Posted on February 19, 2021 | Comments Offon Fact: polar bears are thriving despite sea ice loss according to the scientific literature
Is Facebook now an expert on polar bear conservation status? Apparently they have decreed themselves the last word for online content. There is a plan afoot to label anything that says polar bears are not being harmed by recent sea ice declines as ‘disinformation’ – but on whose authority? Thanks to Josh for the cartoon below.
A new section of the Climate Science Information Center, launching alongside the labelling trial, debunks common myths such as the false claim that polar bear populations are not suffering due to global heating, or the widespread belief that excess carbon emissions help plant life. Facebook is working with climate communication experts from around the world, including at the University of Cambridge, to produce the content.
Ah, they’re consulting ‘climate communication experts‘! Those experts surely must be up on all the latest papers and not trusting the word of obviously biased conservations organizations like the WWF or PBI whose real reason for existence is the generation of as much money in donations as possible?
The peer reviewed literature supports the claim that polar bears are currently thriving despite recent ice declines – especially in the Chukchi and Barents Seas – regardless of what computer model predictions say about what might happen in the future. This is a fact, not a ‘myth’. See my paper from 2017 and my 2019 book for most of the citations (Crockford 2017, 2019) and others in the reference list below. Check them out yourself before you believe Facebook. Ask me for any paper you’d like to see via the ‘contact me’ form and I’ll send it along. Also, look for my State of the Polar Bear Report 2020 next week.
The polar bear has two features that mark it as a thriving species: it’s as wide-spread across the Arctic as it was hundreds of years ago and there has not been a sustained, statistically significant decline in numbers in any of the 19 official subpopulations. Modest declines in abundance for Western and Southern Hudson Bay documented in 2016 were not statistically significant and have almost certainly been reversed since then.
That’s because the last four years have been especially good for Hudson Bay bears: in 2020, most Western Hudson Bay bears left for the newly-formed ice as early in the autumn as they did in the 1980s – for the fourth year in a row – and sea ice breakup in spring was also like the 1980s for the second year in a row. Southern Hudson Bay bears experienced virtually identical conditions. The number of bear problems in Churchill, Manitoba, which self-identifies as the ‘Polar Bear Capital of the World’, were the lowest in years.
Bears that came ashore in mid-to-late August and left in November would have spent only three months on land – about one month less than most bears did in the 1980s and two months less than bears did in the early 2000s (Castro de la Guardia et al 2017). The last four years at least have been very similar – so it’s no wonder none of this information has been made available in the peer-reviewed literature.
It’s not just these Canadian bears that have been thriving: virtually all polar bears across the Arctic have been in excellent condition in recent years. Photos of fat bears are the ‘new normal’. They’ve had an abundance of fat seal pups to eat in the spring due in large part to increased primary productivity. According to NOAA scientists, summer growth of plankton in the Arctic has increased since 2002 because of longer ice-free periods, especially in the Russian Arctic, the Barents Sea and Hudson Bay. Due to especially low ice levels in 2020, plankton blooms hit records highs in August (see photo below). More abundant plankton benefits the entire Arctic food chain: more fish means fatter seal pups and well-fed polar bears. This goes a long way towards explaining why polar bears doing so well in areas like the Chukchi and Barents Seas where profound summer sea ice losses have occurred in recent years.
However, none of these recent facts were taken into account for the 2020 computer model that predicted the near-extinction of the species by 2100 and minimal cub survival for Southern Hudson Bay bears before 2030. This pessimistic model’s primary assumption was that historical data from Western Hudson Bay polar bears could be used as a proxy to predict how all other bear populations across the Arctic would respond to various predicted declines in summer ice coverage. Unfortunately, the model also depended upon the scientifically discredited and implausible ‘worst case’ climate scenario (‘RCP8.5’) to arrive at its dystopian vision of future sea ice conditions.
As a consequence, this new prediction of polar bear extinction is even less worthy of serious consideration than the failed prediction polar bear specialists developed in 2007. We now know that polar bears have generally benefitted from much less summer sea ice than was available in the 1980s and rather than declining continuously, September sea ice levels have been rather stable since 2007 (see graph below, from US NSIDC).
