01 Jun

Scientists Admit Polar Bear Numbers Were Made Up To ‘Satisfy Public Demand’

From The Daily Caller


This may come as a shocker to some, but scientists are not always right — especially when under intense public pressure for answers.

Researchers with the IUCN Polar Bear Specialist Group (PBSG) recently admitted to experienced zoologist and polar bear specialist Susan Crockford that the estimate given for the total number of polar bars in the Arctic was “simply a qualified guess given to satisfy public demand.”

Crockford has been critical of official polar bear population estimates because they fail to include five large subpopulations of polar bears. Due to the uncertainty of the populations in these areas, PBSG did not include them in their official estimate — but the polar bear group did include other subpopulation estimates.

PBSG has for years said that global polar bear populations were between 20,000 and 25,000, but these estimates are likely much lower than how many polar bears are actually living in the world.

“Based on previous PBSG estimates and other research reports, it appears there are probably at least another 6,000 or so bears living in these regions and perhaps as many as 9,000 (or more) that are not included in any PBSG ‘global population estimate,’” Crockford wrote on her blog.

“These are guesses, to be sure, but they at least give a potential size,” Crockford added.

PBSG disclosed this information to Crockford ahead of the release of their Circumpolar Polar Bear Action Plan in which they intend to put a footnote explaining why their global population estimate is flawed.

“As part of past status reports, the PBSG has traditionally estimated a range for the total number of polar bears in the circumpolar Arctic,” PBSG says in its proposed footnote. “Since 2005, this range has been 20-25,000. It is important to realize that this range never has been an estimate of total abundance in a scientific sense, but simply a qualified guess given to satisfy public demand.”

“It is also important to note that even though we have scientifically valid estimates for a majority of the subpopulations, some are dated,” PBSG continues. “Furthermore, there are no abundance estimates for the Arctic Basin, East Greenland, and the Russian subpopulations.”

“Consequently, there is either no, or only rudimentary, knowledge to support guesses about the possible abundance of polar bears in approximately half the areas they occupy,” says PBSG. “Thus, the range given for total global population should be viewed with great caution as it cannot be used to assess population trend over the long term.”

PBSG’s admission also comes after academics and government regulators have touted their polar bear population estimates to show that polar bear numbers have grown since the 1960s. PBSG estimates have also been used to show that polar bear populations have stabilized over the last 30 years.

Polar bear populations became the centerpiece of the effort to fight global warming due to claims that melting polar ice caps would cause the bears to become endangered in the near future. Years ago, some scientists predicted the Arctic would be virtually ice free by now.

Polar bears became the first species listed under the Endangered Species Act because they could potentially be harmed by global warming. But some recent studies have found that some polar bear subpopulations have actually flourished in recent years.

“So, the global estimates were… ‘simply a qualified guess given to satisfy public demand’ and according to this statement, were never meant to be considered scientific estimates, despite what they were called, the scientific group that issued them, and how they were used,” Crockford said.

“All this glosses over what I think is a critical point: none of these ‘global population estimates’ (from 2001 onward) came anywhere close to being estimates of the actual world population size of polar bears (regardless of how scientifically inaccurate they might have been) — rather, they were estimates of only the subpopulations that Arctic biologists have tried to count,” she added.

Follow Michael on Twitter and Facebook


09 Feb

Green Energy – Not Fit for the Grid

Guest post by Viv Forbes.

Cartoon 5

Germany’s wind and solar power generation came to a standstill in late 2013. More than 23,000 wind turbines ran out of wind and most of the one million photovoltaic systems ran out of sunlight. For a whole week, coal nuclear and gas-powered plants generated an estimated 95 percent of Germany’s electricity.

Britain has 3,500 wind turbines, but during a period of extreme cold they produced just 1.8% of UK’s electricity. But, gluttons for punishment, politicians intend building more.

When electricity demand peaked at the height of the recent heatwave in Southern Australia, the total power output from the fleet of wind farms across Victoria and South Australia was almost zero. Solar panels worked at their peak for a short time during the heat of the afternoon, but waned as the sun moved on and smokiness increased.

