BRIAN ROSS REPORTS
TOP BLOTTER CATEGORIES
- Abramoff Lobbying Scandal
- American Al Qaeda
- Avian Flu
- Beirut Hospital Out of Gas
- CIA
- CIA Secret Prisons
- D.C. Madam Affair
- FBI
- Federal Air Marshal Service
- Homeland Security
- Hurricane Katrina
- Mark Foley Internet Scandal
- Millionaire Sex Scandal
- Nigerian E-mail Scams
- Norman Hsu, Clinton Fundraiser
- NSA: Wiretapping
- Osama bin Laden
- Payola
- Pharmacy Investigation
- Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert
- Terror
- Troopergate
- U.K. Airline Terror Plot
- U.K. Bombing Attempts
- Wen Ho Lee
- William Jefferson
- Zarqawi
« Previous | Main | Next »
Polar Bear Brawl: Dem Blasts Exxon Over Research
October 23, 2007 11:05 AM
The debate over the future of Alaskan polar bears is heating up, as a crucial government deadline passes.
A key Democratic congressman accused ExxonMobil last week of pushing junk science intended to fool the public into believing Alaskan polar bears are not in danger.
The U.S. Geological Survey recently concluded that climate change and other factors would reduce the global polar bear population by two thirds by 2050, and wipe out the Alaskan polar bear population entirely. Newer research has indicated that could happen even more quickly.
But a new scientific paper, funded in part by ExxonMobil, called some of that research into question, and has been used in efforts to keep polar bears off the government's endangered species list.
Click Here for Full Blotter Coverage.
Environmentalists have for years pushed the federal government to categorize the animal as "threatened," which would afford it increased environmental protections. That could complicate petroleum companies' efforts to develop oil and gas operations in Alaska if they were found to impact the bears' habitat. It could also put increased regulatory pressure on industries which emit greenhouse gases.
Opponents of the effort, including the State of Alaska, have cited a recent article in a research journal for support, whose authors thank ExxonMobil and others for funding their work.
While recognizing the possible impact of climate change on the polar bear, the authors concluded "it is simply not prudent to overstate the certainty" that climate change, or any other single factor, is responsible for "observed patterns in polar bear population ecology." The article, which was labeled a "Viewpoint" essay because it contained no new research, was published in the September issue of the Journal of Ecological Complexity.
In their conclusion, the article's authors thanked ExxonMobil and the American Petroleum Institute for their financial backing. They noted that the paper's views were "independent of sources providing support."
Rep. Brad Miller, D-N.C., chairman of the oversight and investigations panel for the Science and Technology Committee, blasted the piece as "a facade of scientific respectability for those who say the polar bear is just fine." In his letter to ExxonMobil, Miller asked the company to provide all of its records from the past five years relating to its support of scientists studying polar bears and other arctic animals.
ExxonMobil spokesman Gantt Walton responded to Miller's letter, saying it was "ridiculous" to conclude that the company has control over the researchers' work. ExxonMobil "does not request nor direct specific studies," he said. Nevertheless, "we have provided a lot of information to the congressman in the past and we will work with him on this issue."
The fate of the polar bear has sparked the public's concern. On Monday, several activists in polar bear costumes joined protesters outside the U.S. Capitol, carrying signs identifying them as "Polar bears for solutions to war and global warming."
Americans have reportedly submitted more than 600,000 comments to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on whether to grant the polar bear protected status. The deadline for comments passed Monday, and a final ruling is expected in January.
Do you have a tip for Brian Ross and the Investigative Team?
October 23, 2007 | Permalink | User Comments (17)
OH gee. A Republican connected company paying for science deniers?
I'm getting that Deja Vu feeling all over again.
Posted by: bobby stickers | Oct 23, 2007 12:56:01 PM
The same strategy is and has been applied by numerous industries, tobacco, timber, petroleum, pharmaceutical, etc. Junk science dressed up a real scientific research in order to justify or at least create confusion when an issue affects the bottom line. Profits over health and wellness of the people or the planet.
Posted by: BooMan | Oct 23, 2007 1:52:59 PM
Old shell game
Say one thing, do another...
Posted by: toungeTyed | Oct 23, 2007 3:48:54 PM
"Endangered"? "Threatened"? Because of Global Warming?
"A report for the World Wide Fund for Nature shows that polar bears, which are warm-blooded, have grown in numbers where temperature has increased, and have become fewer where temperature has fallen. Polar bears evolved from brown bears 200,000 years ago, and survived the last interglacial period, when global temperature was 5 degrees Celsius warmer than the present and there was probably no Arctic ice-cap at all. The real threat to polar bears is not “global warming” but hunting. In 1940, there were just 5,000 polar bears worldwide. Now that hunting is controlled, there are 25,000."
