Now that Charles is King, it seems the new euphemisms for WEF-style totalitarian climate change activism is a defence of “environmental issues,” “protecting the natural world,” and “backing conservation.”
In a pre-coronation interview with the BBC, Sir David Attenborough said on Friday he believes that Charles will continue his activism while he is King, despite the constitutional demand that a British monarch remains apolitical. Today is Attenborough’s 97th birthday and it seems fitting to say I believe him. Why wouldn’t he tell the truth?
Money quote from Attenborough: “…now everybody realises that the future of humanity is dependent upon a healthy natural world. The way ahead demands that leaders of the state should actually give their full backing and I’m quite sure that as King he will lead this country in a very important way.”
In true 1984 style, it seems the ruling elite are redefining terms to fit their ideology: recasting the King’s former activism and promotion of World Economic Forum agendas as entirely a defence of the environment and conservation issues. No doubt this tactic is meant to convince the naive public that there was never any politics involved in what Charles did before and so it cannot be considered political now that Charles is King.
But those who have been paying attention know better.
It also suggests that what those wealty powerbrokers have planned for us cannot work without the King’s considerable power and influence. This may sound awfully cynical but my eyes have been opened by Attenborough’s behaviour over the falling walrus issue and the alliances he’s made with the WWF and Netflix over the last few years. You may agree when you read what has been circulating in the news over the weekend, summarized below.
Posted in Advocacy, Book promotion, science
Tagged 1984, activism, Attenborough, capitalism, climate change, global warming, lockdowns, politics, WEF
Worth watching if you haven’t seen it – and a second look if you have – a rare balanced documentary produced by the CBC in 2014 on polar bear conservation, with interviews with biologists Mitch Taylor and Andrew Derocher.
“In The Politics of Polar Bears, Reg Sherren will pick his way through the message track to help you decide what is really happening with the largest land carnivore on the planet.”
Short version here (about 18 minutes):
Entire version (45:30):
Online summary by the producer of the film, Reg Sherren (see excerpt below).
The most up-to-date discussion of polar bear numbers and the politics of polar bears are in my popular new book, The Polar Bear Catastrophe That Never Happened.
Posted in Advocacy, Conservation Status, Population, Sea ice habitat
Tagged Andrew Derocher, CBC, Churchill, condition, documentary, jail, Mitch Taylor, polar bear, Polar Bears International, politics, sea ice, weights
The activist lawyer primarily responsible for polar bears being listed as ‘threatened’ on the US Endangered Species List (ESA) in 2008 is frustrated that those efforts have not generated her preferred political action. Kassie Siegel also claims in another 10 years it will be too late to save polar bears from extinction — despite clear evidence to the contrary.
In an emotional rant over at The Hill with a predictably hysterical headline, Siegel perhaps reveals more than she should about her motivation (“Keeping fossil fuels in the ground is the only way to save polar bears ravaged by climate change,” 26 May 2018).
Posted in Advocacy, Conservation Status, Population, Sea ice habitat
Tagged activists, anniversary, CBD, climate change, ESA, global warming, polar bear, politics, sea ice, walrus
With a few big guns on one side and some fringe folk on the other, a dichotomy of opinion has developed amongst polar bear researchers regarding whether or not consumption of land-based foods is making a difference to polar bear survival (or is likely to in the future).
It’s been going on for a while now. Last year, two US Geological Survey members of the IUCN Polar Bear Specialist Group (PBSG) apparently got fed up with the scatter-shot of papers promoting terrestrial foods as a possible salvation for polar bears (e.g. Iles et al. 2013; Iverson et al. 2014; Rockwell and Gormezano 2013a, 2013b). In April, they published a canon volley of a paper meant to blow all that ‘polar-bears-might-survive’ talk out of the water once and for all (Rode et al. 2015).
