Planet Ark : Greenpeace Arctic Mission to Spotlight Polar Bears: "Two US explorers plan to start a four-month summer expedition to the North Pole next month to gather information on the habitat of an animal they believe could be the first victim of global warming -- the polar bear.
Lonnie Dupre and Eric Larsen plan to travel 1,100 miles by foot and canoe over the Arctic Ocean to test the depth and density of the ice in summer in a mission sponsored by Greenpeace, the environmental group said on Thursday.
According to some scientific predictions, the Arctic Ocean could become ice-free in the summer within a hundred years.
Polar bears cannot survive without sea ice and the US government said in February it would consider whether the bears should be protected under the Endangered Species Act."
This begs the question: How do polar bears survive in the zoo? And if they're such great creatures, why can they not survive with a slightly changing climate?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
33 comments:
Is it because they dig holes in the ice to get to fish?
If the ice melted, they would have to retreat further inland, away from the ice sheet and would have insufficent food supplies?
In the zoo, they get given fish.
Every Blessing in Christ
Matthew
Matt, you may have a point.
Althought if the ice is softer, it may be easier to eat. :D
Your posts show that you guys are seriously retarded.
Your lack of any wit or intellectual response to any posts here, or at Jen's musings show that you are a left wing nut with no basis for your belief, other then your hatred for Bush.
Glad to have you, never the less.
Palm Boy -- there's nothing intellectual on this blog, so I kept my comment on a level that would be understood here. You've proven your ignorance by assuming I have "hatred for Bush" which couldn't be further from the truth. The fact is, you know nothing about the Arctic (ever been there? I have) you know nothing about Polar Bears and you not absolultly ZERO about Greenpeace. So, based upon what I've read of this blog and the rest of the posts, I maintain that you're retarded.
I'm rather surprised here.
First of all.
If this blog is "retarded",
Why do you keep coming back?
Is it to make your self feel better because you're only semi retarded?
One more thing,
If you're so wise and All knowing,
Why do you hide behind the Anonymous option?
Why not take credit for your greatness and make yourself known?
Earth Mover: I was looking at other blogs having to do with the North Pole and stumbled on this garbage. I left a post, big deal? I doubt I would have responded, but PalmBoy assumed I hated Bush (just because he's a kool-aid drinker doesn't mean we all are, though) and it's sad, but within their rights, to post idiotic statements that have no basis in fact. As for not posting my identity...it seems nobody tells their true identity here, but has a "profile" with very little information about them. Look at Palm Boy...he has a picture of stormtrooper, so he's as anonymous as I am. If you care that much, my name is jim & I live in Seattle. And yes, I am great. Thanks for noticing.
Lol.
***FLAME WAR!!!***
Your right. There is nothing intelectual about this here blog. It's common sense, bibically grounded and based on the current events in the world, rather then an elitest academic view of the world.
So, I assume you have a love for Bush now?
No, I haven't been to the artic. Please tell me what you saw there.
Greenpeace: Fearmongering Enviromentalist Warriors, bent on wreaking the US economy at the expensise of preserving that which is not in danger.
"So, based upon what I've read of this blog and the rest of the posts, I maintain that you're retarded."
Ok. Ignorance is bliss. You apparently don't like having that bubble of bliss popped.
Earthy: Thank you!
Steve: I showed up in a North Pole search? Sweet!
I assumed you had a hatred for Bush because there have been Anonymous commenters before who have no interest in anything aside from flaming the president and Cheney.
And its a Clone trooper, not stormtrooper. Clones good, Stormys bad.
Thanks for visiting.
Hey Palm Boy,
Hate to burst your bubble,
But Stormtroopers are clone troopers in new armor.
Sorry dude.
*covers ears*
Not listening!
I think clones are good. They age at an accelerated rate, so most of them are useless for fighting 7 years after ROTS. Then the empire just conscripts a bunch of people and makes them fight.
"Your (sic) right. There is nothing intelectual about this here blog. It's common sense, bibically grounded and based on the current events in the world"
So common sense & biblically grounded means debating what's a stormtrooper or a clone?? Should I bother to repeat my earlier thoughts about this blog?
