The danger of global warming became clear as it is blamed for radically declining musk ox populations. From the story:
A team of scientists has discovered that the drastic decline in Arctic musk ox populations that began roughly 12,000 years ago was due to a warming climate rather than to human hunting. “This is the first study to use ancient musk ox DNA collected from across the animal’s former geographic range to test for human impacts on musk ox populations,” said Beth Shapiro, the Shaffer Career Development assistant professor of biology at Penn State University and one of the team’s leaders. “We found that, although human and musk ox populations overlapped in many regions across the globe, humans probably were not responsible for the decline and eventual extinction of musk oxen across much of their former range.” The team’s findings will be published in the 8 March 2010 issue of the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
That can’t be right. Humans are the cause of all ills, especially species decline.
Of course, it can’t be left at that. We may not have been the problem way back then, but we are now:
Shapiro continued, “We know from historical data that musk oxen are sensitive to changes in the Arctic environment. While we cannot confirm exactly what climate factors are driving the changes we observe in musk oxen over the last 65,000 years, we can say with confidence that humans are not causing local extinctions. In Greenland, for example, humans and musk oxen arrived and began their expansion at the same time.” According to Gilbert, “We wonder how the current climatic instability will effect the survival of musk oxen in the near future. There’s a lot in the news about the plight of polar bears, but musk ox may be similarly at risk.”
Uh, polar bear numbers have increased in recent decades, not the other way around. Sigh.
March 9th, 2010 | 6:05 pm
Smith,
Shapiro never said (that we know of) polar bear numbers are decreasing or increasing. She alluded to media reports of their plight.
This issue with the polar bears is not difficult.
1) Polar bear populations were as low as about 5000 (+/-, etc, etc)
2) Present polar bear populations are about 22,000
3) The numbers have increased, yes, does this mean they are NOT in “danger”? (this “danger” being a ready indicator of the state of the arctic ecosystem – which appears most susceptible to global warming right now, and as polar bears are the top of the food chain, it is a means to question what is happening)
Numbers CAN increase, but the species CAN STILL be in danger. If humans take strong measures to “save” them (only good ‘ole Jesus saves, I know), these increases could be a result of human action. Are they increasing fast enough? If measures aren’t taken to protect them, will they decline? Is the present population struggling to survive and keep their numbers? Will the population remain where it is? Given the steps taken, should there be MORE than 20,000?
They might be doing ok now, but are they thriving, are they struggling, will they be around in 20 years, 50 years???
This is not difficult, good gravy.
Again, the stereotype is that the conservatives, anti-science crowd, religious mythologists, various deniers, etc, etc aren’t the clearest thinkers. Is feeding them these scraps of confusion (referring to the polar bears) helping to erase that stereotype? Or is just given them more ammo to spout around, thus revealing that they know little and think far less?
You’re doing a disservice to such readers. While it may be a winning formula within the extremely anti-intellectual landscape of majority America, it will not stand up to the experts. When push comes to shove, the experts, despite their minuscule numbers, seem to win.
March 9th, 2010 | 6:10 pm
this is like saying, “Rwanda is doing great cause their population is up to 10 million from 8 million over the last 10 years”
Just cause their population is up, doesn’t mean they are doing great.
Logical fallacy
Wesley J. Smith Reply:
March 9th, 2010 at 8:56 pm
You have no sense of humor, David. Zero. It’s a real problem for people of your ilk. You should learn to smile more.
March 9th, 2010 | 6:13 pm
[...] Global Warming Hysteria: Musk Ox Populations at Risk! » Secondhand … Tags: arctic, became-clear, drastic, from-the-story, Global Warming, radically-declining, story, [...]
March 9th, 2010 | 7:18 pm
Everything is indeed caused by global warming, check this grid: http://www.hootervillegazette.com/causedby.html
If you’re tired of this type of nonsense, join The Climategate Countryclub and Unite against the Gorebots and alarmists:
http://www.climategatecountryclub.com
So far we have close to 500 members from 28 countries.
March 9th, 2010 | 9:31 pm
Then it’s all a joke? Not sure I “get it”. In any event, it’s been my experience that “conservative” humor usually involves someone getting hurt.
“Humans are the cause of all ills, especially species decline.” That’s pretty whiny, don’t you think?
The polar bear situation is not quite as bumper-sticker simple. The population decades ago is unknown. The current estimate is 20-25K. What is known is that disappearing arctic ice is not good for polar bears. Perhaps it’s not important to us, being as exceptional as we are.
March 9th, 2010 | 10:06 pm
Glad to see you are able to withstand scrutiny, Smith, by responding with data and evidence that defends your position.
