Skip to content

2017 in review: polar bear prophesies of doom more at odds with current reality

January 3, 2018

By Paul Homewood


End of year round up from Dr Susan Crockford:



Tales of doom and gloom about polar bears reflect what some people think might happen in the future, not what is happening right now.  Currently, polar bears are doing just fine despite the low summer sea ice coverage they’ve experienced since 2007 (Crockford 2017a; York et al. 2016). In other words, there has been no global population decline as predicted: officially, the numbers were 22,000-31,000 (or 26,500 average) in 2015 (Wiig et al. 2015) but about 28,500 when estimates published since then are included (Aars et al. 2017; Dyck et al. 2017; Matishov et al. 2014; SWG 2016), up from about 22,500 in 2005).



Wrangel Island bears on whale_29 Sept 2017 SUN


This increase might not be statistically significant but it is most assuredly not the decrease in abundance that was predicted by ‘experts’ such as Steve Amstrup and colleagues (Amstrup et al. 2007), making it hard to take subsequent predictions of impending catastrophe seriously (e.g. Atwood et al. 2016; Regehr et al. 2016; Wiig et al. 2015).

The doomsayers can’t stand to have someone provide the public with unbaised evidence of this failure so they attack my scientific integrity with an academically weak and aggressively vindictive ‘peer-reviewed’ paper (Harvey et al. 2017, in press) that you’ll hear more about in the new year.


The full post with a lot of detail is here.


But it is certainly watching again this GWPF video, recorded last year.




  1. Stonyground permalink
    January 3, 2018 12:21 pm

    Talking of failed predictions of climate doom, I was wondering if the year 2020 is likely to become a bumper year for them. It seems to lurk in the back of my mind that many of these prognostications of impending disaster contained the phrase ‘by the year 2020’ in them. With the year 2020 now being only two years away I’m starting to look forward to hearing the excuses that come out.

  2. January 3, 2018 12:42 pm

    stony, Bernie Lewin touched on this point in his book:
    “Where SCOPE 29 looked toward the time required for a doubling of the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide, at Villach the policy recommendation would be based on new calculations for the equivalent effect when all emitted greenhouse gases were taken into account. The impact of the new calculations was to greatly accelerate the rate of the predicted warming. According to SCOPE 29, on current rates of emissions, doubling of the carbon dioxide concentration would be expected in 2100. At Villach, the equivalent warming effect of all greenhouse gases was expected as early as 2030.” Pg.209

    “This new doubling date slipped under a psychological threshold: the potential lifetime of the younger scientists in the group. Subsequently, these computations were generally rejected and the agreed date for ‘the equivalent of CO2 doubling’ was pushed out at least 20 years; indeed, never again would there be a doubling estimate so proximate with the time in which it was made.” Pg.209

  3. Gerry, England permalink
    January 3, 2018 1:49 pm

    When it comes to predictions from the climate science fiction community it is far easier to list all those predictions that have come true as I have below:

    this space has been intentionally left blank

    • Jack Broughton permalink
      January 3, 2018 2:15 pm

      Didn’t they predict that they would attend lots of exotic-location meetings and receive bucket-loads of cash and meja attention?

  4. Jack Broughton permalink
    January 3, 2018 2:13 pm

    I was reading about the “Juliana vs US Government case” in which a group of kids have been coerced to sue the US Government over their Climate Change policy. An essential feature seems to be that 97% of scientist believe in Anthropogenic climate change,… therefore it must be true. Unfortunately, the law being what it is, they have a 50% chance of winning. Is there any more news on the Mann vs Ball case anywhere?

    • HotScot permalink
      January 3, 2018 2:24 pm


      The last I heard of the Mann vs Ball case is that Mann is in contempt of court for not producing his data when required to.

      I believe the case was heard in a Canadian court, and as Mann lives in the US, there wont be an extradition request any time soon.

      Presumably the case can be concluded, when Mann produces his data.

  5. Ian permalink
    January 3, 2018 8:18 pm

    Did anybody else listen to Iain Dale on LBC this evening? He interviewed a Ms Charlotte McDonald of Edinburgh Zoo about the birth of a polar bear cub. She couldn’t help herself, when asked about the status of the polar bear. She’s obviously not a frequent visitor here or to WUWT. Here’s the text of an email I’ve just sent them. I’ve copied it to Ms Crockford for comment.

    I think I heard Ms Charlotte McDonald declare, on LBC Radio this evening, that the Polar Bear is endangered, along with its prey species, due to “climate change”.

    Whilst there have been some scare stories recently, including the video of the starving bear, my understanding is that the threat to the polar bear of “climate change” is vastly exaggerated. One respected source of information on the subject and who I believe would dispute the view expressed by Ms McDonald, is a Ms Susan Crockford:

    Why is she wrong?

  6. Ross King permalink
    January 6, 2018 5:10 pm

    Apropos Polar Bears, someone with better artistic skills than I might contemplate a cartoon of Gore and Mann clutching each other anxiously on a vestigial ice floe, while a proximate ice floe approaches, crewed by a bevy of salivating bears, transfixed on a pending bounty, and propelled by paddling ‘crew..members’.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: