Tuesday, February 19, 2008

Global warming can kill

(My bold) WASHINGTON — What's likely to happen if the world does nothing to combat global warming? The answer from the Nobel Prize-winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change was jaw-dropping: more than 40 percent of known plant and animal species could become extinct by the end of this century.

Many scientists who've been studying climate change say extinctions aren't inevitable if the world greatly reduces its dependence on oil, coal and natural gas. As daunting as the warning signs and projections are, there's still time to fend off the worst, they say. But they also warn that "business as usual" would bring devastating changes in the decades ahead.

"We're locked into a different planet, but we can still make it a planet similar to what we have known," said Lara Hansen, an ecologist who's the chief climate-change scientist at the World Wildlife Fund. The Arctic Ocean will be ice free in the summer in a few years, "but we're not locked into the Arctic being ice-free year round, or Greenland melting."

[snip]

Some paleontologists have suggested that the world already is witnessing a sixth mass extinction, after five others known from the fossil record. The fifth was the end of the dinosaurs and some 70 percent of other species 65 million years ago. Some of the projections of a do-nothing trend on global warming suggest that 70 percent of all living things could become extinct again.

[snip]

The World Conservation Union says that the rapid loss of species today is 1,000 to 10,000 times higher than the natural rate of species loss over the past millions of years. The causes of the current threat go back through human history: habitat destruction for development and agriculture, overexploitation, diseases and invasions of alien species. Climate change adds to the pressure on vulnerable species.

The group's "Red List" comprises 16,306 plant and animal species that the group says are threatened with extinction. It also says that there's evidence from the effects of climate change on species around the world that rising temperatures will be "catastrophic for many species."

Biologist Camille Parmesan of the University of Texas at Austin, who participated on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, said that some 40 scientific studies found that the risk at higher temperature increases, 7 to 9 degrees Fahrenheit, could range from an extinction rate of more than 40 percent to more than 70 percent.

[snip]

Earth's average temperature has increased by about 1 degree Fahrenheit since 1890, and roughly another degree is expected from the greenhouse gases that already have been released, because of a lag in the climate system and because carbon dioxide, the main greenhouse gas, stays in the atmosphere for hundreds of years.

Many scientists say that the world would be in trouble with any warming of more than 2 degrees Celsius — about 3.5 degrees Fahrenheit — above 19th-century levels. At that temperature, the panel's report said, up to 30 percent of species would be at increasing risk of extinction and most corals would be bleached.

The report found that temperatures could be kept below that level by reducing greenhouse gas emissions by about 80 percent by 2050, or about 2 percent per year. They're now increasing by about 3 percent per year.

Thomas Lovejoy, a conservation biologist who heads the Heinz Center for Science, Economics and the Environment, said he thought that the world would see serious disruptions in ecosystems before global warming hit 3.5 degrees. But he said that the high level of extinction the panel projected wasn't inevitable if society greatly reduced fossil fuel pollution and invested more in wildlife protection.

Lovejoy, Parmesan and some 600 other scientists sent a letter last month urging Congress to pass legislation to curb U.S. global-warming pollution and invest more in protecting wildlife and habitats.

The National Wildlife Federation sent a similar appeal this week from 670 hunting and fishing organizations in all the states.

4 comments:

Stienster said...

World Wildlife Fund Site Lets Public Track Polar Bears Along Hudson Bay (Posted 2/6/08)
Dec 03, 2007 04:30 AM
Catherine Porter
ENVIRONMENT REPORTER

Want to see how climate change is affecting polar bears without adding to the problem by jumping in a plane? The non-profit World Wildlife Fund has launched a “polar bear” tracker site that lets you follow the paths of six female bears with their cubs over the next year. They hope it personalizes the issue for Canadians and drives them towards change.

“This is a Canadian icon species and it’s in trouble,” said Pete Ewins, WWF’s director of species conservation. He travelled to Hudson Bay’s Wapusk National Park this past summer to help Canadian Wildlife service researchers fit two female bears with satellite collars which will transmit data every four days for the next year, when they will automatically detach.

The David Suzuki Foundation has called on the Canadian government to protect polar bears as a threatened species. To date, the environment minister has not recognized the bears as a “species of concern,” despite scientists saying otherwise.

http://www.thestar.com/article/281913

Not all scientists are on board. Are agendas of the social engineers
driving the science?

***The state of Alaska yesterday questioned the scientific justification for proposals to add polar bears to the US endangered species list. Tina Cunnings, a biologist attached to the Alaskan government, questioned whether they needed sea ice to survive, saying they could adapt to hunt on land and find alternative food sources to seals. ********
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/03/09/wpolar09.xml

editor’s comment: One wonders how the polar bears survived periods of global warming that preceded the ice ages, e.g. when Greenland was settled by Europeans.

Make a Comment

Make A Comment: ( 1 so far )
Your Comment
Name
Mail (hidden)
Website

blockquote and a tags work here.

One Response to “World Wildlife Fund site lets public track polar bears along Hudson Bay”
Comments RSS Feed

There money in pulling heart strings with polar bears and pandas.

