5 of 21

Write now Article Tools

Page 2 of 4

Andrew Derocher of the World Conservation Union says; "I don't think there is any question polar bears are in danger from global warming," Then he follows that up with; "People who deny that have a clear interest in hunting bears." I don't know about you, but I smell a giant, gun hating, animal kissing, tree hugger in our midst. No Mr. Derocher, people who say that, have a "clear interest" in truth and being intelligently informed. Just for the sake of your argument, let it be known, we have bears and many other animals on our land, and we have a "no hunting" policy, because we love all animals, and we feel obligated to give them a sanctuary of safety. Further, I "deny" your statement Mr. Derocher, because in one morning, I found thirteen stories, all from "highly worthy" scientific sources and foreign government agencies, telling us the whole story, which refutes your claims. Read between Mr. Derocher's lies and you see many inconsistencies. He says this to get your emotions up, quote; "Bear numbers on the west coast of Hudson's Bay had shrunk by 22 per cent over the past decade." Then he is told of "several" studies proving bear numbers on the increase in another area, so much so they are a public threat. From 850 in the eighties to over 2100 now. To that he says, quote; "To say that bear populations are growing in ONE area now is irrelevant." Wait a minute! Are we not COUNTING bear populations Mr. Derocher? Which analytical method do want Mr. Derocher? In case you didn't catch that, Mr. Derocher is telling us, a "decreasing" population in one area "is important" and should be weighed, but an "increase" in population in another area is somehow "unimportant" and should not be considered. Strange science Mr. Derocher! If this is how Mr. Derocher derives and compiles all of his data, may I suggest, this whole study is "irrelevant."

Lets look at a few others. The U. S. Geological survey, and the Canadian Wildlife service did a study in one small area of Polar bear populations. I am not going to give you all the stats, I just want to show you what a "complete" story of "truth" looks like. They tell us, the population of bears went down by roughly 264 bears from 2001 to 2006 in the Southern Beaufort Sea area. Then they come right out and tell you the truth of the findings, saying; "Because "PRECISION" of earlier "ESTIMATES" "was low," our current "ESTIMATE" of population size and the earlier ones "CANNOT" be statistically differentiated." (emphasis added to show

• << previous page
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• next page >>

Add your voice

Know something about How polar bears are affected by global warming?
We want to hear your view. Write now!