Go to first unread
Back
to top
'Soul-crushing' video of starving polar bear goes viral
Watch
Announcements
The video below is really hard to watch. It shows a starving polar in an ice-less habitat. Still, amazingly despite video evidence such as this, people claim that global warming is a myth and that eco-systems aren't being destroyed.
“As temperatures rise and sea ice melts, polar bears lose access to the main staple of their diets – seals,” the video noted. “Starving, and running out of energy, they are forced to wander into human settlements for any source of food.”
“As temperatures rise and sea ice melts, polar bears lose access to the main staple of their diets – seals,” the video noted. “Starving, and running out of energy, they are forced to wander into human settlements for any source of food.”
0
reply
Report
#2
You do know that today there are a lot more polar bears extant than there were 50-60 years ago? If they are going extinct because of global warming why would there population numbers be increasing?
They are not endangered. An endangered bear is a Himalayan brown bear.
I don't know the circumstances of that particular bear, but perhaps the bear wandered too far from where their prey normally is. I don't how you can extrapolate from one starving bear that all polar bears are going extinct.
This is "tragedy porn."
They are not endangered. An endangered bear is a Himalayan brown bear.
I don't know the circumstances of that particular bear, but perhaps the bear wandered too far from where their prey normally is. I don't how you can extrapolate from one starving bear that all polar bears are going extinct.
This is "tragedy porn."
5
reply
Report
#3
oh man that is heartbreaking, wat a beautiful animal, being victims of waste and like u said global warming, no animals deserves that treatment.
1
reply
(Original post by Hirsty97)
You do know that today there are a lot more polar bears extant than there were 50-60 years ago?
They are not endangered. An endangered bear is a Himalayan brown bear.
I don't know the circumstances of that particular bear, but perhaps the bear wandered too far from where their prey normally is.
You do know that today there are a lot more polar bears extant than there were 50-60 years ago?
They are not endangered. An endangered bear is a Himalayan brown bear.
I don't know the circumstances of that particular bear, but perhaps the bear wandered too far from where their prey normally is.
The destruction of their eco-systems means polar bears are having to travel in land to find food before they invariably starve.
0
reply
Report
#5
It was probably a very old bear who was at the point of death. Give him some privacy you perverts.
0
reply
Report
#6
(Original post by Hirsty97)
You do know that today there are a lot more polar bears extant than there were 50-60 years ago? If they are going extinct because of global warming why would there population numbers be increasing?
They are not endangered. An endangered bear is a Himalayan brown bear.
I don't know the circumstances of that particular bear, but perhaps the bear wandered too far from where their prey normally is. I don't how you can extrapolate from one starving bear that all polar bears are going extinct.
This is "tragedy porn."
You do know that today there are a lot more polar bears extant than there were 50-60 years ago? If they are going extinct because of global warming why would there population numbers be increasing?
They are not endangered. An endangered bear is a Himalayan brown bear.
I don't know the circumstances of that particular bear, but perhaps the bear wandered too far from where their prey normally is. I don't how you can extrapolate from one starving bear that all polar bears are going extinct.
This is "tragedy porn."
0
reply
Report
#7
(Original post by DeBruyne18)
Polar bears are in the process of becoming extinct as their eco-systems are destroyed by a rise in global temperature.
The destruction of their eco-systems means polar bears are having to travel in land to find food before they invariably starve.
Polar bears are in the process of becoming extinct as their eco-systems are destroyed by a rise in global temperature.
The destruction of their eco-systems means polar bears are having to travel in land to find food before they invariably starve.
In fact starvation was likely brought onto this polar bear as a consequence of overpopulation; too many bears in the area meant the young inexperienced bear was left without food.
Polar bears coming to land is natural, their population by the Hudson bay after their annual eating cycle is finished and they are at their heaviest they will come onto land to fast. Polar bears do not hibernate per se but they are evolved to live off "fat reserves" for extended periods of time.
