Polar bear searches in vain for ice

The Toronto Star reports that residents of Shamattawa, Manitoba, sighted a polar bear on the edge of town far south of the tree line.  We have learned from Dr. David Suzuki that the bear was apparently confused and wandering.  The famous zoologist stated to the Righteous Investor: “He seems to have been dismayed because of the lack of ice up north, and is searching too far to the south for unmelted ice upon which the species typically hunts for seals.  Then, as he wandered south, the intense Manitoba summer began to give him heat-induced insomnia and insanity.  Over-heated polar bears are dangerous animals and we warn people not to approach the bear and try to pet it.”

This is alarming news, just as many in Canada who drive hybrid vehicles were becoming smug about their reduced carbon footprint.  While it is true that children and others concerned about the environment throughout the world have become sensitized to the plight of the polar bear which often drowns in the Arctic ocean due to the scarcity of ice–the story of Nanooky, the young lost bear far south of his home, is a parable of the dangers of driving cars and turning on electric lamps equipped with the deadly incandescent light bulb–the root causes of global warming.  Suzuki said further, “It is time that people woke up and did something about their personal carbon footprint.  I recommend turning off your lights at night between 8:00 and 8:30; in addition, it could have immense benefits if every 5 minutes people held their breath for 30 seconds.  It is not that long, and most people, even the very young and the elderly, can achieve such a goal with practice.  But imagine the reduction of carbon emissions if a significant percentage of the world’s 6 billion people held their breath for 10% of the time!  It could end up saving the life of a young polar bear like Nanooky.”

Carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas which is emitted by cars, electric lights and human beings.  It is toxic to the environment, especially to polar bears.  This is because it traps heat near the surface of the planet like an overcharged electric blanket.  After the polar bears become extinct, humans will be next.  But that would actually be good thing, as then the number of carbon emissions would be greatly reduced and the planet will begin to heal.  But we at the Righteous Investor only regret that the polar bears will probably become extinct first.

Richard Lindzen is the Rembrandt of Climatology

Feedback on the Great Global Warming Swindle:

My anonymous, climate specialist friend that I mentioned in my post “Anthropogenic Global Warming: Is there a consensus?“, has sent some feedback regarding the channel 4 documentary after I sent him the post from Palabre with the nine parts of video on Youtube.  He wrote back to me yesterday (February 10):

I just watched all the episodes of the Great Global Warming Swindle. I wish it was publicized as much as Al Gore’s propaganda movie. All those scientists who stepped up to speak the real “inconvenient” truth are all legitimate and well respected; their statements are factual, not rhetoric. Richard Lindzen has often been blamed for Bush’s refusal to follow the Kyoto protocol or the rest of this Global warming movement (other than the accused Big Business interests). Lindzen was to have had Bush’s ear on it. I’ve always had a lot of respect for him, as far back as my grad school days.

Today he wrote again, “Calling Lindzen a climatologist is like calling Rembrandt a painter.”

Continue reading

Antartic Meltdown will Drown American Capital!

In rhetoric or logical argumentation, a slippery slope fallacy is according to Ian B. Johnson:

The Slippery Slope also might well be called the “Appeal to Fear.” It shows a proposition to be unacceptable by first stating that acceptance of the proposition will lead to an unacceptable result, then stating that the unacceptable result will in turn lead to an even more unacceptable result. The chain may continue through several steps and will lead to an end result that is very clearly unacceptable. The real problem with the slippery slope is that none of the steps in the chain need to be proven for the argument to persuade most partisans who are looking for a reason to be persuaded; instead, each step merely needs to sound reasonable in isolation.

Now consider this headline from LiveScience.com:  Antartic Meltdown would Flood Washington, D. C. Well not before all the penguins and polar bears die of heat exhaustion, and all the people on the planet are going to be fried by that time not to mention the dolphins which will be boiled to death:  “if you had hot water poured on you, you would flee, wouldn’t you?”

This blog suggests there’s nothing to worry about, but I don’t have the time to work out the math.