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.

(Phys Org2)   Norwegian reindeer herds are being boosted by climate change. Scientists made the discovery after local residents began complaining about a marked increase IN ALL THAT DAMN JINGLING   (phys.org) divider line 49
    More: Cool, Norwegian, Svalbard, climate change, long-term experiment  
•       •       •

1401 clicks; posted to Main » on 16 Jul 2014 at 9:48 PM (9 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



49 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2014-07-16 08:37:07 PM
Had one of those bastards stuck in my chimney last Sunday. I've put barbed wire all around the roofline, but they keep landing on it out of habit.
 
2014-07-16 09:53:37 PM
Are they pining for the fjords?
 
2014-07-16 09:55:14 PM
This can't be true. Global warming is going to cause everything to go extinct. A scientist made a model to prove it.
 
2014-07-16 09:57:25 PM

SmackLT: Had one of those bastards stuck in my chimney last Sunday. I've put barbed wire all around the roofline, but they keep landing on it out of habit.


Blame Hallmark.

4.bp.blogspot.com
 
2014-07-16 10:00:18 PM
LOL I was trolling above, but then I read the article:

"Winter warming is widely held to be a major threat to reindeer across the arctic but, in the high arctic archipelago of Svalbard global warming has had the opposite effect. Our data provides remarkable confirmation of this counter intuitive observation"
 
2014-07-16 10:02:53 PM
Wait until Santa's helpers find them
 
2014-07-16 10:04:29 PM

stirfrybry: LOL I was trolling above, but then I read the article:

"Winter warming is widely held to be a major threat to reindeer across the arctic but, in the high arctic archipelago of Svalbard global warming has had the opposite effect. Our data provides remarkable confirmation of this counter intuitive observation"


Keep reading...

"This is one of only a very few studies on animal populations and climate change that involves animals being physically counted annually rather than estimated."

So the "widely held" is without data. These guys actually tried doing science with data.
 
2014-07-16 10:08:26 PM
So is this good or bad?
 
2014-07-16 10:09:12 PM
More yummy venison?  Thanks Obama!
 
2014-07-16 10:09:28 PM
Why would this be counter-intuitive? Warmer temperatures mean more vegetation (ie. food), therefore larger populations. Seems quite intuitive to me.
 
2014-07-16 10:11:13 PM

WelldeadLink: Keep reading...

"This is one of only a very few studies on animal populations and climate change that involves animals being physically counted annually rather than estimated."

So the "widely held" is without data. These guys actually tried doing science with data.


You know estimates are based on data, right?
 
2014-07-16 10:12:52 PM

WelldeadLink: stirfrybry: LOL I was trolling above, but then I read the article:

"Winter warming is widely held to be a major threat to reindeer across the arctic but, in the high arctic archipelago of Svalbard global warming has had the opposite effect. Our data provides remarkable confirmation of this counter intuitive observation"

Keep reading...

"This is one of only a very few studies on animal populations and climate change that involves animals being physically counted annually rather than estimated."

So the "widely held" is without data. These guys actually tried doing science with data.


I just find it funny when scientists admit their bias (...counter intuitive observation ).
 
2014-07-16 10:18:04 PM
The team found very little winter mortality

That's unsurprising. Easier winter = easier winter.

and very high calving

This here is more significant. On the face it looks obvious - more babies because more food. But it's not clear that warming will lead to more food when their food is used to growing in the cold. It could have been a catastrophe for lichen, or the kinds of lichens could've been different from temp to temp and they could've gotten the wrong kind.

Bottom line: More reindeer babies. More reindeer babies means more Laplander babies. Which means more Laplander chicks to tongue my balls.
 
2014-07-16 10:21:54 PM
Reindeer meet is actually quite delicious. I'm all for this.

/particularly in sausage
//mmmmmmmmmm.... reindeer meet sausage
 
2014-07-16 10:23:29 PM
pbs.twimg.com

I hope this is worth THE NOISE!
 
2014-07-16 10:24:13 PM

JonnyBGoode: [pbs.twimg.com image 598x324]

I hope this is worth THE NOISE!


Oh good, I'm not the only one who thought this.
 
2014-07-16 10:27:48 PM
Commence to jingling
 
2014-07-16 10:38:10 PM

stirfrybry: WelldeadLink: stirfrybry: LOL I was trolling above, but then I read the article:

"Winter warming is widely held to be a major threat to reindeer across the arctic but, in the high arctic archipelago of Svalbard global warming has had the opposite effect. Our data provides remarkable confirmation of this counter intuitive observation"

Keep reading...

"This is one of only a very few studies on animal populations and climate change that involves animals being physically counted annually rather than estimated."

So the "widely held" is without data. These guys actually tried doing science with data.

I just find it funny when scientists admit their bias (...counter intuitive observation ).


How is that a "bias," in the sense you seem to imply? The overall data points one way, so you would intuitively assume the next piece of datum will go that way. When it doesn't, it's counter-intuitive.

It's not a conspiracy, dumbass. It's science.

/idiots like you love to complain about science when it doesn't go "your way." So guess who's really got the bias?
 
2014-07-16 10:39:30 PM

unchellmatt: Reindeer meet is actually quite delicious. I'm all for this.

/particularly in sausage
//mmmmmmmmmm.... reindeer meet sausage


Sausage... meet reindeer.

I think you two will be very happy together.
 
2014-07-16 10:47:47 PM

brimed03: stirfrybry: WelldeadLink: stirfrybry: LOL I was trolling above, but then I read the article:

"Winter warming is widely held to be a major threat to reindeer across the arctic but, in the high arctic archipelago of Svalbard global warming has had the opposite effect. Our data provides remarkable confirmation of this counter intuitive observation"

Keep reading...

"This is one of only a very few studies on animal populations and climate change that involves animals being physically counted annually rather than estimated."

So the "widely held" is without data. These guys actually tried doing science with data.

I just find it funny when scientists admit their bias (...counter intuitive observation ).

How is that a "bias," in the sense you seem to imply? The overall data points one way, so you would intuitively assume the next piece of datum will go that way. When it doesn't, it's counter-intuitive.

It's not a conspiracy, dumbass. It's science.

/idiots like you love to complain about science when it doesn't go "your way." So guess who's really got the bias?


say what? You sound like the idiot, my friend. Who said conspiracy? A little defensive about your religion?
 
2014-07-16 10:51:17 PM
Climate change caused Polar Bears to die of starvation.

Now climate change is causing a surge in Reindeer populations.

So....Polar Bears are just too damn picky, is what the problem is!
 
2014-07-16 10:54:39 PM
Seriously, I remember an article posted where they found a polar bear corpse in Sweden and claimed that the bear had starved to death because of climate change.....
 
2014-07-16 11:00:40 PM

ELMiller: Seriously, I remember an article posted where they found a polar bear corpse in Sweden and claimed that the bear had starved to death because of climate change.....


They being thedailyfail?
 
2014-07-16 11:13:30 PM
 
2014-07-16 11:27:57 PM
i759.photobucket.com
 
2014-07-16 11:37:02 PM
Soon it'll never be lovely weather
For a sleigh ride together
With you.
 
2014-07-16 11:37:48 PM
Yeah I'm SURE it has NOTHING to do with them killing off all the predators and damn near banning hunting, must be global warming what else could it be?
 
2014-07-17 12:04:47 AM
This can only mean one thing.
REINDEER SAUSAGES FOR EVERYONE!!!
 
2014-07-17 12:09:13 AM
THE BELLS! THE BELLS!
flix66.com
 
2014-07-17 12:10:54 AM

Mentat: WelldeadLink: Keep reading...

"This is one of only a very few studies on animal populations and climate change that involves animals being physically counted annually rather than estimated."

So the "widely held" is without data. These guys actually tried doing science with data.

You know estimates are based on data, right?


