New study: polar bear survival rate falling

A newly released US Geological Survey report shows that far fewer polar bear cubs are surviving off Alaska's northern coast. While the decline in sea ice due to increased Arctic temperatures is not attributed as a cause in the study, according to Kassie Siegel at the Centre for Bilogical Diversity, an organization lobbying for polar bears to be designated as “threatened” under the Endangered Species Act, “it's just another example of seeing all of the impacts that scientists have previously predicted come to pass.” The authors of the report recently observed polar bear deaths directly related to sea ice retreat, and concluded that, “these anecdotal observations, in combination with both the changes in survival of young and in physical stature reported here, suggest mechanisms by which a changing sea ice environment can affect polar bear demographics and the status of populations.”


If you check the acknowledgements of this polar bear study you can see that it was paid for Exxon, Conoco-Phillips and BP. According to the lessons you have taught us we should not trust this study and instead expose the authors as oil industry stooges. Or is it allright if these corps pay for studies as long as the conclusions are cause for alarm. Please explain!

We have absolutely no problem with corporations funding scientists to do science, with one caveat being that they fully disclose their involvement in funding the project. This is exactly what Exxon did with this study, so we have no problem with it.

Anecdotes are unproven === The authors of the report recently observed polar bear deaths directly related to sea ice retreat.”=== And sea ice retreats every spring. But I have yet to see proof, any proof, that these deaths have been actually linked to AGW. Anyone? The authors then state that “these (are) anecdotal observations.”

stigmeology tautosyllabic denucleate suprarenalectomize shotten unalertly coverlet desugar
Appleby, John (Wildcrow)