January 2009 Area Newsletter: Fill & Download for Free

Not likely.When nationwide direct distance dialing (DDD) was introduced circa 1953, area codes were introduced in the following format:- First digit: 2-9- Second digit: 0-1- Third digit 0-9, but not the same as the second digit.These rules allowed the use of 144 area codes, and about 90 of them were put in service in the 1950s. By the end of 1994, all 144 area codes were in service.On January 1, 1995, the area code format was changed to:- First digit: 2-9- Second digit: 0-8- Third digit 0-9, but not the same as the second digit.Note that the second digit of an area code cannot be 9. Several other combinations were reserved for other purposes. The number of possible area codes increased from 144 to over 600.By 2013, there were 364 area codes in service, covering all 50 states, DC, US territories in the Pacific, all Canadian provinces and territories, and a hodgepodge on US territories, British territories, independent nations, and one Dutch territory (Sint Maarten) in the Atlantic and the Caribbean.Another side affect of all this has been the introduction of overlay area codes. In overlays, 10 (or 1+10) dialing is mandatory. Some states (notably California, Illinois, and New York), in a futile effort to retain 7D dialing, fought overlays to the bitter end, and opted for area code splits instead. In the end, after all those splits, they've ended up with overlays in many area codes anyway, with 1+10D local dialing.Meanwhile, states like Maryland and Texas recognized the inevitable, and opted for overlays, with 10D dialing, early in the game.For a case study of this issue, see my article "PSC adds overlay area codes in 715 and 920" in the January 2009 issue of SBE Chapter 24 newsletter.http://www.sbe24.org/archives/newsletters/ltrs2009/jan09.pdfThe ultimate irony: the states that fought overlays for the longest now have ELEVEN-DIGIT (1+10D) dialing, while the states that embraced overlays early on now have TEN-DIGIT dialing.Brought to you courtesy of your local Citizens Utility Board.Neal McLainBrazoria, Texasaka Texas Cable Guy

Integration: Too Much, Too Little, Forming a HubIn publishing, starting in 2013—-actually it goes all the way back to 2009 with my TV show.2008In 2008, while escorting a class downtown (Manhattan) to a job fair one of my students mentioned that a young lady he knew had been on American Idol, been judged off but had found YouTube success singing online. I asked more in-depthly about it and came to understand about using YouTube for education and that the videos could be monetized. The very next day (I have a Tony Robbins 24 hour Rule about “good ideas”) I went and bought a webcam and started by essentially turning classes and workshops I’d done for years into short videos. It took off pretty well.2009In 2009, I revisited the idea of doing a cable access TV show and that’s how The Kyle Phoenix Show was born.A few years before that producers from a show had approached the non-profit I was working at about filming us, our programs, our events. We did it. Afterwards I went to the Executive Director with the nascent idea that maybe we could do a full fledged show—-in fact as the Youth Coordinator I had 30–50 young men that the studio would train for free who could produce the show. Great exposure, no extra work/money needed. He tanked the idea. (But I sensed it was a viable idea so I kept it floating in my noodle for a few years.)The last week of December 2009, the first episode broadcast. Actually sitting, waiting with a bottle of champagne, I missed my own premiere. The show broadcast at midnight Friday according to the Programming department. So there I was at home, excitedly waiting at 11:59pm Friday.There is no 12 midnight Friday after 11:59pm Friday.There however is a 12 midnight Friday, after 11:59pm Thursday.For years in advertising I had to make the distinction and explained it a thousand and one times to people so they could see the show.Then in the past few years the time slot moved to 1130pm Thursday nights. We’re up to episode 405–418—it’s a 13 week season, 4 seasons a year. Yayness!2013In 2013, one of my esteemed professors at Columbia, Stephen Brookfield, suggested that with all the consulting, teaching, running around, curriculum design, trainings/workshops I was teaching/facilitating, I was missing out on the real profit—-publishing books. It would act as a calling card to my work.I went into my office and when I started isolating material , I first found and published 3 (three) non-fiction books, then 3 (three) more then 40 (forty) more and then matching eBooks, then more fiction books, then White Paper Briefs, articles, it has turned into a behemoth.My error, mistake, re-do:Michael Gerber’s E Myth starts out with the exercise of stopping and writing down all the things you would do differently years into your business and then he takes you through a structured divisional workshop that teaches you how to isolate your business into clear, presentable formats—-which is what I’ve done, assiduously.2017In 2017, I spent nearly 11 months just doing the E Myth Process/Analysis/Reorganization. It was time and money well spent.What I found was that I’ve created a hydra of sorts—-all media related. But a lot of the tentacles video, TV, paperbacks, E Books (differing in publishing than paperbacks), appearances, articles/blogs, affiliate relationships were connected by me—myself, my brand—-but not always as a singular entity though they did support and financially rely upon each other as divisions.That was hard to admit.That I’d made something good but scattered.First mistake, the mass of work I created without a plan in 2013 or even as far back as 2009. Yes, I test out and think through things but within those initial 4 years I was just experimenting.My second mistake was that it took me a while to understand and rectify and stylize the difference betweenin person teaching,on videos teaching,on TV teachingand in print teaching and digital/E Book teaching.They are one, different mediums and two, differing necessary styles, which require different equipment, training, software, time commitments.Publishing Learning CurveMy first books were a mess. I had them technically edited but stylistically they were a mess and not coherent, not in content, but context. By that I mean, the information was solid, I’m a wealth of information. But I had to learn how to translate how I disperse reams of information in classes to students and how I tried to pack all of that into books (reams of pages). I left out the kitchen sink because there were already three in the books.My FIRST review on Amazon was from a guy who liked the book but complained about essentially the layout, the context, too much information. Luckily I was able to hear and address his criticisms. I went back and redesigned an entire book. (I now have, thanks to E Myth a detailed Step by Step Production Process—-the goal after his workshops is that I should be able to hand a binder to a stranger/employee and they can open it and “make” the “apple pie” of my pie business. (He uses apple pies/bakery as a metaphor for one’s business.))First, for decades before this, I am a writer. The writing, the content was great and informative but the design of the books took time to mature. Now I have design books, themes, color wheels, color psychological profiles for book covers (there’s a whole study), Fiverr, a better eye.I’d taken and taught graphic design software and I have a dozen certifications in various programs but I was doing it from a technical standpoint, not a designers. One of the things I do now is I color in coloring books. I draw more. I doodle, I sketch. I take more pictures with my phone (I have several for different kinds of phones). I have huge physical folders (clasp-able plastic folders—-clear—-I found about 50 at a business closing—-they’re perfect for notebook, page, manuscript, draft and even book proof carrying—-I got the idea from Martha Stewart who has a “red file” massive office of folders—-clippings of stuff she finds, sees, likes, that she will often go through for inspiration—-so that she can pull out a picture of something from a 15 year old magazine pictorial and say that’s the green I mean and then color scan for it. Me and Martha—-we’re perfectionists who learn to manage with good enough.)Good Enough posted on Facebook's campus wall.I had to learn that my Production Process and 12 Step Editorial Process had to be Good Enough. That nothing would ever be perfect. (I have had freak outs in the bathroom of book signings because in the reading I spotted a one word typo and I just knew everyone else in attendance would see it. No one ever does. I’ve learned to make a note about it and the technology of digital publishing allows me to correct those errors not castigate myself over them.)I re-did the book I got the bad review on and contacted the reviewer and gave him a brand new copy (Customer Service skills, don’tcha know!).But that experience taught me to set the final product aside and then come back to it with fresh, critical, customer eyes. Now I do a minimum of 4 proof copies before I call something the Final or Sale copy. I purposefully do watermarking Not For Sale stamping in books to keep track of them. Though I also use the 4 Proofs to try out covers. I used to think a book cover was a book was a book cover. Now I can honestly tell you if I start a book in January—-the first thing I do is a mock up cover so that by December of that year I can have 5 or 9 top choices and designs (to print out—-you have to print it out—-the screen isn’t good enough—-I spend a lot of time dropping off, picking up things and redoing things at FedEx copy centers and Columbia Copy Center—-they all know me by name and preferences).I have umpteenth binders at work and home that I carry with me and presentation portfolios so that if I run into someone I can ask their flat opinion about something. I recently bought a tablet and a new laptop to go along with my Nokia just for pics and IPhone just for videos—-and