Scientists: Most Polar Bears Dead By 2050

(AP)  More than two-thirds of the world's polar bears will be killed off by 2050 - including the entire population in Alaska - because of thinning sea ice from global warming in the Arctic, government scientists forecast Friday.

The agency projects that polar bears during that time will lose 42 percent of the Arctic range they need to live in during summer in the Polar Basin when they hunt and breed.

Polar bears depend on sea ice as a platform for hunting seals, their primary food. But the sea ice is decreasing due to climate change.

"It's that declining sea ice that appears to be driving the results in our models," said U.S. Geological Survey scientist Steven Amstrup, the lead author of the new studies. "As the sea ice goes, so goes the polar bear."

Scientists do not hold out much hope that the buildup of carbon dioxide and other industrial gases blamed for heating the atmosphere like a greenhouse can be turned around in time to help the polar bears anytime soon.

"Despite any mitigation of greenhouse gases, we are going to see the same amount of energy in the system the next 20, 30 or 40 years," Mark Myers, the USGS director, said.

Greenland and Norway have the most polar bears, while a quarter of them live mainly in Alaska and travel to Canada and Russia. But the USGS says their range will shrink to no longer include Alaska and other southern regions.

The findings of U.S. and Canadian scientists are based on six months of new studies, during which the health of three polar bear groups and their dependency on Arctic sea ice were examined using "new and traditional models," Myers said.

They were made public to help guide Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne's decision expected in January on his agency's proposal to add the polar bear to the government's endangered species list.

Last December, Kempthorne proposed designating polar bears as a "threatened" species deserving of federal protection under the Endangered Species Act, because of melting Arctic sea ice from global warming. That category is second to "endangered" on the government's list of species believed most likely to become extinct.

A separate organization, the World Conservation Union, based in Gland, Switzerland, has estimated the polar bear population in the Arctic is about 20,000 to 25,000, put at risk by melting sea ice, pollution, hunting, development and tourism.

[the_quietman]

Re: Hybrid Polar Bears
Actually one was shot this year and the examining scientists were indeed surprised. It has been speculated that this may be one of natures ways of adaptation to environmental change.

[octavianfdlr]

Now we''re using computer simulations to predict that species should be considered "threatened." How about starting a new federal task force (part of the FBI, perhaps) to fight the Sandman(TM) which we all saw simulated on the recent Spiderman(R) movie? After all, that was also a computer simulation!

[sassalin]

MyIDonCBS,

That''s right....I forgot that Bush is the only President we have had as a nation and the issues and problems we have could not have been addressed earlier.

Give me a break....If you care so much then do something besides complain on a messageboard.

Oh one more thing....have you been to Iraq to see what is going on? Have you talked to the people, the soliders? Until then don''t believe all the info on TV or the newspapers. Get the facts for yourself. Don''t just parrot them from someone else.

[grammawhamma]

"someone who is personally polluting, but favors global solutions to the warming problem is NOT a hypocrit"
Posted by ubrew12 at 08:00 PM : Sep 09, 2007

Are you kidding me?? So "do as I say and not as I do is acceptable to you"?? Give me a break!!

[myidoncbs]

Dear Bush Apologists,

It%u2019s not ALL Bush''s fault, but Bush is not without fault. By denying the current global warming trend, and refusing to participate in any attempt to fix it, he is responsible for delaying the work that must be done. This will force us to take even more drastic and costly action in the future.

Through obfuscation, misdirection, and outright lying, Bush has convinced many of you that there is no consensus on global warming, when there is. He is supposed to protect the nation. He has failed.

Which brings up another failure: Iraq. Oh, yeah. He''s going to "protect us" by killing a lot of people all around the world. He didn''t protect us on 9/11, as he sat there like a total re-****, reading "My Pet Goat". He didn%u2019t catch bin Laden. He never accomplished anything, yet declared "Mission Accomplished" years ago. He let re-tards plan the war, who didn''t send in enough troops. He didn''t supply the troops with the armor they needed. He didn''t plan at all for what happens after "winning". He is simply the world''s biggest f-u-k up, bar none.

Every 2 or 3 months, Bush claims "significant progress" is "around the corner". BS! Four years into this "cakewalk" that has killed 3800 American soldiers + wounded 27000, while killing over a million Iraqis who did not attack us on 9/11, and you mo-rons think that NOW were starting to see some progress?

Go back to whatever slimy hole you inbred re-tards crawled out of, why don''t ya?

[mikeperona]

So much bad science going on here, so many ridiculous assumptions and silly extrapolations. Yet all the discussion in this forum is childish political bickering. How ignorant.

[ubrew12]

hawksprings said: "Your arguement is nothing more than the classic "Do as I say, not as I do." "

If I were arguing for banning gay ***, and were Larry Craig, you would be right.

But if I think mpg standards should be raised, and gas taxes likewise, to combat Global Warming, but drive a Hummer to work, you would NOT be right. Cuz driving a Hummer is a personal choice; recognizing the dangers of warming is not.

Not all morality ''begins at home''. In the case of Global Warming, just getting people to recognize that there''s a problem is sufficient, and Gore can be thanked for that.

[hawksprings]

ubrew12, Global Warming isn''t a personal problem?
Algore said it''s a moral issue. That sounds personal to me.

Your arguement is nothing more than the classic "Do as I say, not as I do."
Try it out on your kids and see how it goes over. Adults don''t appreciate it much either.

Erasmus, we have a queen size sleeper sofa, one of the kids could sleep on that and you could have their room.

...

[ubrew12]

hawksprings said: "Algore has multiple homes, which are excessively large and grossly inefficient with outdoor heated pools. "

Global Warming is a global problem, not a personal one. Homosexuality is a personal ''problem'', not a global one. Hence, someone who is personally polluting, but favors global solutions to the warming problem is NOT a hypocrit, while someone who favors ''global'' solutions to homosexuality, like making it illegal, but is personally gay, IS a hypocrit. Gore is not a hypocrit, Craig is: it''s that simple.

Gore favors, as do I, a cap and trade system that allows developed countries to continue polluting AS LONG AS steps are taken (perhaps in other countries), to COUNTER the effects of that pollution. That MAY seem hypocritical to YOU, but the atmosphere doesn''t distinguish between personal and global pollution either way. And it IS the atmosphere that we''re talking about, after all.

[afmca]

To hawksprings .. if you look at the party that consistently has fought environmental regulations it is the Republicans. If you look for the party who have the most members that don''t even want to acknowledge global warming it is the Republicans. If you want to look at an administration that has gone out of their way to censor scientific studies concerning global warming and it ill-effects it is Bush and the Republicans. You''re right the super-rich exist in both parties, have multiple homes, and practice the same hypocrisy .. but even the most hypocritical of Democrats pale when compared to their Republican counterparts. And then you have the Prophets for Profits telling people to ignore the environment and focus on abortion & *** because it could split their power and hurt their contributions. I know Jesus would be proud.