Polar Bears Are Thriving

Speak of gaslighting, and look who shows up.

You know, we tried to bring the caribou back to Maine. They just died.

 

It doesn't take a genius to do basic fact checking.

 

Yes, and . . . ?
Nothing to do with climate, says Maine.

In 1993, 12 caribou were again released in Baxter State Park. This time the caribou were fitted with radio collars, they all died or migrated out of the area. The consensus is that Maine will never again support a caribou herd because the woodlands have changed from old growth to a relatively young forest.

Where did the Caribou Go By - Maine.gov

 

That's not what Maine biologists say. As usual, you're doing fiction.

That was an experiment, a test to see if it was possible. It wasn't.

Moose are a lot more adaptable, but they are under pressure from the diseases and parasites that come along with the warmer climate. One moose was found dead from a couple hundred thousand ticks. Winter used to kill most ticks, not now. We can see that in our own yard, and my wife got deathly ill because of it.

The Mods won't let me tell you what I think of you, but I know you will have no trouble figuring that out.

 

Actually, it's what the biologists do say. Read the link.

 

Notice how they spend most of their replies making absurd false claims while ignoring the topic itself.

 

Facts are not gaslighting. Telling people the evidence of their own eyes is not reality is gaslighting.

Who made you the Minister in Charge of Keeping Everything Exactly the Same?

 

Sorry about your wife, but that doesn't mean she got sick because of fossil fuels.

 

[QUOTE="bringiton, post: 1073372380, member: 70792]

Who made you the Minister in Charge of Keeping Everything Exactly the Same?

[/QUOTE]

And right before that you were talking about gaslighting.

That's kind of amazing, but not in the good way.

 

My nomination for Non Sequitur of the Month.

 

Climate change.

 

My nomination for Non Sequitur of the Month.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, I was wondering if you had the self awareness to get that.

 

So you had to find someone to blame it on. I get it.

 

They say both.

 

That's not 'someone'.

Fact is, things are moving North, including diseases.

You are quite careful in pretending you don't 'get it'...

 

Nope. Not a single mention of climate change in the link.

 

When did the climate not change?

What is the "natural state" of the climate of the planet?

Because here is a huge shocker to you. The natural state of the climate of our planet is to not have a permanent ice cap over the North Pole. In fact, through most of history going back over a billion years there has been no ice there at all. And also no ice over Antarctica.

So if anything, we are actually returning to what is natural for the planet. And when the climate finished adapting, the planet is going to much wetter and more humid.

Are you even aware of that fact? That the less ice there is, the more humid and wet our planet is. That is why during interglacials, the rainforest bands are immense. There is also almost no tundra, there are actual forests in most of Siberia, and northern Canada and Alaska.

Don't believe me? Examine this a bit.



This is a leaf of the metasequoia, an ancestor of the modern sequoia tree. And in the same location and strata they have found giant palm frond fossils.



This should give you an idea exactly how warm the "normal" is for our planet.

https://www.juneauempire.com/life/kupreanof-fossils-paint-picture-of-a-warm-and-ancient-earth/

In case you are not aware, what I just posted is known as a "Reference". Can you say "Reference"? I'm not sure you can.

You see, that is something that people who are serious about science use. And not just cherry picking ones from sites they happen to agree with, but actually doing the research to see what supports a claim. Even researching for facts contrary to their beliefs, as a challenge to see if they are right or not in the first place.

Oh, and before you or some other tries to challenge me about "Continental Drift", Alaska was actually slightly farther north than it is today! You see, at that time Anchorage was roughly in the latitude that the center of the state would be in today. Hence, what I claimed earlier about palm trees growing in Central Alaska.



Now kindly prove in any way that permanent ice caps are the normal condition for the planet. And that the brief times (geologically speaking) that they actually did exist was anything but an aberration.

 

Okay - let me know when you do that because I have yet to see any fact checking of the astroturf blogs you keep posting

 

And that “warmer climate” is what the current ecology of the planet is designed to live in?

 

Keep up the good work.

 

Projecting manmade climate change: scenarios to 2050
Posted on May 19, 2021 by curryja | 332 comments
by Judith Curry Stop using the worst-case scenario for climate change — more realistic scenarios make for better policy.

". . . The most striking aspect of the comparison between the IPCC and IEA scenarios to 2050 is the strong divergence of RCP8.5 from the IEA scenario, with RCP8.5 emissions values more than twice as high as the IEA STEP scenario at 2050.

RCP8.5 was formulated to explore an extreme outcome that is judged by energy analysts to be extremely unlikely. However, RCP8.5 is commonly referred to as the ‘business as usual’ scenario. Referring to RCP8.5 as ‘business as usual’ implies that it is probable in the absence of stringent emissions mitigation. The IPCC, the U.S. National Climate Assessment and a majority of published papers have centered their analyses on RCP8.5 as a reference scenario against which climate impacts and policies are evaluated. Further, RCP8.5 is being used by the insurance sector for projecting climate change impacts and also by state and local governments for regional adaptation planning. . . . "

 

Irrelevant.

Do you believe in science and evolution, or not? Because if you are trying to say that there is no change, that seriously puts you right in the camp with those "Young Earth Intelligent Design" fools. Who believe what there is now is what has always been, will always be, and is all that there should ever be.

If you believe in science, you would know that the planet changes all the time. And life either evolves with it, or dies.

Yes, a lot of things will die. As they have in every single case like this in the past. And guess what? As many or more will evolve and thrive in the new climate.

Heck, look at all the megafauna we have roaming the planet today. Oh no, wait, you really can't do that. Because most of them went extinct as the current Ice Age started to end. That is why we do not have dire wolves, giant sloths, and giant cave bears roaming North America.

But the ecology? Don't make me laugh with that silly claim. Hell, are you even aware that for much of the history of our planet, almost no life at all today could have survived?

 

Do you believe? Because you seem to be suggesting evolution can occur over a very short time. We are losing species NOW

Yes it does but every time it has changed THIS a fast there has been a recorded mass extinction

And you think that will not impact on food production?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G4H1N_yXBiA
Wait! Don’t tell me! Food comes from supermarkets yes?

Again - that change happened at a SLOWER RATE than the current change we are seeing plus there were not as many humans to feed then

More “droughts and flooding rains” not a good outlook for food production

 

There is no increase in extreme weather. Meanwhile, increased CO2 and modest warming are generating record crop yields.

 

You didn’t watch them did you? In fact I am betting you did not even START ato watch

One contrarian (paid by big oil) versus

279 authors
65 countries
354 contributing authors
More than 18,000 scientific papers reviewed

Yep!