I see you know as much about your Bible as you do the Arctic or Greenpeace...which is next to nothing. God is the biggest environmentalist, as it's his creation...not Rush Limbaugh's or Sean Hannity's (I can tell sheep because you all "BAAAaaaahhh" the same).
Sure, groups like Greenpeace have made mistakes, but they're just a bunch of people who care about the natural world around them. There is no interest in wrecking economies (green policy actualy makes more $$ in the long run) or making America a socialist state. That's just the lies of the right who fear what they do not understand.
So, Get your nose out of Rush Limbaugh's ass and do a little research in the Arctic and the Antarctic. You'll see that if you pay attention to some of the "elitist academics" (what a retarded phrase) you might learn something about the natural world. Afterall, you admitted that there is nothing intellectual about you or your posts...just a bible-thumping ostrich with his head in the sand.
Cheers,
Jim in Seattle
"So common sense & biblically grounded means debating what's a stormtrooper or a clone?? "
No, current events is what brought that topic up.
You appear to be in desprate need of a sense of humor.
"God is the biggest environmentalist, as it's his creation"
If you could please point out where God says that the larva of a fruit fly is more important then a hospital, then I may believe you.
Matthew 10:31
"31So don't be afraid; you are worth more than many sparrows."
"not Rush Limbaugh's or Sean Hannity's (I can tell sheep because you all "BAAAaaaahhh" the same).
I fail to see the difference between your assumption of that, and my assumption of your feelings twoard Bush.
And what's wrong with Limbaugh's position anyways?
"There is no interest in wrecking economies (green policy actualy makes more $$ in the long run) or making America a socialist state.
Ok, ya know why gas cost more? Because we started mixing in ethanhol this month, rather then MTBE. Why? Because Ethanol burns cleaner. Unfortunatly, with out a $0.53 subsidy, it cost a lot more then gas. With the subsidy, it still cost more. In addition, it cannot be mixed with the old gas, or the entire tank is ruined.
That was greenpeace and other enviro goups ideas.
And how exactly does 'green' policys make more money?
"You'll see that if you pay attention to some of the "elitist academics" (what a retarded phrase) you might learn something about the natural world.
Um, yeah. The elitest academics who are telling me man is causing global warming, and that I came from primordal ooze?
I don't think so.
Read this post, its mainly about the envirogroups making a ton of useless fear about global warming.
http://pushbackignorance.blogspot.com/2006/04/state-of-fear-global-warming.html
Good day to ya.
Palm Boy -- your poor understanding of your Bible is showing by taking Matthew 10:31 out of context, and as a pretense that you can laugh off flushing God's creation down the toilet is pathetic and sad.
As for the rest of your response, you're proving your ignorance with every sentance you write.
J-
Wooo now,
Just because we're debating doesn't mean there is cause for inapropriate language.
As for the storm trooper part,
That was more of a personal comment to Palm Boy that happens to appear on this blog,
As he said,
It's called humor.
Now, on to matters at hand.
Generally when some one disaggrees with something that has been done,
they should provide an alternative.
Therefor...
Would you be so kind as to explain the proper context of that verse?
Since you brought up context and not validity,
I assume you beleive what the Bible says.
As for your claim as to stumbling onto this blog looking for North Pole Blogs...
I don't see this one on any search for the north pole.
And one more thing,
Who keeps a bolg on the north pole?
That must be really boring.
Day 1
It was cold today.
Day 2
Still cold
Day 3 Had cookies with Santa.
Day5
Missed a day of blogging, Got my tongue frozen to the water pump yesterday...
Jason, I was sitting here, cruising my blog and watching the Mav's clobber the Grizzlies with my family, then I started cracking up. Garnered strange looks, hehe.
And ditto on asking for an explanation. I didn't think Jim responded, maybe he's just busy and could take the hours to think up a half logical and consise rebutall.
Daweed, thanks for finding that verse. It's extreamly relevant, but I didn't want to take the time to find it.
Sorry,
I haven't got time to follow sports.
As for that verse...