I’m often carrying this tech assemblage. My new goal is to buy a toy phaser from Star Trek and just freak the world out. I found a tablet hip holster carrier that basically turns it into a tricorder…but now I can scan digital proofs of text and covers and pictures and check websites and such and blah blah blah…somewhere in there I’m working and teaching too….and carting around those materials.I literally have three physical offices around Manhattan and a mobile one in my backpack. But what I learned was that you have to lay everything out in detail, in extreme detail to really consider it.Sexuality and Men (Customers) in The ClosetI always knew that I would branch the videos, the TV show and the publishing into not just areas around sex and sexuality, but finance, education, fiction and then slowly starting taking on and publishing other authors. But here’s what I can tell you about the sex and sexuality field—-and I’ll narrow this demographic down even further—-people of color.I’d been teaching workshops to people of color for years so the first and what I thought would be the best selling materials were from-for them—-they’d sustained attention to the YouTube videos and then to the TV show—-(though the YouTube videos suffered because TV is easier to produce, not faster, but easier in a state of the art studio that I go to and faster response from the 500,000+ residents of Manhattan that the show is broadcast to)—-—-so when Brookfield suggested publishing I thought built in demographic, materials, easier monetization let me start there and then branch to education, fiction, etc..Outing, the First ProblemThe issue I’ve learned is two fold—-sexuality for people of color is different than that for mainly a White non-heterosexual demographic. I am flooded privately with accolades and attention and even small events but publicly—-it’s very difficult to get a room full, a convention full of Black/Latino gays and lesbians and same gender lovers and trans folk together—-because it outs people. And not all of the people in attendance at conventions, events, meetings—-who are brown—-are out.You would think this wouldn’t be an issue—-but when part of Customer Service and advertising is public reviews for a minority production or demographic and they won’t show their names, faces, locations, it defeats positive word of mouth in public. In private, I’m batting a thousand. In fact I’ve made several lists over the years because I’m Out and brown. No, like national lists of influential people and I’m like whhhhhhhhhhat? Me? But then when you look at a few more lists and see it’s the same 20 people recycled you realize there ain’t but 25 of us who are Out publicly and brown so you will make a list.This doesn’t translate to sales but it means for investment purposes to a marketing campaign I’ve had to expand the demographic and pointedly color of models and guests on my materials, books, TV show. Perhaps the harsh racial reality of marketing in America is that you can’t survive as an entirely minority directed business. Which of course leads to backlash from minorities who want to know why the demographic has spread over the years—-my materials can’t survive and stay viable as minority audience directed.That stung, it really did, especially when the E Myth analysis proofed out what I’d slowly come to suspect.The Color of the Second ProblemThe inner dynamic of this, which I know as a teacher, is that minorities aren’t consuming the written word as much to completely sustain a company on. There are certain kinds of books that are flourishing—-they’re called ghetto books, hood lit, urban fiction—-and I’m neither knocking nor judging them. I’m even doing a “reading project” of reading 100 of them. And yes, I have one in the works, as an experimental writing exercise. Minority informational books do well from celebrities so that’s why the TV show became such an entity to push. People of color are more invested in video/TV media than print.Building An Audience, Multiple TimesMy thought/plan had been that video would rollover it’s audience to TV, maybe I’d upload or live-stream the TV show and rollover that audience to publishing and then join it together as a circle. Now I see it’s creating literally an audience for each medium and the spillage rolls over. Right now I have about 10,000 folk in mass emailing (thank you, Constant Contact), I can push the starship engines to high “warp” and push out to post to 2 million people around the world and I can burn the engines—-I did this for 1 week in 2012 and nearly got kicked off of and banned from…the internet—-18 million people.Space, The Final FrontierI had to start a whole starship analogy--E Myth again—to quantify what were the differences, especially when I have books, E Books, newsletters, White Briefs, Special Reports, blogs, and articles—-I have Twitter——it re-posts links but right now I can’t do more than that. I had to distinguish an apple pie from an apple strudel or an apple tart or an apple amuse bouche.I have starships (books), shuttle craft (blogs, articles), space stations (websites-social media), planets (website), moons (blog sites) and galaxies (new ventures—radio show, ITunes Podcast, etc.). Yes, I have wall maps and have terrified students who wander into a classrooms and find me mapping out—-the universe—-complete with cut out ships to represent products—-in a classroom on the black boards. They politely nod and close the door.I learned from my mistakes that I am obliquely in the media business. What I’m really in is the media creation, content creation and media distribution business—-I thought I made videos, a TV show and wrote books.My mistake was not recognizing this grander plan and vision and honing down on creating from that aspect with systems and processes. I was initially like a restaurant where I was perfecting a fish or chicken dish at a time, rather than building a physical restaurant with tables and chairs and a bar and staff and pots and pans. The fish was good but there was no tables, just chairs and only spoons, no forks.Integration has meant stepping back and creating a business structure with systems and detailing it out ad infinitum so that I can hand an employee a binder of how it is to be done. How to make a good (enough) apple pie.#KylePhoenix

No. No. No. There are no poor starving polar bears from global warming. There is evidence there are too many bears and this could explain the Russian story.When deer, wolves or bears grow too fast they often become a threat to nearby human populations. The result is culling of the herds to get a better balance. I remember when Canadian wolves were introduced into Wyoming to cull the over multiplied deer population. The result was positive. Canadian Inuit hunting of Polar bears which has been ongoing for centuries has the same effect.Take a good look at the Russian bears and the evidence is strong they are healthy and not starving but they will always prefer a free meal to the rigours of hunting their own prey.No, climate change hasn’t driven polar bears to take over a Russian townAnthony Watts / 2 days ago February 11, 2019Dr. Susan Crockford writes:The MSM have gone mad for this story today. I wrote up a post yesterday debunking the AGW claim.Polar bears have been terrorizing a Russian town on the Barents Sea since DecemberLarge group of polar bears at the Belushya Guba town dump on Novaya Zemlya, Russia. From the 11 Feb. 2019 story at The Daily MailSince early December, a group of 52 polar bears have terrorized the Russian village of Belushaya Guba on southern Novaya Zemlya. The aggressiveness of some of the bears, their boldness in entering local buildings and fearlessness in the face of the usual deterrents has caused the local government to call a state of emergency to help the town residents.Global warming is blamed for the problem but as is so often the case, that claim does not stand up to scrutiny.BARENTS SEA BEARS ARE THRIVINGAccording to recent research results, despite low ice cover since 2016, the population of polar bears around Svalbard and presumably in the Barents Sea as a whole are still increasing, as they recover from decades of over-hunting in the 19th and 20th centuries (Aars 2018; Aars et al. 2009, 2017; Crockford 2017).This incident of winter problems with polar bears and others like it reported from the Russian Arctic, almost certainly reflect the confluence of a growing human presence in the Arctic and thriving polar bear populations, not lack of sea ice due to global warming.Recall that explorer William Barents and his crew, who became stranded on the shore of northeast Novaya Zemlya over the winter of 1596-1597, had endless problems with polar bears (back when polar bears and sea ice were really abundant). That story provides an important perspective on this year’s troubles.Republished with permission of the author, originally published at https://polarbearscience.comhttps://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/02/11/no-climate-change-hasnt-driven-polar-bears-to-take-over-a-russian-town/Here are the facts -Polar bear populations healthy not dwindling.POLAR BEAR Numbers Not Declining Despite Media Headlines Suggesting OtherwiseNO other icon of ‘Global Warming’ epitomizes its very own false narrative like the polar bear does for ‘Climate Change’.WITH deadly irony, polar bear numbers have grown dramatically as carbon dioxide emissions have risen in lock-step. A CO2 correlation, at last!INDIGENOUS Inuit’s of Northern Canada are now facing the very real task of having to cull the population as “the polar bear may have exceeded the co-existence threshold.”