Anthropogenic Negative Climate Change (ANCC)

[Sid Belzberg]

Polar Bears in Canada

1. COSEWIC Assessment and Status Report on the Polar Bear

Nov 25, 2019 — The Canadian population is predicted to decline over the next three generations (35 years) due to a reduction in seasonal coverage of sea ice.

https://www.sararegistry.gc.ca/virtu...ear_0808_e.pdf

2. Polar bear population decline a wake up call for climate ...


The news comes from a new study linking the dramatic decline in this polar bear subpopulation in northeast Alaska and Canada to a loss of sea ice due to climate change action.

Southern Beaufort Sea polar bears show 40% drop in numbers.

World Wildlife Fundhttps://www.worldwildlife.org › stories › polar-bear-pop...

3. For most subpopulations with repeated censuses, data suggest a slight increase in the last 10-25 years (Study done in 2020 (?) - article is Nov. 13, 2020)

https://wwf.ca/stories/polar-bears-canada/

4. [Projection]

Today

Today, polar bears are among the few large carnivores that are still found in roughly their original habitat and range–and in some places, in roughly their natural numbers.

Although most of the world’s 19 populations have returned to healthy numbers, there are differences between them. Some are stable, some seem to be increasing, and some are decreasing due to various pressures.

Status of the polar bear populations
Updated 2021 with data from the IUCN Polar Bear Specialists Group:

3 populations are in decline
2 populations are increasing
4 populations are stable
10 populations are data-deficient (information missing or outdated)

---

In the future


By 2040, scientists predict that only a fringe of ice will remain in Northeast Canada and Northern Greenland when all other large areas of summer ice are gone. This “Last Ice Area” is likely to become important for polar bears and other life that depends on ice.

A projection of sea ice in the archipelago, supported by WWF, shows that much of the region is facing significant ice loss in the coming decades – with potentially serious consequences for polar bears.
Global polar bear numbers are projected to decline by 30% by 2050.

https://www.arcticwwf.org/wildlife/p...ar-population/

Bob A (Anthropogenicist)

Hi Bob,
The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the WEF are heavily involved with the Worldwide Fund. The World Wild Life Fund has also collaborated closely
With the Eco Health Alliance through Fauci, NIH gave grants to the Eco Health Alliance that funded the Wuhan Institute of Virology to create the Sars-Cov2 virus together with several other labs, including the University of North Carolina and the Winnipeg level 4 bio lab.
Hence, the sources you are providing to make a case for a declining Polar bear population in Canada are conflicted and unreliable. The Trudeau Governments stats are also unreliable for the same reasons

This executive summary that you have not read in my post unequivocally refutes your post. https://www.thegwpf.org/content/uplo...Bears-2023.pdf

"2023 marked 50 years of international cooperation to protect polar bears across the Arctic. Those efforts should be hailed as a conservation success story: from late-1960s population estimate by the US Fish and Wildlife Service of about 12,000 individuals, numbers have almost tripled, to just over 32,000 in 2023 (with a wide range of potential error for both estimates). •

There were no reports from the Arctic in 2023 indicating polar bears were being harmed due to lack of suitable habitat, in part because Arctic sea ice in summer has not declined since 2007. • Contrary to expectations, a study in Svalbard found a decrease in polar bears killed in defense of life or property over the last 40 years, despite profound declines in sea ice over the last two decades. •

A survey of Southern Hudson Bay polar bears in 2021 showed an astonishing 30% increase over five years, which adds another 223 bears to the global total. • A concurrent survey of Western Hudson Bay polar bears in 2021 showed that numbers had not declined since 2011, which also means they have not declined since 2004. Movement of polar bears across the boundaries with neighbouring subpopulations may account for the appearance of a decline, when none actually occurred. •

The IUCN Polar Bear Specialist Group has ignored a 2016 recommendation that the boundaries of three Hudson Bay subpopulations (Western HB, Southern HB, and Foxe Basin) be adjusted to account for genetic distinctiveness of bears inhabiting the Hudson Bay region. A similar boundary issue in the western Arctic between the Chukchi Sea, and the Southern and Northern

Beaufort subpopulations, based on known movements of bears between regions, has been acknowledged since 2014 but has not yet been resolved. • The US Fish and Wildlife Service and the IUCN Polar Bear Specialist Group, in their 2023 reports, failed to officially acknowledge the newfound South-East Greenland bears as the 20th subpopulation, despite undisputed evidence that this is a genetically distinct and geographically isolated group. Numbers are estimated at 234 individuals."

