Photographer Links Heartbreaking Image Of Polar Bear To Climate Change And Post Goes Viral On Facebook

"Beautiful bears, photogenic bears, playful or even at a kill," noted Kerstin Langenberger -- a wildlife photographer from Germany, who was describing the types of polar bears tourists usually spot in Svalbard, a group of islands in the Arctic Ocean. Writing on her Facebook page, she then went on to describe the stark reality of what has happened to these beloved bear populations. "I have also seen dead and starving polar bears," she added as she linked her observations to climate change. And to make her point, she posted this image.
HTML5 video is not supported!




Since she posted it on August 20, it has been shared over 40,000 times and liked by more than 20,000 Facebook users.
Her message was clear."Only few times I have seen beautifully fat mothers with beautifully fat young."Many times I have seen horribly thin bears, and those were exclusively females - like this one here."A mere skeleton, hurt on her front leg, possibly by a desperate attempt to hunt a walrus while she was stuck on land." Langenberger was dogmatic about what is to be blamed for these malnourished bears: the rapid rise of global temperatures. "I see the glaciers calving, retreating dozens to hundreds of metres every year. I see the pack ice disappearing in record speed."

She added: "With the pack ice retreating further and further north every year, they (female bears) tend to be stuck on land where there's not much food." This is not the first time a photographer has captured such shocking images of the Arctic's polar bears. Paul Nicklen, a National Geo fellow and photographer posted this image on Instagram after travelling to Svalbard.


http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/09/15/photographer-links-heartbreaking-image-of-polar-bear-to-climate-change-and-post-goes-viral-on-facebook_n_8137966.html?utm_hp_ref=uk

What they missed out was the fact that the bear was injured, a broken front leg caused, so they think by an tussle with a Walrus. The bear could not hunt after this injury so that is the cause of her condition!

I see some of the climate change people who are shouting about that skinny Polar Bear being a victim of said change are keeping quiet now the truth is out.

What truth Nicko?
Polar Bears are suffering which is evidently clear.

The truth about that particular Bear, he had his front leg broken in a fight with a Walrus, it is clearly seen in that photo, his front left leg is out of shape. It would be a mercy to shoot him to save him more suffering as it is obvious he can't hunt any more.

What truth, where is your link Nicko?
I see no injury

Can't give a link didge, it was in the Mail or the Sun or the Express, the Wife throws the papers out after we have read them. If you still have a picture of the Bear, study his front left leg, it's been broken.

I will have to do some research on your claim.
Sorry to me it does not look broken
Anyway its besides the point as this was not the only picture on there and how many are this thin and scrawny Nicko

brings to mind another lefty promoted photo doesnt it...they will stop at nothing .....

victorismyhero wrote:brings to mind another lefty promoted photo doesnt it...they will stop at nothing .....

What of showing the plight of Polar bears?
Wow how nasty of them/

I remember a photo of a Polar Bear stander on a small piece of ice, people screaming the ice is melting look at this poor Bear stuck on a small ice flow. Turned out the Bear had just jumped from a large ice flow to the small piece that had broken off.

All well and good Nicko, but the fact is many Polar bears areas to hunt are shrinking and they are suffering. So yes people may mistake a situatin they see, but its silly to ignore the fact there is a problem with is endangering Polar Bears.





The number of polar bears inhabiting a frozen sea north of Alaska declined by about 40% from 2001 to 2010, according to a study published on Monday. US Geological Survey researchers and scientists from Canada and the United States found that bear survival rates in the south Beaufort Sea were particularly low from 2004 to 2006, when only two of 80 cubs monitored were known to have survived.

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/nov/17/polar-bear-population-falls-sea-north-alaska

Many polar bears go onto land... nothing new or unusual... remember this...


http://boredomtherapy.com/watched-helplessly-starving-polar-bear-approached-dogs-something-amazing-happened/



And have you forgotten that arctic sea ice was up 30% last year?

Have you forgoten how you fucked up on the 30 percent and I showed you were an idiot?

Climate Myth...