Sadly, the facts indicating that polar bears are thriving across the Arctic are routinely pushed aside in favour of an ominous prophetic narrative because it supports the ‘climate change emergency’ rhetoric. ‘Trust the science’ is meaningless if model outputs based on faulty assumptions are considered evidence and if scientists display obvious biases, as the IUCN Polar Bear Specialist Group does when it ignores a massive increase in population numbers that was not statistically significant, as they did for Barents Sea bears, but adopts the new number if it’s not statistically significant but shows a slight decline as they did for Western Hudson Bay.
This is why I do what I do – someone needs to keep the public abreast of recent literature and on-the-ground developments that don’t conform to the climate emergency narrative and to call out false statements made by polar bear specialists with an agenda. There is currently no climate emergency for polar bears, despite what computer models suggest might happen decades from now.
REFERENCES
Aars, J. 2018. Population changes in polar bears: protected, but quickly losing habitat. Fram Forum Newsletter 2018. Fram Centre, Tromso. Download pdf here (32 mb).
Atwood, T.C., Bromaghin, J.F., Patil, V.P., Durner, G.M., Douglas, D.C., and Simac, K.S., 2020. Analyses on subpopulation abundance and annual number of maternal dens for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on polar bears (Ursus maritimus) in the southern Beaufort Sea, Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2020-1087. https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr20201087. pdf here.
Castro de la Guardia, L., Myers, P.G., Derocher, A.E., Lunn, N.J., Terwisscha van Scheltinga, A.D. 2017. Sea ice cycle in western Hudson Bay, Canada, from a polar bear perspective. Marine Ecology Progress Series 564: 225–233. http://www.int-res.com/abstracts/meps/v564/p225-233/
Coupel, P., Michel, C. and Devred, E. 2019. Case study: The Ocean in Bloom. In State of Canada’s Arctic Seas, Niemi, A., Ferguson, S., Hedges, K., Melling, H., Michel, C., et al. 2019. Canadian Technical Report Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 3344.
Crawford, J.A., Quakenbush, L.T. and Citta, J.J. 2015. A comparison of ringed and bearded seal diet, condition and productivity between historical (1975–1984) and recent (2003–2012) periods in the Alaskan Bering and Chukchi seas. Progress in Oceanography 136:133-150.
Crockford, S.J. 2017. Testing the hypothesis that routine sea ice coverage of 3-5 mkm2 results in a greater than 30% decline in population size of polar bears (Ursus maritimus). PeerJ Preprints 19 January 2017. Doi: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.2737v1 Open access. https://peerj.com/preprints/2737/
Crockford, S.J. 2019. The Polar Bear Catastrophe That Never Happened. Global Warming Policy Foundation, London. Available in paperback and ebook formats. Crockford, S.J. 2020. State of the Polar Bear Report 2019. Global Warming Policy Foundation Report 39, London. pdf here.
Dyck, M., Regehr, E.V. and Ware, J.V. 2020. Assessment of Abundance for the Gulf of Boothia Polar Bear Subpopulation Using Genetic Mark-Recapture. Final Report, Government of Nunavut, Department of Environment, Iglulik. 12 June 2020. Pdf here.
Frey, K.E., Comiso, J.C., Cooper, L.W., Grebmeier, J.M. and Stock, L.V. 2020. Arctic Ocean primiary productivity: the response of marine algae to climate warming and sea ice decline. 2020 Arctic Report Card. NOAA. DOI: 10.25923/vtdn-2198 https://arctic.noaa.gov/Report-Card/Report-Card-2020/ArtMID/7975/ArticleID/900/Arctic-Ocean-Primary-Productivity-The-Response-of-Marine-Algae-to-Climate-Warming-and-Sea-Ice-Decline
George, J.C., Moore, S.E. and Thewissen, J.G.M. 2020. Bowhead whales: recent insights into their biology, status, and resilience. 2020 Arctic Report Card, NOAA. DOI: 10.25923/cppm-n265 https://arctic.noaa.gov/Report-Card/Report-Card-2020/ArtMID/7975/ArticleID/905/Bowhead-Whales-Recent-Insights-into-Their-Biology-Status-and-Resilience
Lippold, A., Bourgeon, S., Aars, J., Andersen, M., Polder, A., Lyche, J.L., Bytingsvik, J., Jenssen, B.M., Derocher, A.E., Welker, J.M. and Routti, H. 2019. Temporal trends of persistent organic pollutants in Barents Sea polar bears (Ursus maritimus) in relation to changes in feeding habits and body condition. Environmental Science and Technology 53(2):984-995.
