|
#126
|
|||
|
|||
http://www.polarbearsinternational.org/bear-facts/
Polar Bear Status Report Polar bears are a potentially endangered species living in the circumpolar north. They are animals which know no boundaries. They pad across the ice from Russia to Alaska, from Canada to Greenland and onto Norway's Svalbard archipelago. No adequate census exists on which to base a worldwide population estimate, but biologists use a working figure of 20,000 to 25,000 bears with about sixty percent of those living in Canada. |
#127
|
|||
|
|||
Rossini,
Since we don't know how many there are, how do you have any confidence in your poisition that the population is declining? |
#128
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Um, not exact the best source of information. That said, I see no reason to drag DDT into this discussion, unless you want to admit that we've handled global warming + have decided not to throw that theory out
__________________
read a lot, think for yourself |
#129
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Quit trying to attack the messenger, and respond with facts that disput the allagations. |
#130
|
|||
|
|||
Rossini - thanks for your facts backing up your claims. Until you put some numbers up to back your never ending hyperbole, I consider you an uninformed poster.
__________________
"Nothing cleanses your soul like getting the hell kicked out of you." - Woody Hayes |
#131
|
|||
|
|||
How about putting together a cogent argument that is more than cut + pasted text from advocacy sites?
There's a big difference in between major peer-reviewed journals and web-based blogs/advocacy groups [whatever `side' they are on].
__________________
read a lot, think for yourself |
#132
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#133
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
__________________
The Sand People are easily startled, but they will soon be back, and in greater numbers. All statements have been peer reviewed. |
#134
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
If talking about other subjects, IMO I don't see why asking for scientific articles vs. web-postings is an outrageous thing to ask. At least when claiming that the articles/studies others cite are incorrect, I guess I'd expect to have similarly scientific work if we are to agree that a theory is bunk. And if you don't have access to the articles, why are you so quick to dismiss what you admit you haven't read? Especially when people who have read them seem to think very different things about their validity than the non-readers.
__________________
read a lot, think for yourself |
#135
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#136
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Regardless, you're right, environmental groups need to be taken with a grain of salt as well, BUT they often have legit research to back up claims, whereas that site you linked to doesn't as far as I can tell. Read the mission statement for websites, it's the first thing I do. For example: 21st Century Science & Technology magazine challenges the assumptions of modern scientific dogma. That first sentence alone tells me that this site is way out of the mainstream and needs very solid evidence to support the claims they are making. Evidence that they don't seem to have for many issues. Also, please stop pasting entire articles, it muddies up the thread and we have no way of knowing where you got it from most of the time (which I'm sure is intentional on your part, as the stuff you post is not usually of very high standards, and you know it).
__________________
The Sand People are easily startled, but they will soon be back, and in greater numbers. All statements have been peer reviewed. |
#137
|
|||
|
|||
Sure, but I'll need a few days to dig them up.
As for studies about people who read peer-reviewed vs. not ... I don't know of a study. But if you haven't read the scientific literature you claim is bunk, how do you claim it's bunk? [don't tell me some pundit told you to think that, unless you want me quoting the Sierra Club and other opposing pundits .... my take is that we need to get away from advocacy/pundits when discussing SCIENCE, as advocacy/pundits only matter when it's all opinion IMO]
__________________
read a lot, think for yourself |
#138
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Sam, greenbean has given you a plethora of scientific data supported by well done scientific research in an extrememly patient manner. Chris
__________________
"Try to learn something about everything and everything about something" -- Thomas H. Huxley |
#139
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
__________________
The Sand People are easily startled, but they will soon be back, and in greater numbers. All statements have been peer reviewed. |
#140
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Now these same people want us to quit using energy, because the "think" it might be responsible for .04 C over the last 100 years. Maybe! And none of the death mongers are riding bikes. Why believe those who say do as I say, not as I do? Lead by example. Get a coat, sell your car, and shut up. Gosh I didn't know you ran this forum. Are there any other posting rules that I am not aware of. |
#141
|
|||
|
|||
Well, has in past threads on this subject, I think this one has run it's course. Time to close it before anyone goes far enough overboard for a ban.
__________________
Bill "LOL, well I have no brain apparently. " - dc (Debi) |
|
|