Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post. Register to become a member today!
What are all your thoughts on the effect global warming has on skiing? Do you even believe in it?Seems like every season there’s less snow and it keeps getting warmer. Prime example of this is the end of Camp of Champions (RIP). At this rate the future of skiing definitely isn’t improving snow wise.
(If this is in the wrong section I apologize I’m still new)
lmmccWhat you're seeing in the picture isn't just a polar bear dying of old age. It shows a polar bear, who may not even be a very old adult, dying of starvation. That isn't just dying of old age. If you think about it in people terms normally old people don't die of starvation and it isn't considered natural. Polar bears shouldn't, and normally, don't die of starvation, that's why what you are seeing isn't just a polar bear dying of old age.
Lol except it makes no sense to think of it in people terms, as people can go to the grocery store. There is no grocery store for polar bears. They get old and become slower and start having trouble catching food, which becomes a vicious cycle.
If you think of it in people terms in less developed countries (which would be more comparable to life as a wild animal), they absolutely die of starvation.
Honestly though, what makes you think that any animals shouldn't and dont die of starvation? Haven't you ever seen that graph of fox and rabbit populations?
TheDoughAbidesRegardless of the fucking polar bear weve put 50 trillion tons of carbon into the atmosphere since the dawn of the industrial revolution, explain to me how that wouldn't affect the climate.
Im not saying it wouldn't, im just saying the polar bear is stupid click bait and not representative of anything
cool_nameI'm not trying to say people shouldn't try to live a greener life, if they can, they should. I just can't stand when I see clickbait propaganda like this shared. The science heavily favours the argument that humans have affected the climate. All this does is weaken the credibility of environmentalists because it shows a willingness to manipulate information to pry on emotions.
Climate change is an all or nothing belief, one can be skeptical of aspects while still agreeing it is a problem. One can even think the effects are dramatically overplayed, but still think climate change is a problem.
cool_nameLol except it makes no sense to think of it in people terms, as people can go to the grocery store. There is no grocery store for polar bears. They get old and become slower and start having trouble catching food, which becomes a vicious cycle.If you think of it in people terms in less developed countries (which would be more comparable to life as a wild animal), they absolutely die of starvation.
Honestly though, what makes you think that any animals shouldn't and dont die of starvation? Haven't you ever seen that graph of fox and rabbit populations?
I'm not saying that there are 0 animals who die of starvation in the wild because that would be absurd and unrealistic and doesn't match the realistic expectation of an ecosystem. All I'm saying is that if there are x number of polar bears who die of starvation each year then that number is rising so instead. Of course it becomes harder for old polar bears to catch food cuz you know, problems, and I'm sure some of them definitely die of starvation. What I'm saying is that no matter what age or what not any polar bear will die of starvation since there is nothing to eat. For regular old polar bears who die because of starvation in a normal, ice and snow filled habitat they die cuz they just can't catch food. Here it doesn't matter how strong, fast, young the polar bear is because there is absolutely nothing to eat in this habitat so the polar bear has to die of starvation. Going back to humans, let's say that you have a group of people ranging from top physical shape to old and filled with problems. If you stick all of those people in a habitable forest and taking away variables like if they knew outdoor skills or not then the people in good shape will survive and not starve but some of the old people might die of starvation because they can't do anything but maybe other old people won't. This is comparable to the normal polar bear habit. Now if you stick all of those same people in a sand filled desert then all of those people regardless of physical shape and age will die of starvation because there is nothing to eat or drink. This is comparable to the starving polar bear picture where he is out of his natural habitat and there is nothing to eat. I might be making no sense but I hope you understand where I'm trying to go with this analogy.
cool_nameLol except it makes no sense to think of it in people terms, as people can go to the grocery store. There is no grocery store for polar bears. They get old and become slower and start having trouble catching food, which becomes a vicious cycle.If you think of it in people terms in less developed countries (which would be more comparable to life as a wild animal), they absolutely die of starvation.
Honestly though, what makes you think that any animals shouldn't and dont die of starvation? Haven't you ever seen that graph of fox and rabbit populations?