Posted by: Perri Nelson | Oct 23, 2007 4:55:52 PM
Rep. Brad Miller should have requested the articles of incorporation from Gantt Walton.
Exxon should be put under public receivership until a new publicly accountable board is reconstituted.
We need to set an example.
Posted by: Michael Keenan | Oct 23, 2007 5:48:23 PM
Their science is no worse than that developed on public or non-profit grants funded and run by politically correct bureau-hacks with an agenda. Don't get correct results, don't get funded next year! Makes for lots of conclusions not supported by the facts buried deep in the report - where almost no one with an over-opinionated mouth really reads.
Posted by: Pete Nick | Oct 23, 2007 7:35:24 PM
Yeah, sure, Polar Bears will be happier when it's warmer...they can hang out on the beach and fish with long poles, instead of always having to stand on ice flows and grab fish with their paws or jaws. Yes, it's the beginning of a golden age for the bears. The more we change the world in search of ever-greater profits for already-rich shareholders, the better off all animals will be. Dumbass Republicans and their even stupider followers...all of you conservatives out there: How much did you pay in taxes in 1999? Worldcom made $3 Billion that year and paid zero taxes. You probably paid more than ExxonMobil did last year. That's what the GOP does for you. Suckers.
Posted by: Heliocracy | Oct 24, 2007 3:51:12 AM
Heliocracy, try to picture in your mind the price of gas being triple what it is now! You mentioned helping the rich. If the price of gas is higher the POOR get hurt the worst. Why? They have to pay a higher percentage of their income.
If the supply of oil is down due to Exxon or another "big oil" company not being allowed to drill in Alaska, prices will no doubt be higher.
But you are far smarter than any Republican. The polar bears are far more important than people are.
Posted by: jfm125 | Oct 24, 2007 2:26:12 PM
Let us not forget who owns their own oil company in gulf. Isn't it just so cozy to know that oil barons rule your pocketbook?
It's all economics (BS) [It's all GREED]...
Posted by: ToungeTyed | Oct 24, 2007 3:18:31 PM
Hey Bears, adapt or die, the choice is yours.
Posted by: Tony | Oct 24, 2007 4:36:16 PM
Sink or swim polar bears
Posted by: BTL musings | Oct 24, 2007 10:17:09 PM
Don't waste your breath trying to reason with liberals, they aren't capable of it. They cried and wailed that the pipeline would endanger caribou, but the caribou population has skyrocketed since then, they actually congregate around and underneath it for warmth and shelter.
They are willfully ignorant. It doesn't matter how much evidence you show them contradicting the anthrocentric global warming model, they will always refuse to listen. As the posters here have shown.
Posted by: Bill | Oct 24, 2007 10:28:08 PM
Sink or swim polar bears that's what people in N.O. had to do.
Posted by: BTL musings | Oct 24, 2007 10:35:30 PM
Went to Hudson bay last year and actually watched polar bears and learned about them. 1) They do not do anything but wait for the ice. There is nothing for them to eat besides kelp on the beach. They just lay there.... and wait. (and play-fight). They do not feast on berries and the like in the summer. 2) Their body fat dissipation has been well documented for years and it has been graphed. According to the graph/study, the female bears of Hudson Bay will not have enough body fat to reproduce after about 2012 or so (like gymnasts who do not have periods). 3) Polar bears are designed to swim 15 miles between ice packs - they are now swiiming (or drowning) attempting to swim up to 60 miles to find ringed seals.
Posted by: AndieLee | Oct 24, 2007 11:02:10 PM
Perri - Polar bears are SO adapted to their cold climate - millions of hairs per inch, hollow (quill-like) fur and black skin - not to mention far more body fat that normal bears have - that when they play fight, after about 5 minutes they drop to the ground and frantically gulp snow, then splay across any available snow/ice to cool their core temperature down. You don't have to assign blame for global warming if it makes you feel better, but open your eyes and mind to the consequences -despite what the oil companies say, it's for real and now we, as a planet, need to deal with it.
Posted by: AndieLee | Oct 25, 2007 9:14:33 AM
Why don't you liberals actually try to make me a computer model accurate to within 1 degree that can estimate the temperature in a controlled sunspace. When you accomplish that, then come back with your ignorant rants about global warming and "science."
I doubt half you ignorant alarmist have even passed a high school physics course.
Posted by: Engineer | May 14, 2008 11:42:54 PM
Since the scientific community can't agree, do YOUR OWN research...
Follow the money-trail that funds the NGO's that sponsor "green" media, and the U.N., and the I.P.C.C. Find out who has a vested interest in everyone "going green". Seriously. I dare you.
Posted by: J. West | May 30, 2008 1:00:48 PM
Post a comment