At dinner time on any still, cold winter night, when all suburban stoves, lights, TV’s and heaters need power, solar panels sit in the dark, powerless. And the idle wind turbines are probably drawing power from the grid for heating, lubrication, electro-magnets, hydraulics and start-up.

Despite the expenditure of trillions of dollars on conferences, green energy subsidies, research, carbon taxes, carbon trading, solar and wind subsidies, plant construction, additional transmission lines and back-up power, wind and solar only produce a derisory share of world energy (“zero” to the nearest whole number).

We keep hearing how “research” will solve the key green energy problems, but no amount of research can alter the fact that solar energy will always be variable, intermittent and dilute.

Even if solar panels collected 100% of the solar energy that fell on them, and no dust or snow ever covered the panels, the output is always variable and intermittent, with the rise and fall of the sun, the long night and the variable clouds, snow and dust.

Similarly the wind is variable, often too weak, sometimes too strong, and even when it is just right, there may be no demand for that surge of power. Germany has 23,000 wind turbines – they produce an average of about 17% of their installed capacity; on some days, they harvest nothing except subsidies (and they are good at that).

And crucially, both wind and solar energy are very dilute, so large areas of land are required to collect significant energy and to build the spider-web of roads and transmission lines required to connect to each other and to the grid. Solar panels rob green plants underneath of their sunlight. Wind turbines annoy neighbours with their noise, devalue their properties and slice up eagles, bats and migrating birds. These are very significant human and environmental costs never mentioned by green energy disciples and promoters.

No amount of research can change the key intermittent and dilute nature of green energy. We should stop wasting ever-increasing amounts of money on pointless research.

Even if we invented magic batteries (small with massive capacity, low cost, no energy losses and everlasting life), the green energy plants would still need to spend over 60% of the energy they generate to charge the batteries in order to produce 24/7 power.

There are places when green energy is appropriate and useful, and people should be free to use it at their own expense. But for grid power, it is not fit-for-purpose.

All of this explains why Green Germany is now using more coal than it did in 2009 and its power supply is more expensive and less reliable.


Viv Forbes is the Chairman of the Carbon Sense Coalition. He is a geologist, mineral economist, “political gadfly”, part time company director and full time sheep and cattle breeder. He has a Bachelor Degree in Applied Science (Geology).


Follow Andy on Twitter

Like him on Facebook

Email Andy at

“Speak without fear, question with boldness.”

08 Feb

Uh Oh! Germany Building NEW Coal-Fired Power Plants

Uh Oh! Don’t look now, but Germany is building NEW coal-fired power plants. Yes, you read that right… the leader in solar, wind and “renewable energy” is going back to coal to replace it’s fleet of ZERO CARBON nuclear power plants.

Read about it here (since you won’t find it in the Lame Stream Media)

Why Germany’s Nuclear Phase Out is Leading to More Coal Burning

Of course, the left will spin this as a good thing.

In September 2012 Germany’s Environment Minister opened a new lignite power plant, arguing the following: “If one builds a new state-of-the-art lignite power plant to replace several older and much less efficient plants, then I feel this should also be acknowledged as a contribution to our climate protection efforts.”

So with this new alternative arithmetic, a coal-fired power plant is better then a zero-emission nuclear power plant?


And there’s more here..

Cuts in Nuclear Energy Mean Higher Electricity Costs, More Carbon Emissions

The benefits of nuclear energy are often taken for granted―until they begin to disappear.

In several countries, the closing of one or more nuclear power plants has affected the reliability and price of electricity, greenhouse gas emissions and the economy.

And of course in the USA, there’s a war on coal AND nuclear power, with the federal government, through EPA regulations, forcing the closure of both.

First US nuclear power closures in 15 years signal wider industry problems

As the economics of building plants and maintaining old ones erode, some experts see little hope for an industry being touted by some as a climate savior.

