The list of things that consensus experts on climate got wrong continues to grow, and it’s gotten so bad some of them can’t bear it. Polar bears, actually. Back when it was global warming, they were doomed, and it was your fault. Guess what?
Related: The Polar Bear Population has Increased 600% Despite Mann-Made Al-Gore Warming
The only polar bears you can’t find are the ones they used to put on cans of Coca-Cola. The real deal is not only doing fine; they are thriving regardless of how much sea ice there is or its thickness.
If you recall, thinning ice – which has also been a consistently inconsistent loser of a prediction for the Consensus Cult – was a predictor of doom for the polar bear. Progressives from every corner declared them endangered, and the climate criers went out among the people. You did this and must repent. No modernity for you. We will take your cheap energy and your right to travel and reduce you to huddled masses yearning to be free.
The bears, they just kept doing their thing, which has been going on a lot longer than the politicization of the weather. If you recall, we’ve shared reports of extreme warmth, little ice, and even arboreal forests in northern Greenland, all throughout Earth’s not-that-distant history. None of that had anything to do with you, and the polar bears, wherever they were, didn’t give a damn, so neither should you.
Or maybe it did.
What if increased CO2 and less dense sea ice or its absence is actually good for polar bear populations? Or was it opportunists using fraud to enrich themselves and attract undeserved attention?
” … far from being “accidental”, polar bear specialists (and Ian Stirling in particular) used the fledgling global warming agenda for their own ends: they employed emotionally manipulative narratives about starving and dying animals to boost funding for their field and ensure their job security. Polar bear specialists fed the climate change beast by providing it with an icon, and then sat back to reap the rewards. I have no doubt Ian Stirling knew exactly what the media and climate activists would do with that short documentary for the CBC back in 1999.”
So, consensus scientists are really just politicians and should be treated like them with the understanding that they are more difficult to dislodge, especially when actual politicians keep giving them a platform for their fraud because it advances a particular agenda.
HT | WUWT
