[Blue_Nose]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Blue_Nose Blue_Nose:

Embarassing for me!!

Email the link to him - this is crucial information!! Obviously what you claim is common knowledge of polar bears slipped passed him in his years of reseach.

I think you can reach him at holyshit@youreamoron.com

Seems it slipped past you, too, jackass.

For Christ's sake - the guy is cited on the Wikipedia polar bear page over a dozen times and you still think you know more about their behaviour than he does?

Mind-bogglingly ridiculous

[mixedfarmer]

Well the heads of the oil companies don't care how many bears die or how the air is beeing destroyed. The only concern is profit. How long will we all have to put up with this anti-social behavior. Manufacturing retooled in world war2 and designed and produce new equipment in less than a year but automakers said it will take many years to produce large quantities of fuel cell or electric cars. I dont have the capital to produce them. the oil industry is sitting on large amounts of wealth and they need to legislated to produce non co2 producing items.

[PluggyRug]

mixedfarmer mixedfarmer:

Well the heads of the oil companies don't care how many bears die or how the air is beeing destroyed. The only concern is profit. How long will we all have to put up with this anti-social behavior. Manufacturing retooled in world war2 and designed and produce new equipment in less than a year but automakers said it will take many years to produce large quantities of fuel cell or electric cars. I dont have the capital to produce them. the oil industry is sitting on large amounts of wealth and they need to legislated to produce non co2 producing items.

CO2 is not a pollutant.

Carbon Monoxide is the culprit and I am wholeheartedly for the reduction of pollutants. However electric and fuel cell vehicles need their energy from somewhere which in itself causes pollution.

[BartSimpson]

Blue_Nose Blue_Nose:

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Blue_Nose Blue_Nose:

Embarassing for me!!

Email the link to him - this is crucial information!! Obviously what you claim is common knowledge of polar bears slipped passed him in his years of reseach.

I think you can reach him at holyshit@youreamoron.com

Seems it slipped past you, too, jackass.

For Christ's sake - the guy is cited on the Wikipedia polar bear page over a dozen times and you still think you know more about their behaviour than he does?

Mind-bogglingly ridiculous

Indeed. Stirling cites the exact behavior I'm noting in his 1999 book "Polar Bears".

http://books.google.com/books?id=Devvkx ... x93w&hl=en

So his statement:

$1:

"We found four different incidents where the bear had been killed by an adult male to eat — in other words, cannibalism," Stirling said Wednesday.

"I thought that was very unusual. I've never seen it, anywhere."

Is total bullsh*t since he himself wrote about this exact same thing nine years ago.

[BartSimpson]

What? No nasty retorts after I debunk the glorious polar bear expert with his own words?

[ridenrain]

Snap!!

And he would have got away with it too, if it weren't for that meddlesom kid, Bart Simpson!

[hurley_108]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

What? No nasty retorts after I debunk the glorious polar bear expert with his own words?

You haven't debunked anything. You haven't shown that the killed bears were cubs. You're predicating your whole argument on suggestive but ambiguous word choice to describe the attacking bears.

Also, learn to put links inline with text, like this. Jackass.

[Tricks]

hurley_108 hurley_108:

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

What? No nasty retorts after I debunk the glorious polar bear expert with his own words?

You haven't debunked anything. You haven't shown that the killed bears were cubs. You're predicating your whole argument on suggestive but ambiguous word choice to describe the attacking bears.

Also, learn to put links inline with text, like this. Jackass.

Bears never fight?

[DerbyX]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Blue_Nose Blue_Nose:

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Blue_Nose Blue_Nose:

Embarassing for me!!

Email the link to him - this is crucial information!! Obviously what you claim is common knowledge of polar bears slipped passed him in his years of reseach.

I think you can reach him at holyshit@youreamoron.com

Seems it slipped past you, too, jackass.

For Christ's sake - the guy is cited on the Wikipedia polar bear page over a dozen times and you still think you know more about their behaviour than he does?

Mind-bogglingly ridiculous

Indeed. Stirling cites the exact behavior I'm noting in his 1999 book "Polar Bears".

http://books.google.com/books?id=Devvkx ... x93w&hl=en

So his statement:

$1:

"We found four different incidents where the bear had been killed by an adult male to eat — in other words, cannibalism," Stirling said Wednesday.

"I thought that was very unusual. I've never seen it, anywhere."

Is total bullsh*t since he himself wrote about this exact same thing nine years ago.

