» News

Scientists Admit Polar Bear Numbers Were Made Up

Home - by - May 31, 2014 - 08:00 America/New_York - 15 Comments

Barbwire

This may come as a shocker to some, but scientists are not always right — especially when under intense public pressure for answers.

Researchers with the IUCN Polar Bear Specialist Group (PBSG) recently admitted to experienced zoologist and polar bear specialist Susan Crockford that the estimate given for the total number of polar bars in the Arctic was “simply a qualified guess given to satisfy public demand.”

Crockford has been critical of official polar bear population estimates because they fail to include five large subpopulations of polar bears. Because of the uncertainty of the populations in these areas, PBSG did not include them in their official estimate — but the polar bear group did include other subpopulation estimates.

PBSG has for years said that global polar bear populations were between 20,000 and 25,000, but these estimates are likely much lower than how many polar bears are actually living in the world.

more

image: AnimalWildlife

» 15 Comments

  1. Anonymous

    May 31st, 2014

    So are the pjrojected cafe mpg standards and attempt to put us all in micro mini clown cars, “clean zero emissions” electric cars, etc.

    Thumb up +6

     
  2. Racist

    May 31st, 2014

    Well then how many “Polar Bars” are there in the Arctic to be exact? I know there’s that one up by the North Pole where Olive the other reindeer met Round John Virgin and that grumpy flightless reindeer who sounds like Michael Stipe, in that Drew Barrymore Christmas cartoon. But there’s bound to be more than one bar in a place where the entire work season actually only lasts 1 season out of the year!!! It’s gotta be worse than a Injun Resermavation in terms of alkyholism!!!

    Thumb up +1

     
  3. Boobie the Rocket Dog

    May 31st, 2014

    I just want to reach out and pet that bear, but I’d probably lose my hand in the process.

    Thumb up +2

     
  4. Stirrin the BS

    May 31st, 2014

    Mr. Bear, you’re a day early. Claudia doesn’t post her critters until Sunday morning. Go back to sleep.

    Thumb up +9

     
  5. grayjohn

    May 31st, 2014

    I wonder how much other “Science” is made up. Are all their degrees and doctorates made up too?
    Is there anything they won’t lie about?

    Thumb up +7

     
  6. Facts are stubborn thinks.

    Anyone calling themselves a scientist should never be allowed to so much as hold a beaker, test tube, or a slide rule ever again if they changed data for public demand. WTF kind of science is that.

    Too bad we did away with stocks in the town square, cause I feel the need to publicly shame them. What an effin joke they are.

    Thumb up +7

     
  7. Tim

    May 31st, 2014

    When we consider that most “science” is performed at the behest of some bureaucracy or another, and that the funding is from the taxpayers, we begin to understand that most “science” is BULLSHIT to promote some bureaucratic agenda. The bureaucracy shops for “scientists” to fund, and finds an awful lot of very willing dupes – the rewards are enormous.

    Thumb up +9

     
  8. D-Bad

    May 31st, 2014

    This leads to a revision of the the age old rhetorical question ‘Does a bear shit in the woods?’ to ‘Does a climate scientist make shit up?’

    Noteworthy Comment Thumb up +10

     
  9. ed

    May 31st, 2014

    early 60s polar population approx. 6000, 2014 approx. 52000

    Thumb up +3

     
  10. Kevin R.

    May 31st, 2014

    Public demand? The Natural Resources Defence Coucil and the Sierra Club do not the public make.

    Thumb up +5

     
  11. twofer

    May 31st, 2014

    celebrity death match: algore vs. ANY polar bear

    send about 5000 inner city ne’er do wells up the the arctic and let them try to kill THOSE polar bears

    Thumb up +3

     
  12. DaveVA

    May 31st, 2014

    Must have been having a blue Popsicle.

    Thumb up +4

     
  13. Stranded in Sonoma

    May 31st, 2014

    @Kevin R. — Bingo! You get today’s Blue Ribbon!

    Not only do liberals cherry pick the “scientists,” the “scientists” cherry pick the data and also cherry pick who they consider to be “the public” just in case their data is called into question found to be as phony as Obama’s birth certificate.

    Maksim nailed this very topic long ago.

    Thumb up +2

     
  14. Stranded in Sonoma

    May 31st, 2014

    Because of the uncertainty of the populations in these areas, PBSG did not include them in their official estimate…

    What uncertainty? You mean the uncertainty of continued funding if you included those populations?

    This is the very thing that Michael Crichton spoke about in his speech Science Policy in the 21st Century.

    (The file linked is an MHT file that will only open in Internet Explorer. Just save it to your computer first. Sorry.)

    Traditionally policymakers have trouble getting good information. This problem is especially acute with scientific decisions, because the issues are complex and policymakers are not usually trained in science. In addition, the staffs feeding policymakers often give them deliberately-biased information in an effort to make a partisan case.

    (Emphasis not in original)

    Read the entire speech. You will see that even Crichton recognized the libtards wanted nothing to do with the truth and the facts. They just wanted to protect their agenda.

    Thumb up +1

     
  15. Bad_Brad

    May 31st, 2014

    If memory serves me correct, didn’t Sara Palin call bull shit on this a long time ago?

    Thumb up +5