That's not to say polar bear conservation shouldn't be encouraged, there are other factors that are a threat to polar bear conservation: pollution, hunting from Inuits, oil developments encroaching on their territory, just don't claim they are on the precipice of extinction like the Javan elephant or Amur leopard because that is categorically untrue.
0
reply
Report
#8
(Original post by Pretty Flako)
Nope this is you thinking you're above people because you know that polar bears but really you're just an edgy right wing knob.
Nope this is you thinking you're above people because you know that polar bears but really you're just an edgy right wing knob.
0
reply
Report
#10
(Original post by Hirsty97)
Until the IUCN lists them as endangered I won't consider them to be in immediate danger of extinction. I trust the IUCN as a source more than you. Some population groups may be in decline because of deteriorating ecosystems, but because the population has been rising consistently since the 1970s I fail to see how they are "in the process of extinction."
Until the IUCN lists them as endangered I won't consider them to be in immediate danger of extinction. I trust the IUCN as a source more than you. Some population groups may be in decline because of deteriorating ecosystems, but because the population has been rising consistently since the 1970s I fail to see how they are "in the process of extinction."
0
reply
Report
#11
(Original post by Hirsty97)
I have no idea what you are trying to say. Can you be more coherent?
I have no idea what you are trying to say. Can you be more coherent?
0
reply
(Original post by Hirsty97)
Until the IUCN lists them as endangered I won't consider them to be in immediate danger of extinction. I trust the IUCN as a source more than you. Some population groups may be in decline because of deteriorating ecosystems, but because the population has been rising consistently since the 1970s I fail to see how they are "in the process of extinction."
In fact starvation was likely brought onto this polar bear as a consequence of overpopulation; too many bears in the area meant the young inexperienced bear was left without food.
Polar bears coming to land is natural, their population by the Hudson bay after their annual eating cycle is finished and they are at their heaviest they will come onto land to fast. Polar bears do not hibernate per se but they are evolved to live off "fat reserves" for extended periods of time.
That's not to say polar bear conservation shouldn't be encouraged, there are other factors that are a threat to polar bear conservation: pollution, hunting from Inuits, oil developments encroaching on their territory, just don't claim they are on the precipice of extinction like the Javan elephant or Amur leopard because that is categorically untrue.
Until the IUCN lists them as endangered I won't consider them to be in immediate danger of extinction. I trust the IUCN as a source more than you. Some population groups may be in decline because of deteriorating ecosystems, but because the population has been rising consistently since the 1970s I fail to see how they are "in the process of extinction."
In fact starvation was likely brought onto this polar bear as a consequence of overpopulation; too many bears in the area meant the young inexperienced bear was left without food.
Polar bears coming to land is natural, their population by the Hudson bay after their annual eating cycle is finished and they are at their heaviest they will come onto land to fast. Polar bears do not hibernate per se but they are evolved to live off "fat reserves" for extended periods of time.
That's not to say polar bear conservation shouldn't be encouraged, there are other factors that are a threat to polar bear conservation: pollution, hunting from Inuits, oil developments encroaching on their territory, just don't claim they are on the precipice of extinction like the Javan elephant or Amur leopard because that is categorically untrue.
Polar bears are listed as a 'vulnerable species'. Their number is declining and is expected to decline by a further 30% by 2050.
Global temperatures are rising, ice caps are melting. They are demonstrable scientific facts. As a result, animals which live in such eco-systems are increasingly vulnerable.
The lengths some people go to try and make out the either global warming isn't happening, or that it has no impact is really quite amazing.
1
reply
Report
#13
(Original post by Pretty Flako)
Polar bears are an endangered species as of 2008 and is listed by the USA. I trust them more than you.
Polar bears are an endangered species as of 2008 and is listed by the USA. I trust them more than you.
You can read about the criteria here:
http://www.iucnredlist.org/static/ca...a_3_1#critical
0
reply
Report
#14
(Original post by Hirsty97)
There's a distinction between endangered and threatened. Polar bears are "threatened".
