Picky Polar Bears

[FastEd]

I saw this news item today, struck me as being funny:

Polar Bears Now Eat Dolphins, Thanks to Global Warming

Now they are eating Dolphins?
That is strange. I never heard of a Polar Bear ever turning down a meal of anything, hot or cold.

 

[GunnyGene]

Seals, Dolphins, People. What difference does it make now? :wink:

 

[JohnBoy]

Ahhh, reminiscing on days gone by - a simpler time . . . those were the days - when bears could be bears and men could be . . . eaten!

 

[SAJohn]

My favorite Far Side was Larson's polar bears looking at an igloo with one bear telling the other "these are really tasty, crunchy on the outside and gooey on the inside".

Long ago a friend worked up in polar bear country. A cub showed up in their village. One Disney raised idiot thought the cub was so cute that he walked up to it. You are probably thinking the momma polar bear arrived and did some chewing on the guy but you are wrong. That cute polar bear cub proceeded to bite a nice hunk of butt out of that fellow.

 

[Cooperhawk]

I saw the article and what is happening is the ice is freezing so fast the Dolphins are trapped before they can migrate. :shock:

 

[SAJohn]

Cooperhawk, That is a good way to keep them fresh.

 

[Bear Paw Jack]

I would love to see the article. I spent 4 years in Barrow and have seen and been around plenty of Polar bears. Seen plenty of Bowhead whales and a few Narwhale, even some killer whale. Mostly Polar bears work on Seals of one kind or another. Bearded seals and such. They have spring whaling when they go out in the skin boats and then fall whaling when they go out under power. Then they go a LONG way out. The bears get to enjoy whales from time to time when a whale get's away after being harpooned, they sink and then they get bloated and float back up. If the drift brings the whales in to the beach the bears get their share. (they are called Stinkers). (to use the term lightly, it's actually worse than that). In that case I've seen multiple polar bears and even one time saw a grizzly that had traveled a long way north, they just follow their nose and they had a regular picnic. Fun to watch them, until people who also like to watch and do stupid things like getting their kids in a picture with a polar bear in the back round. But I haven't seen any dolphins or even heard of them up there. Barrow sits between the Chuckchi and the Beaufort in the Arctic ocean. They use the skins from the beareded Seal (also called Uguruk-excuse the spelling) to make the skin boats used for spring whaling. The odor is enough to gag you I can guarantee. The celebration they do for what they get in the spring is called Nalukataq and it's quite a time. Interesting article http://fairbanks-alaska.com/barrow.htm

 

[Rancher Will]

I saw the article and it clearly states that the reported five dolphins were trapped in ice due to the ice freezing earlier this past year than in previous years, DUE TO GLOBAL WARMING. I believe the report was from Norway and the report stated that most dolphins migrate South before freeze up. Some years a few dolphins are trapped in ice when the Arctic Ocean freezes but this past year Global Warming caused the ice to freeze earlier than usual.

 

[Cooperhawk]

Yep, forgot where I saw it, but that's the one. "Global Warming"? :roll:

 

[Pierow]

You are a dolphin trapped by ice and have managed to keep one breath hole serviceable for days hoping for a way out. As you peer up the hole to take another breath you see the smiling face of a polar bear. Dang, sucks to be you for sure.

Pierow

 

[powder smoke]

BPJ here you go a bit bias with the global warming thing! ps

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/polar-bears-now-eat-dolphins-thanks-to-global-warming/

 

[Bear Paw Jack]

Sounds like this is the first time. Anomolees happen. When I saw the grizzly munching on a stinker with the polar bears people were pretty amazed as well. Not sure that exceptions make a rule but it's interesting. Everybody has to eat.

 

[Jimbo357mag]

People like to find exceptions to the global warming trend but the slow, steady march of higher temperatures is starting to take a toll on the world. There are probably 10 events that happen to prove global warming for every one exception. 8) 8) 8) 8)

 

[Rancher Will]

Jimbo,may I respectfully ask a question? Why do you, and most Global Warming supporters continually accuse us of being disbelievers? Nobody disputes claims that climate changes. In fact I have never heard anyone claim that climate is static.