HOOAH!!!
I thought that was an army thing.
Guys:
If you spill milk on your kitchen floor, do you blame somebody else and get on your hand and knees and pray to God to clean it up for you?
If your toilet is overflowing and spilling water and grime all down your hallway, what is your course of action? Do you consult your Bible for a verse saying that it's not your fault?
The point is, take personal responsibility for the creation that gives you and your family life.
Taking scripture out of context is nothing new. It's funny how you also forget the Commandment "Thou shalt have no other gods before Me"...which, in society today, $$ could be considered a god and $$ is the reason for the destruction of rainforests (fact)the poisoning of low-income communities with toxic waste incinerators (fact) and Exxon/Mobil getting record profits, but still haven't paid the Valdez settlement to the small family fisherman who lost their livelyhoods due to the negligence of that company (fact).
I admitted before that Greenpeace is far from perfect, but they've done more good then harm and have the best intentions. Since you're all bible-thumpers (I know my Bible too, but look at the whole thing in context)...you may recall the story of Noah and great flood. Noah was saving the animals, building a boat and was ridiculed and scorned by society as a kook and a madman.
Rather then making baseless claims (you guys really no nothing about Greenpeace) about environmentalist as a whole, maybe you should be thinking of us as modern day Noahs. Perhaps God has touched hearts in different ways and has chosen the "environmentalist wackos" and "eliets academics" to promote his urging to preserve that natural world as he intended it....with whales, healthy forests, clean oceans, healthy/happy humans, insects...etc..all living in his creation in harmony. Not a bunch of speciescentric bloggers claiming "dominion" over the natural world.
Keep in mind that you guys are the modern equivilent of a society that ridicules "Noah" and will perish due to their own ignorance.
Yes, ignorance.
J-
P.S.
Y'all should also keep in mind that humans, animals & plants do not live in spite of each other. Every being needs to the other to exist. A world without healthy old-growth forests chokes from lack of oxygen, polluted oceans upset the globe's natural food chain and affects humans just as much. Dupont dumping technical grade DDT in Asia after it was outlawed in the states isn't just bad buisness, it's turned out to be murder. I could go on & on with dozens of examples, and I'm sure you could add a few of your own.
The world's resources are finite and the world's weathiest country should be good stewards to the earth and good neighbors to the rest of God's children. Wouldn't you agree with that?
I've been to the Arctic, I've been to Antarctica and I've seen (some) of the effects we've had on the "Earth's Air Conditioners". The changes are provable and the results of continued denial will prove devestating to coastal communities and have already had a negative impact on HUMANS in other countries. I've read more than you, I've studied more than you and listening to the claims of the right-wing propogandists tv & radio is sad.
The enviros are not the ones that hold the keys to power in this country and shouldn't be blamed for "economic ruin" when we don't make policy, we try to fix it. We're the minority. We're the Noahs.
More later, but I got to get some stuff done.
Cheers,
J-
I'm still waiting to hear the correct context for those verses.
Who are you?
You've been to both polar regions?
That's impressive.
Ok, that really wasn't a response, but you said you'd get back.
In the meantime, I'll respond to the last two posts.
"
The point is, take personal responsibility for the creation that gives you and your family life. "
I may be hard headed here, but praying to God is about the most effective thing I can do to save the enviroment.
If I wanted to destroy the enviroment, how would I do it?
Drive a Hummer and spew gasses? Oh wait, the termites in my house are already doing that, and 1 car out of 300 million will hardly make a pinprick of a difference.
Ok, so I run my air conditioner all the time. Well, in Texas, I can do that or suffer injuries. I choose coolness. And with the 35 million other air conditioners in the US alone running simultaneously, again, hardly a pinprick.
I could start digging and rearange the terrafirma, but only on my property. Not much difference.
My point is, that even if I wanted to affect the global enviroment, for good or ill, I can't. And for some people to have the arrogance to think that people can, its astounding.
"Taking scripture out of context is nothing new.
As Earthy said, I fail to see how it's out of context.