You can read about the criteria here:
http://www.iucnredlist.org/static/ca...a_3_1#critical
There's a distinction between endangered and threatened. Polar bears are "threatened".
You can read about the criteria here:
http://www.iucnredlist.org/static/ca...a_3_1#critical
Don't try to educate me.
0
reply
Report
#15
(Original post by DeBruyne18)
Their number isn't increasing, it's declining. https://www.worldwildlife.org/storie...-change-action
Polar bears are listed as a 'vulnerable species'. Their number is declining and is expected to decline by a further 30% by 2050.
Global temperatures are rising, ice caps are melting. They are demonstrable scientific facts. As a result, animals which live in such eco-systems are increasingly vulnerable.
The lengths some people go to try and make out the either global warming isn't happening, or that it has no impact is really quite amazing.
Their number isn't increasing, it's declining. https://www.worldwildlife.org/storie...-change-action
Polar bears are listed as a 'vulnerable species'. Their number is declining and is expected to decline by a further 30% by 2050.
Global temperatures are rising, ice caps are melting. They are demonstrable scientific facts. As a result, animals which live in such eco-systems are increasingly vulnerable.
The lengths some people go to try and make out the either global warming isn't happening, or that it has no impact is really quite amazing.
Climates always change by glacial and interglacial cycles that occur over thousands of years, in the past 100,000 years there have been periods where there have been much less and more ice than in recent history. Polar bears survived that. I'm far from an expert on climatology but I can be so modest to say I know a fair bit about polar bears.
I told you that they were vulnerable and not endangered. People have been wrong in predicting polar bear population in the past who's to say they won't be wrong again? I.e it was estimated in the 1980s that the Hudson Bay population would decline to around 600 by 2011, yet today there are over 1000. *
I don't know why you're upset about this I think it's a great relief to know that polar bears aren't quite as endangered as sensational news reports would lead you to believe. A polar bear is a highly adaptable and resilient animal; I'm more concerned about other animals. If the WWF predicts with 70% confidence that the polar bear will have its population reduced by 30% come 2050, that means the chances of them being extinct by 2050 are virtually zero.
https://www.canadiangeographic.ca/ar...ut-polar-bears
0
reply
Report
#16
(Original post by Pretty Flako)
Earlier on you said they suffered from overpopulation when their populations are decreasing LOL
Don't try to educate me.
Earlier on you said they suffered from overpopulation when their populations are decreasing LOL
Don't try to educate me.
0
reply
Report
#17
(Original post by Pretty Flako)
You're a complete idiot. I rarely call people it simply because in most cases people are just being one, but you're literally someone with inferior genetics.
You're a complete idiot. I rarely call people it simply because in most cases people are just being one, but you're literally someone with inferior genetics.
0
reply
Report
#18
(Original post by Hirsty97)
Oh my! My feelings are so badly hurt by a faceless stranger on the internet. How will I recover?
Oh my! My feelings are so badly hurt by a faceless stranger on the internet. How will I recover?
0
reply
Report
#19
(Original post by Hirsty97)
The link refers to one subpopulation I already said there are some subpopulations that are at risk but in aggregate their population size is stable/increasing. In 2010,
Climates always change by glacial and interglacial cycles that occur over thousands of years, in the past 100,000 years there have been periods where there have been much less and more ice than in recent history. Polar bears survived that. I'm far from an expert on climatology but I can be so modest to say I know a fair bit about polar bears.
