Polar bears have become a poster child for those who believe climate change will affect Earth dramatically in the coming century. Earth’s south polar continent – Antarctica – is solid ground covered with ice. But polar bears don’t live on the southern half of Earth’s globe. They live in the northern Arctic, which has no solid ground beneath its layers of sea ice. If Arctic ice melts completely during future summers, as some scientists have suggested it might, the polar bears’ habitat will be gone.
That’s why – although no one knows for certain how warm Earth might get in the coming century, or if the polar ice will become a polar sea – many fear for the fate of polar bears. For example, the U.S. Geological Survey projects that two thirds of polar bears will disappear by 2050.
There is a ray of hope, however. Research announced in early 2010 suggests that polar bears might be able to adapt quickly to a new habitat. The research centers on DNA from a rare fossil discovered in Norway in 2004.
Charlotte Lindqvist is research assistant professor in the University of Buffalo Department of Biological Sciences. She conducted this research with Stephan C. Schuster at Penn State. “Our results confirm that the polar bear is an evolutionarily young species that split off from brown bears some 150,000 years ago,” she said, “… perhaps adapting to the opening of new habitats and food sources in response to climate changes just before the last interglacial period.”
In other words, snowy white polar bears may have split from brown bears only 150,000 years ago, which is a blink of an eye in evolutionary terms.
The research centers on a rare, well-preserved, 110,000-to-130,000-year-old, fossil jawbone and canine tooth, found in the Svalbard archipelago of Norway. Lindqvist analyzed DNA extracted from the sample, and in 2008, compared it to tissue sames from modern bears.
These scientists emphasized that – while their data demonstrate polar bears have adapted in the past – it’s not certain that the polar bears therefore will also be able to adapt to current and future changes in the Arctic.
Lindqvist said, “Climate change now may be occurring at such an accelerated pace that we do not know if polar bears will be able to keep up.”
The iteration of Brown Bear we call the Polar Bear is a very recent one indeed. They came along only about 150,000 years ago. By the way, they don’t eat ice, they eat seals and fish. If the ice gets too thick and too extensive, they will have to move south. Where people are. Please understand, polar bears are carnivores. They eat meat. It just so happens that people are meat!
And, there are more polar bears about now than 50 years ago. This would lead a thinking person to believe that “climate change” is helping, not hurting polar bear populations.
Another thing, polar ice has waxed and waned a lot over the lsst hundred years, in fact over the last six hundred years. It is documented that the Chinese voyaged through the “northwest passage” many years ago. So have many other folks. The ice melts and refreezes as it will. One day, polar bears will join dinosaurs in the “extinct” category. Humans will not cause it, nor will humans be able to stop it.
“Climate change” has replaced AGW for a reason. The climate of the earth evidently failed to read and heed the global warming dogma.
Hi Ben, thanks for your comments. I’m trying to find out where this statement that “there are more polar bears now than 50 years ago” came from. Can you supply a link?
Thank you!
Deborah
Since there are more of them than 50 years ago, climate change has helped their numbers.
Hi a p,
Okay so both you and Ben Napier – comment above – say there are more polar bears now than 50 years ago. Would you mind giving me a link to where that information comes from?
Next question. Obviously, polar bears don’t answer census questions. So the only way to know their numbers would be a scientific study of some kind. Why do you believe that study (if indeed there is a study – and not just the words of some blogger somewhere), but not other scientific studies? Do you only believe the science studies that back up your own opinions?
?
:-)
Deborah
http://newsbusters.org/node/12694
there are also a number of studies within the US Geolical Survey site at http://www.usgs.gov/newsroom/special/polar_bears/
you have to did through the population pdf’s but the stats are there depending upon area showing either steady numbers or increases in population.
Basically the whole polar bear extinction thing is a massive lie…
Jonathan, sorry your comment wasn’t automatically approved. I think our (new) system bans comments with two links or more. We welcome your voice here.
I see the first link you provided is from a blogger … not a scientist. And I did dig through the USGS pdfs that you suggested and found that – while bears in some parts of the Arctic may be increasing in population – bears in other parts of the Arctic are in fact declining.
Overall, what is the polar bear population doing? I don’t know, but the links you provided don’t contain that information.
So I still don’t see the evidence that – as two other commenters here said – “there are more polar bears now than 50 years ago.” Are there? The scientific evidence – from the USGS link that you provided – seems to be that the melting of sea ice will negatively affect the bears. And it’s also logical to assume that may be, since the bears live in a sea ice habitat. But as this post on which you commented suggests, maybe the bear can adapt to a non-sea ice environment quickly? No one knows.
If I missed something specific here, Jonathan – some statement from a scientific study that “there are more polar bears now than 50 years ago” – please let me know. I would like to see that.
Bloggers tend to oversimplify things. I know. I’m also a blogger, and I know how limiting words can be. Meanwhile, nature is complex. The polar bear population is complex. Interactions between the bears and their natural habitat are – no doubt – only now beginning to be studied and understood by scientists. It’s only been in recent decades that many scientists have been able to go to the poles and study them.
To say that the decline of polar bears due to climate change is a “lie” isn’t true. It’s not a lie. It’s just science at work trying to understand a very big and complex world.
All best,
Deborah
Can I use this information on the project that I’m wokring? It’s about sustainably managing environment. I will properly cite you.
Polar bears survived these 2 warm periods in the past so why not now?
http://web.me.com/uriarte/Earths_Climate/6._The_Eemian.html
http://www.ngu.no/en-gb/Aktuelt/2008/Less-ice-in-the-Arctic-Ocean-6000-7000-years-ago/
It seems the Polar Bear has adapted to climate changes over its 150K year existance. It appears likely that the bear ice habitat is a result of its pursuit of fish and sea mammals for food. As sea ice melts, it is likly to pursue those animals. Such pursuit may lead to other food sources, if those animals decline. I’m not aware of any specific survival dependancy on the barren ice. If that’s the case it doesn’t seem likely that loss of the ice would dramtically affect the Polar bear. What do you think?
You shouldn’t be afraid about polar bears and you shouldn’t be afraid about climate. I personly think that prognosis are little bit exaggerated.
Best Regards
Marek