Our dispute with the Global Warmers is their claim that humans cause the change, citing false information to support thatr claim. Every claim of the global warmers has been based on "Computer Models" and never from actual verifiable climate records, basic chemistry or physics.

There are hundreds, perhaps thousands of actual verifiable records that prove that climate has changed, often significantly over eons of time. There are no records, not one, that indicates that humans are responsible for climate change, even over a few decades.

I also notice that Global Warmers conveniently refuse to admit to even basic chemistry or physics. For example why do we keep hearing and reading that Carbon Dioxide, CO/2, is a pollutant? It is absolutely not a pollutant. In fact without CO/2 life on Earth as we know it would not exist. Furthermore areas of increased CO/2 produce the greatest supply of nutrients for all life. One of my trucks is and has been contracted for years, hauling CO/2 to green houses and hydroponic farms to enhance the growth of crops. Without CO/2 you wouldn't have any fizz in your soda drink either.

There are actual pollutants, some actually increased by human activity, none of which the Global Warmers seem concerned about. Naturally these pollutants are so insignificant that even the Global Warmers have not yet created a chart from their Computer Models to make us alarmed. In fact,. it is the Global Warmers who support the increase in real pollutants.

Let me give just one example:

Take the Ethanol regulations for one example. We know that Physics and Chemistry show that adding Ethanol to gasoline for internal combustion engines increase the production of pollutants such as Nitrous Oxide, and others.

Here is the proof with just one example that is representative of thousands of others. We know that every gallon of gasoline burned in an internal combustion engine produces a specific amount of pollutant material along with beneficial CO/2 and water. Water is the largest portion.

Using my own Chrysler 300C, with the Hemi Engine, as one example of thousands of autos today, our own accurate records demonstrate that when I and/or my wife fills the tank with gas containing 10 percent Ethanol, (all along the Front Range in Colorado), we average 28-29 MPG driving by actual measurement.

When we fill the tank in Wyoming or at stations on the West Slope of Colorado, without any Ethanol, we average 36 to 38 MPG. This is based not only on our purchased records but also on the computer readout that shows our continual, real time, MPG as shown on the automobile display.

If you remember your grade school arithmetic, you will note that burning 10 percent Ethanol in the gas requires approximately 34 gallons of fuel per 1000 miles, of which at 10 percent, is 3.4 gallons of Ethanol and 30.6 gallons of pure gasoline.

Burning pure gasoline in the same engine, without any Ethanol. requires approximately 27 gallons of fuel per 1000 miles, all pure gasoline.

Now tell me how burning 30 gallons of gasoline per every 1000 miles produces less pollution than burning 27 gallons of the same gasoline in the same engine.

 

[FastEd]

Will, with all due respect. That ole Chrysler 300 wouldn't get 38 MPG falling off a cliff...
You need to get your automobile display calibrated.

 

[Jimbo357mag]

There is plenty of science to support global warming now at a faster rate (because of man) than anything nature could explain.

http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/GlobalWarming/page3.php

Alcohol blended in gasoline is designed to increase complete combustion and to reduce nationwide oil consumption. It's purpose has little to do with lowering CO2 emissions.

http://www.autoblog.com/2009/08/13/greenlings-why-is-there-ethanol-in-gasoline/

Why is there ethanol in gasoline?

quote> In the early 1990s, the United States government issued a series of amendments to the Clean Air Act that included the requirement to use oxygenated gasoline (minimum oxygen content of 2.0-percent by weight for reformulated gasoline in ozone non-attainment areas, for what it's worth) to help the fuel burn more completely in combustion. One of the favored oxygenates was methyl tert-butyl ether, or MTBE.

