At least that is what this WaPo article on the possibility of Polar Bears being listed as an endangered species because of global warming would like you to believe.
The Bush administration has decided to propose listing the polar bear as threatened under the Endangered Species Act, putting the U.S. government on record as saying that global warming could drive one of the world’s most recognizable animals out of existence.
The administration’s proposal — which was described by an Interior Department official who spoke on the condition of anonymity — stems from the fact that rising temperatures in the Arctic are shrinking the sea ice that polar bears need for hunting. The official insisted on anonymity because the department will submit the proposal today for publication in the Federal Register, after which it will be subject to public comment for 90 days.
However, there are a couple major assumptions in the article that have been included for either comic relief or for their “Fear Factor”
Because scientists have concluded that carbon dioxide from power-plant and vehicle emissions is helping drive climate change worldwide, putting polar bears on the endangered species list raises the legal question of whether the government would be required to compel U.S. industries to curb their carbon dioxide output.
Of course, you recognized that the above sentence is missing the word “some” in from of the words “scientists”. Apparently Juliet Eilperin’s watching of AlGore’s movie multiple times has qualified her to be the WaPo’s science writer.
Especially after this little snippet she saw fit to include.
Northern latitudes are warming twice as rapidly as the rest of the globe, according to a 2004 scientific assessment, and by the end of the century annual ocean temperatures in the Arctic may rise an additional 13 degrees Fahrenheit. As a result, researchers predict that summer sea ice, which polar bears use as a platform to hunt for ringed seals, will decline 50 to 100 percent.
I guess she couldn’t be bothered to name the “2004 scientific assessment” so that we could take a look for ourselves.
I also wonder if it was from this same “assessment” that she got the broad figure of “50 to 100 percent”?
Also missing from this article, which specifically mentions melting ice in the Pacific, is the fact that the ice in the Atlantic is thickening. They mention that there are bears on that side of the arctic, but mention nothing about their lack of troubles.
And the Death Cult Propganda marches on.
Those damn bears think nothing about swiming 125 kilometers at a time. Somehow I suspect they will survive this “MAN-MADE-DISASTER”. And to anyone who thinks they are cute, cuddley animals, I suggest a short stay above the Artic circle or a drop over to Resolution Island.
Are we to be given a name(s) of the “Bush Administration Official(s) who are making this proposal?
When we get the name(s), will someone please run them by the actual department head (Secretary of the appropriate Cabinet Position) to see if this really IS the position of the Bush Administration?
This has all the earmarks of a set up pushed by a Clintonian section which didn’t get properly replaced by real Bush Admin people.
This particular problem of Bush not changing out administrators more than two or three levels down in any Department has come up before.
If this is Interior, I suspect that Secretary Gale Norton has already taken action, now that she knows there is a beer-hall putsch in progress.
As far as remediation for an indangered species goes, doesn’t there have to be a scientific basis for the remediation? There is absolutely no proof that any level of CO2 reduction that the government can order will actually slow down “global warming”, if it is actually occurring, which also has never been properly determined.
There’s no science, only bullshit and pseudo-science. Hopefully, the new SCOTUS will get a case based on this phony “science”, and relegate it to the dumpster.