I'm not sure what planet you live on, but the polar bears only home is getting smaller and source of food (aka seals) is declining due to ice receding. Yes certain populations are increasing (great job you can Google), but there are other populations that are either decreasing or are stable. Polar bears are categorized as "vulnerable" and expected to decline 30% over by 5050. This is a direct result of global warming and not click bait.
Yes it is possible that they may adapt and rebound in numbers, but that is not what scientists are predicting. Your rabbit and fox example is good but not the same. What you are referring to is called a Population Cycle. While fox populations go through boosts and declines (as do many other populations such as deer with vegetation.), they eventually rebound as the population of their food is allowed to flourish again. This polar bear thing is not a cyclical event that has been experienced over and over in nature such as fox and rabbits or other animals. The seal populations will not return to the polar bear habitats until ice increases, which if you haven't heard, isn't getting bigger.
Next time, I suggest know what you're talking about before trying to relate and apply bad examples as fuel to your Google educated fued. I'm giving you a C+ on your argument.
IsitWinterYet17I'm not sure what planet you live on, but the polar bears only home is getting smaller and source of food (aka seals) is declining due to ice receding. Yes certain populations are increasing (great job you can Google), but there are other populations that are either decreasing or are stable. Polar bears are categorized as "vulnerable" and expected to decline 30% over by 5050. This is a direct result of global warming and not click bait.Yes it is possible that they may adapt and rebound in numbers, but that is not what scientists are predicting. Your rabbit and fox example is good but not the same. What you are referring to is called a Population Cycle. While fox populations go through boosts and declines (as do many other populations such as deer with vegetation.), they eventually rebound as the population of their food is allowed to flourish again. This polar bear thing is not a cyclical event that has been experienced over and over in nature such as fox and rabbits or other animals. The seal populations will not return to the polar bear habitats until ice increases, which if you haven't heard, isn't getting bigger.
Next time, I suggest know what you're talking about before trying to relate and apply bad examples as fuel to your Google educated fued. I'm giving you a C+ on your argument.
You know the polar bear population is rising right?
cool_nameExcept the fact that their population is rising completely rebuts the scientists prediction.
It's not. Some are rising, some are declining, some are staying steady, and some are difficult to measure. You are so wrong on so many levels. The only thing that is widely accepted as true is that their populations will significantly decline overall in the next 30 years. Just stop before you dig your head further in the sand.
IsitWinterYet17It's not. Some are rising, some are declining, some are staying steady, and some are difficult to measure. You are so wrong on so many levels. The only thing that is widely accepted as true is that their populations will significantly decline overall in the next 30 years. Just stop before you dig your head further in the sand.
http://dailycaller.com/2017/02/16/polar-bear-numbers-still-on-the-rise-despite-global-warming/
The polar bear population is rising.
It was also accepted as true that their population was going to decline, that was proven wrong, so im not really putting much stock in their future prediction.
Also, the photo is not of a future polar bear dieing, It is a current one. So, I fail to see how the fact that future populations levels may decline is at all relevant to my argument that this current photo is misrepresenting the current state of polar bear population levels, which are rising.
TheDoughAbidesOr maybe protection efforts became more successful in the past few years?
Well not really because the prediction was if the ice shrinks the polar bear habitat will shrink, causing their population to decline. Ice has shrunk, but what we have seen is the polar bear population rise, not fall, rebutting their prediction.
Edit:
and as I mentioned in the other post, future predictions that the population level will fall doesn't make the photo stop being click bait, as currently the population level isnt falling and this is a picture of a current polar bear.
**This post was edited on Dec 11th 2017 at 6:58:45pm
cool_nameWell not really because the prediction was if the ice shrinks the polar bear habitat will shrink, causing their population to decline. Ice has shrunk, but what we have seen is the polar bear population rise, not fall, rebutting their prediction.
Source? Do you expect polar bear populations to rise in succeeding years or something?
TheDoughAbidesSource? Do you expect polar bear populations to rise in succeeding years or something?