[Bob Armstrong]

Polar Bears in Canada

1. COSEWIC Assessment and Status Report on the Polar Bear

Nov 25, 2019 — The Canadian population is predicted to decline over the next three generations (35 years) due to a reduction in seasonal coverage of sea ice.

https://www.sararegistry.gc.ca/virtu...ear_0808_e.pdf

2. Polar bear population decline a wake up call for climate ...


The news comes from a new study linking the dramatic decline in this polar bear subpopulation in northeast Alaska and Canada to a loss of sea ice due to climate change action.

Southern Beaufort Sea polar bears show 40% drop in numbers.

World Wildlife Fundhttps://www.worldwildlife.org › stories › polar-bear-pop...

3. For most subpopulations with repeated censuses, data suggest a slight increase in the last 10-25 years (Study done in 2020 (?) - article is Nov. 13, 2020)

https://wwf.ca/stories/polar-bears-canada/

4. [Projection]

Today

Today, polar bears are among the few large carnivores that are still found in roughly their original habitat and range–and in some places, in roughly their natural numbers.

Although most of the world’s 19 populations have returned to healthy numbers, there are differences between them. Some are stable, some seem to be increasing, and some are decreasing due to various pressures.

Status of the polar bear populations
Updated 2021 with data from the IUCN Polar Bear Specialists Group:

3 populations are in decline
2 populations are increasing
4 populations are stable
10 populations are data-deficient (information missing or outdated)

---

In the future


By 2040, scientists predict that only a fringe of ice will remain in Northeast Canada and Northern Greenland when all other large areas of summer ice are gone. This “Last Ice Area” is likely to become important for polar bears and other life that depends on ice.

A projection of sea ice in the archipelago, supported by WWF, shows that much of the region is facing significant ice loss in the coming decades – with potentially serious consequences for polar bears.
Global polar bear numbers are projected to decline by 30% by 2050.

https://www.arcticwwf.org/wildlife/p...ar-population/

Bob A (Anthropogenicist)

[Sid Belzberg]

Today is Polar Bear Day! From a population of just 12,000 bears in the late 1960s, numbers have almost tripled to 32,000 in 2023!!! But, hey! weren't you told that your fossil emissions are killing them?
State of Polar Bear Report 2023 - with data from all agencies involved in estimating Population numbers. https://www.thegwpf.org/content/uplo...Bears-2023.pdf

[Sid Belzberg]

"Swedish farmers have now JOINED the European-wide farmer's protest. Something big, something historic, has been taking place all over Europe over the last few months. Farmers in 20 European countries have taken to the streets to protest against unfair policies driven in large by the climate agenda. If you have only been reading the mainstream media, you might not have realized how large these protests actually are.

I've been following this, and tens of thousands of farmers all over Europe have been protesting for months. They've blockaded Paris, they've blockaded airports, they've even built walls around government buildings in protests. These protests are nothing but historic, yet you barely see anything about it in the news.

The farmers are saying NO to the World Economic Forum agenda. Now, the protests have reached Sweden, with farmers taking to the streets with hundreds of their tractors, with some carrying banners reading "No farmers, No food, No future." It's estimated that hundreds of 9f tractors joined the protests in the Swedish region of Skåne.

You see, this all comes back to the UN Agenda 2030. They have outlined several "Global Goals" that is to be implemented all over the world in time for the year 2030. One of these goals is "Climate Action". And they have decided that farmers are polluting too much.

Instead, if you are to listen to the World Economic Forum, people should be eating insects and fake meat to save the planet. There was even a guest at this year's World Economic Forum who said that fishing and farming were akin to "ecocide" and should be "recognized legally as a serious crime". Yes, you read that correctly.