You were warned… “Under my plan… electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket” ~ Senator Obama,  January 2008


08 Feb

Great Lakes Ice Cover Is the Largest We’ve Seen This Century

MODIS satellite image of the Great Lakes on Feb. 7, 2014. Bright white in this image shows mainly clouds over the Great Lakes, however, you can see lake ice in southern and western Lake Michigan, southern Lake Superior, and far western Lake Erie. (UW-SSEC/Google Earth)

MODIS satellite image of the Great Lakes on Feb. 7, 2014. Bright white in this image shows mainly clouds over the Great Lakes, however, you can see lake ice in southern and western Lake Michigan, southern Lake Superior, and far western Lake Erie. (UW-SSEC/Google Earth)

One effect of the persistently cold winter of 2013-2014 is showing up on the world’s largest group of freshwater lakes.

According to an analysis by NOAA’s Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory, ice covered 78.7 percent of the Great Lakes on February 6. Not since early 1996 has ice been so widespread on the Great Lakes.

This is an abrupt turn around from the past four winters, during which the peak ice coverage remained around 40 percent or less. As you can see in the graph below, the 40-year average is just over 51 percent.

Read full article


08 Feb

Climate Science – An Inconvenient Truth


28 Dec

Ice Breaker Gets Stuck Trying to Rescue Global Warming Scientists Trapped in Antarctic Ice

A Russian expedition ship carrying global warming scientists got stuck in ice earlier this week. Now a Chinese ice breaker sent to rescue the scientists is frozen too just miles away.

Global warming strikes again.
Aysor reported:

South Pole weather has stymied a rescue by a Chinese icebreaker trying to reach an expedition vessel trapped for the past four days in frozen seas, a ship officer told CNN Friday.

The Chinese icebreaker Xue Long, or Snow Dragon, was just six nautical miles away from the rescue, but now it’s stuck in an Antarctica ice floe, too.

The Chinese crew is hoping a French icebreaker 14 nautical miles away will arrive and offer relief, said Zhu Li, chief officer of the Chinese ship.

But it’s likely the French vessel Astrolabe will also be slowed by the polar cap’s extreme frigidity, Zhu said.

Those two icebreakers — plus a third, from Australia — were battling the planet’s coldest environment in trying to reach the stranded Russian ship MV Akademik Shokalskiy, whose 74 researchers, crew and tourists remained in good condition despite being at a frozen standstill since Monday.

It all shows that some lands — especially the ends of the Earth — will never be tamed.

The Snow Dragon is in near-constant communication with the Russian exploration vessel and has ample supplies of water, food and medicine — even a helicopter — if the ice-bound Shokalskiy needed them, Zhu said.

The Russian expedition ship is carrying scientists and passengers led by an Australian climate change professor, but they all may have to wait two more days for one or all three icebreakers to free it, said Capt. Wang Jiangzhong of the Snow Dragon…

…The expedition is trying to update scientific measurements taken by an Australian expedition led by Douglas Mawson that set out in 1911.

The expedition to gauge the effects of climate change on the region began November 27. The second, and current leg of the trip, started December 8 and was scheduled to conclude with a return to New Zealand on January 4.


15 Jul

Greenpeace co-founder Dr. Patrick Moore: “Long live the humans”

Greenpeace co-founder Dr. Patrick Moore: ‘Thank goodness we came along & reversed 150 million-year trend of reduced CO2 levels in global atmosphere. Long live the humans’  

Moore: ‘CO2 is lower today than it has been through most of the history of life on earth…At 150 ppm CO2 all plants would die, resulting in virtual end of life on earth’

By Marc Morano  –  Climate Depot

Greenpeace Co-Founder Dr. Patrick Moore commented a new study trying to explain the lack of global warming:

The new study claims: ‘Abrupt increase’ in CO2 absorption slowed global warming: Excerpt: ‘The earth would have warmed faster in the last two decades had there not been an unexplained rise in the amount of carbon dioxide being absorbed on land, scientists believe.” Scientists have discovered an “abrupt increase” since 1988 in the uptake of carbon dioxide (CO2) by the land biosphere, which comprises all of the planet’s plant and animal ecosystems…the breakthrough had taken scientists “completely by surprise”…[study] explains how much CO2 is absorbed by plants and animals, with some of the CO2 then being passed from plants into the land.” [End study excerpt]

Ecologist Dr. Moore pulled no punches in commenting on the new study: “These people are either completely naive about the relationship between CO2 and plants or they are making this up as a way of deflecting attention from the lack of warming for the past 15 years.” Moore is the author of the book, “Confessions of a Greenpeace Dropout: The Making of a Sensible Environmentalist,” in which he exposes the green movement and explains why he left the organization.