Lowry, L. 1985. “Pacific Walrus – Boom or Bust?” Alaska Fish & Game Magazine July/August: 2-5. pdf here.
MacCracken, J.G., Beatty, W.S., Garlich-Miller, J.L., Kissling, M.L and Snyder, J.A. 2017. Final Species Status Assessment for the Pacific Walrus (Odobenus rosmarus divergens), May 2017 (Version 1.0). US Fish & Wildlife Service, Anchorage, AK. Pdf here (8.6 mb).
Perovich, D., Meier, W., Tschudi, M., Hendricks, S., Petty, A.A., Divine, D., Farrell, S., Gerland, S., Haas, C., Kaleschke, L., Pavlova, O., Ricker, R., Tian-Kunze, X., Webster, M. and Wood, K. 2020. Sea ice. 2020 Arctic Report Card, NOAA. https://arctic.noaa.gov/Report-Card/Report-Card-2020/ArtMID/7975/ArticleID/891/Sea-Ice Pdf of entire Arctic Report Card here (12mb).
Regehr, E.V., Hostetter, N.J., Wilson, R.R., Rode, K.D., St. Martin, M., Converse, S.J. 2018. Integrated population modeling provides the first empirical estimates of vital rates and abundance for polar bears in the Chukchi Sea. Scientific Reports 8 (1) DOI: 10.1038/s41598-018-34824-7 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-018-34824-7
Rode, K.D., Regehr, E.V., Douglas, D., Durner, G., Derocher, A.E., Thiemann, G.W., and Budge, S. 2014. Variation in the response of an Arctic top predator experiencing habitat loss: feeding and reproductive ecology of two polar bear populations. Global Change Biology 20(1):76-88. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/gcb.12339/abstract
Rode, K. D., R. R. Wilson, D. C. Douglas, V. Muhlenbruch, T.C. Atwood, E. V. Regehr, E.S. Richardson, N.W. Pilfold, A.E. Derocher, G.M Durner, I. Stirling, S.C. Amstrup, M. S. Martin, A.M. Pagano, and K. Simac. 2018. Spring fasting behavior in a marine apex predator provides an index of ecosystem productivity. Global Change Biology http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/gcb.13933/full
But remember… John Kerry now says “ONLY NINE YEARS LEFT!!” to change our wicked ways. The poor polar bears.
How did the polar bears survive 6003 years ago when the Arctic was ice free?
And how did they survive in the middle ages when the Vikings were growing crops in Iceland (where almost nothing will grow now outside of a greenhouse)? The polar bear was animal well known to the Vikings. Really….shouldn’t polar bears be extinct by now? But here they are today, with numbers increasing in many places.
Fortunately for the PB’s they places they inhabit are quite vast, the distances extreme, and very inhospitable, without a huge carbon footprint to simply survive the cold, for most of the year to humans. The only way the small populations of Inuit natives did it for so long was to harvest whales and burn blubber, something they don’t do much of anymore with fossil fuel powered villages and modern snowmobiles and aircraft to bring them outside foods and energy.
they were democrats
Obviously they didn’t.
But remember… John Kerry is a blithering idiot on all manners of topics from climate to national security and nuclear proliferation. The guy actually thinks climate change is a bigger threat to man and the planet than a regional nuclear war.
I find it amazing that John Kerry, being so dumb, can actually walk and talk at the same time. The guy has so many Billy Madison trophies he needs his wife’s mansions just to hold them all.
Polar Bears are doing just fine because Polar Bears are “adaptable”. They take what the weather hands them and they move forward. Don’t waste their time crying about it. More people should take a cue from the Polar Bears and quit crying about what they can not change.