So, the plan is that you will eat fake meat and insects to save the planet. In reality, this is not much different from what happened under the Soviet Union. Stalin called farmers the "enemy of the people." The Communists seized the farmer's land. The result was that millions of people were starved to death. Now, we are seeing the elites wanting to seize control of the food supply in the name of climate change. Farmers are now once again being painted as “enemies” because they supposedly pollute the earth.

It's Climate Communism."
https://twitter.com/PeterSweden7/sta...94976211562543


UNREAL SCENES Police tried to stop the farmers from protesting outside the EU headquarters in Brussels. Farmers used their tractors to break through the police barriers.


https://twitter.com/PeterSweden7/sta...76119740699118



Thousands of farmers are blockading the city of Brussels and protesting outside the EU headquarters. SHARE - Did you hear about this on in the media?

https://twitter.com/PeterSweden7

[Sid Belzberg]

Earth is Approaching "Tipping Points" in Earth's Environment



"A drumbeat of recent reports has driven home the fact that our planet’s complex environmental systems are undergoing profound upheavals as a result of human activity.

Glaciers around the world, from Greenland to Switzerland to Antarctica, are melting faster than expected as atmospheric and ocean heat hit new highs.

New research suggests that up to half of the Amazon rainforest could rapidly transform into grasslands or weakened ecosystems in the coming decades as a result of deforestation, climate change and drought. Those stresses could eventually drive the entire forest ecosystem, home to a tenth of the planet’s land species, past a tipping point that would trigger a forest-wide collapse.

And a new study suggests that a crucial network of ocean currents that carries warm water into the North Atlantic is showing early signs of collapse because of an influx of fresh water from melting glaciers.

All of these developments appear worrisome on the surface. But, most concerning of all, they raise the specter that the planet may be approaching some of the so-called tipping points that could trigger severe and irreversible changes."

https://messaging-custom-newsletters...d396a4debfd6ce

Bob A (Anthropogenicist)

Yet another example of the Marxist WEF useful idiot trumpeting WEF propaganda.
https://www.helsinkitimes.fi/china-n...c-opinion.html

[Bob Armstrong]

Earth is Approaching "Tipping Points" in Earth's Environment



"A drumbeat of recent reports has driven home the fact that our planet’s complex environmental systems are undergoing profound upheavals as a result of human activity.

Glaciers around the world, from Greenland to Switzerland to Antarctica, are melting faster than expected as atmospheric and ocean heat hit new highs.

New research suggests that up to half of the Amazon rainforest could rapidly transform into grasslands or weakened ecosystems in the coming decades as a result of deforestation, climate change and drought. Those stresses could eventually drive the entire forest ecosystem, home to a tenth of the planet’s land species, past a tipping point that would trigger a forest-wide collapse.

And a new study suggests that a crucial network of ocean currents that carries warm water into the North Atlantic is showing early signs of collapse because of an influx of fresh water from melting glaciers.

All of these developments appear worrisome on the surface. But, most concerning of all, they raise the specter that the planet may be approaching some of the so-called tipping points that could trigger severe and irreversible changes."

https://messaging-custom-newsletters...d396a4debfd6ce

Bob A (Anthropogenicist)

[Sid Belzberg]

Negative Climate Change - Affecting the Lifestyle of Earth's Residents

Polar Bears



"As the Ice Melts, Polar Bears Are Failing to Find Enough Food on Land."

https://time.com/6694426/climate-cha...lctg=206908353

Bob A (Anthropogenicist)

Yet more MSM horseshit from our Marxist WEF useful idiot.

Constant dire predictions have been an attempt to counter effective criticism of polar bears as AGW icon says outgoing PGSG chair

Posted on July 3, 2021 | Comments Offon Constant dire predictions have been an attempt to counter effective criticism of polar bears as AGW icon says outgoing PGSG chair

In an unexpected statement, Dag Vongraven (the out-going Chairman of the Polar Bear Specialist Group) suggests that much of the incessant dire warnings of doom about the future of polar bears from PBSG members has been a counter-measure to offset the effective efforts by myself and others to expose the flawed rhetoric this group promotes.