*“Inuit believe there are now so many bears that public safety has become a major concern,”“Public safety concerns, combined with the effects of polar bears on other species, suggest that in many Nunavut communities, the polar bear may have exceeded the co-existence threshold.”Nunavut’s polar bear population is unsafe, government document says | The Globe and Mail*https://climatism.blog/2019/01/17/climatism-2019-state-of-the-climate-report/Posted: January 22, 2018 | Author: Jamie Spry | Filed under:polarbearscienceIn scanning comments generated by the recent flurry of internet interest in polar bears and blogs I noticed that a good many people, fed alarming media stories, are still convinced that polar bear numbers are declining rapidly when nothing could be further from the truth.In some cases, the media have made a possible future problem sound like a current problem. In others, people are remembering data from 2010 or so, not realizing that the picture has changed — or they assume that a conservation status of ‘threatened’ or ‘vulnerable’ (e.g. Amstrup et al. 2007) must mean numbers are declining (because that’s true for virtually all species classified that way, except polar bears).The sea ice situation hasn’t really improved or deteriorated since 2007 but the polar bear picture is much better: there is information on more subpopulations and studies show most are holding stable or increasing (Aars et…https://climatism.wordpress.com/2018/01/22/polar-bear-numbers-not-declining-despite-media-headlines-suggesting-otherwise/← Histrionics over Arctic temperatures & sea ice extent: implications for polar bearsDr. Susan J. Crockford Polar bear scientist U of VictoriaState of the Polar Bear Report 2017 shows polar bears are thrivingPosted on February 27, 2018 | Comments Offon State of the Polar Bear Report 2017 shows polar bears are thrivingMy new report reveals that polar bears are doing well despite recent reductions in sea-ice. It shows in details why this is so, with summaries of critical recent research.Press release and pdf below. And read my op-ed in the National Post here.polar bears can survive a complete or nearly complete fast from June to late November (and pregnant females from June to early April the following year). That’s the beauty of their Arctic adaptation: …Starvation is the leading natural cause of death for polar bears because if they cannot put on the fat they need in spring, they will not survive the low food months of summer and winter, whether they are on land or out on the sea ice (Amstrup 2003).Polar bear survival depends on the consumption of large numbers of fat, newborn seals that are only available in abundance from March to mid May (depending on the location and species of seal): after this time, fewer seals are available and are very hard to catch.FINANCIAL POSTPolar bears keep thriving even as global warming alarmists keep pretending they’re dyingSusan Crockford: Polar bears are flourishing, making them phony icons, and false idols, for global warming alarmistsA polar bear eats a piece of whale meat as it walks along the shore of Hudson Bay near Churchill, Man.Sean Kilpatrick/The Canadian PressSpecial to Financial PostSusan CrockfordFebruary 27, 20186:30 AM ESTOne powerful polar bear fact is slowly rising above the message of looming catastrophe repeated endlessly by the media: More than 15,000 polar bears have not disappeared since 2005. Although the extent of the summer sea ice after 2006 dropped abruptly to levels not expected until 2050, the predicted 67-per-cent decline in polar bear numbers simply didn’t happen. Rather, global polar bear numbers have been stable or slightly improved. The polar bear’s resilience should have meant the end of its use as a cherished icon of global warming doom, but it didn’t. The alarmism is not going away without a struggle.Part of this struggle involves a scientific clash about transparency in polar bear science. My close examination of recent research has revealed that serious inconsistencies exist within the polar bear literature and between that literature and public statements made by some researchers. For example, Canadian polar bear biologist Ian Stirling learned in the 1970s that spring sea ice in the southern Beaufort Sea periodically gets so thick that seals depart, depriving local polar bears of their prey and causing their numbers to plummet. But that fact, documented in more than a dozen scientific papers, is not discussed today as part of polar bear ecology. In these days of politicized science, neither Stirling nor his colleagues mention in public the devastating effects of thick spring ice in the Beaufort Sea; instead, they imply in recent papers that the starving bears they witnessed are victims of reduced summer sea ice, which they argued depleted the bears’ prey. There are also strong indications that thick spring-ice conditions happened again in 2014–16, with the impacts on polar bears being similarly portrayed as effects of global warming.The polar bear's resilience should have meant the end of its use as an icon of global warming doomOne reason that the 2007 predictions of future polar bear survival were so far off base is that the model developed by American biologist Steven Amstrup (now at Polar Bears International, an NGO) assumed any polar bear population decline would be caused by less summer ice, despite the Beaufort Sea experience. Moreover, Amstrup and fellow modelers were overly confident in their claim that summer ice was critical for the polar bear’s survival and they had little data on which to base their assumption that less summer ice would devastate the polar bears’ prey.Consequently, many scientists were surprised when other researchers subsequently found that ringed and bearded seals (the primary prey of polar bears) north of the Bering Strait especially thrived with a longer open-water season, which is particularly conducive to fishing: These seals do most of their feeding in summer. More food for seals in summer means more fat seal pups for polar bears to eat the following spring, a result that’s probably true throughout the Arctic.As long as polar bears have lots of baby seals to eat in spring, they get fat enough to survive even a longer-than-usual summer fast. And while it’s true that studies in some regions show polar bears are lighter in weight than they were in the 1980s, there is no evidence that more individuals are starving to death or becoming too thin to reproduce because of less summer ice.Not all bears get enough to eat in the spring, of course. Starvation has always been the leading natural cause of death for polar bears, due to a number of factors including competition, injury, tooth decay and illness. Some cancers induce a muscle-wasting syndrome that leads to faster-than-usual weight loss. This is likely what happened to the emaciated Baffin Island bear captured on video in July 2017 and promoted by National Geographic late last year. The videographers claimed it showed what starvation due to sea-ice loss looked like — an implausible conclusion given the time of year, the isolated nature of the incident, and the fact that sea ice that year was no more reduced than previously.That starving-bear video may have convinced a few more gullible people that only hundreds of polar bears are left in the world. But it also motivated others to locate the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List report for 2015 that estimated global polar bear numbers at somewhere between 22,000-31,000, or about 26,000, up slightly from 20,000-25,000, or about 22,500, in 2005. Newer counts not included in the 2015 assessment potentially add another 2,500 or so to the total. This increase may not be statistically significant, but it is decidedly not the 67-per-cent decline that was predicted given the ice conditions that prevailed.The failure of the 2007 polar bear survival model is a simple fact that explodes the myth that polar bears are on their way to extinction. Although starving-bear videos and scientifically insignificant research papers still make the news, they don’t alter the facts: Polar bears are thriving, making them phony icons, and false idols, for global warming alarmists.Susan Crockford, a zoologist and adjunct professor at the University of Victoria, is author of State of the Polar Bear Report 2017, released Tuesday. She will present her findings at Grounds for Thought in Toronto. www.susancrockford.comMy Published CommentJames Grant Matkin ·Arctic ice is stable and not melting away as predicted. Yes, polar bears are thriving, sea levels are not rising much if at all, Pacific islands are rising not sinking. The fear mongering of the alarmists is revealed as politics not science.“No matter if the science is all phony; there are collateral environmental benefits…. Climate change [provides] the greatest chance to bring about justice and equality in the world.”Christine Stewart, former Minister of the Environment of CanadaThat Paris conference agenda got a useful boost from U.S. government agency scientists at NASA and NOAA who conveniently provided “warmest years ever” claims. Both have histories of stirring overheated global warming stew pots with alarming and statistically indefensible claims of recent “record high” temperatures.Global cooling from unstoppable solar cycles of dimimuished sunspots is rearing its ugly head as it did in the seventies. BEWARE cooling is a real threat.http://business.financialpost.com/opinion/polar-bears-keep-thriving-even-as-global-warming-alarmists-keep-pretending-theyre-dyingThis just in about increasing ice from falling temperatures annually.W. Hudson Bay Freeze-Up Earlier Than 1980’s Average For Third Year In RowNov 11, 2019This is the third year in a row that freeze-up of Western Hudson Bay (WH) ice has come earlier than the average of November 16 as documented in the 1980s.Reports by folks on the ground near Churchill confirm polar bears are starting to move onto the sea ice that’s developing along the shore after almost five months on land.After five good sea ice seasons in a row for WH polar bears, this repeat of an early freeze-up means a sixth good ice season is now possible for 2019-2020.Sadly for the tourists, however, it means the polar bear viewing season in Churchill will be ending early this year, just like it did last year and the year before.When mothers with cubs are out on the ice (see photo above), it’s pretty certain the mass movement from land to sea ice is well underway because these family