New Hudson Bay sea ice modelling paper is more utterly useless fearmongering about polar bears

A new collaboration by sea ice and polar bear specialists that predicts a catastrophic future for polar bears in Hudson Bay (Stroeve et al. 2024) can be dismissed as yet another bit of utterly useless fearmongering for two reasons: 1) it’s a model projection that uses widely discredited SSP5-8.5 “business as usual” climate scenarios for its predictions; and 2) it’s based on the false premise that Western and Southern Hudson Bay polar bears have already suffered harm from reduced sea ice blamed on fossil fuel-caused global warming.

The fact that recently-deceased Ian Stirling was a prominent co-author should come as no surprise: his irrational promotion of the idea that future “climate warming” could doom polar bears to near-extinction – even after recording and publishing evidence to the contrary – will go down in history as an appalling violation of scientific principles.

Adding to the dubious validity of the paper: lead author Julienne Stroeve’s 2007 paper predicting summer sea ice decline by 2050 was proven wrong by actual data by the time it was published (Stroeve et al. 2007, 2014) and a more recent update failed to foresee the recent 17-year stall in decline. And co-author Steve Ferguson, a seal biologists, rashly stated in 2016 that Hudson Bay could be ice-free in winter as early as 2021 [which, needless to say, never came close to fruition].

I’d say if Southern Hudson Bay polar bears might be extirpated as soon as 2030, as the paper’s co-author Alex Crawford suggests, the global temperature and ice melt had better get a move on: a survey showed the SH population was thriving in 2021 and Hudson Bay sea ice hasn’t hit any kind of death spiral in the three years since.

Continue reading

Huge area of open water on Hudson Bay created by wind, not ice melt, NSIDC experts confirm

Sea ice experts at the US National Snow and Ice Data Center just confirmed my suspicion that the huge area of open water in eastern Hudson Bay during May this year was caused by winds, not ice melt. In other words, it’s a rare occurrence but not a sign of extra-early sea ice melt caused by global warming.

Money quote: “Unusual strong and persistent winds from the east caused the low extent.”

Continue reading

New data show Svalbard polar bears are fatter than they were in 1993 despite continued low sea ice

Researchers at the Norwegian Polar Institute have finally updated their spring data, which show male polar bears in 2024 were even fatter than they were in 1993 and litter sizes of new cubs were just as high, despite continued low sea ice in the region over the summer months especially.

Continue reading

Ian Stirling, grandfather of polar bear biologists, dead at 82

Ian Stirling, who laid the foundation for our understanding of polar bear ecology and almost single-handedly made the polar bear an icon of global warming, died last week in Edmonton at the age of 82 [my mistake in the headline: he would have turned 83 this September]. Stirling was said to have played a critical and calming diplomacy role at international Polar Bear Specialist Group meetings but over the last several decades, like so many other “conservationists,” he became an outspoken activist for what he called the “climate warming” issue.

It was sad for me to have witnessed a respected and dedicated biologist turn his back on science the way he did but I am also saddened by his passing. He truly did make a huge contribution to science but could have done so much more with the time he had.

Continue reading

Polar bears are going extinct? Actually, they’re not! A new video worth watching and sharing

Great Barrier Reef specialist Peter Ridd has just published an excellent video about my work and the way I’ve been treated by the scientific community just for pointing out that polar bear populations have failed to respond as predicted to the recent decline in Arctic sea ice.

Dr. Ridd has been treated equally abominably, as he explains here.

Here’s the video: Polar bears: They are going extinct!? 27 April 2024 [length 6:57]

The report Peter refers to in the video is this one, which was published in February 2024:

Crockford, S.J. 2024. State of the Polar Bear 2023. Briefing Paper 67. Global Warming Policy Foundation, London. Download pdf here.

In other words, the polar bear catastrophe we were promised never happened. In case you missed it, I wrote a book about that. Polar bears across the Arctic are thriving: not just because their numbers have increased overall but because the field data collected from bears in regions that have had the most dramatic declines in summer sea ice, including the Barents Sea and the Chukchi Sea, show the bears are healthy and reproducing well.

A good year for Svalbard polar bears due to abundant sea ice coverage

A sow and a pair of half-grown cubs recently paid a visit to the Polish Research Station in southwestern Svalbard without causing any more trouble than racing heart-rates, according to a report in The Guardian today.

Money quote from the leader of the expedition [my bold]:

This year the team had seen more polar bears than usual, he added. Usually there were around 20 bear sightings a year, but this year there had been close to 40 sightings since June and they expected to see more in their final three months.

So far, we have not observed any clearly emaciated individuals. This year is probably a good year for Svalbard’s polar bears because there is a lot of sea ice here compared to recent years,” he said [The Guardian, 2 April 2024, see photo above].

Continue reading

2024 Arctic sea ice maximum a whopping 14th below average following hottest year since 1850

Officially, the maximum winter sea ice extent for 2024 was 15.01 mkm2, reached on 14 March. At an unimpressive “14th lowest” on record, this is astounding news for the winter following the “hottest year on record.” Undeterred, the US government headline writers at the National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC) today went for “Arctic sea ice reaches a below-average maximum.” Note the long-term average (1981-2010) is only 15.65 mkm2 and 15.01 is within 2 standard deviations (see below, screencapped 14 March 2024).

Continue reading

Hudson Bay polar bears now considered most likely to survive future sea ice loss

Over the last 10 years, Hudson Bay polar bears have morphed from being the “most at risk” across the Arctic to the “least at risk.” Who would have thought?

That’s probably because the experts now have to admit that polar bear numbers have not declined since 2004 and bears have been in good body condition since at least 2016. Southern Hudson Bay bears have apparently increased in number since 2016. How ironic is it that the photo above, taken in Hudson Bay — the only Arctic region where trees grow — was used to illustrate a recent Mother Jones article promoting a new prediction of future Arctic summer sea ice loss that’s said to pose a threat to polar bear survival.

Continue reading

State of the Polar Bear 2023: W. Hudson Bay polar bear numbers have not declined since 2004

In my State of the Polar Bear 2023 report for the Global Warming Policy Foundation, I discuss recent news relevant to polar bear conservation and science issues. The most startling of these is the revelation that Western Hudson Bay polar bear numbers have not declined since 2004.

Continue reading

NY Times pushes an implausible story of polar bear evolution and what makes a species

Carl Zimmer over at the New York Times penned a misleading story of speciation, using the polar bear as an example. It explains polar bear evolution based on a genetic interpretation that ignores the fossil record, bear behaviour, and geological history. [h/t Kip Hanson].

In my opinion, this kind of ‘science communication’ is more misleading than enlightening because it fails to alert readers to the fact that the topic is actually more complicated and gives the impression that the author considers readers too stupid to understand a more accurate explanation.

Polar Bear Evolution does a better job for those who are really interested in the process: it doesn’t hide the complicated nature of speciation or polar bear evolution. It doesn’t pretend to present “the truth” but explains how a good scientist gets to a plausible explanation that best fits the evidence.

Continue reading