"$$ is the reason for the destruction of rainforests (fact)the poisoning of low-income communities with toxic waste incinerators (fact) and Exxon/Mobil getting record profits, but still haven't paid the Valdez settlement to the small family fisherman who lost their livelyhoods due to the negligence of that company (fact)."
Claimed fact, not shown as fact. As for oil spills, "About 1,000 barrels of oil seep naturally each day from the seabed into U.S. marine waters. Natural seeps introduce about 100 times more oil into U.S. marine waters than do OCS oil and gas activities."
-Mineral Management Service, “OCS spills” March, 1999
"I admitted before that Greenpeace is far from perfect, but they've done more good then harm and have the best intentions."
Yeah, good intentions with wayward consequenses.
"Perhaps God has touched hearts in different ways and has chosen the "environmentalist wackos" and "eliets academics" to promote his urging to preserve that natural world as he intended it"
Isn't that a cute thought. That God would be placing animals ahead of humans, and steering the wills of atheists or new agers to do his bidding. Right.
"Keep in mind that you guys are the modern equivilent of a society that ridicules "Noah" and will perish due to their own ignorance."
Um, right. Was Noah harming anyone? Were his actions hurting and hindering those around him? No, he was just building a boat on him land. Greenpeace is a different breed altogether. Rather then quietly working to preserve the enviroment, they are activly lobbying and disemination false information to harm companies, and in the process, those employed by the companies and their families.
BTW, We're pushing back the frontiers of ignorance, not standing as a bastion of it. I know, that may be hard for a person who can't respond to a well articulated arguement, but thats whats happening.
Your post, pt. II.
"Y'all should also keep in mind that humans, animals & plants do not live in spite of each other. Every being needs to the other to exist."
I don't think thats true. Does a fish need a bear hunting him to survive? Nature is a dangerous, violent, and savage place, not one of peaceful coexistance.
"The world's resources are finite and the world's weathiest country should be good stewards to the earth and good neighbors to the rest of God's children. Wouldn't you agree with that?"
Why, yes I do. But I think you may be aiming at the wrong target here. The countries that are polluting themselves the most are the developing nations, such as China, Mexico, and Nigera. They have little or no enviromental regulations like we have in the US and europe.
As for finite resources, we are never going to run out of anything. The market will make sure of that.
I'm suprised you've been to both polar regions. Why would someone who works with the State Attorney General's office in Washington state need to do that?
Its also interesting how you assume I've done no reserch on this topic.
http://pushbackignorance.blogspot.com/2006/03/antartica-is-melting-end-is-near.html
Yes, the poles are melting. Is that manmade? No. Is it a natural cycle? Yes.
This guy works for Washington's State Attorny General!
That's really impressive.
What exactly do you do?
And how do you have the time to come to a blog like this?
Palm:
Sometimes I wonder if you even bother trying to comprehend what I write, or are just coming up with your responses without even trying to have them make sense. For instance, your response that "nature is a violent place w/o peaceful coexistence". Sure it sounds good (more sheeps bleating), but you just prove that you have no understanding of the natural world.
It's sad, really.
As for taking the scriptures out of context. I'm talking about pulling one verse from Mathew and rationalizing that into some belief that you're greater than God's whole creation. Again, go back and re-read (and this time try to comprehend it) my previous posts and see if you can come up with a better response.
As for why I went to the Antarctica and the North Pole. That not important to this conversation, but I have been to both. The problem you see the "environmentalism" through a miopic eye. You don't even (seem to) care that what's happening in the Arctic may not affect you, but it will affect thousands of people in coastal communities above the arctic circle. You think the argument is humans vs. animals...and that's a product of the right-wing bs propogandists...when it's really about the whole spectrum of God given life on the globe.
If you guys want blame environmentalists for the world's problems, that's your right, but you certainly are not factually right.
Later!
J-
Guys: I also had to comment on this nonsense
"Claimed fact, not shown as fact. As for oil spills, "About 1,000 barrels of oil seep naturally each day from the seabed into U.S. marine waters. Natural seeps introduce about 100 times more oil into U.S. marine waters than do OCS oil and gas activities."