units are usually the last to leave.CURRENT ICE CONDITIONSWeather in Churchill was very cold today, -36C with the wind chill. The slight moderation in temperature in the forecast for the rest of this week is still very conducive to ice formation:The Canadian Ice Service charts for 10 November 2018 below (the overall picture and the details for ice development in northern Hudson Bay) show the ice conditions last year at the time that bears left for the ice:Just to round out the comparison, below is the detailed ice development chart for 11 November 2017:W. Hudson Bay Freeze-Up Earlier Than 1980's Average For Third Year In RowPolar Bears & The Sleazy New York TimesPublished on April 16, 2018Written by Donna LaframboiseSPOTLIGHT: Journalistic professionalism evaporates in front of our eyes.BIG PICTURE: When historians document the demise of the mainstream media, an article published this week by the New York Times will make an excellent case study.Titled “Climate Change Denialists Say Polar Bears Are Fine. Scientists Are Pushing Back,” it’s written by Erica Goode who isn’t just any journalist. She’s a former Environment Editor of the Times. In 2009, she “founded and led a cluster of reporters dedicated to environmental reporting.” Currently, she’s a visiting professor at Syracuse University.Out here in the real world, a debate exists about polar bears. Will they be adversely affected by climate change or will they continue to adapt as they have historically?Since the future hasn’t yet arrived, it’s impossible to know whose opinions will turn out to be correct. But rather than presenting a range of perspectives to her readers, Goode takes sides. Apparently clairvoyant, she knows that experts concerned about the long term prospects of polar bears are correct. She knows that dissenting voices are wrong. No other possibility is conceivable within the confines of her exceedingly narrow mind.She doesn’t tell us that researchers with significant academic records and decades of experience can be found on both sides of this question. Instead, in the first sentence of her article, Goode negates all possibility that a legitimate debate might be in progress. Climate “denialists,” she declares, are “capitalizing” on the iconic status of polar bears “to spread doubts about the threat of global warming.”Goode knows the dissenters are playing politics. She knows their motives are profane. With a wave of her hand, she thus relieves herself of the obligation to take seriously these alternative viewpoints.People who think polar bears are currently doing well – a separate question from how they might fare in the future – are similarly labeled “climate denialists” by Goode in paragraph four. Individuals on the other side of the fence, meanwhile, are portrayed as “real experts” and “mainstream scientists.”Last November, a shocking paper was published online. It has now appeared in the print edition of the journal BioScience. Titled “Internet Blogs, Polar Bears, and Climate Change Denial by Proxy,” the PDF version fills five pages of text, followed by two pages of references. This is an assault by a gang of 14 authors on an individual scholar.The target is Susan Crockford, a Canadian zoologist and adjunct professor with more than 35 years experience in her field. As the author of PolarBearScience.com, Crockford performs a public service. She encourages us to look past activist spin and media hype. Not everything we’re told about polar bears, she says, rests on a solid foundation.While it’s appropriate for these 14 people to challenge Crockford’s assertions, their tone is anything but scholarly. This is five pages of name-calling. PolarBearScience.com is labeled a “denier blog” at the outset. So are online venues that cite Crockford’s work. The term ‘denial’ is used 9 times. ‘Denier’ 18 times. ‘Deniers’ 12 times.The entire exercise is brazenly political. This paper sends a message to everyone else: think twice before departing from the polar bear party line. Our ugly gang of bullies will come looking for you next.How does Goode present these events? Is 14 against one viewed as a tad unsporting? Does anyone in her article express astonishment that a naked political screed somehow got published in a peer-reviewed academic journal? Is free inquiry lauded? The importance of vigorous scientific debate championed?I’m afraid not. She’s an extension of the gang, you see. Smugly certain that Crockford is a ‘climate denier,’ Goode considers this female scholar in a male-dominated field unworthy not only of a hearing, but of empathy, as well.According to Goode, the 14 are merely “scientists banding together against climate change denial.” She quotes Michael Oppenheimer: “Some climate scientists basically have had enough of being punching bags.” Voilà, the victim is transformed into an aggressor who deserves what she got.Goode tells us Oppenheimer is “a professor of geoscience and international affairs” at Princeton. She fails to mention that he spent two decades cashing paycheques at the overtly activist Environmental Defense Fund. This man isn’t impartial. He has a flashing neon sign of an agenda.In the world inhabited by Goode, polar bear dissenters are dismissed out-of-hand because she knows they’re politically motivated. But orchestrated political behaviour by a gang of 14 is OK. And scientists affiliated with organizations that lobby for political change are reliable commentators.Rather than inform its readers in a fair and even-handed manner, the Times this week became a mouthpiece for one side in a scientific debate. Erica Goode chose to be prosecutor, judge, jury, and executioner in the case of Susan Crockford.She sided not with the brave dissident, but with the numerous and the powerful. Crockford wasn’t merely assaulted in BioScience, her assault was justified and amplified in the pages of the Times. By another woman.TOP TAKEAWAY: Environmental reporting at the New York Times is a disgrace.Polar Bears & the Sleazy New York Times | PSI IntlPolar bears not starving, says Nunatsiavut wildlife managerThis monster polar bear was photographed in Labrador in 2016.Jim Goudie says there are lots of bears the in northern Labrador/Quebec regionGeoff Bartlett · CBC News · Posted: Apr 21, 2018 11:00 AM NT | LThis monster polar bear was photographed in Labrador in 2016. Research suggests numbers of the animals have been increasing since before 2007. (Submitted by Edwin Clark)One of the people who oversees an Indigenous hunt of polar bears says the population is doing well, despite heart-wrenching photos online suggesting some bears are starving.Every year, the Nunatsiavut government awards polar bear licences to Inuit hunters living in the northern Labrador settlement area.The Inuit set a quota of 12 polar bears this winter. Nunatsiavut wildlife manager Jim Goudie said all 12 were taken within the first seven days of the season.Sea ice is critical habitat for polar bears from late fall through late spring onlyPosted on July 14, 2018 | Sea ice is critical habitat for polar bears from late fall through late spring onlySea ice is said to be “an essential habitat for polar bears” but that’s an overly simplistic advocacy meme as ridiculous as the “no sea ice, no polar bears” message with which the public is constantly bombarded. Polar bears require sea ice from late fall to late spring only: from early summer to mid-fall, sea ice is optional. Historical evidence of polar bears that spent 5 months on land during the summer of 1874 proves an extended stay ashore is a natural response of polar bears to natural summer ice retreat, not a consequence of recent human-caused global warming. Sea ice is a seasonal requirement for polar bears: it’s not necessary year round.[This PBI newsletter from 2011 repeats this meme and Andrew Derocher’s recent tweet conveys a similar message (“Sea ice loss = habitat loss for polar bears”)]As long as sea ice is available from late fall through late spring (December to early June) and accompanied by abundant seal prey (sometimes it isn’t, see Derocher and Stirling 1995; Stirling 2002; Stirling et al. 1981, 1982, 1984), polar bears can survive a complete or nearly complete fast from June to late November (and pregnant females from June to early April the following year). That’s the beauty of their Arctic adaptation: fat deposited in early spring allows polar bears to survive an extraordinary fast whether they spend the time on land or sea ice.Young and very old bears, as well as sick and injured ones, are the exception: these bears often come ashore in poor condition and end up dying of starvation — as a much-publicized bear on Baffin Island who likely had a form of cancer did last summer (Crockford 2018). Competition with bigger, stronger bears means these bears can’t keep what they are able to kill and they are most often the bears who cause problems. Starvation is the leading natural cause of death for polar bears because if they cannot put on the fat they need in spring, they will not survive the low food months of summer and winter, whether they are on land or out on the sea ice (Amstrup 2003).Polar bear survival depends on the consumption of large numbers of fat, newborn seals that are only available in abundance from March to mid May (depending on the location and species of seal): after this time, fewer seals are available and are very hard to catch.As I’ve stated previously (Crockford 2018:15):“Sea ice extent in June has declined, on average, from just over 12 mkm2 in the 1980s to just over 11 mkm2 from 2004-2017. 