You are in error none-the-less. Infanticide is done by a great many animals including the common house cat. In virtually all cases it is not done for food but rather to eliminate potential threats to their own offspring or to bring the females back into heat more quickly. That is the predation he was talking about. The cubs are killed but not eaten.

Predation with the goal of consuming the corpse for food is entirely different.

You guys are arguing that a) global warming is a myth; b) global warming is simply a normal natural process.

Which is it?

You claim global warming as a normal phenomenom but then dispute any possible effects of that warming such as polar bears starving.

That doesn't fly. Artificial or natural warming has no bearing on the effect warming has on arctic conditions and the animals that live there.

[hurley_108]

Tricks Tricks:

hurley_108 hurley_108:

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

What? No nasty retorts after I debunk the glorious polar bear expert with his own words?

You haven't debunked anything. You haven't shown that the killed bears were cubs. You're predicating your whole argument on suggestive but ambiguous word choice to describe the attacking bears.

Also, learn to put links inline with text, like this. Jackass.

Bears never fight?

Do they fight to the death and then the winner eat the loser is the question. Me, I'm tempted to believe an expert on polar bears when he says he saw something he never saw before.

What's more likely:

That he saw a level of cannibalism he's never seen before?

or

That he's thrown away over a decade of polar bear research to lie in an incredibly obvious way to become a shill for anthropogenic global warming?

[hurley_108]

DerbyX DerbyX:

You are in error none-the-less. Infanticide is done by a great many animals including the common house cat. In virtually all cases it is not done for food but rather to eliminate potential threats to their own offspring or to bring the females back into heat more quickly. That is the predation he was talking about. The cubs are killed but not eaten.

Predation with the goal of consuming the corpse for food is entirely different.

You guys are arguing that a) global warming is a myth; b) global warming is simply a normal natural process.

Which is it?

You claim global warming as a normal phenomenom but then dispute any possible effects of that warming such as polar bears starving.

That doesn't fly. Artificial or natural warming has no bearing on the effect warming has on arctic conditions and the animals that live there.

Bart's got himself caught up in quite a little web of inconsistent denial, hasn't he?

[Tricks]

If they are having more trouble finding food, but aren't necessarily starving, do you think they would take the easy route? Seems like most are thinking one extreme or the other.

[BartSimpson]

hurley_108 hurley_108:

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

What? No nasty retorts after I debunk the glorious polar bear expert with his own words?

You haven't debunked anything. You haven't shown that the killed bears were cubs. You're predicating your whole argument on suggestive but ambiguous word choice to describe the attacking bears.

Also, learn to put links inline with text, like this. Jackass.

Ooops, too late! CBC already sent me a note that they'll be investigating the report as false.

[BartSimpson]

DerbyX DerbyX:

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Blue_Nose Blue_Nose:

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Blue_Nose Blue_Nose:

Embarassing for me!!

Email the link to him - this is crucial information!! Obviously what you claim is common knowledge of polar bears slipped passed him in his years of reseach.

I think you can reach him at holyshit@youreamoron.com

Seems it slipped past you, too, jackass.

For Christ's sake - the guy is cited on the Wikipedia polar bear page over a dozen times and you still think you know more about their behaviour than he does?

Mind-bogglingly ridiculous

Indeed. Stirling cites the exact behavior I'm noting in his 1999 book "Polar Bears".

http://books.google.com/books?id=Devvkx ... x93w&hl=en

So his statement:

$1:

"We found four different incidents where the bear had been killed by an adult male to eat — in other words, cannibalism," Stirling said Wednesday.

"I thought that was very unusual. I've never seen it, anywhere."

Is total bullsh*t since he himself wrote about this exact same thing nine years ago.

You are in error none-the-less. Infanticide is done by a great many animals including the common house cat. In virtually all cases it is not done for food but rather to eliminate potential threats to their own offspring or to bring the females back into heat more quickly. That is the predation he was talking about. The cubs are killed but not eaten.

Predation with the goal of consuming the corpse for food is entirely different.

You guys are arguing that a) global warming is a myth; b) global warming is simply a normal natural process.

Which is it?

You claim global warming as a normal phenomenom but then dispute any possible effects of that warming such as polar bears starving.

That doesn't fly. Artificial or natural warming has no bearing on the effect warming has on arctic conditions and the animals that live there.

Stirling's 1999 book cites cannibalism as typical behavior. His words, not mine.

[hurley_108]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Stirling's 1999 book cites cannibalism as typical behavior. His words, not mine.

Quote the passage that says so.