You might want to check with National Geographic or Nature on these 'facts' I seem to recall reading the exact opposite. Is that supposed to be a joke? Next you'll be telling me that New Scientist says it isn't so. Are you kidding me? All the scientific breakthroughs since the late 70s have been published in Nature. I am currently reading Genome, which is a history of the mapping to the whole human genome and it references Nature on about every twentieth page. I know you can't tell the difference between legitimate science publications and blogs, but it is worth a looksie if you ever get a break in between reading the Heartland. I have read this from many scientific sources. A majority of the polar bear populations are thriving, some others are holding steady, and only a few are actually in decline. Overall, the polar bear population has greatly increased since the 1980s. That couldn't be right, n2sooners. Hudgal says she read the opposite in Nature. Either you are spreading falsehoods or Nature is spreading propaganda. Now, which is it? From earlier this year, so possibly newer numbers. The latest government survey of polar bears roaming the vast Arctic expanses of northern Quebec, Labrador and southern Baffin Island show the population of polar bears has jumped to 2,100 animals from around 800 in the mid-1980s. How about the WWF? Like to see someone try to paint them as some right wing group bought out by the oil companies or some other such nonsense used to dismiss news they don't like. 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. Now most populations have returned to healthy numbers, though there are large uncertainties regarding some that are still harvested quite heavily and others for which information is lacking. There are believed to be at least 22,000 polar bears worldwide, and about 60% of these are in Canada. They are found in 20 more or less distinct population... Wow: Nature: wrong Heartland: right These are all from this month: http://environment.newscientist.com/article/dn12940-hunting-male-polar-bears-risks-population-collapse.html http://popsci.typepad.com/popsci/2007/09/polar-bear-popu.html http://www.thestar.com/ArcticInPeril/article/279817 http://www.physorg.com/news114956186.html [url=http://www.nature.com/news/2007/071123/full/news.2007.282.html]http://www.nature.com/news/20... populations have increased slightly (a VERY few), most populations have continued to decline. Perhaps we can find a way to bring the populations back up to their previous levels. Of course too, we have several thousand in zoos around the world. I don't know...do polar bears breed in captivity? I know we used to have a polar bear at the San Antonio zoo, but it died about a year ago or so. Can you imagine a polar bear in our 106 degree summers? talk about animal cruelty! Wilhelm, I do not believe n2 intentionally spreads misinformation, unlike you. As far as I can tell, all of her posts earnest. We have had our differences and been on the same side of issues, but I respect input from n2, whether I agree or not. Plus, I like the name! I'm originally an Okie! Hehe! |
Related ClipsView the Top Clips from November 16, 2007
Embed This Clip In Your Site...
|
||
|
|
|||