Arctic sea ice has recovered
"Those who have been following NSIDC and JAXA sea ice plots have noted that this has been an extraordinary year so far, with Arctic sea ice hitting the “normal” line on some datasets. ...
As of today,JAXA shows that we have more ice than any time on this date for the past 8 years of Aqua satellite measurement for this AMSRE dataset." (Anthony Watts, 22 April 2010)


Discussions about the amount of sea ice in the Arctic often confuse two very different measures of how much ice there is. One measure is sea-ice extent which, as the name implies, is a measure of coverage of the ocean where ice covers 15% or more of the surface. It is a two-dimensional measurement; extent does not tell us how thick the ice is. The other measure of Arctic ice, using all three dimensions, is volume, the measure of how much ice there really is.
Sea-ice consists of first-year ice, which is thin, and older ice which has accumulated volume, called multi-year ice. Multi-year ice is very important because it makes up most of the volume of ice at the North Pole. Volume is also the important measure when it comes to climate change, because it is the volume of the ice – the sheer amount of the stuff – that science is concerned about, rather than how much of the sea is covered in a thin layer of ice*.
Over time, sea ice reflects the fast-changing circumstances of weather. It is driven principally by changes in surface temperature, forming and melting according to the seasons, the winds, cloud cover and ocean currents. In 2010, for example, sea ice extent recovered dramatically in March, only to melt again by May.


Sea-ice is subject to powerful short-term effects so while we can't conclude anything about the health of the ice from just a few years' data, an obvious trend emerges over the space of a decade or more, showing a decrease of about 5% of average sea-ice cover per decade.

Source: Rayner et.al, 2004, updated

Where has the thick ice gone?

When we consider the multi-year ice and look at the various measurements of it, we see a steep decline in this thick ice. As you might imagine, thick ice takes a lot more heat to melt, so the fact that it is disappearing so fast is of great concern.
[url=http://psc.apl.washington.edu/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/schweiger/ice_volume/BPIOMASIceVolumeAnomalyCurrentV2.png?[/url]
Source: Polar Science Centre, University of Washington
It is clear from the various data sets, terrestrial and satellite, that both the sea ice extent and multi-year ice volume are reducing. Sea ice extent recovered slightly during the Arctic winters of 2008-09, but the full extent of annual ice reduction or gain is seen in September of each year, at the end of the Arctic summer. The volume of multi-year ice has not recovered at all, and is showing a steeply negative trend.
* Footnote: Although a thin layer of ice doesn’t tell us much about the overall state of ice loss at the Arctic, it does tell us a great deal about Albedo, the property of ice to reflect heat back into space. When the sea ice diminishes, more heat passes into the oceans. That heat melts the thick ice and speeds up the melting of thinner sea ice, which in turns allows more heat to accumulate in the oceans. This is an example of a positive feedback.







https://www.skepticalscience.com/Has-Arctic-sea-ice-recovered.htm

Cuchulain wrote:Have you forgoten how you fucked up on the 30 percent and I showed you were an idiot?

No dodge... I don't remember that because it never happened!!!



http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2415191/And-global-COOLING-Return-Arctic-ice-cap-grows-29-year.html


And Antarctic ice grew massively too!!!


https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/wp/2013/09/23/antarctic-sea-ice-hit-35-year-record-high-saturday/



Plenty of evidence about this if you or anyone else wants to know the truth.


In fact there was one article I remember about a ship full of global warming 'scientists' and 'experts' that set sail to The arctic to measure their claimed disappearing ice... actually getting stuck in this non existent ice for weeks!!!

Ha ha ha I just gave you the evidence again and you produce the Daily mail


ha ha ha ha ha

Oh you are such a Tit Twatty

I suggest you go back and read the staggering evidence I just presented you that you instead wish to put your fingers in your easrs and go



'la la la la la, Im not listening, la la la la'

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/jan/5/curl-irony-alert-global-warmists-get-stuck-in-ice/?page=all






You really are a twat dodge!!!


It is You putting your fingers in your ears and shouting 'la la la'...!!!