Based on partial data, right?
I have partial data on how many tanks I know how to drive.
 
2014-07-17 12:16:39 AM
Take Olive, for instance. Olive ... the other reindeer.
 
2014-07-17 12:18:43 AM
So alleged climate change, possibly caused by man, may have caused animal population in one small region to increase slightly?
 
2014-07-17 12:24:40 AM

WelldeadLink: Mentat: WelldeadLink: Keep reading...

"This is one of only a very few studies on animal populations and climate change that involves animals being physically counted annually rather than estimated."

So the "widely held" is without data. These guys actually tried doing science with data.

You know estimates are based on data, right?

Based on partial data, right?
I have partial data on how many tanks I know how to drive.


All data is partial data.
 
2014-07-17 12:33:43 AM

Mentat: WelldeadLink: Mentat: WelldeadLink: Keep reading...

"This is one of only a very few studies on animal populations and climate change that involves animals being physically counted annually rather than estimated."

So the "widely held" is without data. These guys actually tried doing science with data.

You know estimates are based on data, right?

Based on partial data, right?
I have partial data on how many tanks I know how to drive.

All data is partial data.


42.
 
2014-07-17 12:39:42 AM

Danger Avoid Death: Mentat: WelldeadLink: Mentat: WelldeadLink: Keep reading...

"This is one of only a very few studies on animal populations and climate change that involves animals being physically counted annually rather than estimated."

So the "widely held" is without data. These guys actually tried doing science with data.

You know estimates are based on data, right?

Based on partial data, right?
I have partial data on how many tanks I know how to drive.

All data is partial data.

42.


But what's the question?
 
2014-07-17 12:51:42 AM

Fark like a Barsoomian: The team found very little winter mortality

That's unsurprising. Easier winter = easier winter.

and very high calving

This here is more significant. On the face it looks obvious - more babies because more food. But it's not clear that warming will lead to more food when their food is used to growing in the cold. It could have been a catastrophe for lichen, or the kinds of lichens could've been different from temp to temp and they could've gotten the wrong kind.

Bottom line: More reindeer babies. More reindeer babies means more Laplander babies. Which means more Laplander chicks to tongue my balls.


what
The
FARK
was that????????
 
2014-07-17 01:30:10 AM

johnny_vegas: Fark like a Barsoomian: The team found very little winter mortality

That's unsurprising. Easier winter = easier winter.

and very high calving

This here is more significant. On the face it looks obvious - more babies because more food. But it's not clear that warming will lead to more food when their food is used to growing in the cold. It could have been a catastrophe for lichen, or the kinds of lichens could've been different from temp to temp and they could've gotten the wrong kind.

Bottom line: More reindeer babies. More reindeer babies means more Laplander babies. Which means more Laplander chicks to tongue my balls.

what
The
FARK
was that????????


He likes Laplander women to lick his balls and give him lap dances. Also she will eat his delicious sausage while while singing jingle bells in a sleigh pulled by Reindeer at the tropical paradise that is the North Pole.

So said my cousin's friend.
 
2014-07-17 01:31:11 AM
verdoux.files.wordpress.com
 
2014-07-17 01:44:04 AM

Fark like a Barsoomian: The team found very little winter mortality

That's unsurprising. Easier winter = easier winter.

and very high calving

This here is more significant. On the face it looks obvious - more babies because more food. But it's not clear that warming will lead to more food when their food is used to growing in the cold. It could have been a catastrophe for lichen, or the kinds of lichens could've been different from temp to temp and they could've gotten the wrong kind.

Bottom line: More reindeer babies. More reindeer babies means more Laplander babies. Which means more Laplander chicks to tongue my balls.


*squickest boner*
 
2014-07-17 02:00:56 AM
 
2014-07-17 05:08:19 AM

brimed03: unchellmatt: Reindeer meet is actually quite delicious. I'm all for this.

/particularly in sausage
//mmmmmmmmmm.... reindeer meet sausage

Sausage... meet reindeer.

