In a May 15 article, Associated Press writer H. Josef Hebert practically cheered the addition of polar bears to a federal “threatened species” list thought of the subjectively positive effects this could have on the global warming debate: “The massive and powerful furry creature that lumbers across the Arctic ice may accomplish what 20 years of environmental activism has not done: force the issue that global warming already is having an effect and there is a price for both action and inaction.”
In his story, “Analysis: Polar Bear's Impact on People is Felt,” Hebert explained that the polar brings a “face” to the global warming debate. Whereas scientists have “long have talked of the visible damage that global warming has done to sea coral” this has “escaped the notice of the average person.” However, the polar bear, according to Wildlife Conservation Society President Steven E. Sanderson as quoted in the article, is different because it is “big, it's charismatic and it's powerful. It's beautiful and it generates sympathy. If it blinks out, you'll notice.”
Hebert also took a swipe at President Bush, complaining the White House wasn’t going far enough: “The Bush administration is taking pains to draw a line between protection of the majestic mammal and the origin of its plight -- global warming.”
"This listing should not open the door ... to regulating greenhouse gas emissions from automobiles, power plants and other sources," argued Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne, in line with views expressed by President Bush last month.
Hebert’s snarky response: “Business fears the bear.”
Closing his story, Hebert called on the public to make sacrifices to so that the polar bear can be saved from ghastly global warming.
Sure, Hebert conceded, global warming legislation will ramp up costs for electricity, gasoline and fossil fuels. “But then there are other costs,” Hebert insisted: “the loss of an Arctic icon.”
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
which one?
May 16, 2008 - 13:02 ET by mister josephwill we be saved by the cute-n-cuddly polar bears, the regular, normal polar bears, the caffeine-fueled polar bears, or the polar bears with little tiny feets?
Endangered Oil Exploration
May 16, 2008 - 13:25 ET by allanfThe addition of the polar bear to the putative endangered species list enables any Federal Judge to use her commission to block oil exploration projects in the arctic. The endangered species act allows private citizens (e.g. eco-groups) to petition the Federal Court for injunctive relief.
aren't those regions
May 16, 2008 - 14:06 ET by mister josepharen't those regions 'international waters'?
Polar bears in space
May 16, 2008 - 17:47 ET by nkviking75Mister joseph, if polar bears lived on Jupiter and were "endangered", it would be America's fault.
[sarcasm off]
When you put the clowns in charge, don't be surprised when a circus breaks out.
Perhaps the Polar Bear has outlived it's habitat?
May 16, 2008 - 13:49 ET by c5thenAs a holdover from the last Ice Age, maybe it should have gone extinct along with the Wooley Mammoth, Mastadon, Saber Toothed Cats, Cave Bear, Dire Wolf, etc. The Fur Seal would certaintly make a comeback without their #1 predator.
I'm more than willing to lose an "Arctic Icon" if it means lower energy bills and 5% unemployment instaed of 10% or more. Why don't these TV reporters making 7 figure salaries set up an non-profit trust fund with 10% of their annual pay to help these "worthy causes"?
The day that "politician" became a career choice is the day we started losing the Republic. Let's get it back! Alan Keyes '08.
You left out the
May 16, 2008 - 14:36 ET by mattmYou left out the man-bear-pig...
seven dollar gasoline
May 16, 2008 - 14:09 ET by wizardjrThanks to the cute and cuddley Polar Bears we will have seven dollar gasoline and eight hundred dollar a month heating bills.
How many times do we have to point out that
a) Polar Bears have been around for at least 100,000 years
b) temperatures have been way hotter and way colder than now
c) the bears are still here (and thriving)
d) they did it without our help (or hindrance)
DUH!
And one more
May 16, 2008 - 16:19 ET by 10ksnookerPolar bears are just Kodiak brown bears with white coats.Anyone need polar bear recipes? They are a little gamey, but good to eat.
Polar bears were hunted to near extinction, market hunting reduced their numbers, not global warming. Once hunting restriction were imposed in the 70s by treaty, there are now about 3x as many as there were then.
The notion that they are endangered by ice melting is no more true than the Kodiak brown bear going extinct. Apparently the polar bear species evolved during the last interglacial period when the Boreal forest grew up to the Arctic Ocean. Yes most of that barren tundra was covered with trees, the tree carcasses are buried in the peat.
I have seen polar bears up close and personal, you do not want to go near them without a gun, a very big gun -- They eat people. We had a research shop in Ft Churchill Ca that we regularly visited, you could not go outside without armed escort.
...... it is “big, it's
May 16, 2008 - 14:44 ET by MidAmerica...... it is “big, it's charismatic and it's powerful. It's beautiful and it generates sympathy. If it blinks out, you'll notice.”
Now we have to hope that they do dissappear because that will save us from 'global warming'.
Irena Sendler
May 16, 2008 - 14:58 ET by danboIrena died May 12 in Warsaw. The Nobel comittee decided there were others more worthy of the Peace prize. The world has lost a true hero.
