Comments on: Consider the Polar Bear

By: Jeremy Pierce

Jeremy Pierce — Tue, 23 Nov 2010 01:34:49 +0000

My point is that there’s no reason to believe polar bears will die out for this reason, because most of them are living close to the land or even on it. They swim to the ice from the land, after all, so it’s not exactly the sort of situation where they’ll be stranded on a rapidly-melting ice pole unable to get back to land.

By: C. Ehrlich

C. Ehrlich — Sun, 14 Nov 2010 17:31:07 +0000

Jeremy,

Doesn’t it seem a bit silly to suppose that the polar bear’s ability to swim means that it can survive widespread ice melt? Polar bears, like human long-distance swimmers, will drown if they don’t find eventual resting places. Moreover, if the resting place that they do find is iceless (perhaps you are imagining that the species will migrate to some forest), they are likely to face competition with species better suited for these environs. As a species, the polar bear has presumably flourished because it has, over millennia, adapted to its unique environment. Other species (think of orcas and brown bears) have used the millenia to adapt to the alternative ice-free environments.

By: Jeremy Pierce

Jeremy Pierce — Thu, 11 Nov 2010 02:51:12 +0000

Polar bears turn out to be able to swim, which means that if you destroy their habitat they can easily go find some more. There’s really no reason to be concerned about them, at least in that respect (although perhaps hunting them raises concerns, but I don’t ever hear about that issue, just the false claim that their ice will melt and cause them to starve, cannibalize each other, and end up trapped on tiny ice pillars as they melt around them. The way the media and left-environmentalist politicians use polar bears is one of the clearest cases of Colbert’s truthiness in contemporary politics.

By: Gary Simmons

Gary Simmons — Mon, 08 Nov 2010 07:12:12 +0000

“Consider the polar bear, how he hides… but I tell you that not even Solomon in all his splendor was camouflaged like one of these!”

Sorry — I couldn’t help it!

Good post.

By: J. Bob

J. Bob — Sat, 06 Nov 2010 15:21:51 +0000

Seems the polar bears & ice flows are doing quite well, in spite of what Al predicted.

Conservation is one thing, assuming you know what you are doing. CO2 global warming is another. As “Climategate” showed, CO2 warming, is a money trough that just keeps on giving.

By: Tom Gilson

Tom Gilson — Sat, 06 Nov 2010 10:52:00 +0000

Thanks for an excellent article. Although the typo Mark found is classic, teeming with potential for future employment, it would be a shame to let his comment remain the only one here much longer.

“Consider” indeed. May I use some hyperbole to make a point? We Christians know B.F. Skinner was wrong with his all-encompassing theory of conditioned behavior, yet our actions in some areas come dangerously close to supporting his thesis. Ring the environmental bell, and we shout, “Stop it! No liberalism here!”

A quiet pause to consider the polar bear, the maple tree, or the clear flowing brook, won’t hurt us. It won’t turn us into nature-worshipers, tree-huggers, or anti-capitalists. It might instead restore some balance in us, and help us understand how to restore balance in our world.

It won’t hurt to take time to consider.

By: Mark Byron

Mark Byron — Fri, 05 Nov 2010 22:49:24 +0000

“…allow the spread of disease bearing misquotes…”

Let’s not forget the spell-checkers that help aid the spread of those misquotes.