-Mineral Management Service, “OCS spills” March, 1999
Okay, maybe, but just what does this have to do with a negligent EXXON not paying of a settlement (They admitted liability) to thousands of Alaskan Fisherman? Your point really has nothing to do with the fact that sometimes companies have destructive practices that need to be reigned in.
Think about this logically. If 1000 barrels a day (not proven, but has to be speculation) seep up from the earth into the ocean, that, because of deep see water pressure holding any seepage, you're not going to have fisheries wrecked (and people's livlyhoods by the same token), you're not going to have sea-birds covered in oil and you're not going to have tourism threatend by corroded beaches and rivers.
So, if you're going to make a point, please try to think it through logically.
Cheers,
J-
"For instance, your response that "nature is a violent place w/o peaceful coexistence". Sure it sounds good (more sheeps bleating), but you just prove that you have no understanding of the natural world."
Perhaps you would like to share your view of nature, rather then just wailing on about mine.
"Again, go back and re-read (and this time try to comprehend it) my previous posts and see if you can come up with a better response."
Something about milk and responsibility... Got it. Money can be an idol...Got it.
What do they have to do with a verse?
"The problem you see the "environmentalism" through a miopic eye. You don't even (seem to) care that what's happening in the Arctic may not affect you, but it will affect thousands of people in coastal communities above the arctic circle."
Its a very small problem. How far should we go out off our way to save a few people from a natural cycle by trying to fix something we can't? I don't belive natural cycles are our responsibility to control.
"If you guys want blame environmentalists for the world's problems, that's your right, but you certainly are not factually right."
They are certainally much less of a problem then terrorists or drug lords, but they are a rot from the inside.
"Okay, maybe, but just what does this have to do with a negligent EXXON not paying of a settlement (They admitted liability) to thousands of Alaskan Fisherman? Your point really has nothing to do with the fact that sometimes companies have destructive practices that need to be reigned in."
Nothing really, but the Valdez spill was pretty minor compared to natural seepage.
I'm still waiting for you opinion on the correct context of the verse.
I agree with the presented context.
So until I see a better one,
I'm gonna stick with that.
As for the whole nature bit,
Palm Boy is an Eagle Scout.
He knows full and well how things work ou thtere.
Palm Boy:
"...but they are a rot from the inside."
Very "Christ-like" of you. Society said essentially the same thing about Noah.
J-
I think he's avoiding this whole context thing.
He's posted several times since then and hasn't provided what he thinks is the correct context.
COuld it be he's not used to haveing to back up his claims?
FYI this whole context argument seems to be the center of this debate.
If the verse was infact used in context,
Which seems to be the case,
Than this whole debate is over.
If not, than we can debate the finer points of which is more important,
nature or the human race.
Earth:
I did address it, but you guys ignored it. My point of context was that you guys pulled one verse out of Mathew about being greater than a sparrow.
I try to look at Christ's teachings as a whole and not resort to pulling out one verse and saying "I am ruler of all".
God put Adam & Eve as cartakers (dominion) over Eden, his creation. If you guys choose to interpret "dominion" as "F the people in the Arctic because it's a small problem" (Good answer Palm Boy -- God must get a kick out of you and your arrogance) or "I'm greater than a sparrow", then you'll have to answer to your Creator for that attidude.
It's obvious that I'm not changing your mind because you're stuck in your ways and are not willing to consider the possibility that you could be wrong. Your arguments are weak, you call environmentalist "rot", but you don't even have the slighest concept what environmentalism is about.
J-
"If not, than we can debate the finer points of which is more important,
nature or the human race."
Earth: They're not mutually exclusive. I believe I said this before, but you don't have a healthy human race without a healthy natural world.
Did you guys pass basic biology in high school? (and I'm not being sarcastic...I'm being serious)
J-
Than what was Christ's opinion on the Human Race vs Nature?
Also,
We're not saying that because of this the people in the Artic don't matter.
The Point is that Humans are more important than a couple of trees.
I'm going to assume that since you haven't posted in ten days that you were either just looking for an argument ,
Or that you concede all points to the opposing party.
Post a Comment