Most species are, at least the ones that are around thousands or millions of years. Our future is looking dire with these people in “power”
Their heads full of bad wiring are the problem, climate is just doing what it has always done.
“Everything is bad and getting worse, and we’re all doomed — bears, scientists, hoity-toity suburbanites, sackcloth-wearing self-flagellaters, and Pollyannas alike.
“That’s my story, and I’m sticking to it!”
Generic climate “expert.”
Heck, jet engine parts were falling out of the sky in my neck of the woods just yesterday. Fortunately, no one was hurt.
Same in the Netherlands
Wow. What are the chances of that happening on the same day? The Netherlands jet was a 747 freighter.
Some fellow penned Bits Of Engine In Neighbor’s Garden (BOEING).
Climate Change causes jet engines to explode.
{Waiting for the news reports in 3..2..1..}
AND,
Technology, even technology that we think we have a handle on, is dangerous … (so we need to protect the masses from its use and save it for those altruists that are saving & protecting the masses).
Another great posting from Dr. Susan’s website. Facebook has gone all-in with the Biden New Green Weenie agenda, partly because the left supports them, and partly because they are almost sure to make major inroads in the Chinese market. I have heard CNN repeat this nonsense, and a lot of other equally bad misinformation, and the lazy left just assumes its the truth, partly because Trump didn’t agree with it. Maybe we can organize liberal tourist trips to go pet a polar bear before they are all gone? That’s a video I would watch.
Polar bears need shorefast ice in the spring, where hungry sows with cubs find ringed seal pups. Sea ice floes in summer they can take or leave.
Shorefast ice formed in the Arctic even in the balmy, hence high CO2, Pliocene, when the ocean was surrounded by boreal forest. A three million year-old fossil bone attributed to a ringed seal was found at Malaspina, AK.
Polar bears evolved from seal-eating brown bears in the early to mid-Pleistocene. Few bear fossils exist from those ages however.
It has been warmer than now for most of the Holocene, and during the prior interglacials so handily survived by polies.
That supposed Polar Bear experts claim the modest warming and ice loss is an existential threat to polar bears simply exposes them as carnival barking rent-seekers. I mean I understand the conundrum they are in is similar the Great Barrier Reef doom-sayers. If they say everything is doing what they normally do, adapting and evolving as they have to millenia of changing sea temps and climate, and the reefs and the PBs will be fine, the grant money dries up.
So a grant-seeking reinforcing feed-back system develops that encourages both the development of rent-seeking behavior and the resultant doomerism claims for the subject under study. It becomes a feed-back loop that it becomes impossible to tell which is causal, like the chicken or the egg conundrum. More doomerism begets more grants, more grants begets more doomerism.
Land plants get water from the ground with which to conduct photosynthesis. The O2 they release comes from this root-borne water. The H atoms (protons, actually) freed by photons from sunlight are attached to CO2 in the dark reactions to make sugars, ie carbohydrates.
So Josh’s cartoon plant might be shown drawing water from below.
Its a CARTOON.
It’s a cartoon of photosynthesis. Why not make it accurate?
Because cartoons never are accurate, it’s not science.
Or have you erver seen smiling polar bears ?
Cartoons are schematic.
Because cartoons are not meant to be textbooks. The most effective cartoons are minimalist, they give just enough information to get the point across without overloading the reader. If you want or need more information, you really, really shouldn’t be looking to cartoons to give it to you.
The bears should adapt or die….that carnivore diet is selfish….try some lichen…a little seaweed salad…adapt.
We didn’t use to be able to hear the Arctic screaming, but now we do, thanks to “Arctic Amplification”.
Dr Crockford highlights a problem pointed out by Dr Curry a week or so ago.
So called “Climate Experts” are not only not studying basic sciences (geology, physics etc) in lieu of math (modeling) but Universities are also pumping out what I consider “non-science” degrees in programs, or even schools labeled “Climate Communications”.
The result is there is no longer any scientific skepticism regarding the role of CO2 or even whether observed warming is dangerous, but rather acceptance that we have an “existential problem” and mitigation solutions at any cost are justified.
Unfortunately this aligns with the current political narrative around the globe.