140By late May to early June, the young seals that form the bulk of polar bear diets in spring take to the water to feed and are no longer available on the ice, leaving only predatory-savvy adults and subadults hauled out as potential prey. 141This means few seals are actually caught and consumed by polar bears after about mid-June in Seasonal and Divergent sea ice ecoregions, or by mid-July in Convergent and Archipelago regions (see Section 6, Prey Base).”The most pessimistic predictions of March sea-ice extent at the end of the 21st century is about 12.0 million km2 (Stroeve et al. 2007), equal to the average extent of ice for May 2016 (shown below, from NSIDC), which is a perfectly adequate amount of ice to meet polar bear needs in all subpopulations during late winter/early spring:Not a single sea ice prediction suggests the disappearance of sea ice in winter or early spring due to human-caused global warming (Amstrup et al. 2007; Regehr et al. 2016) and predictions of catastrophic polar bear losses due to sea ice declines have failed to materialize (Crockford 2017).From early summer to mid-fall, many bears lounge around on land with no ill-effects. As far as we know, they have always done so (see Historical Evidence below). There is also no biological reason to suggest that well-fed bears that historically did not have to spend much time ashore in summer (such as those in the Southern Beaufort) are incapable of doing so for 5 months if necessary.HISTORICAL EVIDENCEBack in 1874 — well before human-caused global warming reared its ugly head — hundreds of fat, healthy Chukchi Sea polar bears (see drawing below) spent four to five months on St. Matthew Island in the Bering Sea during the summer (at about 60°N latitude, not quite as far south as Churchill, Manitoba); some females stayed on to have their cubs in maternity dens dug into the hills (Eliott and Coues 1875; Elliott 1875; Klein and Sowls 2011).Figure 2. A drawing of polar bears on St. Matthew Island that accompanied the May 1, 1875 Harper’s Weekly Journal of Civilization article written by Henry Elliot. See here.From my 2013 post on this topic:“Elliott’s government report (Elliott and Coues 1875: Appendix) notes that the bears they saw were “in most excellent condition, fat and sleek.” They encountered both males and females with twin cubs. Maynard’s report apparently mentions twins and triplets – “about one third grown” (cited in Klein and Sowls 2011:430), i.e. one year old cubs. Elliott and Maynard found empty maternity dens that had been dug into the hillsides and “bear roads” winding around the island. Fresh water was abundant on the island and while there were walrus and a few seals offshore, there was only scant evidence (the carcass of one young walrus) that the bears were feeding on them. The bears appear to have been fasting – except for the odd bit of scavenging and grass-chewing, which all land-bound polar bears appear to do.”The fact that well-fed Chukchi Sea polar bears spent 5 months onshore in the late 1800s suggests that well-fed polar bears throughout the Arctic have always had the ability to fast for this length of time: it is not a new phenomenon associated with recent sea ice changes blamed on human-caused global warming (Overland and Wang 2013; Wang and Overland 2012, 2015).Note that polar bears no longer den or spend the summer on St. Matthew Island because they were exterminated by commercial hunters. Wrangel Island to the north is now the primary denning/summering location.MODERN EVIDENCEWrangel IslandOne of the largest terrestrial denning area in the Arctic is on Wrangel Island, off the Russian coast of the Chukchi Sea, where in 2017 almost 600 bears were estimated onshore for the 3-4 month summer ice-free season. Bears in the Chukchi Sea are doing very well, better than they were in the 1980s (Rode and Regehr 2010; Rode et al. 2013, 2014, 2018), despite a dramatic reduction in summer sea ice (Serrez et al. 2016).Last year, polar bear biologist Eric Regehr (US Fish & Wildlife Service) told the Daily Mail (23 November 2017) that the Chukchi Sea subpopulation “appears to be productive and healthy.”Photo below of a fat Wrangel Island bear. Shutterstock.SvalbardDespite concerns over the effect of spring sea ice loss around the Svalbard archipelago in recent years (circled in yellow in the maps below, from Walsh et al. 2017), polar bear data collected by researchers up to the spring of 2018 show little to no negative impact from these low ice springs (see previous post here, with references).It must be remembered that the polar bear subpopulation region that encompasses Svalbard is called “Barents Sea” (see map below from the PBSG) and includes the archipelago of Franz Josef Land to the east that has a much colder climate (Barr 1995). Franz Josef Land is where most Barents Sea polar bears live (Aars et al. 2009) and provides abundant denning habitat for pregnant females as well as a refugium for bears that prefer to stay on land during the summer when sea ice retreats. It is likely that most females that formerly made terrestrial dens on Svalbard have now shifted to Franz Josef Land (Aars 2015; Aars et al. 2017; Descamps et al. 2017), except for years (like 2014) with abundant fall ice.Western and Southern Hudson BayHere are critical words to remember (more details here) from biologist Martin Obbard and colleagues (2016:29) on the relationship between body condition and sea ice for Southern Hudson Bay (SH) polar bears, which apply equally well to bears in other regions:“Date of freeze-up had a stronger influence on subsequent body condition than date of break-up in our study. Though models with date of freeze-up were supported over models with other ice covariates, we acknowledge that lower variability in freeze-up dates than in ice duration or break-up dates could have influenced the model selection process. Nevertheless, we suggest that a stronger effect of date of freeze-up may be because even though break-up has advanced by up to 3-4 weeks in portions of Hudson Bay it still occurs no earlier than late June or early July so does not yet interfere with opportunities to feed on neonate ringed seal pups that are born in March-April in eastern Hudson Bay (Chambellant 2010). Therefore, losing days or weeks of hunting opportunities during June and July deprives polar bears of the opportunity to feed on adult seals, but does not deprive them of the critical spring period (Watts and Hansen 1987) when they are truly hyperphagic. No doubt, the loss of hunting opportunities to kill adult seals has a negative effect on body condition, but it appears that for bears in SH a forced extension of the fast in late fall has a greater negative effect on subsequent body condition.” [my bold]In other words, by mid-June at least, polar bears have largely finished their intensive feeding that’s so critical to their survival over the rest of the year. They may catch a few seals over the coming months but for most bears, this makes little difference to their overall condition or potential survival.Most bears are at their fattest in early summer (when they come off the ice to spend the summer ashore) after having gorged on newborn seals in early spring.Breakup dates for Western Hudson Bay have not become progressively earlier each year since 1979: rather, a step-change occurred about 1997/1998 that meant breakup dates since then have been about 3 weeks earlier than before (with much year to year variation). There has been no trend in breakup or freeze-up dates since 1995 or 2001 depending on how you calculate the data (Castro de la Guardia et al. 2017; Lunn et al. 2016).For both Western and Southern Hudson Bay, very late freeze up has had the most negative impact on polar bear survival. When bears come ashore in less than good condition (as they did in 1983), many bears can struggle to survive. However, poor feeding conditions on the bay during early spring (about which virtually nothing is known), can also impact the body condition and survival of bears.REFERENCESAars, J. 2015. Research on polar bears at Norwegian Polar Institute. Online seminar (‘webinar”), January 14. pdf here.Aars, J., Marques,T.A, Lone, K., Anderson, M., Wiig, Ø., Fløystad, I.M.B., Hagen, S.B. and Buckland, S.T. 2017. The number and distribution of polar bears in the western Barents Sea. Polar Research36:1. 1374125. doi:10.1080/17518369.2017.1374125Aars, J., Marques, T.A., Buckland, S.T., Andersen, M., Belikov, S., Boltunov, A., et al. 2009. Estimating the Barents Sea polar bear subpopulation. Marine Mammal Science 25: 35-52.Amstrup, S.C. 2003. Polar bear (Ursus maritimus). In Wild Mammals of North America, G.A. Feldhamer, B.C. Thompson and J.A. Chapman (eds), pg. 587-610. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore.Amstrup, S.C., Marcot, B.G. & Douglas, D.C. 2007. Forecasting the rangewide status of polar bears at selected times in the 21st century.US Geological Survey. Reston, VA. Pdf hereBarr, S. 1995. Franz Josef Land. Oslo: Norwegian Polar Institute. ISBN82-7666-095-9.Castro de la Guardia, L., Myers, P.G., Derocher, A.E., Lunn, N.J., Terwisscha van Scheltinga, A.D. 2017. Sea ice cycle in western Hudson Bay, Canada, from a polar bear perspective. Marine Ecology Progress Series 564: 225–233. Sea ice cycle in western Hudson Bay, Canada, from a polar bear perspectiveCrockford, S.J. 2017. Testing the hypothesis that routine sea ice coverage of 3-5 mkm2 results in a greater than 30% decline in population size of polar bears (Ursus maritimus). PeerJ Preprints 2 March 2017. Doi: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.2737v3 Open access. Testing the hypothesis that routine sea ice coverage of 3-5 mkm2 results in a greater than 30% decline in population size of polar bears (Ursus maritimus)Crockford, S.J. 2018. State of the Polar Bear Report 2017. Global Warming Policy Foundation Report #29. London. pdf here.Derocher, A.E. and Stirling, I. 1995. Temporal variation in reproduction and body mass of polar bears in western Hudson Bay. Canadian Journal of Zoology 73:1657-1665. Canadian Science PublishingDescamps, S., Aars, J., Fuglei, E., Kovacs, K.M., Lydersen, C., Pavlova, O., Pedersen, Å.