This chemical compound was chosen due to its low price and because it helped mixers generate higher octane ratings. All seemed well until California discovered in 1995 that MTBE was showing up in high concentrations in drinking water, which was traced back to spilled gasoline and leaky underground containers. Ethanol was widely seen as a safer replacement for MTBE and its use was pushed by the agricultural industry here in the States.

-------------------

But what about the environment? Is a 10-percent ethanol blend eco-friendly? That's a tougher nut to crack. Obviously, the burning of fossil fuels isn't a great thing in and of itself for the environment, so the question may be whether burning ethanol-infused fuel is better or worse than straight gasoline. Since ethanol is used to oxygenate the gasoline mixture, which in turn allows the fuel to burn more completely and therefore produce cleaner emissions, its use in fuel has obvious benefits for air quality. <end quote

 

[Rancher Will]

Fast Ed, It is not "an old Chrysler". Our Lincoln, that is almost 10 years old, gets the same relative results between pure gas and Ethanol gas. The Lincoln Town Car does not ever get over about 17-18 MPG but gets about 8 or 9 percent better mileage on the highway with pure gas compared to 10 Percent Ethanol.

Our auto computer display with the Chrysler matches very closely with our actual pump fuel receipt records that we keep with all of our vehicles. When we fill the tanks the actual amount of fill depends upon how low the tank happens to be when filled. I am stating the actual facts when we fill with the tank almost empty to fill.

Also most of our car driving is on trips to town and back by my wife mostly (125 miles round trip for our North Ranch, 145 miles round trip for our South Ranch) and longer trips of sometimes over a thousand miles with me driving. We drive very little in cities, my wife almost never in any city larger than Laramie or Steamboat Springs, and then only to the store and back home.

Since I am in business with numerous vehicles, cars, trucks of all sizes and types, etc, I require all of my drivers (and myself) to keep accurate business records. Our MPG records are just part of the input to continually analyze our Cost per Mile, (CPM) for both gas and diesel, management procedures for all of our auto and pickups highway vehicles computed and recorded each month in our accounting records. All of our tractors and semi trucks are diesel and not gas and we keep those MPG and CPM records also for each driver. We have no Ethanol gas on the ranches for any gas engine..

Naturally when we fill with only half a tank to fill the readout and calculation will vary with less difference. I am being truthful and have years of data records to prove what I wrote. If you doubt that a Chrysler 300C year old sedan will get that MPG, check with someone else who has one. We have three of these in our family and one of my employees drives one. They all will confirm what I wrote in that they all notice a difference with different fuel.

The only times when we buy gas with Ethanol, is when we drive to the Front Range of Colorado, Fort Collins, Greeley or Denver, or on long trips such as our last one to Houston Texas last winter. Those are the trips where we notice the difference in MPG. The gas that is delivered to our ranches by the tank wagon is Ethanol free.

Obviously every auto, and every engine, and the way revery driver actually drives, and where, in cities, on open highways, will vary. But I will be willing to bet that if every driver keeps an accurate record, there will be a difference in MPG for their vehicle with and without Ethanol. The variance will only be in percentage.

My point was that gasoline, with Ethanol, requires more gasoline per mile than gasoline without Ethanol. thus the physics indicates more actual pollutants produced with more quantity of gasoline burned per mile compared to fewer quantity of gasoline burned. Note that I mentioned that CO/2 is not a pollutant as the propaganda keeps saying. Ethanol, as far as my limited knowledge of Chemistry allows, does not reduce any true pollutant.

It certainly increases the cost of fuel without any evident benefit that i can see. As a cattle rancher I also am aware that the cost paid by taxpayers as subsidy to produce Ethanol from corn not only is costly to all of us in subsidy taxes and fuel prices at the pump, but is especially costly to cattle producers and consumers based on what it does to the cost of producing beef.