You may remember Vongraven, who in 2014 famously sent me an email alerting me to a PBSG statement that later came back to bite them (in part because it was included in a CBC documentary called The Politics of Polar Bears later that year, see below):

It is important to realize that this range [i.e. their polar bear population estimate] never has been an estimate of total abundance in a scientific sense, but simply a qualified guess given to satisfy public demand.

Will this be another? You be the judge.

In an interview available only in Norwegian on the website for the Norwegian Polar Institute, Dag Vongraven expressed his opinion that “climate change will ultimately lead to the extinction of the polar bear population in Svalbard and major parts of the Russian Arctic“. This dire prediction was reported in English by the Barents Observer (2 July 2021).

However, it turns out Vongraven had more to say which the reporter for the Observer left out but which the folks who write IcePeople (2 July 2021) thought was worth a mention. They wrote:

Vongraven, incidentally, acknowledges in this week’s report [sic, they mean the NPI interview] the increasing visibility of climate change deniers in recent years – and declares that’s partially why there’s an increasing number of dire reports being released.

“Before the (specialist group) meeting in Tromsø in 2009, a physical meeting in the specialist group for polar bears and a report every four years was enough, but after 2009 this has been insufficient because there has been a constant demand for information about the polar bear’s status and future prospects,” he said. “But the increase is also due to the fact that climate deniers and this type of force have become much more active, and polar bears as a symbol of climate change have been reduced as ‘climate hysteria.’”

By the way, the IcePeople piece also provided a link to my July 1 blog post (“Barents Sea polar bears thriving despite huge summer ice loss spring research results are in”), in which I reported the results of spring 2021 research on polar bears in Svalbard posted for all to see on the NPI website by NPI polar bear biologists. Apparently, to some people, posting data such as this is evidence of “denier activity”.

The failure of Svalbard area polar bears to show evidence of harm to their health or population size from the huge decline in summer sea ice seen in the Barents Sea is a problem because it is such a stark contrast to the continued claim that polar bears in Southern and Western Hudson Bay have already registered significant declines in body condition and cub survival in response to only a fraction of the ice loss experienced by Svalbard bears. As I pointed out last year and in The Polar Bear Catastrophe That Never Happened, this contradiction is one of the real conundrums that plague the PBSG.

Meanwhile, the PBSG website is unavailable because the NPI has stopped hosting (as it has done since 2001) and the PBSG must ‘transition’ to a new platform. In the announcement I saw 28 May 2021, there was no hint of how long this might take. Therefore, this website link produces only a snapshot of the PBSG homepage and an obituary for Markus Dyck: the rest of it, with all the content from years ago, is effectively gone. Good thing I’ve downloaded virtually all of their content to my own archive over the years.

Therefore, without the NPI interview as reported by the Barents Observer, we would never know that Vongraven was stepping down as PBSG chairman to be replaced by Nick Lunn (Canada) and Kristin Laidre (USA/Greenland) as co-chairs, which as far as I know has never been done before (having two chairmen). It’s certainly high time for this group to have a female chair (which they have certainly never had before) but it looks to me like this bunch of macho-men don’t expect a woman to do the job competently all by herself. Perhaps I’m wrong: maybe she is so busy she declined the post unless she had help. However, I find it odd that none of the previous male chairs have ever needed to share the chairman load.

Lastly, as an added bonus to Vongraven admitting that my colleagues and I have been doing a good job in exposing the unsubstantiated hysteria around polar bear predictions of doom, the IcePeople article link to the NPI interview inadvertently led me to their ‘publications’ page (which I had not seen before). There you will find links to papers by NPI researchers and critically, pdf copies for download of many papers that are not otherwise available except by journal subscriptions. A gold mine. Thanks, guys!