Ø., Ravolainen, V. and Strøm, H. 2017.Climate change impacts on wildlife in a High Arctic archipelago — Svalbard, Norway. Global Change Biology 23: 490-502. doi: 10.1111/gcb.13381Elliott, H.W. 1875 . Polar bears on St. Matthew Island. Harper’s Weekly Journal of Civilization. May 1 issue. Harper and Brothers, New York.Elliott, H.W. and Coues, E. 1875. A report upon the condition of affairs in the territory of Alaska. US Government Printing Office, Washington. A Report Upon the Condition of Affairs in the Territory of AlaskaKlein, D.R. and Sowls, A. 2011. History of polar bears as summer residents on the St. Matthew Islands, Bering Sea. Arctic 64:429-436. http://arctic.synergiesprairies.ca/arctic/index.php/arctic/article/view/4142Lunn, N.J., Servanty, S., Regehr, E.V., Converse, S.J., Richardson, E. and Stirling, I. 2016. Demography of an apex predator at the edge of its range – impacts of changing sea ice on polar bears in Hudson Bay. Ecological Applications, in press. DOI: 10.1890/15-1256Obbard, M.E., Cattet, M.R.I., Howe, E.J., Middel, K.R., Newton, E.J., Kolenosky, G.B., Abraham, K.F. and Greenwood, C.J. 2016. Trends in body condition in polar bears (Ursus maritimus) from the Southern Hudson Bay subpopulation in relation to changes in sea ice. Arctic Science, in press. 10.1139/AS-2015-0027Overland, J.E. and Wang, M. 2013. When will the summer Arctic be nearly sea ice free? Geophysical Research Letters 40: 2097-2101.Regehr, E.V., Laidre, K.L, Akçakaya, H.R., Amstrup, S.C., Atwood, T.C., Lunn, N.J., Obbard, M., Stern, H., Thiemann, G.W., & Wiig, Ø. 2016. Conservation status of polar bears (Ursus maritimus) in relation to projected sea-ice declines. Biology Letters 12: 20160556. http://rsbl.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/12/12/20160556Supplementary data here.Rode, K. and Regehr, E.V. 2010. Polar bear research in the Chukchi and Bering Seas: A synopsis of 2010 field work. Unpublished report to the US Fish and Wildlife Service, Department of the Interior, Anchorage. pdf here.Rode, K.D., Douglas, D., Durner, G., Derocher, A.E., Thiemann, G.W., and Budge, S. 2013. Variation in the response of an Arctic top predator experiencing habitat loss: feeding and reproductive ecology of two polar bear populations. Oral presentation by Karyn Rode, 28thLowell Wakefield Fisheries Symposium, March 26-29. Anchorage, AK.Rode, K.D., Regehr, E.V., Douglas, D., Durner, G., Derocher, A.E., Thiemann, G.W., and Budge, S. 2014. Variation in the response of an Arctic top predator experiencing habitat loss: feeding and reproductive ecology of two polar bear populations. Global Change Biology 20(1):76-88. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/gcb.12339/abstractRode, K. D., R. R. Wilson, D. C. Douglas, V. Muhlenbruch, T.C. Atwood, E. V. Regehr, E.S. Richardson, N.W. Pilfold, A.E. Derocher, G.M Durner, I. Stirling, S.C. Amstrup, M. S. Martin, A.M. Pagano, and K. Simac. 2018. Spring fasting behavior in a marine apex predator provides an index of ecosystem productivity. Global Change Biologyhttp://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/gcb.13933/fullSerreze, M.C., Crawford, A., Stroeve, J.C., Barrett, A.P. and Woodgate, R.A. 2016. Variability, trends and predictability of seasonal sea ice retreat and advance in the Chukchi Sea. Journal of Geophysical Research 121 (10):7308–7325. Variability, trends, and predictability of seasonal sea ice retreat and advance in the Chukchi SeaStirling, I. 2002. Polar bears and seals in the eastern Beaufort Sea and Amundsen Gulf: a synthesis of population trends and ecological relationships over three decades. Arctic 55 (Suppl. 1):59-76. http://arctic.synergiesprairies.ca/arctic/index.php/arctic/issue/view/42Stirling, I., Andriashek, D., and Calvert, W. 1993. Habitat preferences of polar bears in the western Canadian Arctic in late winter and spring. Polar Record 29:13-24. Habitat preferences of polar bears in the western Canadian Arctic in late winter and spring | Polar Record | Cambridge CoreStirling, I., Calvert, W., and Andriashek, D. 1984. Polar bear ecology and environmental considerations in the Canadian High Arctic. Pg. 201-222. In Olson, R., Geddes, F. and Hastings, R. (eds.). Northern Ecology and Resource Management. University of Alberta Press, Edmonton.Stirling, I, Cleator, H. and Smith, T.G. 1981. Marine mammals. In: Polynyas in the Canadian Arctic, Stirling, I. and Cleator, H. (eds), pg. 45-58. Canadian Wildlife Service Occasional Paper No. 45. Ottawa.Stirling, I, Kingsley, M. and Calvert, W. 1982. The distribution and abundance of seals in the eastern Beaufort Sea, 1974–79. Canadian Wildlife Service Occasional Paper 47. Edmonton.Stroeve, J., Holland, M.M., Meier, W., Scambos, T. and Serreze, M. 2007. Arctic sea ice decline: Faster than forecast. Geophysical Research Letters 34:L09501.Walsh, J.E., Fetterer, F., Stewart, J.S. and Chapman, W.L. 2017. A database for depicting Arctic sea ice variations back to 1850. Geographical Review 107(1):89-107. A database for depicting Arctic sea ice variations back to 1850Wang, M. and Overland, J.E. 2012. A sea ice free summer Arctic within 30 years: An update from CMIP5 models. Geophysical Research Letters 39:L18501.Wang, M. and Overland, J.E. 2015. Projected future duration of the sea-ice-free season in the Alaskan Arctic. Progress in Oceanography136:50-59.https://polarbearscience.com/2018/07/14/sea-ice-is-critical-habitat-for-polar-bears-from-late-fall-through-late-spring-only/POLAR BEAR Numbers Not Declining Despite Media Headlines Suggesting Otherwise“NOAA mysteriously forgot to mention that Arctic ice is expanding in their Arctic Report Card.”POLAR BEAR Numbers Not Declining Despite Media Headlines Suggesting OtherwisePosted: January 22, 2018 | Author: Jamie Spry | Filed under:polarbearscienceIn scanning comments generated by the recent flurry of internet interest in polar bears and blogs I noticed that a good many people, fed alarming media stories, are still convinced that polar bear numbers are declining rapidly when nothing could be further from the truth.In some cases, the media have made a possible future problem sound like a current problem. In others, people are remembering data from 2010 or so, not realizing that the picture has changed — or they assume that a conservation status of ‘threatened’ or ‘vulnerable’ (e.g. Amstrup et al. 2007) must mean numbers are declining (because that’s true for virtually all species classified that way, except polar bears).The sea ice situation hasn’t really improved or deteriorated since 2007 but the polar bear picture is much better: there is information on more subpopulations and studies show most are holding stable or increasing (Aars et…https://climatism.wordpress.com/2018/01/22/polar-bear-numbers-not-declining-despite-media-headlines-suggesting-otherwise/← Histrionics over Arctic temperatures & sea ice extent: implications for polar bearsState of the Polar Bear Report 2017 shows polar bears are thrivingPosted on February 27, 2018 | Comments Offon State of the Polar Bear Report 2017 shows polar bears are thrivingMy new report reveals that polar bears are doing well despite recent reductions in sea-ice. It shows in details why this is so, with summaries of critical recent research.Press release and pdf below. And read my op-ed in the National Post here.ARCTIC ICE EXTENT EXPANDING“NOAA mysteriously forgot to mention that Arctic ice is expanding in their Arctic Report Card.” Gee, could it be because it doesn’t fit the climate alarmists’ narrative?i love ‪#DeplorableClimateScienceBlog for documenting the fraudArctic Sea Ice Increasing For Eleven YearsJames Matkin •"THE GLOBAL ICE AREA IS VIRTUALLY THE SAME TODAY AS IT WAS IN 1979.' Yes, fears of unusual warming by Al Gore and the UN are based on misleading data and pseudo-science not reality. The scientists error exposed by new satellite data have been duped by the oldest trick in the books, CHANCE - when deducing a theory from a false trend over a too short timeline. See https://www.academia.edu/33...Polar bears are thriving because polar ice melt is moderate and not unusual. Recent research with real data shows no unusual warming from fossil fuels. From TIBET recent peer review of climate history derived from 2000 years of tree-rings showed " that "no obvious warming trend since the industrial revolution was observed," WHICH MEANS THE AGW THEORY FAILS.A 2000-Year Temperature History of China's Animaqin Mountains http://www.co2science.org/a......Sadly, the terrible waste and distortion of public resources is massive and will never be recovered to be used to address real issues. This is the greatest scientific hoax ever. Note even if the AGW theory had any merit the reality is the earth's climate is "anti-fragile" and climate change cannot be stopped.See - Nobel laureate Ivar Giaever's speech at the Nobel Laureates meeting 1st July 2015.-https://www.youtube.com/wat...http://netrightdaily.com/2015/08/polar-ice-caps-stable-since-1979/WRITTEN BY THOMAS RICHARD, EXAMINER.COM ON JULY 21, 2015. POSTED IN LATEST NEWSPlentiful Arctic spring ice helping polar bears thrive (despite misleading news)Polar bear expert and zoologist Susan Crockford is firing back today at recently published articles that say polar bears are somehow starving and “food deprived” because of global warming. The problem is that since 1979, polar bears are thriving and far from starving. This is due to plentiful Arctic sea ice they need (except when it’s too thick) to hunt for food before the summer arrives. Unlike most carnivores, polar bears are unique mammals that do all their primary feeding in the spring, and very little during the summer. Other mammals hunt and gather food in the late spring, summer, and fall, but because of the Arctic’s unique climate, late winter/spring is the time that polar bears hunt and fatten up.According to Crockford, “polar bears are at their lowest weight in March and at their highest in June/July.” She notes that other large mammals don’t have this unique eating pattern because no other carnivore lives on the surface of the sea ice. “Summer is warm across the Arctic,” she writes. “It’s the perfect time for polar bears to fast, as little energy is needed for keeping warm, especially if they don’t swim around.”She also notes the “polar-bears-are-doomed crowd can’t hide the fact that this year, spring sea ice habitat for polar bears worldwide has been excellent.” For example, Hudson Bay sea ice extent on July 19 this year was 150,000 square kilometers higher than in recorded on