like rock ‘n roll, and in fact, it is something they probably have always done.
    An easy solution would be to randomly set up some fake Polar bears, near the cliffs, to scare off the Walruses . Not a new idea. We’ve done it with Crows in the corn fields etc. for years.

    • Those fake Polar bears would have to smell like bears for that to work. Walrus have very bad eyesight out of water.

  26. This is nonsense from Attenborough.

    There is plenty of video of hungry polar bears at walrus haulouts nowhere near cliffs, with the polar bears engaging in mayhem to get a meal while the walruses of all sizes, ages and sexes do the best they can to get into the water away from the bears.

    Now I wonder if Attenborough thinks “Jurassic Park” was real.

  27. It’s about time to divest from Netflix and any other organization that peddles mush-brained propaganda.

  28. I’m going to cut Attenborough a little slack seeing as how he’s got to be at least 1/1024th walrus himself. Gotta be tough for him to see walrii perish, whatever the cause.

  29. Hmm. It’s not the just the polar bears or Disney filming the killing to tell lucrative tall tales. Before the age of oil and the pale face, the Indians, er noble Native Americans drove buffalo herds off cliffs for food also. Probably to stock up on meat before the weather changed and a winter of teepee living and telling tall tales under warm fresh buffalo robes with running bare forked tongue teepee squaw Pokelot. There’s even a ski resort still named Squaw Valley in honor of those steamy tepid times with the culturally appropriating pale face mountain men, which probably should be renamed Vagina Valley for today’s sensitive ones still hotdogging those moguls, nooks, and crannies.

  30. Attenborough is a global warming advocate from the time when his peer, David Bellamy, was sacked by the BBC for calling AGM bunkum. Attenborough saw where the money laid and gave up any appearance of being scientific to keep his job and get invited to the big gigs like Davos. The photography is beautiful but the meme is duplicitous.

  31. to prevent being suprized in their sleep they always appoint one as a sentinall and place it in the middle to keep watch over them… As we approached them with the ships they would lie very quiet till we came within two cables length of them, when the one that had the watch would make a great noise to allarm the rest upon which they all began by degrees to raise their heads and shoulders and look around them and then crawl to the edge of the Ice and plunge head foremost into the water, so that by the time we had got within a ½ a cable length of them there would not be one remaining; the noise they make is a mean betwixt the barking of a dog and the bellowing of an Ox… unless we fired at them upon the Ice it was twenty to one that we could hit them in the water, as they dive immediately… After we had got them onboard they were skinned and cut up by the butcher. The hides we preserved for the Rigging, the Blubber or fat we put into casks to melt down into train oil for our lamps; and the flesh disgustfull as it was we eat thro’ extreme hunger, caused by the badness of our provisions and short allowance, which were but just enough to exist upon and were now reduced on account of this supply.

    Capt Gilbert, Cook voyage through Chukchi/Bering Seas, Aug/Sep 1778

  32. The Canadian alarmist CBC has gone the narrative that the Walrus’s haul out on land in record numbers because of climate-change-loss-of-ice. The alarmist-CBC didn’t mention once that the polar bears are spooking the Walrus’s over the edge to get a good meal !!

  33. I put this comment on pour Canadian state/liberal broadcaster web site that had an all emotion play on the Walrus’s, the comment was quickly disable

    . . . Regarding the segment on Walruses jumping of the cliff’s in the April 15 show that isn’t allowing any comments. Polar bears love to stalk and spook the Walrus’s of the cliff’s for a good meal !! There is absolutely nothing abnormal with this Walrus behaviour & it has nothing to do with the climate-change-fear-narrative or sea ice !!!
    https://www.cbc.ca/radio/thecurrent/the-current-for-april-15-2019-1.5098114

Comments are closed.