Below: The CBC’s ‘The Politics of Polar Bears’ (from 2014), short version (the full length version has disappeared):

https://polarbearscience.com/2021/07...ng-pgsg-chair/

[Bob Armstrong]

Negative Climate Change - Affecting the Lifestyle of Earth's Residents

Polar Bears



"As the Ice Melts, Polar Bears Are Failing to Find Enough Food on Land."

https://time.com/6694426/climate-cha...lctg=206908353

Bob A (Anthropogenicist)

[Sid Belzberg]

MEP: People are realizing climate change is a MASSIVE LIE | EU scared of voters after farmers revolt


German MEP, Christine Anderson: EU technocrats are in panic mode, as millions awaken to the Climate scam "They're frightened at this point... People no longer believe in [man-made climate change], and I think they're catching on to the fact that it's a gigantic lie."

[Bob Armstrong]

Carbon Dioxide (CO2) and Greenhouse Gases

"Carbon dioxide (CO₂) is the PRIMARY [Emphasis added] greenhouse gas emitted through human activities. In 2021, CO₂ accounted for 79% of all U.S. greenhouse gas emissions from human activities."

https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/ove...eenhouse-gases

Greenhouse Gases have coalesced into a canopy, part-way up the Earth's atmosphere, which is prohibiting reflected heat from the Earth's surface from escaping into space, as it used to do before man caused the formation of this canopy.

Bob A (Anthropogenicist)

[Pargat Perrer]

.....

.....

This is the Spanish 500, not to be confused with (and much slower than) the Indianapolis 500.

[Sid Belzberg]

The World Economic Forum touts 'carbon removal plants'—each of which removes five million tonnes of CO2 from the atmosphere each year—as "crucial to meeting global climate goals", despite the fact that CO2 currently makes up just 0.04% of the atmosphere, and if it drops to half of that, all plant life—and thus all animal and human life—will perish.

[Sid Belzberg]

Massive farmers protest in Rome with tractors as far as the eye can see. Farmers against the climate communism agenda




https://twitter.com/PeterSweden7/sta...14703345475847


The massive farmer's protest in Spain is continuing. Thousands of tractors out protesting against Socialism and the Agenda 2030.



https://twitter.com/PeterSweden7/status/1756725531779940399


Update
Countries that have now joined the farmers protest: Netherlands, Scotland, France ,Germany, Poland, Lithuania, Romania, Belgium ,Greece, Spain, Italy, Portugal, Ireland, Bulgaria ,Britain ,Wales Moldova

Say no to Genocidal Climate Communism! Say no to net zero!



https://twitter.com/PeterSweden7/sta...47261311152472

[Bob Gillanders]

Climate scientist Michael Mann wins his defamation lawsuit.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eX_a...el=PBSNewsHour

[Bob Armstrong]

CT Non-chess Forums

Learning Centres

Negative Climate Change



This is a somewhat unique thread, says its originator.

It is my understanding that both Anthropogenicists and Naturalists agree:

Statement # 1 - Negative Climate Change is currently occurring.

However they disagree on almost everything else:

1. Rate of negative climate change;
2. Causes of negative climate change;
3. the scientific "how" of negative climate change;
4. the projected consequences and timeline of this negative climate change.
5. whether there is any "crisis"

In this thread so far, it has appeared that both sides claim to have science on their side (With disputes about how many scientists are on each side, the type of scientists, and the qualifications of each other's scientists).

Both sides have impressive credentials for their scientists and their "expert" reports. Both sides have a multiplicity of impressive looking graphs with many multiple lines across them.

So we cannot say there is a dearth of material to go through.

But, admittedly, it can be hard to compare charts which seem to be dealing with something from slightly different perspectives. It can be difficult to evaluate the worth of the attacks on various scientists' credentials.

We even have expert reports on glaciers: one says they are melting; the other says they are NOT melting.

Whoa....how can both be true? Is it possible they both are.....but they're viewing glaciers from somewhat different perspectives, and the meaning of "melting" is in dispute?

Anyway, to conclude, this thread has served the very good purpose of presenting CT viewers a wealth of conflicting material, among which to determine the truth as THEY see it.

And we know many are reading only.....for many reasons, though, they are hesitant to make a public commitment on their view, or they simply have not yet come to conclusions, given the overwhelming amount of material, and the extent of opposition. This is fine.

That there may be few drivers of the thread (Posters), as long as they are presenting ongoing evidence supporting their view, this thread is worthwhile.

Bob A (Anthropogenicist)