I think you two will be very happy together.


God DAMNIT.
That's actually..... That's the best iPhone autocorrect I ever did. Huh. I'm ok with this

Meet. Meat.
 
2014-07-17 05:57:08 AM

Space Station Wagon: Commence to jingling


           Oh, I thought it was commence to
assets-s3.mensjournal.com
 
2014-07-17 06:01:25 AM

Mentat: Danger Avoid Death: Mentat: WelldeadLink: Mentat: WelldeadLink: Keep reading...

"This is one of only a very few studies on animal populations and climate change that involves animals being physically counted annually rather than estimated."

So the "widely held" is without data. These guys actually tried doing science with data.

You know estimates are based on data, right?

Based on partial data, right?
I have partial data on how many tanks I know how to drive.

All data is partial data.

42.

But what's the question?


a) b) or c)
 
2014-07-17 06:59:53 AM

Fark like a Barsoomian: it's not clear that warming will lead to more food when their food is used to growing in the cold.


It`s also not clear that it will lead to less so their default position was that EVERYONE IS GOING TO DIE!

and then they found that reality wasn`t going along.

Luven: Yeah I'm SURE it has NOTHING to do with them killing off all the predators and damn near banning hunting, must be global warming what else could it be?


Well the FIRST claim is always that it is global warming, until firm evidence comes out that there was another cause then it IS global warming. This is why SO many things are claimed to be due to global warming....

It`s a weird science protocol where you blame *everything* on global warming then see what can be dis proven. Shotgun science I call it.  Wide spread pattern and then you see what doesn`t hold up.

Then we end up with crap like this

"Mysterious giant hole in Siberia likely caused by global warming, not UFOs or meteors"

Let`s just assume with no evidence except a hole in the ground that a hole found in the ground is caused by global warming (as opposed to summer) and if nobody proves otherwise THEN IT WAS!

[/snark]


It HAS been shown though that globally, there is likely to be financial benefits overall with a temperature rise of up to 2 degrees peaking at about 1 degree. It`s good that we now have a revised temperature we are heading for that is about the amount we need to get only benefits overall (we are heading for about 2 degrees warming? IIRC). Obviously local changes will happen that may not be locally good.

retractionwatch.files.wordpress.com
17 Estimates of the global economic impact of climate change, expressed as the welfare-equivalent income loss, as a function of the increase in global mean temperature relative to pre-industrial times. The blue dots represent the estimates. The central line is the least squares fit to the 17 observations: D=3.99(1.39)T−1.82(0.52)T2, R2=0.67, where D denotes impact and T denotes temperature. The outer lines are the boundaries of the 95% confidence interval, where the standard deviation is the least squares fit to the five reported standard deviations or half confidence intervals: Soptimistic=0.43(0.16)T, R2=0.65 and Spessimistic=1.82(0.86)T, R2=0.53, where S is the standard deviation.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165188913000092
 
2014-07-17 07:48:47 AM
I would guess it happened since the night Kris Kringle went nuts.
 
2014-07-17 08:07:09 AM

unchellmatt: brimed03: unchellmatt: Reindeer meet is actually quite delicious. I'm all for this.

/particularly in sausage
//mmmmmmmmmm.... reindeer meet sausage

Sausage... meet reindeer.

I think you two will be very happy together.

God DAMNIT.
That's actually..... That's the best iPhone autocorrect I ever did. Huh. I'm ok with this

Meet. Meat.


www.american-buddha.com
www.american-buddha.com
 
2014-07-17 10:52:33 AM
www.shadowlocked.com
Like the idea of more reindeer, not so happy about the warmer temperatures.
 
2014-07-17 11:59:46 AM
Do these reindeer belong to Satan Claus?  (Not a typo.)
 
2014-07-17 08:19:25 PM

Li'l Robbie: Do these reindeer belong to Satan Claus?  (Not a typo.)


Well, the innermost circle of Hell is ice...
 
Displayed 49 of 49 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report