We had a wonderful television story from Canada the other week, a polar bear that became friends with a dog. They enjoyed a bit of scampering around and fun-fighting and the polar bear went on to return each year to renew his friendly aquaintance with the dog – even bringing some of his mates with him. In normal circumstances the polar bear would have eaten the dog but this did not happen. The dog was quite clever, in fact, as instead of barking in fear he initiated the play. The polar bear with dinner on it's mind was sidetracked and thought he was back in puppy times and larking around. It made good television.
Polar bear numbers are of course one of those CAGW doomsayings. We are going to lose all the polar bears because global temperature is going to warm up by a few degrees. Common sense would suggest this was nonsensical as polar bears have lived through a succession of warmings and coolings in the past – and there is nothing that indicates they won't be able to adapt in the future. The doomsayers were always rather loose with the facts, concentrating on some numbers from the Hudson Bay locality (which was massaged as these things tend to be) and ignored polar bear life expectancy in the rest of the world. Over at www.bishop-hill.net/blog/2014/6/1/guess-the-number-of-bears-in-the-freez… … Andrew Mountford recalls an unpleasant interview he had on BBC radio where he said estimates of polar bear numbers were based on computer simulation. The over excited Greenpeace chap hyperventillated and repeatedly interrupted Andrew, calling him a flat earther, among other uncharitable insults. Now, it seems, a new paper has come out and said more or less the same thing. The chump from Greenpeace is not expected to apologise – or even to lodge the information in his forehead. He will carry on berating anyone that disagrees with him. Polar bears are under threat from climate change – we must do something quickly. The peasants should not be allowed to drive cars or switch their lights on, it is destroying the world.