Image of starving polar bear raises questions

[tmttactical]

In an article for the August issue of National Geographic titled “Starving-Polar-Bear Photographer Recalls What Went Wrong,” Cristina Mittermeier talks about the intended message of the image versus the message that was received.

“We had lost control of the narrative,” she said.

http://www.foxnews.com/science/2018...questions-about-climate-change-narrative.html

My comments: We all love animals and would not want to see one suffer and of course we all want out planet to survive and prosper, (DUH) the big difference we are not distorting the facts and twisting date to suit our own purposes. I bet most if not all remember the picture of the emaciated (starving) polar bear and the massive headlines about "GLOBAL WARMING", well the photographer and National Geographic are saying Oops, maybe we did not paint a true and accurate picture with our article and photograph, out bad. Of course I am paraphrasing a bit, but you can read the article. Basically they got caught being misleading and now are backing pedaling.

Note: Mods or Admin, if this is in the wrong place please move and if not allowed please delete and inform me as to avoid in the future.

 

[DrHenley]

She knew exactly what she was doing, and it had the intended effect.

 

[Dani]

It truly does break my heart to see an animal suffering but just a picture does not tell the whole story here. There is a lot of different scenarios that could have led this polar bear to this condition. Yes it is so sad but just like the news media is famous for selective news coverage so are journalist. Most want to push a certain agenda down your throat and they will play with your heart strings to make you see it their way.

 

[lonewolf]

they reckon the recent hot weather here in the UK is down to climate change and we will get more of them in the future and they will become more frequent.

 

[Squirtgunsquirter]

Bear is too skinny.

No reason to hunt it.

 

[Mountain trapper]

There is no shortage of polar bears. In fact there are more polar bears now than in any time in recent history. The PB's have even expanded there range further south too. Polar bears are scavengers, they eat anything. There's also no shortage of ice in the Arctic ocean either. In the summer the ice moves around according to the wind and currents.
Just more global warming BS from the Leftest fear mongers.

 

[DrHenley]

There's also no shortage of ice in the Arctic ocean either. In the summer the ice moves around according to the wind and currents.

Didn't John Kerry say that by summer of 2013 there would be no more ice in the Arctic???
Ice extent in the Arctic (as of yesterday):

 

[TexasFreedom]

I don't get it.

Polar bears are no different than people. They get old, they lose their appetite, they starve and die.

For people, I'm not just talking about 3rd world, I mean right here in the US. I'd wager 10's of thousands if not 100's of thousands of people effectively starve to death each year. I've seen it happen to more than one family member. They have a serious illness (cancer, organ issues, etc). They lose their will to fight. They surrender. They can't kill themselves, but they can refuse food. A week, two weeks go by, and they die. I can't say it's cruel, they choose not to eat and know what will happen. Yes, it is sad, but it is part of life.

Same thing with polar bears. Sad? Yes. Caused by mankind? Oh heck no!

BTW, to hunt the starving bear might be more kind than cruel. No, not much meat, but that bear is going to die and soon. It is suffering and there is no way to save it. You can take a couple of skinny bears who would die anyway and spare a healthy bear who will carry on the species. It's not a hard argument.

And Doc, great reminder about liberal environmental lies. Too bad that's not put on the nightly news every day, to show the truth of their lies.

 

[Mountain trapper]

I don't get it.

Polar bears are no different than people. They get old, they lose their appetite, they starve and die.

For people, I'm not just talking about 3rd world, I mean right here in the US. I'd wager 10's of thousands if not 100's of thousands of people effectively starve to death each year. I've seen it happen to more than one family member. They have a serious illness (cancer, organ issues, etc). They lose their will to fight. They surrender. They can't kill themselves, but they can refuse food. A week, two weeks go by, and they die. I can't say it's cruel, they choose not to eat and know what will happen. Yes, it is sad, but it is part of life.

Same thing with polar bears. Sad? Yes. Caused by mankind? Oh heck no!

BTW, to hunt the starving bear might be more kind than cruel. No, not much meat, but that bear is going to die and soon. It is suffering and there is no way to save it. You can take a couple of skinny bears who would die anyway and spare a healthy bear who will carry on the species. It's not a hard argument.

And Doc, great reminder about liberal environmental lies. Too bad that's not put on the nightly news every day, to show the truth of their lies.

A skinny bear is much eaiser to skin than a fat one too. Most polar and grizzly meat goes to the dog teams.

 

[Squirtgunsquirter]

I am looking at the national geographic mag that apologizes for misrepresenting the cause of the bears starvation. Apology wrapped in a global warming lecture.

It's stupid. I used to like Nat Geo. Now every article is about how much humanity sucks. Except vegans. And savages, they are great.