More polar bears in Chukchi Sea than previously thought
June 4, 2021
By Paul Homewood
From Sue Crockford:
A joint US/Russian aerial survey has estimated that a minimum of 3,435 polar bears (but possibly as many as 5,444) likely inhabited the Chukchi Sea in 2016, quite a bit more than a previous study that estimated a population size of 2,937 the same year (which used data from one small US area extrapolated to the entire region).
13 Comments
Comments are closed.
NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT 
Meanwhile at the reliably hysterical Guardian, more screaming headlines for another ‘study’ based on….computer models.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jun/04/arctic-sea-ice-thinning-twice-as-fast-as-thought-study-finds
Garbage in…….garbage out.
Of course. empirical data are troublesome. Better to use models when input can be controlled and output can be selectively chosen.
Twice as fast as previously thought? You mean to tell us that your models were wrong? Quoting St. Greta: How dare you!
That is based primarily on models. As always with the Arctic ice and models, I go back to the Kronprinz Hakkon, an embarrassment that the DMI have explained that I have seen.
*not* explained
Which undoubtedly means there’s no problem with extent – we only get the thinning claims when they can’t whine about area. Of course newer ice is very likely to be thin so if area is increasing, thinning will be too.
Wonder how long before we hear renewed personal attacks against Dr. Crockford by those whose easy monied jobs they feel her revelations threaten? On the previous occasion I do not remember one challenge to the data she presented which used to be what drove science. Everything was personal.
Usually as far as the media is concerned there is a short pause then they double down on the claims of doom after some new junk model based “study” is found saying what “may” or “might” or “could” happen 50 or 100 years into the future based on already shown to be flawed assumptions from which totally dishonest worst case scenarios are extracted to the exclusion of the most likely scenarios. This methodology has become par for the course for those practicing the dark arts which used to be called science within the climate industry.
No reason for anyone to attack Susan, she is reporting info from a joint US/Russian study.
Read Susan Crockford and you soon realise, like so much else, that the climate bigots and zealots are literally talking ignorant rubbish
Not one Climate Alarmist prediction has come true in the last 50 years.
The ” 10X ” in the headline seems not related to the focus of the report. Or did I miss something?
The 10X is more bears on Russian side as compared to US ice area.
The Times. Friday June 4th. Ben Webster Environemnt Editor writing about ” Snow shows Arctic is on thinning ice” managed to bring the bears in again: ” The loss of sea ice threatens polar bears because they rely on it to find and catch seals and build up their fat. On the same page his colleague Emma Yeomans ran the familiar story ” Electric car drivers could earn more than £700 a year by selling excess electricity………” .
There was a time when such writers knew their stuff but lack of time and the easy optiopn of repeating copy from earlier ‘suppositional’ sources offered the easy way out — from researching the subject, I mean.