The source is in my reply to the other poster.
My expectations of future polar bear populations levels are irrelevant to if this picture is a proper representation of anything and not just clickbait.
Even if the population level was shrinking, one photo of one bear is not representative of anything. We should let facts guide our policies, not sensational click bait designed to prey on our emotions.
Jeremy Jones was on the 10 AM jhmr tram today and I chatted with him and Ryland bell about current ski conditions in the west.… All while using my glove to cover up the sticker on my ski that says “Protect our weekends “
Dumb sticker. But anyway I’m curious what you all think about that group. IMO Pow has good intentions and I support their general message, but it seems ironic that many of their main supporting athletes go Heli skiing and snowmobiling and whatnot
cool_nameThe source is in my reply to the other poster.My expectations of future polar bear populations levels are irrelevant to if this picture is a proper representation of anything and not just clickbait.
Even if the population level was shrinking, one photo of one bear is not representative of anything. We should let facts guide our policies, not sensational click bait designed to prey on our emotions.
Who cares if that photo is a misrepresentation it still gets the point across that polar bears are in danger and that they’re populations will undoubtably fall as temperatures continue to rise which cannot be debated unless u don’t believe in global warming and in that case ur an idiot. If you literally go to polarbearsinternational.org it tells you that polar bear populations are completely inaccurate and are not properly measured. The reason people think they’re population is increasing is just because they’re looking at they’re populations in small areas in Alaska and Canada where they banned the hunting of them so obviously it would increase if they’re not being killed by people, but as they continue to lose area they will undoubtedly die.
abaxterWho cares if that photo is a misrepresentation it still gets the point across that polar bears are in danger and that they’re populations will undoubtably fall as temperatures continue to rise which cannot be debated unless u don’t believe in global warming and in that case ur an idiot. If you literally go to polarbearsinternational.org it tells you that polar bear populations are completely inaccurate and are not properly measured. The reason people think they’re population is increasing is just because they’re looking at they’re populations in small areas in Alaska and Canada where they banned the hunting of them so obviously it would increase if they’re not being killed by people, but as they continue to lose area they will undoubtedly die.
Why should people care about facts and arguments being properly represented? Really?
abaxterWho cares if that photo is a misrepresentation it still gets the point across that polar bears are in danger and that they’re populations will undoubtably fall as temperatures continue to rise which cannot be debated unless u don’t believe in global warming and in that case ur an idiot. If you literally go to polarbearsinternational.org it tells you that polar bear populations are completely inaccurate and are not properly measured. The reason people think they’re population is increasing is just because they’re looking at they’re populations in small areas in Alaska and Canada where they banned the hunting of them so obviously it would increase if they’re not being killed by people, but as they continue to lose area they will undoubtedly die.
And obviously the claim that polar bear populations will decrease as the ice melts can be debated based on the fact that the exact opposite has occurred.
It is even more debatable if actual polar population levels are hard to measure, as you claim, as we will therefore have even less facts to measure our predictions against.
cool_nameWhy should people care about facts and arguments being properly represented? Really?
Lol you have no proof that that photo is even clickbait. Ur entire argument is based on the fact that polar bear populations are rising but clearly u did no research since I just disproved that in my last post. Idk what the hell ur so salty about when u don’t even have an argument
abaxterLol you have no proof that that photo is even clickbait. Ur entire argument is based on the fact that polar bear populations are rising but clearly u did no research since I just disproved that in my last post. Idk what the hell ur so salty about when u don’t even have an argument
States my argument, then says I have no argument, lol good one!
The photo itself is proof.
cool_nameAnd obviously the claim that polar bear populations will decrease as the ice melts can be debated based on the fact that the exact opposite has occurred.It is even more debatable if actual polar population levels are hard to measure, as you claim, as we will therefore have even less facts to measure our predictions against.