 

[Bear Paw Jack]

Will, don't hold your breath for Jimmy to answer and if he does it won't be cogent as he only knows how to speak in sound bites that he hears somewhere. He's union so most of what he knows politically is what he's told. :roll:

 

[Rancher Will]

Fast Ed, Jimbo, anyone else, I have no desire to get into a debate with anyone. So may I suggest that you try a test of any vehicle that you have available, that I do with our vehicles on a more or less regular basis. Don't take my word for this. Try it yourself. Perhaps this will make my comments more clear.

I do this from time to time to check how our vehicles, trucks and cars, perform under different conditions, fuel sources, maintenance records, etc. It gives us information for maintenance comparisons, etc. It may help to show you what your vehicles are capable of doing and indicate a pending problem.

I do this test most often almost always when when starting on a fairly long trip knowing that I will need to purchase numerous tanks of fuel. As I mentioned above, all of our gasoline fuel on our ranches is all pure gasoline. So that is what I start the test with. The test should work with any vehicle that has a gas engine if the vehicle has a computer readout showing the real time MPG while running as our Chrysler and most of our newer trucks do.

When driving on an open highway, at the stat of a trip with home gas, at normal highway speed, switch on the computer readout to show the real time MPG displayed. Now adjust your accelerator to show the RPM of the engine, watching the read out of the MPG display. Now adjust the engine RPM up or down to get the highest MPG reading possible on your computer display. When the highest MPG reading is obtained, set the cruise control and observe the MPG reading remain constant. Note that MPG at that RPM.

Now, later in the trip, after having purchased gas containing Ethanol a few times, to be sure that all of the fuel in the tank contains the 10 percent Ethanol, I run the test again.

Switch the car Computer display to show the real time MPG. Now adjust the engine RPM while watching the MPG reading to locate the highest MPG reading available for that fuel, time and highway. When the highest MPG reading is obtained, switch on Cruise Control and observe that the MPG remains the same.

No matter what make or model car you are driving those two MPG readings will give you the maximum MPG possible for that auto, under those conditions with those fuels. This will almost never be the RPM's that you normally widh to drive, and are not intended to so indicate, but will show the maximum MPG available for those fuels and engine speed for that vehicle.

However comparing the two readings will indicate with accuracy the difference and actual capability of the engine and car that you are driving, comparing fuel with and without 10 percent Ethanol. (Ed, it makes no difference if the computer readout is "re calibrated" since both readings will be from the same computer accuracy or lack).

Just a side note: I ask my truck drivers to run this test from time to time with our Diesel Semi Trucks to compare BioDiesel Fuel with straight Diesel. It helps us to run the trucks at the most cost efficient RPMs when possible.

You will not get the same readings with every test. I do not get the same readings on every test with our Chrysler or trucks. You will not either. You may be surprised when you learn just what your vehicle is capable of doing and you may find some cars that get better fuel MPG than a Chrysler 300C. In fact I would expect many newer cars to do better than ours.

You may not wish to travel at the most efficient RPM road speed but you may find, as we do, that when your actual MPH speed is close to the best RPM/MPG speed your cost is much lower for the trip. In our business, with me buying over two Hundred Thousand Dollars per year for fuels, it makes a difference.

 

[Jimbo357mag]

Will, don't hold your breath for Jimmy to answer...

What's the question? I already explained that ethanol is added to gasoline to improve combustion not for CO2 emissions or mileage. The overall net effect of adding ethanol to gasoline - I have no idea. I don't think anybody knows for sure. :wink:

 

[wolfsong]

Will, don't hold your breath for Jimmy to answer...

What's the question? I already explained that ethanol is added to gasoline to improve combustion not for CO2 emissions or mileage. The overall net effect of adding ethanol to gasoline - I have no idea. I don't think anybody knows for sure. :wink:

Your last sentence sums up the whole GW/CC theory quite nicely and truthfully.

 

[Tensaw]

People like to find exceptions to the global warming trend but the slow, steady march of higher temperatures is starting to take a toll on the world. There are probably 10 events that happen to prove global warming for every one exception. 8) 8) 8) 8)

Sorry Jimbo. Just a bunch of bull.

Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) theory has been dominant for the past three decades as absolute fact in the public mind. In the last several years, however, cracks in the fortress of “settled science” have appeared, and public opinion has begun to shift. Increasingly, alarmist predictions have failed to come to fruition.

In 2004, NASA’s chief scientist James Hansen authoritatively announced that there is only a ten-year window to act on AGW (presumably by transferring mass quantities of taxpayer funds to global warmist causes) before climate Armageddon destroys humanity. Well, that window has now shut tight, and AGW is AWOL.

 

[Cooperhawk]

What's the question? I already explained that ethanol is added to gasoline to improve combustion not for CO2 emissions or mileage. The overall net effect of adding ethanol to gasoline - I have no idea. I don't think anybody knows for sure. :wink:

The Ethanol was added to gas because tetra ethyl lead was eliminated causing poorer combustion. There were other alternatives, but the grain lobby wanted it. In fact one of the biggest players was Archer Daniels Midland. It has jacked the price of corn world wide making farmers quite wealthy in the process. The effect has been poorer countries not being able to buy corn meal for food, and the farmers concentrating on corn and not other grain crops causing their price to escalate as well.

How do I know this? I have several friends and relatives raising as much corn as they can. Lately however the state here cut off subsidies which were needed to make Ethanol viable, and the plants are beginning to shut down, causing the price of corn to drop.

 

[FastEd]

Will, ole buddy, pal of mine, I'm not questioning your theories on the gasoline/alcohol thing. I've never had to deal with that and I'm not trying to act like an intellectual giant. I've been playing with cars for more years than I like to think about. Dealers can set those mileage indicators to read any way you want. Checking the gas mileage the proper way, a Chrysler 300 wouldn't get 38 mpg going downhill in a wind storm. I'll kiss your ass on Third and Main and give you 30 minutes to draw a crowd.

 

[Mike J]

People like to find exceptions to the global warming trend but the slow, steady march of higher temperatures is starting to take a toll on the world. There are probably 10 events that happen to prove global warming for every one exception. 8) 8) 8) 8)

I saw a scientist on tv talking about global warming the other night. IIRC he said the temperature of the earth had raised 4 degrees in the last hundred years. It was on the show John Stossel is doing about Green Tyrants.

 

[wolfsong]

In the meantime, polar bears are doing just fine. However, any moment now the Save the Dolphins advocates will be screaming for international action.

 

[Ozark rkg]

People like to find exceptions to the global warming trend but the slow, steady march of higher temperatures is starting to take a toll on the world. There are probably 10 events that happen to prove global warming for every one exception. 8) 8) 8) 8)

Slow and steady is the way it has been happening for eons.

 

[Jimbo357mag]

Might it not impact your analysis, if you found it to be TRUE, that use of ethanol results in GREATER use of gasoline than use of the pure fuel?

You might want to work a bit harder at being fully informed.

All ethanol does is enrich another segment of society, in order to influence votes in the 'first in the nation' primary.

While it is a fact that adding ethanol to gasoline reduces the mileage in cars (aprox. 3%) it is also a fact that E10 has the country using less gasoline. E85 would reduce our gasoline consumption even more but let's don't go there.

Think of it this way; adding an additional 10% ethanol to a gallon of gasoline let's you drive aprox 7% farther.

I'm not defending either side in this at all, just putting some facts out there.

The original post was about global warming and some Dolphins that were able to go farther north into the Arctic because of warmer water and less ice and then get eaten by a Polar Bear. The story was actually an event that points to more global warming in the Arctic but unfortunately some manage to see it as an anti-global warming event. I really don't get that.

 

[Cooperhawk]

Feeling hot? Take a look at what happened the day snow fell in Cairo after 112 years.



http://www.opposingviews.com/i/gallery/society/snow-fell-cairo-first-time-112-years-photos

 

[Jimbo357mag]

What's that old saying, "don't mess with Mother Nature"?