I told you that they were vulnerable and not endangered. People have been wrong in predicting polar bear population in the past who's to say they won't be wrong again? I.e it was estimated in the 1980s that the Hudson Bay population would decline to around 600 by 2011, yet today there are over 1000. *
I don't know why you're upset about this I think it's a great relief to know that polar bears aren't quite as endangered as sensational news reports would lead you to believe. A polar bear is a highly adaptable and resilient animal; I'm more concerned about other animals. If the WWF predicts with 70% confidence that the polar bear will have its population reduced by 30% come 2050, that means the chances of them being extinct by 2050 are virtually zero.
https://www.canadiangeographic.ca/ar...ut-polar-bears
The link refers to one subpopulation I already said there are some subpopulations that are at risk but in aggregate their population size is stable/increasing. In 2010,
Climates always change by glacial and interglacial cycles that occur over thousands of years, in the past 100,000 years there have been periods where there have been much less and more ice than in recent history. Polar bears survived that. I'm far from an expert on climatology but I can be so modest to say I know a fair bit about polar bears.
I told you that they were vulnerable and not endangered. People have been wrong in predicting polar bear population in the past who's to say they won't be wrong again? I.e it was estimated in the 1980s that the Hudson Bay population would decline to around 600 by 2011, yet today there are over 1000. *
I don't know why you're upset about this I think it's a great relief to know that polar bears aren't quite as endangered as sensational news reports would lead you to believe. A polar bear is a highly adaptable and resilient animal; I'm more concerned about other animals. If the WWF predicts with 70% confidence that the polar bear will have its population reduced by 30% come 2050, that means the chances of them being extinct by 2050 are virtually zero.
https://www.canadiangeographic.ca/ar...ut-polar-bears
This is just a load of fallacious crap.
0
reply
(Original post by Hirsty97)
The link refers to one subpopulation I already said there are some subpopulations that are at risk but in aggregate their population size is stable/increasing. In 2010,
Climates always change by glacial and interglacial cycles that occur over thousands of years, in the past 100,000 years there have been periods where there have been much less and more ice than in recent history. Polar bears survived that. I'm far from an expert on climatology but I can be so modest to say I know a fair bit about polar bears.
I told you that they were vulnerable and not endangered. People have been wrong in predicting polar bear population in the past who's to say they won't be wrong again? I.e it was estimated in the 1980s that the Hudson Bay population would decline to around 600 by 2011, yet today there are over 1000. *
I don't know why you're upset about this I think it's a great relief to know that polar bears aren't quite as endangered as sensational news reports would lead you to believe. A polar bear is a highly adaptable and resilient animal; I'm more concerned about other animals. If the WWF predicts with 70% confidence that the polar bear will have its population reduced by 30% come 2050, that means the chances of them being extinct by 2050 are virtually zero.
https://www.canadiangeographic.ca/ar...ut-polar-bears
The link refers to one subpopulation I already said there are some subpopulations that are at risk but in aggregate their population size is stable/increasing. In 2010,
Climates always change by glacial and interglacial cycles that occur over thousands of years, in the past 100,000 years there have been periods where there have been much less and more ice than in recent history. Polar bears survived that. I'm far from an expert on climatology but I can be so modest to say I know a fair bit about polar bears.
I told you that they were vulnerable and not endangered. People have been wrong in predicting polar bear population in the past who's to say they won't be wrong again? I.e it was estimated in the 1980s that the Hudson Bay population would decline to around 600 by 2011, yet today there are over 1000. *
I don't know why you're upset about this I think it's a great relief to know that polar bears aren't quite as endangered as sensational news reports would lead you to believe. A polar bear is a highly adaptable and resilient animal; I'm more concerned about other animals. If the WWF predicts with 70% confidence that the polar bear will have its population reduced by 30% come 2050, that means the chances of them being extinct by 2050 are virtually zero.
https://www.canadiangeographic.ca/ar...ut-polar-bears
The ice caps are melting and that's destroying eco-systems. I really don't know how you could possibly argue with that point.
This video is a textbook example of the impact of global warming, yet still people deny its existence. The population of polar bears is declining and has declined over recent years.
0
reply
X
Quick Reply
Today on TSR
-
Black Friday 2020 round-upThe deals continue throughout the weekend...
- Help with finding part-time work
- Brussels sprouts: yay or nay?
- How to juggle A-levels AND Btecs?
- Commute to uni or live there?