I think you might be retarded, these stats are not accurate at all but I am using them as an example.
if 10,000 polar bears live in an area of 100,000 acres. Now because of global warming let’s say they have 50,000 acres, why in hell would their population increase, it would obviously decrease because there is less land to live on and less food available.
abaxterLol you have no proof that that photo is even clickbait. Ur entire argument is based on the fact that polar bear populations are rising but clearly u did no research since I just disproved that in my last post. Idk what the hell ur so salty about when u don’t even have an argument
I just love this too much!
cool_nameI just love this too much!
Lol I don’t think u understand English grammar. Obviously u have an argument, it’s just incorrect because it’s based off of data in small areas where they banned hunting, and you have no data to backup why u are saying the picture is clickbait, so therefore I say you have no real argument since it is incorrect and not backed up by any substantial data. Read closely next time bud.
abaxterI think you might be retarded, these stats are not accurate at all but I am using them as an example.if 10,000 polar bears live in an area of 100,000 acres. Now because of global warming let’s say they have 50,000 acres, why in hell would their population increase, it would obviously decrease because there is less land to live on and less food available.
Except polar bears have existed in the artic even when there was no ice....
cool_nameExcept polar bears have existed in the artic even when there was no ice....
Literally doesn’t supply any evidence of that in that article and how we would even know. If during a period in earths history where there was no ice which I’m not sure has existed in thousands if not millions of years we would have no idea what the populations would be like. And even if they were too survive that their populations would undoubtedly suffer greatly.
abaxterLiterally doesn’t supply any evidence of that in that article and how we would even know. If during a period in earths history where there was no ice which I’m not sure has existed in thousands if not millions of years we would have no idea what the populations would be like. And even if they were too survive that their populations would undoubtedly suffer greatly.
It literally does supply evidence of exactly that.
Edit mobile
**This post was edited on Dec 11th 2017 at 8:06:47pm
JohnJonszJeremy Jones was on the 10 AM jhmr tram today and I chatted with him and Ryland bell about current ski conditions in the west.… All while using my glove to cover up the sticker on my ski that says “Protect our weekends “Dumb sticker. But anyway I’m curious what you all think about that group. IMO Pow has good intentions and I support their general message, but it seems ironic that many of their main supporting athletes go Heli skiing and snowmobiling and whatnot
While I respect the shit out of Jones, i have a hard time swallowing the hippocracy of the pro athlete telling me how to live green. They Fly all over the world, use hele's and sleds for filming which all leaves a huge carbon foot print just to preach to the rest of us. 75% of a skiers carbon foot print is the travel to get to the snow. Ya know how far I go to ski. 10 miles.
Take Lexi Dupont.... She preaches green living yet she flies all over the world to talk tell others how to green. Must be nice being a trust fund pro..........
PS Jones is the shit by the way. Mad respect.
snowpocalypseWhile I respect the shit out of Jones, i have a hard time swallowing the hippocracy of the pro athlete telling me how to live green. They Fly all over the world, use hele's and sleds for filming which all leaves a huge carbon foot print just to preach to the rest of us. 75% of a skiers carbon foot print is the travel to get to the snow. Ya know how far I go to ski. 10 miles.Take Lexi Dupont.... She preaches green living yet she flies all over the world to talk tell others how to green. Must be nice being a trust fund pro..........
PS Jones is the shit by the way. Mad respect.
At least for them it is kind of part of their job requirement, better than Dicaprio taking a private jet from Cannes to new york and back again just to collect an green award.
I do appreciate the seeming rise in touring shots in recent ski films though, and the use of drones is great too.
To everyone bitching about airplanes and how bad they are, check out these graphs from a report by the FAA in 2015. Air travel is more energy efficient than cars per person mile traveled and contributes much less pollution versus cars overall.
Next time you want to complain about airline travel being a terrible pollutant, look at yourself. You think your 2003 suped up Subaru is helping the environment? What about your ski van from 1980 that you drive around? Your truck or Tahoe that you like to drive to the ski resort that gets less than 20mpg is terrible for the environment. I wonder how great snowmobiles are?
You want to help the environment? Get a new more energy efficient car.
I will continue to travel by plane to distant resorts versus a 10+ hour car drive. Remember that it's those plane traveling skiers who flood your local resorts on weekends and holidays that help keep them running.
