Am I the only one
who finds it incongruous that President Obama, when on a carefully
choreographed trip to Alaska, even manning his own Instagram account to engage young people, to
spotlight the effects of global warming—which he says is happening “right now”—announced the accelerated acquisition of ice breakers? During his trip, he
told Alaskans that by the end of this century, Alaska will see “warming of
between 6 and 12 degrees,” which he explained: “means more melting.” Six to 12
degrees is a lot of warming, therefore, a lot of melting—which would seem to
require fewer ice breakers not more.
I applaud the
attempt to catch up, as I’ve written previously, I think America is woefully behind in the
Arctic—where Russia is increasingly aggressive. But you have to wonder what his
speech writers were thinking to have him asking Congress to spend more on ice
breakers on the same trip where he’s predicting more warming.
Perhaps he really
knows, what many scientists are claiming: Arctic ice is growing—with updated NASA data showing polar sea ice is approximately 5 percent above the post-1979
(the year satellite instruments began measuring the ice caps) average. This,
despite former Vice President Al Gore’s claim that the Arctic ice cap could be completely gone by now.
In fact, according to the April 1896 edition of National Geographic,
Alaska, glaciers have been retreating there since George Washington was
president.
In a September 4 Wall
Street Journal op-ed, Patrick Moore, one of the co-founders of Greenpeace, said: “It is a historical fact that the glacier in Glacier Bay
began its retreat around 1750. By the time Capt. George Vancouver arrived there
in 1794 the glacier still filled most of the bay but had already retreated some
miles. When John Muir, founder of the Sierra Club, visited in 1879, he found
that the glacier had retreated more than 30 miles from the mouth of the bay,
according to the National Park Service, and by 1900 Glacier Bay was mostly
ice-free.”
Another thing
surprised me about his trip. An AP report of Obama’s Alaska visit states: “every stop was
elaborately staged to showcase the president in front of picture-perfect
natural wonders. …the White House arranged for photographers and reporters to
pull up alongside him in a separate boat, capturing stirring images of the
president gazing wistfully from the deck at serene waters and lush mountain
vistas.” Yet, with all this planning for dramatic effect, there were no polar
bears—not even mentioned.
Well, one polar
bear might have been spotted: Frostpaw. The Center for Biological Diversity
(CBD) has a polar bear costume (“made entirely out of synthetic materials,” according to the Vineyard Gazzette—which means made
from petroleum products) that it drags out and a staffer dons to
follow Obama, and remind him, as the press release says:
Rescind proposals
to drill for oil in the Arctic and along the Atlantic coast;
Halt all new fossil
fuel development on public land;
Cut greenhouse
pollution from airplanes and other unregulated sources;
Reject, once and
for all, the Keystone XL pipeline; and
Be an international
climate leader.
CBD claims Frostpaw
was dispatched to Alaska, but there are no reports that Obama got to see it.
Now, I understand
that his three-day journey didn’t take him to locales where the real white
bears frolic, but since they’ve become the symbol of Al Gore’s global warming
scare, you’d think he’d at least mention them while he was in there—after all
when people think of Alaska, they think of polar bears. What better imagery to
evoke?
Once again, perhaps
his speech-writers were aware of claims of falsified records and the besmirched Charles Monnett
(whose observations of drowned polar bears helped galvanize the global warming
movement), and reports of rebounding polar bear populations. While they don’t
get much mainstream press coverage, several scientists are reporting an unprecedented increase in the world’s polar bear
population.
One of the foremost
authorities on polar bears, Canadian biologist, Dr. Mitchell Taylor, testified
before the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works. He said: “Of the 13 populations of polar bears in Canada, 11 are
stable or increasing in number. They are not going extinct, or even appear to
be affected at present.”
Then there is Dr.
Susan J. Crockford, an evolutionary biologist in British Columbia, who has
studied polar bears for most of her 35-year career. She claims polar bears are threatened by too much ice. She’s
released a new, in-depth report on the relationship between sea ice and polar
bears, entitled Arctic Fallacy—but you don’t see her conclusions touted in the New
York Times.
In his book, Landscapes & Cycles: An Environmentalist's Journey to Climate
Skepticism, biologist and ecologist Jim Steele argues: “glaciers have retreated and expanded numerous times
since the end of the last ice age. Polar bear numbers are at record highs with
approximately 25,000 bears. And Arctic sea ice, which had precipitously
declined from the mid-2000s to 2013, has had a reversal since then, now
equaling historic levels considered normal.”
But, if they don’t
fit the accepted propaganda, we don’t hear about these reports.
Filmmaker J.D. King
is trying to change that through a new film: Icebear. Following the success of
his two previous films—Blue and Crying Wolf, King is in the midst of a Kickstart campaign
(ending September 24) to fund the film. He explains: “It is very important to
raise the money for the movie through crowdfunding. This needs to be a film by
the people’s demand and support—so that it cannot be accused of being a product
of a special interest group or organization.”
On the
crowd-funding site, King offers a variety of facts about polar bears—with
links to the source data. He explains: “The power of the media is great, as
evident by how they’ve chosen to present only one side of polar bear story.
They’ve used polar bears, misused science, and preyed upon people’s emotions
all the while ignoring any facts that contradict the narrative they want to
make reality. But if we’re not getting the whole truth about polar bears, why
should we accept the larger narrative about man-made, catastrophic climate
change?” This is why he wants to produce Icebear—but he needs our help. Will
you kick in?
The polar bears are
there—which is maybe why President Obama didn’t even mention them on his Alaska
trip. He wanted to “spotlight the effects of global warming” and a rebounding
polar bear population doesn’t fit the narrative.
The author of Energy Freedom, Marita Noon serves as the executive
director for Energy Makes
America Great Inc. and the companion educational
organization, the Citizens’ Alliance
for Responsible Energy (CARE). She hosts a weekly radio
program: America’s Voice for Energy—which expands on the content
of her weekly column. Follow her @EnergyRabbit.
No comments:
Post a Comment