Per Sovereignty International, WWF-USA reported an income of $132,874,116 million in 1995.

http://www.sovereignty.net/p/clim/wc1-97.htm

One of the founders of the WWF back in 1961 was Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands. Coincidentally he was also a founder of the Bilderberg club. Conspiracy & secret society buffs have been on the trail of the grand-club of the world’s elites for decades since the first Bilderberg meeting in 1954. The Bilderbergs seek to influence world events to further the interests of the global elite and the establishment of the UN as a formal world government.

“One of the best kept secrets is the degree to which a handful of giant conglomerates all belonging to the secret Bilderberg Group, Council on Foreign Relations, NATO, the Club of Rome and the Trilateral Commission control the flow of information in the world and determine what we see on television, hear on the radio and read in newspapers, magazines, or books.”

“Bilderberg has, at one time or another, had representatives of all major US and European newspapers and network news outlets attend. The inadequately named international free press attends on their solemn promise to report nothing. This is how Bilderberg keeps its news blackout virtually complete in the United States and in Europe. “

Part of the plan is to have …unelected, self-appointed, environmental activists appointed to positions of authority re. “the use of atmosphere, outer space, the oceans, and, for all practical purposes, biodiversity. This invitation for “civil society” to participate in global governance is described as expanding democracy.”

NGO activity would include agitation at the local level, lobbying at the national level, producing studies to justify global taxation through UN organizations such as Global Plan, one of Bilderberg´s pet projects for over a decade. The strategy to advance the global governance agenda specifically includes programs to discredit individuals and organizations that generate “internal political pressure” or “populist action” that fails to support the new global ethic. The ultimate objective, according to the source, being to suppress democracy.
The United Nations Environment Programme, along with all the environmental treaties under its jurisdiction, would ultimately be governed by a special body of environmental activists, chosen only from accredited NGOs appointed by delegates to the General Assembly who are themselves appointed by the President of the United States, who is controlled by the Rockefeller-CFR-Bilderberg interlocking leadership. This new mechanism would provide a direct route from the local, “on-the-ground” NGO affiliates of national and international NGOs to the highest levels of global governance. For example: The Greater Yellowstone Coalition, a group of affiliated NGOs, recently petitioned the World Heritage Committee of UNESCO asking for intervention in the plans of a private company to mine gold on private land near Yellowstone Park. The UNESCO Committee did intervene, and immediately listed Yellowstone as a “World Heritage Site in Danger.” Under the terms of the World Heritage Convention, the United States is required to protect the park, even beyond the borders of the park, and onto private lands if necessary.
The ideas being discussed, if implemented, will bring all the people of the world into a global neighbourhood managed by a world-wide bureaucracy, under the direct authority of a minute handful of appointed individuals, and policed by thousands of individuals, paid by accredited NGOs, certified to support a belief system, which to many people - is unbelievable and unacceptable.
http://www.bilderberg.org/2005.htm#leave

The oil industry incl. Royal Dutch Shell are Bilderberg members. Queen Beatrice of the Netherlands (assets of $5 billion) owns 60% of Royal Dutch Shell and is also a Bilderberg member.

While WWF Canada was nominating Shell for an environmental award, other concerned citizens around the world were appealing to Shell and world governments to intercede on behalf of Ken Sara-Wiwa.
“Shell’s actions (drilling and exploring for oil) in Ogoni territory caused the protests and Shell admitted that they have urged the government to call in the army to quell protest and supplied arms for the
security force. In fact, 40% of the military dictatorship’s revenue is
derived from Shell. Shell Canada has refused to condemn or accept
responsibility for these outrageous acts despite the fact that 78% of Shell Canada’s stocks are owned by Shell UK and Royal Dutch Shell - the international parent company which made the decision to continue oil exploration in Nigeria despite human rights abuses of the Nigeria
military dictatorship. If we award Shell Canada we will in effect be
awarding the actions of Shell UK and Royal Dutch Shell.”

After a sham trial Mr. Sara-Wiwa and 8 other Ogoni activists were executed by the military dictatorship in Nigeria on November 10th, 1995.They died for leading a peaceful protest against Shell Nigeria’s
destruction of Ogoni land. This outrageous act, was perpetrated by
military dictatorship which is supported by Shell.”

How do reasoning individuals reconcile these intellectual inconsistencies?

The NGOs are created and funded by the ruling elites and serve as a cover and distraction to the backroom plots of wars, coups, revolutions, assassinations and executions. The war on Climate Change is just another pretext for taxing the masses for CO2 and entrenching the power of the elites. Meanwhile paid-for NGOs, work hand in hand with the main stream media to divert your attention to threat to polar bears on ice flows.

Aside from the dollars they are stealing from you and me and the world’s poor, do we want the blood on our hands by going along with these actions?
http://windfarms.wordpress.com/2008/02/06/world-wildlife-fund-site-lets-public-track-polar-bears-along-hudson-bay/

Steve Bates said...

And I thought I was a conspiracy theorist! I yield the title...

ellroon said...

Stienster, when you just copy and paste a rant like that, nobody wants to plow through such a heap of weirdness. Do you have a point? Make it short, understandable, and provide links.

Otherwise you get deservedly mocked.

(Thanks, Steve.)

ellroon said...

This post is to the point.