that date in 2009 (526.2 vs. 368.5 mkm2).Norwegian polar bear researchers also reported a good crop of cubs this spring because conditions have been excellent for pregnant females around Svalbard. Worldwide, the amount of Arctic sea ice on July 18, 2015, was the same on that date in 2006, and by July 19, there was actually more sea ice than the same date in 2006 (8.4 vs. 8.3 mkm2).Put simply, the recent summer ice melt has not interfered with the spring feeding period “that is so critically important for polar bears.” Leftover sea ice in early summer meant there was plenty of sea ice in the spring (April-June), even in the Southern Beaufort Sea. The only polar bear region with below-average sea ice extent over the last five years was the Chukchi Sea, but researchers have already shown that polar bears in that region are “doing very well even with no summer sea ice.”Even though the Chukchi Sea currently has below-average summer sea ice, it doesn’t affect a polar bear’s eating habits, as fasting during the summer is normal for them. These Arctic carnivores put on hundreds of pounds of fat during the spring feeding period, chowing down on plump, plentiful young seals that are easy to catch, in preparation for the summer months. This time period, known as the “walking hibernation,” is likely an adaptation to their environment and not a physiological mechanism.What all this means, Crockford writes, is that summer sea ice declines predicted in the Arctic “cannot possibly have any significant impact for otherwise healthy bears.” In 2012, this was evidenced by the record-breaking low September ice extent in the Southern Beaufort Sea that showed no noticeable effect on polar bear health or survival. Why? Summer ice extent has “nothing to do with polar bear health or survival.” Spring ice conditions are what matter most to all polar bear populations. It’s the time of year they spend fattening up for the upcoming summer.http://climatechangedispatch.com/plentiful-arctic-spring-ice-helping-polar-bears-thrive-despite-misleading-news/Posted on 14 Oct 2017 by Iowa Climate Science EducationDay 285 Arctic sea ice extent has been increasing since the start of MASIE records in 2006. This year is fifth highest since 2006.fmasie_4km_allyears_extent_sqkm.csvMeanwhile, criminals in the press and scientific community continue to report the exact opposite of what the data shows.https://iowaclimate.org/2017/10/14/arctic-sea-ice-increasing-for-eleven-years/@ccdeditorArctic Sea Ice Volume Up 15% Over The Past Decade | The Deplorable Climate Science Blog ‪Arctic Sea Ice Volume Up 15% Over The Past Decade“In a new report published by London-based think tank, the Global Warming Policy Foundation, zoologist Susan Crockford says that predictions that climate change is bringing about the demise of these iconic creatures have proven to be far from the mark.Dr Crockford’s report, published to mark International Polar Bear day, makes clear that although Arctic sea-ice has declined to levels not expected until 2050 and widely predicted to cause catastrophe for polar bears, their numbers have remained stable, or have even increased slightly. As she explains“Ice levels during the key feeding period in Spring have been good, and prey species have been abundant. It’s not really a surprise that polar bears are doing so well.”And in the Southern Beaufort Sea, the one area where polar bear numbers have fallen, the reason appears to be too much sea ice rather than too little.“The fearmongering from the media and the polar bear specialists is now backfiring”, says Crockford. “They convinced the world that polar bears were doomed but the facts got out. Now would be a good time to set the story straight”.The State of the Polar Bear Report 2017 summarizes clear, reliable and concise information on the current state of polar bears in the Arctic since 2014, relative to historical records.It highlights up-to-date data and research findings in a balanced and factual format that avoids hype and exaggeration. It is intended for a wide audience, including scientists, teachers, students, decision-makers and the general public interested in polar bears and Arctic ecology.”Here it is, in pdf form: State of the Polar Bear Report 2017Cite as: Crockford, S.J. 2018. State of the Polar Bear Report 2017. Global Warming Policy Foundation Report #29. London.Less Svalbard polar bear habitat during the early Holocene than nowPosted on April 21, 2018 | Comments Offon Less Svalbard polar bear habitat during the early Holocene than nowSvalbard in the western Barents Sea has recently had less sea ice extent than it had in the 1980s, especially in the west and north, but this is not unprecedented.New evidence from clams and mussels with temperature-sensitive habitat requirements confirm that warmer temperatures and less sea ice than today existed during the early Holocene period about 10.2–9.2 thousand years ago and between 8.2 and 6.0 thousand years ago (based on radio carbon dates) around Svalbard. Barents Sea polar bears almost certainly survived those previous low-ice periods, as they are doing today, by staying close to the Franz Josef Land Archipelago in the eastern half of the region where sea ice is more persistent.As this sea ice chart for 18 April 2018 shows, ice this month has been virtually absent from the west and north coasts of the Svalbard Archipelago, while Franz Josef Land to the east is surrounded by highly concentrated pack and land-fast ice.From a new paper by Jan Mangerud and John Svendsen (2018) [my bold]:Svalbard, located between 74° and 81°N, is the warmest place on Earth at this latitude (Drange et al., 2013). This is because of the North Atlantic Current and large-scale atmospheric circulation which transport warm water and air masses from lower latitudes northwards across the Atlantic and along the coast of Norway to Svalbard (Figure 1). Yet, during the Holocene Thermal Maximum, the climate of Svalbard was considerably warmer than at present.The transition from Younger Dryas cold to Holocene Thermal Maximum warm conditions took place very rapidly, according to records from nearby Greenland (Taylor et al. 1997), warming in “steps” of about five years each over a period of about 40 years. This was at last as fast, if not faster than, recent Arctic warming between the 1980s and 2015. And since polar bears of the Barents Sea and adjacent Arctic areas appear to have survived this change to Holocence Thermal Maximum conditions, it challenges the notion that recent warming has been (or will be) too fast to allow polar bears to survive without huge changes in their present distribution (Amstrup et al. 2007).The summer water temperature map from Mangerud and Svendsen (below) not only illustrates why western Svalbard is subject to periods of no or low sea ice in winter but why Franz Josef Land to the east (surrounded by near-zero temps (in blue), even in summer) is the perfect refugium for polar bears during low-ice years (Aars 2015; Aars et al. 2017; Andersen and Aars 2016; Barr 1985; Chernova et al. 2014; Descamps et al. 2017; Fauchald et al. 2014), see previous post here.Franz Josef Land provides the most stable sea ice habitat for Barents Sea polar bears because it is largely beyond the influence of warm water influxes from the North Atlantic.The schematic below from Mangerud and Svendsen shows the warm water incursions from the Atlantic flowing past the west coast of Svalbard at about 11 thousand years ago, when the Laurentide Ice Sheet still covered the eastern half of Canada and the northern US, excluding fish, seals and polar bears from most of Canadian Arctic and Hudson Bay.Here is the abstract from Mangerud, J. and Svendsen (2018) [my bold, link added]:“Shallow marine molluscs that are today extinct close to Svalbard, because of the cold climate, are found in deposits there dating to the early Holocene. The most warmth-demanding species found, Zirfaea crispata, currently has a northern limit 1000 km farther south, indicating that August temperatures on Svalbard were 6°C warmer at around 10.2–9.2 cal. ka BP, when this species lived there. The blue mussel, Mytilus edulis, returned to Svalbard in 2004 following recent warming, and after almost 4000 years of absence, excluding a short re-appearance during the Medieval Warm Period 900 years ago. Mytilus first arrived in Svalbard at 11 cal. ka BP, indicating that the climate was then as least as warm as present. This first warm period lasted from 11 to 9 cal. ka BP and was followed by a period of lower temperatures 9–8.2 cal. ka BP. After 8.2 cal. ka, the climate around Svalbard warmed again, and although it did not reach the same peak in temperatures as prior to 9 ka, it was nevertheless some 4°C warmer than present between 8.2 and 6 cal. ka BP. Thereafter, a gradual cooling brought temperatures to the present level at about 4.5 cal. ka BP. The warm early-Holocene climate around Svalbard was driven primarily by higher insolation and greater influx of warm Atlantic Water, but feedback processes further influenced the regional climate.”Survival of Barents Sea polar bears during low-ice years does not require emigration to another sea ice ecoregion or even another subpopulation area. The eastern Barents Sea (located in Russian territory), as defined by the Polar Bear Specialist Group (see map below), provides ample habitat for polar bears to thrive despite extended fluctuations in seasonal sea ice cover in the western portion. Although it must be frustrating for Norwegian researchers and their colleagues to see “their” bears abandoning Svalbard for Franz Josef Land because of recent low ice levels, they are not witnessing a biological catastrophe.Bottom line: Barents Sea polar bears are loyal to this region because the eastern portion has the habitat they require to thrive even when sea ice cover in the western portion essentially disappears for thousands of years at a time.aTaylor, K.C., Mayewski, P.A., Alley, R.B., Brook, E.J., Gow, A.J., Grootes, P.M., Meese, D.A., Saltzman, E.S., Severinghaus, J.P., Twickler, M.S., White, J.W.C., Whitlow, S., and