• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Alaska sues to overturn polar bear protection

Scarecrow Akhbar

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 22, 2005
Messages
11,430
Reaction score
2,282
Location
Los Angeles
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent

So polar bears are being used to lose America jobs and energy independence and revenues.

Nuke the polar bears.
 
The polar bear population is increasing. How is it that they are "endangered"?
 
The polar bear population is increasing. How is it that they are "endangered"?

They're not.

The socialists are merely abusing the Endangered Species Act to wreak more harm on America.

That's always been their goal.
 
The polar bear population is increasing. How is it that they are "endangered"?

Last year there were reports that the Bears were not in jeopardy. Oh look a story about it; .: U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works :: Press Room :.

Report Released on January 30, 2008

I kind of like to look at more than one source. This is and official one.
Anecdotal evidence in the form of stories from northern Europe last year said the numbers were such that the bears were becoming a nuisance.
 
The polar bear population is increasing. How is it that they are "endangered"?

They are not. It's just another leftist attack on America.
 
So polar bears are being used to lose America jobs and energy independence and revenues.

Nuke the polar bears.

Removing an animal from the Endangered Species Protection Act is something to be proud of. It means we have successfully revived that species, we won that battle.

Now as the left only rewards failure, it makes sense that they would frown upon polar bears graduating the evolutionary equivalent of AA; especially since doing so harms Al'Gore's claim that the polar bears are at risk from global warming.

If you're temporally disabled, you get the parking permit and special access. When you're healed, you loose you handicap permit and special access.

As polar bears are no longer in danger, they loose the special privileges associated with protecting them. Our need for oil now supersedes their privilege to live on a few secluded acres.

They can have the rest of the state.
 
I'm all for protecting endangered species, but even after reading the article, I'm still not sure how offshore oil drilling is supposed to threaten them. The article suggested they were threatened because they live on the ice, and there's less ice now than there used to be (and predictions say there will be even less in the future.) But it doesn't really explain the link between offshore oil drilling and less ice. Does offshore drilling make the ice melt faster somehow? I just don't get it.
 

There is not less ice.

That is a leftist lie.

Al'Gore used pictures taken in winter and compared them to pictures taken in the summer. It's deception, nothing more.

Global warming is not an issue.
 
Global warming is not an issue.

I'm not saying it is. I'm not saying it isn't either, though. I don't think we know enough to prove anything conclusively at this point. That's why I think taking drastic action to try to 'correct' it is a foolhardy idea.

However, my point was that the article was saying that melting ice is the reason the polar bears are threatened, but did nothing to explain how offshore drilling would further threaten them. I still don't get it.
 
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…