"There is a clear attempt to establish truth not by scientific methods but by perpetual repetition."
- Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D. Professor of Meteorology, MIT
So I am spending nearly $4
May 16, 2008 - 15:10 ET by MassConservativeSo I am spending nearly $4 a gallon and sending most of that to regimes in the middle-east that would just as soon see me dead to feel the joy of an f***ing polar bear blinking at me.
Would these be the bears in the three of the four known populations wandering around the Arctic and growing in numbers that I will never in my lifetime see or the bears couped up in zoos all across this country for my amusement?
I say no thanks. I'll go with darwin on this one and take my chances that the bears will adapt like they have for thousands and thousands of years.
Ironically the bears adapt but we panic less than one hundred years into the industrial revolution and try and set our severals back a few centuries on bogus science.
Obama '08 - He has the Wright stuff...and that is WRONG for America
I like my polar bears
May 16, 2008 - 16:34 ET by SchnikeysI like my polar bears char-grilled.
It generates sympathy? I have no need for a sympathy generator, I sold my last one at a yard sale.
------------------------------------------------------------
Grizzly Bear '08
You know a political stunt
May 16, 2008 - 16:44 ET by CortillaenYou know a political stunt is unconsionably stupid when even Doc N. is making fun of it. (Give me a shout if he changes that so I can fix it to the archive)
www.rhjunior.com Great comics with a hefty dose of Christian and anti-nutjob goodness.
"With your mind as high as Mt. Fuji you can see all things clearly. And you can see all the forces that shape events; not just the things near to you." -Miyamoto Musashi
Let Us sponsor a Polar bear pettin trip for AP STAFF
May 16, 2008 - 19:24 ET by JayTeeI would give money to help sponser a Polar Bear- A.P. trip to the nearest Polar Bear habitat for their up close and Personable visit so they can help save those Species of the Planet that would have Journalists for Breakfast.
Let us join together and FEED the threatened Polar Bears.
JT... Hell yeah. Not only
May 16, 2008 - 19:28 ET by Clear thinkerJT...
Hell yeah. Not only will I chip in some coin, I will also be willing to spread Seal blood all over them just prior to them getting out to pet the cute little cuddly bears.
"Abstain from McCain"
-
May 16, 2008 - 21:30 ET by dahliatraversYes, I saw this article. Yet another example of maudlin emotionalism taking the place of science and facts in the reporting on AGW.
Even if humans are causing global warming, the price we would have to pay to stop it would be enormous -- all-encompassing/all-sacrificing, in fact.
Double Jeopardy?
May 17, 2008 - 13:33 ET by BacchusYet another assault is coming. How will the polar bears survive this?
Airbus announced Thursday it will begin strip-mining the oceans of basic plant life, algae, and convert it into a biofuel to burn in their fleets of jets. Algae is at the very bottom of the ocean's food chain. Sharp reductions of it will adversely affect all ocean life including polar bears, who live in harmony with the arctic ocean. Algae consumes large amounts of CO2 too. Losing that capacity will hurt the polar bears for a second time as temperatures rise, melting their mobile homes on the arctic ice. Double jeopardy. So, shouldn't algae be protected now too, like the polar bear? Should algae ever disappear, won't the planet be in a huge mess?
Rally now to save the algae - before it's all gone.
/sarc
HOLLYWEIRD AND OTHER NON-THINKERS
May 18, 2008 - 09:16 ET by reelman46Prince Charles: Eighteen months to stop climate change disaster By Andrew Pierce, 15/05/2008.
CRAWFISH NOTE: Why does anyone care about the rants
and illogical bozo shock statements of so many unqualified but “famous”
folks? IF there was ever a crisis, would you call any actor or prince
or athlete or fossil liberal? Even the 1974 Harvard (wrong) conclusion
that “an ice age was nearing” seems to have been forgotten. Hey, at
least they were highly educated. What qualifies the Sean Penn and
Madonna crowd to do a meaningful endorsement of any politician or
environmental position? Maybe they should also comment on football bowl
games. Makes as much sense. Ask yourself what these people represent in
their “family” lives, what possible role model they have been to
anyone, what moral standards (or arrest record) do they have, what
education prepared them or just how they have lived with a hundred
times your salary. In most all cases you will frown and shake your
head. These people have lots more personal problems to go with their
“lots more money.” So, what can you learn from them?
Its just pathetic how the fawning media gives the unqualified freakish
a forum to babble opinions as if they had a clue. The very few times
one of these dufus types was asked a serious probing question about
their stance on an issue…the response (if given instead of arrogant
silence) was so shallow, so juvenile, so emotion-based, so
reality-free…the viewer was left with mouth agape. They are only
actors. Their job is “to pretend to be somebody they are not”.
“Pretending to be thinkers” is easy for them too.
Doug Schexnayder, Ph.D. (theconservativecrawfish)