“Everybody” knows that CO2 is deadly poison. All that stuff they’ve taught over the last several centuries about CO2 being “necessary for all life” is hogwash, upstaged by the latest doomsday fad.
The University climate communications programs, like Yale’s program comes to mind, are just a dressed-up form of propaganda and teaching the indoctrinated kiddies how to run disinformation campaigns to sell a defective product.
I have no idea why people still use FB. Zuckerberg is a liar, a thief, and quite frankly a traitor to his country.
…. because, unfortunately, they have sh!t lives in reality. Look at griff and loydo. They have to go somewhere on the internet to tell everyone how happy, content and clever they are.
It’s going to be ugly around here in the Bay Area when FB and the rest disappear up their own @sses.
FB is over reaching in a most spectacular way. Now they’re attacking entire countries (Australia). I believe their days are numbered. If Trump actually does decide to set up a social media platform, or hand his hat on an existing one, he has nearly 80 million followers already. You have to wonder how quickly something like that might swallow up large numbers of FB and twitter members.
And Canada is entering the fray against big tech/social media. Of course the current powers that be in the US will make law with a title that gives the impression that it is reigning in Big Tech/Social Media but which actually codifies protections for them so they can continue their censorship.
The only way we are going to be able to beat them is to cut their income stream by shunning them and using other more honest forums.
You’ve got that right. It has to be “get woke, go broke” … and soon. Canada (Trudeau) can be trusted to do whatever the globalists and China deem proper. I’ve watched Canada’s gradual decline with deep sadness. We used to be a country with balls.
In Florida, a bill has been introduced and supported by Gov DeSantis that will fine any social media company for deplatforming/censoring any political candidate. The fine will be $100,000 per day. The bill also allows citizens to sue social media for using their personal information in ways not authorized by the citizen.
We need to follow this to see if it becomes Florida law and how it is implemented. If it is successful, it can be a blue print for each state.
I will not be surprised when the massive anti-DeSantis campaign starts.
Agreed. The sub-headline here ought to be “DON’T GET YOUR NEWS FROM FACEBOOK”! Just another arm of state run media (or perhaps it should be media run state….). All I use FB for is to see what friends and relatives are up to. That’s it.
People use Facebook because they like to gossip. There is no other reason. Facebook tracks the gossipers to sell marketing data. They don’t really care about you, they care about profit from advertising. So as long as your gossip is about cats and grandchildren, everything is hunky for them. Of course, a nation full of people who only say “I agree” and “How wonderful” may be boring as hell, but advertisers like that.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/john-kerry-iran-trump-biden-washington-times
Reminds me of Ted Kennedy and the dear Commandante letter from back in the 80’s.
When you want to know what the Democrats are doing, just check to see what they are accusing their opponents of.
Fact: Human beings are thriving despite a hiatus from Facebook.
On the Dark Horse podcast this week, Bret and Heather discussed the government’s efforts to unconstitutionally shut down free speech. link
The headline on the House Energy and Commerce committee’s website is:
So, even though the government is forbidden from regulating speech, it wants to force/encourage/coerce Facebook et al. to do it for them. That’s discussed starting around 48:59
I would say that the meat of their discussion about the various attacks on free speech goes from about 42:30 to about 1:05:00.
Free speech is absolutely fundamental to the proper functioning of society. If nothing else, real science can’t progress without free speech. Bret and Heather discuss the removal of the “Lab Leak Hypothesis” page from Wikipedia. They point out the importance of the debate over that hypothesis when it comes to preventing or dealing with the next pandemic.
Freedom is the secret sauce that made America great. The loss of freedom will be its downfall.
My only FB contact is and was only Whatsapp for family out of home contacts .
I abandoned Facebook to Loydo and Griff a long time ago.
I saw what it was going to become from the start and never bothered … too many self involved, entitled progressives airing their narcissism in public.
What is Facebook these days? They aren’t a tech company since they aren’t doing anything technologically innovative, unless you count automated censorship. I guess they are an advertising delivery company, but they are hardly unique in that field. It’s my understanding that very few young people join Facebook. Yeah, it may have been cool a dozen years ago, but young people are more interested in Snapchat, Instagram, or TikTok than a platform used by their parents.