I’m still waiting for you to make a clear, concise conclusion as to what you think about global warming (the average global temperature of Earth has increased rapidly on a geological timescale, very likely due to fossil fuel usage by mankind). You were able to come to a conclusion over Rom Houben quite quickly (in fairness, I was, too); global warming has WAY more data than Houben’s consciousness – so why have you not taken a clear position on global warming yet?
If you don’t like my ilk, just abort my comments. It might make you smile.
March 9th, 2010 | 10:32 pm
Wes is right, David. If you see a problem, make fun of it and it will go away. Hey, it worked with W!
March 10th, 2010 | 12:11 am
The article notes that there is no confirmation of the climate factors driving changes in musk oxen over the last 65,000 years. And, now they “wonder” what climate change will do…Funny scientists – keep on wondering…
March 10th, 2010 | 12:12 am
You know David and Jeffrey: What makes humor works is an element of truth. And the sanctimony of the global warming hysterics makes them juicy targets.
March 10th, 2010 | 12:25 am
This is a bioethics blog.
I’ll be happy to direct anyone interested to websites run by AGW skeptics, those in which just about every post has all the data you could ask for.
March 10th, 2010 | 10:52 am
Nigel Marven had trouble accepting the surface comments by people whose agenda might not be fair to folks who actually do have a living experience with the North. He offers this expose as a pretty good guide as to why some lies are too big to fail.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-500424/Polars-bears-brink-Dont-believe-it.html
Neat and believable observations .
March 10th, 2010 | 5:00 pm
Donnie,
Here’s what Mr. Marven states toward the end of the piece:
“I think climate change is happening, but as far as the polar bear disappearing is concerned, I have never been more convinced that this is just scaremongering.
“People are deliberately seeking out skinny bears and filming them to show they are dying out. That’s not right.
“Of course, in 30 years, if there’s no ice over the North Pole, then the bear will be in trouble.
“But I’ve seen enough to know that polar bears are not yet on the brink of extinction.”
How soon do you think we can wait to act to preserve North Pole ice?
March 10th, 2010 | 9:49 pm
Jeffery, I’m not taking the side of the hysterical denialists, but what exactly can human beings do about something the scale of the polar ice caps? We may be contributing to the warming trend, but Ma Nature’s contribution is far more than ours.
We do need to do most of the basic things that the climate change believers recommend, i.e., reduce use of fossil fuels, find lower footprint energy methods, etc. if for no other reason than to cope with cyclical climate change. We can do all these things without crippling our economies, in fact we may help them (despite what you may have heard from neo-con fearmongers).
I just talked to a professor of engineering from a very traditional school, one that is largely dependent on the petrochemical industry. He said the cars we drive in 20 years will look nothing like the cars we drive today. He also said new buildings will be zero energy, that is, they will generate all their own energy. He did not seem to think this would involve economic ruin. He did say some of the old guard tends to panic when he talks that way.
March 11th, 2010 | 6:35 pm
Hello Jeffery.
You made note of some reference points in the article. Thank you for reading it. I do not believe that it is humanity that is going to cause global warming and the extinction of Polar Bears. In fact the Polar bear will most likely adapt to the change expecially if one believes in the evolutionary theory. However the main jist of the Global Warming alarmists is that evil man is the orchestrator of Global; Warming while ignoring the reality that the earth was ice down to Manhatten at in past ice ages. If I were a Floridian 10,000 years ago would I be blaming man for the ice level retreat back to the glacier areas of Canada & Alaska….. Or would I be smart enough to realize nature has program the earth to change course many times.
One of the most telling worries I have about the real agenda of Global Warming alarmists was while I watched the Copenhagen Cofference. The East Anglia Crowd invited Hugo Chavez to speak. He ranted & hate mongered against the Capîtalist free market system telling the audience how evil Canada & the US of A type industries were for poluting the world. When he finished his rant, Hugo received a deafening round of applause for villifying the capitalist freemarket nations from the audience. Yet anyone with half a brain knows socialist or communist based big government nations like Russia,India & China have no desire to cripple their industrialization with carbon capping.
From that applause it is easy to see the East Anglia policy makers are using global warming to slaughter free markets or they would come down much harder on China, Russia & India. There is also a faction within the global marketing game that are interested in lining their pockets with sucker dollars as the villify Free Enterprising Capitalist who actually are coming up with methods of reversing carbon footprints even as the Socialist countries increase their big government industries.
March 12th, 2010 | 12:14 am
thank you Mr. MacLeod
Links
Blogs
Find Us
Contact