I think we live in really scary times that go beyond just skiing. We are just starting to see the initial impact of the western lifestyle on our ecosphere. There is nothing sustainable about the lifes we lead whatsoever. We live in a man-made reality which is out of touch of the reality of nature. But this reality we live within is starting to do irreversible damage to the planet, which we will pay for in terms of resource scarcity.
I find it humorous when people think using an electric car, buying a recycled coat, or anything similar is going to somehow benefit the ecosphere. There is literally nothing healthy about the consumptive lifestyle that we lead - it stands in contradistinction to the harmony that nature demands of us. I would hope that our search through materilstic values has some sort of purpose at its end. Perhaps though we are just on a delusional trip instigated by selfish wants and desires to be comfortable.
I really think the only way forward is to drop the materialistic dream entirely, which would never happen because we have to much skin in the game currently and too many people relying on this unhealthy infastructure we've built. The way back to healthiness is simply to give up consumer values entirely. Growing healthy food will be the priority. I see a future of just simple farmers really with none of these invented worlds existing any longer including skiing. People won't be buying stuff or needing to entertain themselves beyond the realm of nature.
I think if you want an epitome of our cluelessness, look no further than Las Vegas, a city full of water fountains that we've decided to build in the middle of the fucking desert. If there ever comes a time where water is scarce, we will remember Las Vegas in horror. And I seriously think all this arises simply because we now live in worlds invented by human ideals, values, and visions, which are imperfect. The spell of nature no longer has a grip on us. In fact our progression as a collective was and is motivated by our desire to escape the hardships that nature forced upon us. We are attempting to escape nature for some reason and in the process are destroying it and its ability to sustain our life.
**This post was edited on Dec 14th 2017 at 10:10:11pm
**This post was edited on Dec 14th 2017 at 10:18:22pm
JAHSHUAI think we live in really scary times that go beyond just skiing. We are just starting to see the initial impact of the western lifestyle on our ecosphere. There is nothing sustainable about the lifes we lead whatsoever. We live in a man-made reality which is out of touch of the reality of nature. But this reality we live within is starting to do irreversible damage to the planet, which we will pay for in terms of resource scarcity.I find it humorous when people think using an electric car, buying a recycled coat, or anything similar is going to somehow benefit the ecosphere. There is literally nothing healthy about the consumptive lifestyle that we lead - it stands in contradistinction to the harmony that nature demands of us. I would hope that our search through materilstic values has some sort of purpose at its end. Perhaps though we are just on a delusional trip instigated by selfish wants and desires to be comfortable.
I really think the only way forward is to drop the materialistic dream entirely, which would never happen because we have to much skin in the game currently and too many people relying on this unhealthy infastructure we've built. The way back to healthiness is simply to give up consumer values entirely. Growing healthy food will be the priority. I see a future of just simple farmers really with none of these invented worlds existing any longer including skiing. People won't be buying stuff or needing to entertain themselves beyond the realm of nature.
I think if you want an epitome of our cluelessness, look no further than Las Vegas, a city full of water fountains that we've decided to build in the middle of the fucking desert. If there ever comes a time where water is scarce, we will remember Las Vegas in horror. And I seriously think all this arises simply because we now live in worlds invented by human ideals, values, and visions, which are imperfect. The spell of nature no longer has a grip on us. In fact our progression as a collective was and is motivated by our desire to escape the hardships that nature forced upon us. We are attempting to escape nature for some reason and in the process are destroying it and its ability to sustain our life.
**This post was edited on Dec 14th 2017 at 10:10:11pm
**This post was edited on Dec 14th 2017 at 10:18:22pm
If you truly believe what you say Ditch evrything you own and become a beet farmer.
JAHSHUANo joke man, starting to feel like a hypocrite for living a conventional lifestyle. Been eating at my soul lately.
Obviously it's not that soul wrenching if you haven't done it already. If you were sure of your convictions you would change your lifestyle without hesitation. So don't preach a gospel that you don't even believe in yourself.