If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.
Fark SearchWeb Fark

         more options... Create account

(AP) Interesting Trouble a bruin as Alaska denies polar bear threat   (ap.google.com) divider line 21
More: Interesting  
•       •       •

546 clicks; posted to Politics » on 23 Feb 2008 at 10:37 AM   |  Make this a Fark FavoriteFavorite    |   share: Share on OMGTWITTER WEB2.0share on StumbleUponshare on Facebook  more»   |    Get this fabulous T-Shirt and impress the methane out of your friends! shirt it!

21 Comments   (+0 »)


Fark.com's  Political Inclination Thermometric Analyzer:
Neutral 3.28% Fascist
Archived thread
 
xBIGxEASYx [TotalFark] 2008-02-23 03:36:43 AM  
Listing polar bears as threatened "would establish a dangerous precedent based on mathematical models instead of biological observations," Sen. Ted Stevens said Tuesday.

Sen. Ted Stevens? They have locked that crook up yet?

 
Atvar [TotalFark] 2008-02-23 04:16:35 AM  
xBIGxEASYx: Sen. Ted Stevens? They have locked that crook up yet?

Not a chance. Without him, Alaska would be screwed over in terms of earmarks. Most folks here don't care for him, but our roads would be in even worse shape without the money he brings in.

 
ndotseth 2008-02-23 04:37:12 AM  
Computer models are never wrong.
Just ask the National Weather Service.

 
vikes555 2008-02-23 10:51:25 AM  
See what not passing the Protect America bill did?!

Man.

/Warrentless wiretapping yahoo

 
TheKnownUniverse [TotalFark] 2008-02-23 10:53:52 AM  
Polar bear thread! Flocke and Knut reporting!

i147.photobucket.com

i241.photobucket.com

i108.photobucket.com

i143.photobucket.com

i117.photobucket.com

i96.photobucket.com

/because baby polar bears are better than another global warming or ANWR debate

 
Massa Damnata 2008-02-23 10:57:39 AM  
Not sure what motivation they could possibly have for denying that. Its not like they possess a massive amount of such a product which, should the endangerment of polar bears not be denied, might need to be considered correlated to such endangerment.
/In all reasonableness, however, if fossil fuels do significantly contribute to global warming, it makes little sense to penalize only Alaska (merely because they are a sensitive region)when the phenomenon is by definition global.

 
yeegrek 2008-02-23 11:05:49 AM  
Damn good headline, subby.

 
Jon Snow [TotalFark] 2008-02-23 11:06:25 AM  
img252.imageshack.us

There is no global warming. There is no melting of the Arctic. Polar bears are committing suicide by the hundreds at the pipline gates. The polar bears are going to surrender or be burned in their dens. They will surrender, it is they who will surrender.

 
yeegrek 2008-02-23 11:07:54 AM  
Good luck getting this one.

i202.photobucket.com

 
Sleeping Monkey [TotalFark] 2008-02-23 11:24:07 AM  
Gee, a state soaked with politicians joined at the hip with big oil, speaking out against environmental protections? Inconceivable!

 
uptonogood 2008-02-23 11:27:03 AM  
they're just pissed that their annual checks might start shrinking and might actually have to work for that extra oil money that each citizen gets (which most actually blow on crap they don't really need), but then again, why the hell do people live up there?

 
manwithplanx 2008-02-23 11:32:23 AM  
karisblog.org

Approves

 
Dorf11 2008-02-23 11:44:45 AM  
Just more pandaing to environmentalists. They photoshop a kodiak instamatic and right away it's a grizzly environmental disaster.

/right next to nothin'

 
dudemanbro [TotalFark] 2008-02-23 11:51:15 AM  
Greedy bastards.

 
I Said [TotalFark] 2008-02-23 11:59:57 AM  
Atvar: Not a chance. Without him, Alaska would be screwed over in terms of earmarks. Most folks here don't care for him, but our roads would be in even worse shape without the money he brings in.

At least your roads will actually go to other destinations, though.

 
I Said [TotalFark] 2008-02-23 12:06:14 PM  
ndotseth: Computer models are never wrong.
Just ask the National Weather Service.


That's a silly answer. Sure computer models can be wrong, but we don't know that this one is. We do know that Ted Stevens is a corrupt senator who is in bed with oil companies.

Who to trust on environmental issues: A computer, that may or may not be correct or a glorified oil lobbyist. Hmmmmmmmmmmmm

 
Edsel 2008-02-23 12:19:14 PM  
I Said: That's a silly answer. Sure computer models can be wrong, but we don't know that this one is. We do know that Ted Stevens is a corrupt senator who is in bed with oil companies.

Who to trust on environmental issues: A computer, that may or may not be correct or a glorified oil lobbyist. Hmmmmmmmmmmmm



Where the heck is this gibberish about mathematical models coming from? The polar bear observations seem to be coming from a variety of sources.

Maybe Ted read about it on the intertubes.

 
Shaggy_C 2008-02-23 12:21:44 PM  
Listing a species as "threatened" means it is likely to become endangered. "Endangered" is even more dire and means a species is in danger of extinction throughout all or much of its range.

They're arguing against making it 'threatened' because it would make
"a law with the best of intentions...subverted by the lawyers for the extreme environmental organizations and the liberal Democratic leadership," So, once again, Republicans ignore science when politically necessary. Farking idiots.

 
hasty ambush 2008-02-23 12:33:50 PM  
Atvar: xBIGxEASYx: Sen. Ted Stevens? They have locked that crook up yet?

Not a chance. Without him, Alaska would be screwed over in terms of earmarks. Most folks here don't care for him, but our roads would be in even worse shape without the money he brings in.


Same excuse people give for voting for John Murtha

 
burndtdan 2008-02-23 01:11:42 PM  
Atvar: xBIGxEASYx: Sen. Ted Stevens? They have locked that crook up yet?

Not a chance. Without him, Alaska would be screwed over in terms of earmarks. Most folks here don't care for him, but our roads would be in even worse shape without the money he brings in.


how does he send the money? through a series of tubes? or in a dumptruck?

 
I Said [TotalFark] 2008-02-23 01:18:54 PM  
Shaggy_C: They're arguing against making it 'threatened' because it would make
"a law with the best of intentions...subverted by the lawyers for the extreme environmental organizations and the liberal Democratic leadership," So, once again, Republicans ignore science when politically necessary. Farking idiots.


That is exactly what's going on.

Any time the republican party attaches the word "extreme" to any cause or person, they are essentially saying "I have no facts to argue with you, but I think you're a jerk so you must be wrong about everything."

It only took the party decades to agree with science on the existence of global warming. They are the anti-science party and should not be trusted when discussing the issue.

 
Displayed 21 of 21 comments


[Continue Farking]