Next the idiots will be trying to tell us that all the polar bears in the Antarctic have been wiped out and how this must be down to 'climate change' too...!!!


They will say something like this...

"In a two year study of The Antarctic, not a single polar bear has been seen, suggesting that they may have all now been wiped out by the effects of global warming on their natural habitat..."... etc


While totally forgetting to mention that polar bears are only found in the northern hemisphere in arctic regions!!!

Cuchulain wrote:

Climate Myth...

Arctic sea ice has recovered
"Those who have been following NSIDC and JAXA sea ice plots have noted that this has been an extraordinary year so far, with Arctic sea ice hitting the “normal” line on some datasets. ...
As of today,JAXA shows that we have more ice than any time on this date for the past 8 years of Aqua satellite measurement for this AMSRE dataset." (Anthony Watts, 22 April 2010)


Discussions about the amount of sea ice in the Arctic often confuse two very different measures of how much ice there is. One measure is sea-ice extent which, as the name implies, is a measure of coverage of the ocean where ice covers 15% or more of the surface. It is a two-dimensional measurement; extent does not tell us how thick the ice is. The other measure of Arctic ice, using all three dimensions, is volume, the measure of how much ice there really is.
Sea-ice consists of first-year ice, which is thin, and older ice which has accumulated volume, called multi-year ice. Multi-year ice is very important because it makes up most of the volume of ice at the North Pole. Volume is also the important measure when it comes to climate change, because it is the volume of the ice – the sheer amount of the stuff – that science is concerned about, rather than how much of the sea is covered in a thin layer of ice*.
Over time, sea ice reflects the fast-changing circumstances of weather. It is driven principally by changes in surface temperature, forming and melting according to the seasons, the winds, cloud cover and ocean currents. In 2010, for example, sea ice extent recovered dramatically in March, only to melt again by May.


Sea-ice is subject to powerful short-term effects so while we can't conclude anything about the health of the ice from just a few years' data, an obvious trend emerges over the space of a decade or more, showing a decrease of about 5% of average sea-ice cover per decade.

Source: Rayner et.al, 2004, updated

Where has the thick ice gone?

When we consider the multi-year ice and look at the various measurements of it, we see a steep decline in this thick ice. As you might imagine, thick ice takes a lot more heat to melt, so the fact that it is disappearing so fast is of great concern.
[url=http://psc.apl.washington.edu/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/schweiger/ice_volume/BPIOMASIceVolumeAnomalyCurrentV2.png?[/url]
Source: Polar Science Centre, University of Washington
It is clear from the various data sets, terrestrial and satellite, that both the sea ice extent and multi-year ice volume are reducing. Sea ice extent recovered slightly during the Arctic winters of 2008-09, but the full extent of annual ice reduction or gain is seen in September of each year, at the end of the Arctic summer. The volume of multi-year ice has not recovered at all, and is showing a steeply negative trend.
* Footnote: Although a thin layer of ice doesn’t tell us much about the overall state of ice loss at the Arctic, it does tell us a great deal about Albedo, the property of ice to reflect heat back into space. When the sea ice diminishes, more heat passes into the oceans. That heat melts the thick ice and speeds up the melting of thinner sea ice, which in turns allows more heat to accumulate in the oceans. This is an example of a positive feedback.







https://www.skepticalscience.com/Has-Arctic-sea-ice-recovered.htm

For tommy to take off his stupid hat if possible lol and learn some science ha ha ha

nicko wrote:Can't give a link didge, it was in the Mail or the Sun or the Express, the Wife throws the papers out after we have read them.  If you still have a picture of the Bear, study his front left leg, it's been broken.

That's the only link I could find http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/464778/starving-polar-bear-photograph-svalbard-viral-facebook


I love polar bears. They are handsome and beautiful creatures. I'd hate to see them wiped out.

Polar bears are not immortal... they do get old/sick/injured etc...


One picture of one old/sick/injured polar bear just means that it was old/sick/injured etc... not in any way proof of 'climate change' as is trying to be claimed!