But Facebook still makes money, so there’s that. Strange days, indeed.
Always “bears” repeating
Everyone, should immediately paste that on Facebook (farce-book). I may, except I’m already in trouble there, and I’m looking into MeWe as an alternative. It seems to work well.
I would not trust MeWe
Derge, which one can I trust?
Gab
I prefer MaisOui myself. It has a certain je ne sais quoi.
Try as they might, I don’t believe they’ve ever found a more suitable mascot for “climate change”. Do they even make penguin suits? Other than the one from Batman, of course.
Polar bear populations are thriving, much to the consternation of catastrophic climate alarmists. Facebook is apparently very embarrassed about this, and has decided to censor posts pointing out the disconnection. Me thinks the title of the book 1984 was 37 years early and Facebook is Big Brother.
I just got to thinking…the organizations that are making money off of the supposed polar bear crisis have mostly managed to stop (or sharply curtail) the real reason for 20th century polar bear decline – trophy hunting. So now, despite the fact that there are more polar bears around than there have been in many decades, in order to continue their existence (and separate fools from their money) they have to glom onto another issue (non-issue).
New Headline?
“Scientists Say Arctic Seal Survival Threatened by Polar Bear Population Explosion Due to Climate Change.”
It isn’t just polar bears, but ALL climate skepticism.
https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2021/02/19/facebook-says-it-will-fact-check-global-warming-misinformation/
In addition to U Cambridge they use George Mason U and Yale Center for Climate as ‘fact checkers’. I just saw a.post on an AGW skeptical page get flagged with an obnoxious link to their climate hub.
Btw, Zuckie looks even creepier when he smiles.
If the GOP doesn’t run on repealing section 230, they might as well jump off of a bridge.
climate communication experts Pretty much says it all. Their expertise is propaganda not science. That’s been the problem all along. It doesn’t matter how good your science is if the other guys propagandists are better than yours.
I put this article up on farce-book (https://www.facebook.com/john.k.sutherland.7 ) almost an hour ago, and it has not yet seen the censor, as I often do.
These models are all developed by first determining the answer the modeler wants and then develop the calculations to support that result. How can anyone trust these models?
Models are a tool, not a means to determine any valid answers. They help to direct questions towards useful experiments. They should never have been used as an end in themselves.
Fact Checkers = Political Officers nearly all the time imo
I’m sure there’s still a dying polar bear out there somewhere for them to photograph so the ignorant masses feel guilty for breathing.
Susan Crockford,
Good article but I am unhappy to learn that factual reporting and objective expert analysis by you is now banned by Facebook. Disgusting and subversive I contend.
So, Facebook is affraid to allow a factual discussion about mammal biology. This all so surreal.
I especially note your succinct explanation of primary productivity, ice extent and the arctic ecosystem including polar bear health and populations. Keep up the good work for truth and knowledge.
“Bill Rocks
So, Facebook is affraid to allow a factual discussion about mammal biology.”
About anything actually. Having factual discussions about climate change is one reason I got banned. Then they wanted a certified copy of my drivers license, birth certificate or passport to re-activate my account. It was time to forget it.
the only reason facebook or any of these social media sites have any power is because people use them. stop using them, delete them, and they will go the way of the dinosaur
That seems so simple, yet time and again, even on these pages I see people admitting to conforming so they won’t lose their access. I never trusted them from the start. I had no need to be in touch with everyone 24/7.
I use FB to follow a distant daughter and niece. I can’t imagine using it for news or factual information.
why not just email them instead?
Hmmm current Arctic ice extent is currently the highest it’s been in the last 6 years according to DMI. Ocean and Ice Services | Danmarks Meteorologiske Institut (dmi.dk)
Ice thickness DMI Modelled ice thickness
Everything is down the Climate change. Britain’s Daily Telegraph:
“Biblical plague or manageable threat? Beating back swarms with Kenya’s locust hunters
Swarms of the pests, driven by climate change, are wreaking havoc on the food supply of a region regularly facing acute bouts of hunger”
They go on to say these were/are common (but not regular) occurances, even in biblical times but no, this time it’s all down to the dreaded climate change.
You read the Telegraph? You get the “news” you deserve!