Moore told Climate Depot: “Plants grow much faster when CO2 is higher, the optimum concentration is between 1500-2000 ppm so there is a long way to go before plants are happy. CO2 levels in the atmosphere have continued to rise despite plants absorbing more CO2. So what is the ‘scientists’ point? It is to obfuscate, confuse, and otherwise muddy the waters with disinformation.

Moore continued: “We should challenge them to admit that CO2 is the most important nutrient for all life on earth and to admit that it is proven in lab and field experiments that plants would grow much faster if CO2 levels were 4-5 times higher in the atmosphere than they are today. This is why greenhouse growers pipe the exhaust from their gas and wood heaters back into the greenhouse to increase CO2 levels 3-5 times the level in the atmosphere, resulting in 50-100% increase in growth of their crops. And they should recognize that CO2 is lower today than it has been through most of the history of life on earth.

“There is no ‘abrupt’ increase in CO2 absorption, it is gradual as CO2 levels rise and plants become less stressed by low CO2 levels. At 150 ppm CO2 all plants would die, resulting in virtual end of life on earth.

“Thank goodness we came along and reversed the 150 million-year trend of reduced CO2 levels in the global atmosphere. Long live the humans,” Moore concluded.

Related Links:

Physicist Dr. Lubos Motl: Land biosphere’s absorption of CO2 skyrockets

Rising CO2 a Boon for Biosphere – Earth in ‘CO2 Famine’ – Cutting CO2 ‘a profoundly evil act’ – Climate Depot Fact Sheet on CO2

Greenpeace Co-Founder Dr. Patrick Moore Questions Man-Made Global Warming, Calls it ‘Obviously a Natural Phenomenon’

Greenpeace Co-Founder Dr. Patrick Moore Rips Windfarms: ‘They are ridiculously expensive and don’t work half the time…The industry is a destroyer of wealth and negative to the economy’

Co-founder of. Greenpeace Dr. Patrick Moore slams claim that ‘global warming causes biggest shift of marine life in two million years’ Moore: ‘They are basically blaming every change they see on global warming, even the return of a species that was native to the Atlantic for millions of years’

Greenpeace Co-Founder Slams Species Extinction Scare Study as proof of how ‘peer-review process has become corrupted’ – Study ‘greatly underestimate the rate new species can evolve’

Climate Depot Report: Rainforest Factsheet: Clear-Cutting the Myths About the Amazon and Tropical Rainforests

‘Save the Trees — Use More Wood’ – May 1, 2002 — Greenpeace co-founder and Ecologist Dr. Patrick Moore stated in 2002: Save the Trees, Use More Wood: Excerpt: “We should be growing more trees and using more wood,” explained Moore. “The less wood we use, the more steel and concrete we use. […] Moore explained that a greater demand for wood products leads to more forested land, noting that 80 percent of the timber produced in the U.S. comes from private property. He predicted that if “those land owners had no market for wood, they would clear the forest away and grow something else they could make money from instead.” “When you go into a lumber yard, you are given the impression that by buying wood you are causing the forest to be lost, when in fact what you are doing is sending a signal into the market to plant more trees,” Moore added.


17 Nov

U.S. Cooling, Not Warming, Over Past Decade, Govt. Data Shows

Written by Michael Tennant
Wednesday, 09 November 2011 09:08

The recent release of the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature (BEST) study, which showed a worldwide temperature increase of about 1°C since 1950, was heralded by many as proof of global warming. Some skeptics, however, noted that the BEST data also showed that temperatures had remained unchanged for the past decade, suggesting that any warming trend had ended around the turn of the century.