Zielinski, G.A. 1997. The Holocene-Younger Dryas Transition Recorded at Summit, Greenland. Science 278:825-827. http://science.sciencemag.org/content/278/5339/825https://polarbearscience.com/2018/04/21/less-svalbard-polar-bear-habitat-during-the-early-holocene-than-now/See: Morano’s new book shoots to #1 at Amazon in 4 Categories! Climatology, Earth Sciences, Env. Science & Nature & EcologyThe book has also been getting extremely positive reviews with a nearly 5 star average at Amazon:Book Excerpt: – Chapter 5: The Ice Caps Are Melting!The Polar BearsThe photogenic polar bear has been the icon for the modern global warming movement. “They are looking for poster children,” explains geologist Bob Carter. “It suits that advertising purpose. It has nothing to do with science.” The fact is that polar bear populations are at or near historic highs. Scientists point out that the computer models predicting polar bear population collapse simply do not reflect reality or account for the adaptability of these animals. “Polar bears have survived several episodes of much warmer climate over the last 10,000 years than exists today,” evolutionary biologist and paleozoologist Susan Crockford of the University of Victoria explains. “There is no evidence to suggest that the polar bear or its food supply is in danger of disappearing entirely with increased Arctic warming, regardless of the dire fairy-tale scenarios predicted by computer models.” As her research shows, “Polar bears have not been harmed by sea ice declines in summer.” And so she rejects predictions of doom: “While the decline in ice extent is greatest in September, all evidence suggests this is the least important month of the year for polar bears—the yearly ice minimum in September occurs after the critical spring/summer feeding period, after the spring/summer mating period and well before the winter birth of cubs,” she added.The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has estimated that the polar bear population was as low as 5,000 to 10,000 bears in the 1950s and 1960s. A 2002 U.S. Geological Survey of wildlife in the Arctic Refuge Coastal Plain noted that the polar bear populations “may now be near historic highs.” And in 2016, the International Union for the Conservation of Nature estimated the current polar bear which according to Crockford is “the highest estimate in 50 years.”As Crockford wrote in 2016, “So far there is no convincing evidence that any unnatural harm has come to them. Indeed, global population size appears to have grown slightly since 1993, as the maximum estimated number was 28,370 in 1993 but rose to 31,000.”Climatologist Judith Curry has said, “It seems like the polar bears are doing well and have managed to evolve and adapt over a very long time. It’s not clear what we’re doing up in the Arctic that’s particularly jeopardizing them.”According to geologist Don Easterbrook, “There are five times as many polar bears now as they were in the 1970s so doesn’t look like they are hurting too much. And I can also tell you on a factual basis that the past 10,000 years we’ve had temperatures that were…a half to 5° warmer and Greenland and the polar bears survive[d] that so there’s not any problem now.”In 2008, scientists spoke out publicly against the polar bear climate fears and I wrote a report for the U.S. Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. What follows is based up on that report.Award-winning quaternary geologist Ólafur Ingólfsson, a professor at the University of Iceland, has also rejected bear fears. “We have this specimen that confirms the polar bear was a morphologically distinct species at least 100,000 years ago, and this basically means that the polar bear has already survived one interglacial period,” said Ingólfsson, who has conducted extensive expeditions and field research in both the Arctic and Antarctic. “This is telling us that despite the on-going warming in the Arctic today, maybe we don’t have to be quite so worried about the polar bear,” he added.Biologist Matthew Cronin, a research professor at the School of Natural Resources and Agricultural Sciences at the University of Alaska Fairbanks, rejected climate fears as well. “Polar bear populations are generally healthy and have increased worldwide over the last few decades,” Cronin said.Biologist Josef Reichholf, who heads the Vertebrates Department at the National Zoological Collection in Munich is also skeptical of bear fears. “In warmer regions it takes far less effort to ensure survival,” Reichholf said. “How did the polar bear survive the last warm period? Look at the polar bear’s close relative, the brown bear. It is found across a broad geographic region, ranging from Europe across the Near East and North Asia, to Canada and the United States. Whether bears survive will depend on human beings, not the climate.”The Nunavut government in Canada is not concerned about the fate of polar bear populations. Territorial Environment Minister Daniel Shewchuk said, “Through direct consultation, [Inuit communities] are unanimous in their belief that polar bears have not declined…. Based on hunter observations, polar bears are presently still healthy and abundant across Nunavut—and for that reason, not a species of special concern.”The Los Angeles Times reported in 2012, “Doomsday predictions of the polar bear’s demise tend to draw an Inuit guffaw here in Nunavut, the remote Arctic territory where polar bears in some places outnumber people….Heart-rending pictures of polar bears clinging to tiny islands of ice elicit nothing but derision.”Internationally known forecasting pioneer J. Scott Armstrong of the Wharton School at the Ivy League University of Pennsylvania and his colleague, forecasting expert Kesten Green of Monash University in Australia, coauthored a January 27, 2008, paper with Harvard astrophysicist Dr. Willie Soon, which found that polar bear extinction predictions violate “scientific forecasting procedures.” As they explained, their “study analyzed the methodology behind key polar bear population prediction and found that one of the two key reports in support of listing the bears had ‘extrapolated nearly 100 years into the future on the basis of only five years data—and data for these years were of doubtful validity.”Polar bear expert Dennis Compayre, formerly of the conservation group Polar Bears International, who has studied the bears in their natural habitat for almost thirty years, weighs in. “I tell you there are as many bears here now as there were when I was a kid,” Compayre, author of the 2015 book on polar bears Waiting for Dancer, said. “Churchill [in Northern Canada] is full of these scientists going on about vanishing bears and thinner bears. They come here preaching doom, but I question whether some of them really have the bears’ best interests at heart.”Executive summary1. Polar bears are still a conservation success story: there are more polar bears now than there were 40 years ago.2. Fewer populations are in decline than in 2010(onlyone,of cially)andonlysix are data de cient (down from nine).3. Abrupt summer sea ice decline has not affected polar bear numbers as pre- dicted: even though sea ice levels dropped to mid-century levels in 2007, the expected decimation of polar bears failed to occur.4. The Chukchi Sea population is thriving, despite a pronounced lengthening of the ice-free season since 2007.5. Less sea ice in the summer in the Chukchi Sea has meant a healthy prey base for polar bears because ringed seals feed primarily in the ice-free season.6. Polarbearshaveshownthemselvestobeadaptabletochangingiceconditions in several regions.7. SouthernBeaufortnumbershavereboundedsincethelastsurveycount.8. Barents Sea numbers have probably increased since 2005 and have de nitely not declined, despite much less sea ice cover.9. There is no evidence that record-low summer sea ice in 2012 had a harmful effect on Southern Beaufort bear numbers.10. Other species are being negatively impacted by high polar bear numbers, es- pecially nesting sea birds and ducks.11.WesternHudsonBaypopulationnumbershavebeenstablesince2004,despite what scientists are telling the media.12. Hudson Bay sea ice has not changed since about 1999: the breakup dates and freeze-up dates are highly variable but the ice-free period was not any longer in 2015 than it was in 2004. However, this fall freeze-up is shaping up to be the earliest in decades.13. ProblembearsinChurchillarenotleanorstarving.14. ChurchillManitobahadthemostproblembearsin1983and2016,whichwere late freeze-up years, but many of the incidents in 2016 can be attributed to in- creased vigilance on the part of patrol of cers after an attack in 2013.15. There have been only marginal sea-ice declines during the feeding period in spring, when polar bears need sea ice the most.16. Theisnoevidencethatsubsistencehuntingisaffectingbearpopulations.17. StressfulresearchmethodshavebeencurtailedinmuchofCanada.ix18. Therehavebeennoreportsofpolarbearcannibalismsince2011.19. Polar bears appear unaffected by pollution: studies suggest only that harm is theoretically possible, not that it has happened.20. Polar bears have survived past warm periods, which is evidence they have the ability to survive future warm periods.Conclusion· Polar bears are thriving: they are not currently threatened with extinction.· Tens of thousands of polar bears did not die as a result of more than a decade of low summer sea ice, as was predicted.· Polar bears don’t need sea ice n late summer/early fall as long as they ar ewell- fed in the spring.·1 A conservation success story· Polar bears are still a conservation success story. With a global estimate almost certainly greater than 28,000, we can say for sure that there are more polar bears now than there were 40 years ago (Fig. 1). Sadly, although completing a global survey was one of the primary objectives of the Polar Bear Specialist Group (PBSG) at its inception 49 years ago, it has so far been unable to do so because at least four subpopulations have never been counted.https://polarbearscience.com