So now that Coke has gone even further Woke and is advising its employees to be “less White”,will they stop abusing the polar bear’s image to sell their “product”?
As for face Book,if their customers have not realized the situation,then Facebook is free to gull them further.
For when it is a “free service” the odds are pretty good,you are the product.
Which has proven true with this outfit.
“All your datas are ours.”
Woke Coke! What about the peddlers of alcohol?
Rum & Liqueur For Sale| Bundaberg Rum| Web Store
When they’re not using poley bears to push drugs they’re pushing them off skyscrapers it seems. When will these outrageous practices ever end?
New look for Facebook
https://ibb.co/VB6XmKP
The walruses too benefit because their primary food source are the clams and mussels (mollusks) on the muddy seafloors of the shallow seas that typify their range. Their whiskers, tusks, and mouth parts are uniquely adapted for foraging the muddy bottoms, breaking up surface sea ice and probably rocks on the sea florr to get at individual mollusks, and then use their power tongue to literally suck the clam flesh out of the shell in one stroke.
The bivalve mollucks consume the phytoplankton they filter out of the water.
The walruses dredge the bivalves off the shallow sea floor and get nice and fat before hauling themselves out on the Arctic shorelines where polar bears can make them jump off cliffs to escape.
So primary productivity is essential across the entire arctic, both the marine mammals and the land dwellers around the coastlines. More Arctic primary productivity = more polar bears across all the sub-populations. The rest of the climate scams on the polar bears claims of pending doom are simply nonsense from rent-seeking carnival barkers.
Poland just voted a new law inflicting a $13.5 millions fine PER CASE to the Big Tech platforms like Facebook, Twitter, Youtube, etc… which would unjustly censor non mainstream, politically uncorrect, conservative, christian and libertarian opinions under their own rules unless they are also contravening to the Poland’s laws.
According to the Polish Justice Minister :“We see that when Big Tech decides to remove content for political purposes, it’s mostly content which praises traditional values or praises conservatism,” he said, “and it is deleted under their ‘hate speech policy’ when it has no legal right to do so.”
…/…”The removal of former U.S. President Donald Trump from social media platforms was just another example of Big Tech overreach and SET A DANGEROUS PRECEDENT.”
“It’s very disturbing because if Big Tech sees themselves as an organization empowered enough to ban a sitting president of the U.S., it sends a message to the world –that they can ban anyone, whenever they want,” he added.
“Poland spent 45 years under communism, and that experience has taught the value of free speech and that when the country sees these disturbing new trends toward censorship, the red light goes on.”BOOM! Poland Will Fine Big Tech $13.5 Million Per Case For Removing Ideological Content: “Poland spent 45 years under Communism…It taught us the value of free speech” (thegatewaypundit.com)
“Poland spent 45 years under communism, and that experience has taught the value of free speech and that when the country sees these disturbing new trends toward censorship, the red light goes on.”
People need to understand the murderous history of Marxism in the 20th century. The fact that there are university professors who openly describe themselves as Marxists disgusts me beyond belief.
I’ve had talks with some of these “professors”.
They proclaim that what happened before wasn’t true Marxism.
Russian Marxism was betrayed by Stalin.
Chinese Marxism was betrayed by Mao.
Venezuelan and Cuban Marxism would have worked but they were sabotaged by the US.
Etc.
And this time it will work, because they are going to be the ones in charge.
“Facebook is working with climate communication experts…”
Mendacious partisans in league with biased incompetents.
I’m sure John Cook is one of their “climate communications experts.” He is an expert at torturing data to make it say what he wants and obscuring data that contradicts his scary stories. Exactly the kind of Leftist-endorsed “Truth” that the social media organs of the Democrat Party—Google, Apple, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram et al.—want to indoctrinate us with. I wonder if they’re taking lessons from Kim Jong-un and Xi Jinping. They’re using the same tactics.
oh if only fkbk WOULD pull the pin and leave Aus!
I used to think “Ah well, in 10 years we will see how wrong the alarmists were” But now we have entered an age of censorship where the facts that prove them wrong are removed and declared “wrong speech”.
I have deep concerns about the future of Western Civilization.