Note that although the PBSG didn’t bother to update their website with the IUCN Red List assessment when it came out last November, they had a link up to the USGS terrestrial feeding paper within 16 days (with an editorial summary in the “NEWS” section as well as a listing of the paper in the “RECOMMENDED READING” section). As I suggest below, this difference in treatment may not be a coincidence.
However, another group of non-PBSG researchers haven’t given up just yet, as shown by the title chosen for the most recent news report (Alaska Dispatch News, 16 June 2016) on the just-finished International Bear Conference:
Want to know how a changing climate is affecting polar bears? Look at what they’re eating.
Apparently, Jeff Welker, a University of Alaska Anchorage researcher who is co-author on two recent papers on the subject of polar bear consumption of terrestrial foods (Tartu et al. 2016 and Rogers et al. 2015), gave a presentation at the conference that raised this topic yet again. His talk came on the heels of an earlier presentation by Todd Atwood, who suggested Southern Beaufort polar bears might benefit from staying onshore to eat left-over whale scraps instead of staying on the sea ice during the summer (even though he had no data to support that opinion – as I discussed in this post).
Here’s the question: is this dispute really about what polar bears eat or don’t eat when they’re on land – or is it symptomatic of the underlying politics of polar bears? [CBC documentary video by that name here]
Posted in Advocacy, Conservation Status, Life History
Tagged adaptation, Amstrup, Atwood, criticism, diet, extinction, grizzly, IUCN, PBSG, polar bear, politics, Red list, resilience, Rode, sub-standard science, terrestrial foods, threatened, Welker
The offensively tasteless “art” produced by Danish sculptor Jens Galschiøt, in collaboration with the World Wildlife Fund, for the specific purpose of influencing politics has reappeared.
‘Unbearable’ is a portable exhibit originally designed for the Paris COP21 climate talks in December 2015 but here it is again in Copenhagen. [h/t Tom Nelson]
It’s simply the Politics of Polar Bears on a global scale that has no basis in science: polar bear numbers have not declined as CO2 has risen. Jens Galschiøt’s tasteless and costly message funded by WWF is not much better than Plane Stupid’s 2009 ad of polar bears falling from the sky (see below). It’s just about as asinine and not supported by science. Continue reading
Posted in Advocacy, Conservation Status, Polar bear attacks, Population, Sea ice habitat
Tagged attacks, carbon dioxide, climate change, CO2, fossil fuels, global warming, impaled polar bear, oil pipeline, Paris, polar bear, polar bear patrol, politics, population size, sculpture, sea ice, unbearable, WWF
Rajendra Pachauri, who led the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) since 2002, resigned today. He faces possible arrest on accusations of sexual assault, stalking, and harassment of several female employees.
You might be as appalled as I was to read the statement above, quoted from Pachauri’s resignation letter — which has nothing to do with the allegations and everything to do with his attitude to science and thus his leadership of the IPCC.
Journalist Donna Laframboise could not have said it better than I regarding Pachauri’s statement:
“Yes, the IPCC – which we’re told to take seriously because it is a scientific body producing scientific reports – has, in fact, been led by an environmentalist on a mission. By someone for whom protecting the planet is a religious calling.
Even here, at the end, Pachauri fails to grasp that science and religion don’t belong in the same sentence; that those on a political mission are unlikely to be upholders of rigorous scientific practice.” [emphasis in original]
The IUCN Polar Bear Specialist Group and conservation organizations like Polar Bears International routinely tout the IPCC as the highest arbiter of science on issues of present and future climate. For 13 long years this man has been their leader.
Add this to “The Politics of Polar Bears.”
Read the rest of Donna’s commentary here, and the Pachauri resignation letter here.
UPDATE 1 (24 Feb 2015): Amazingly, the press release issued by the IPCC makes no mention of why Pachauri has resigned: http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/ar5/P41_acting_chair.pdf
Posted in Advocacy, Sea ice habitat
Tagged activist organizations, Donna Laframboise, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, IUCN Polar Bear Specialist Group, Pachauri, polar bears, Polar Bears International, politics, Rajendra Pachauri, science and religion