Meteorologist and climate-science blogger Anthony Watts has gone those skeptics one better. Having analyzed U.S. temperature data from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s National Climatic Data Center, Watts declared in a column for the Daily Caller: “The trend for the continental United States for the past 10 years is not flat, but cooling.”

Continue Reading »

31 Oct

Historic October 2011 Storm: Snow Totals and Records

Historic October Storm: Snow Totals and Records

by Chris Dolce, Meteorologist (full story)
At least 24 cities in the Northeast have had at least the daily snowfall record for October 29 or October 30 from this storm and some cities had set multiple records including record daily snowfall for any day in October, record snowfall for the month of October, first time with over an inch of snow in October and record cold highs.

So with that being said, there’s only one way to describe this October snowstorm — historic. Records for the month of October have been shattered across the Northeast. Below we have the snow totals from this storm along with some of the new records set from the Mid-Atlantic to New England. Some spots have seen an astonishing, by October standards, 1 to 2+ feet of snow!

New October Snow Records

These are just some of the noteworthy records (there are many more) set across the Northeast from this historic snowstorm. Outside of Worcester, which typically sees its first measurable snow (0.1″ or more) on November 17, most of these cities do not typically see their first measurable snow until another month to month and a half from now!

Hartford, CT – 12.3″ on Saturday (Storm total: 20.3″) crushed the previous single day record snow total in October of 1.7″ set on October 10, 1979.

Worcester, MA – 11.4″ (Storm total: 14.6″) on Saturday beats the previous single day record snow total in October of 7.5″ set on October 10, 1979.

Newark, NJ
– 5.2″ on Saturday was the most snow ever recorded on any October day in history. This is also only the second time with measurable snow in October. The last time measurable snow occurred was when just .3″ fell on October 22, 1952.

New York, NY (Central Park) – 2.9″ on Saturday is the only time in October history that an inch or more of snow has been recorded during the month. This is also just the 4th time in history with measurable snow during the month.

Allentown, PA – 6.8″ on Saturday is the largest October snowstorm in history and just the 6th time in history with measurable snow in October.

Harrisburg, PA – 9.7″ on Saturday is the largest October snowstorm in history and just the 5th time since 1889 that measurable snow has been recorded in October.

Peru, MA – Received 32″, which is the biggest snow total from this storm as of early Sunday morning.

Historic October Snow Totals in the Northeast
Snow totals from this historic October snowstorm.

(full story)


28 Oct

Early Northeast Snowstorm Destined to Shatter Records

Oct 28, 2011; 4:07 AM ET
From a historical perspective, the upcoming major Northeast winter storm could prove to be unprecedented in terms of its early arrival in the season and the amount of snow it will drop. meteorologists are now confident that several inches to a foot of heavy, wet, and in some cases damaging, snow will fall over parts of the Mid-Atlantic and New England on Saturday.

Expert Senior Meteorologist Alex Sosnowski has specifics on the forecast for the upcoming storm.

The notion of a pre-Halloween snowstorm has our meteorologists and climatologists scrambling to put the storm into some sort of perspective as to how many records could be busted by this snowstorm.

For many cities, the snowstorm could go down as the biggest on record for the month of October:

Largest October Snow Events

–Allentown, Pa.: 2.2 inches on Oct. 31, 1925
–Baltimore, Md.: 2.5 inches on Oct. 30, 1925
–Boston, Mass.: 1.1 inches on Oct. 29, 2005
–Hartford, Conn.: 1.7 inches on Oct. 10, 1979
–Philadelphia, Pa.: 2.1 inches on Oct. 10, 1979
–New York City, N.Y. (Central Park): 0.8 inches on Oct. 30, 1925
–Washington, D.C.: 2.0 inches on Oct. 31, 1925

Read full story


© 2021 There Is NO Global Warming! | Entries (RSS) and Comments (RSS)

Global Positioning System Gazettewordpress logo