I am scared to death that the problems of climate change may change the world so dramatically that my children and my one grandchild will be faced with a very difficult world to live in. I understand that there are times when we may use Polar Bears or any other leverage to drive the point home. If your children were about to get in a car with a drunk driver, what would you say to get them to not get in. I suspect ANYTHING!
Ian ,London Ontario

Ian Greasley, London, Canada

Does global warming exist? Yes, certainly! BUT, mankinds' power to effect the environment is so infinitesimal compared to just a few moments of power from the sun that it seems to me to be more likely that any warming we are seeing is part of a natural cycle in earth's evolution.

G Baker, Jonesboro, Georgia, USA

Do all these doom and gloom scientists really know EVERTHING about our planet and the Sun?? At the moment we might just be a little closer to the Sun so the earth gets hotter. Or the heat inside the earth might be going though a hot flash. The Middle Ages was a very hot period in our history, not too many cars around then.

Also I would much prefer Global Warming to Global Freezing, you tend to find a lot less plant growth with the later.

Chris, Auckland, New Zealand

To Pete in Goodyear AZ:

You were complaining that environmentalists do not state the facts when discussing the amount of carbon released into the air from burning 1 gallon of gas. I find it quite entertaining that you use the word "magic" to cover up your ignorance. Let me walk you through a short explanation of what the "magic" is all about:

When you burn something, it might feel like you’re turning it into lightness, air, nothingness. But what you’re really doing is simultaneously vaporizing it and chemically bonding it with oxygen in the air to make it much heavier than it was in solid form.

Carbon dioxide, or CO2, is one carbon atom joined to two oxygen atoms. Oxygen is a little bit heavier than carbon, so when you stick two oxygen atoms onto every available carbon atom, you roughly triple the weight of the gasoline.

Don't get me wrong... I'm all for "explaining" things to people...just try and inform yourself or do a little research before posting ridiculous comments.

Morgan, San Francisco,

For Sue in Davenport, who suggested watching 'The Great Global Warming Swindle' as proving the non-existence of man-made climate change. I suggest you also watch the following video rebutting many of the false claims made in that so-called 'documentary':

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1656640542976216573

Giles, Dublin, Ireland

Please note that there is 2 kind of penguins: the auks or razorbills (pengouins) who live in the Northen Hemisphere and the manchots (penguins) who live in the Southern Hemisphere.

L St Baker, Melbourne, Australia

Global Warming is a natural process that is earning scientists a lot of research grants.

Good things to come from global warming scaremongering -
1. We will be less wasteful.
2. We are looking seriously into renewable energies which will help us in the future.
3. Reducing pollution's "real" effects such as asthma.

Remember the ice age that was coming in the 60's? The streets in Glasgow and the Clyde used to freeze over allowing people to skate to school!

Yes they grow wine just now in England as someone pointed out, but they don't do it completely naturally. They use modern farming techniques and new technology which was unavailable during Roman times... did they even have plastic sheets over the top to protect them from cold nights back in the Roman days? They COULD NOT produce wine in all the same areas as in the Roman days without using technology and new techniques... it's not warm enough... yet.

Graeme, Edinburgh,

A scientist that is not engaged in climate research has no more of a valid opinion on global warming than I do. If they use their title to push global warming “facts” then they are not acting in a scientific manner, but rather a political one.

Mert, Anchorage, Alaska / USA

Adding to my previous post, I said polar bears don't roam our towns and cities. I should've stated that obvioulsy this does happen in some places, my point was that they're not present in every town and city -should've explained that so I offer my apologies. I'm amazed by the number of comments on here from people who seem to be saying 'ignore the climate change scare mongerers, they're just using made up facts' etc etc, but then go on to state how their own opinion is correct but offer nothing in support of this. Even if people on both side of the debate have no respectable evidence to support their argument, I'm inclined to believe scientists who have been to the areas in question and conducted research rather than people sitting at home just saying 'no no, it's all a load of made up rubbish' and then offering absolutely no expanation at all as to why this is supposedly the case. So, we shouldn't believe what scientists are telling us, but we should believe what you tell us?!

Mike, Birmingham,

Yeah since 1950 how many species have gone exstinct? At least a thousand, and there is no such thing as wild horses, and Zebra herds dropped from 50,000 animals to 1,000. Due you like having no rain forest? Business does not own the air, yet it polutes it. Why don't they pay?
It would cost 4 billion to claean up a years worth of industrial pollution, yet it would cost 3 billion to of prevented it.
Farmers know that short term gain kills the land!!!
Finally, I am appaled by anyone who thinks a computer program or drive to a soccer game is worth destroying so much for.
Teddy Rossevelt was much more of a man than Regan could dream. And he said we must conserve.
He also was a Progressiveist, meaning thouse who take the most from the economy should put the most back! Tax the rich, they started this mess anyways!!!
The air quality is so bad from La smog in Colton Ca, that if you wash your car the next day it is covered in thick deisel particulate and wrecked car ash and dust

Paul, Colton, Ca

The unnatural demise of any creature on this planet is a poor reflection on humanity as its caretakers. Polar bears may be next, but we ourselves will soon follow to suffer the same fate. After all, we are what we leave behind.

helena umnus, cleveland, ga

Ecology is complex, but habitat rules. If the habitat is a constant, over ¨harvesting¨ will reverse itself over time if the killing stops. The polar bears population increase is due to lower predation and a healthy habitat. Using these data to imply we shouldn´t decry a permanent human induced destruction of their habitat is destructive ignorance at best and bad propaganda at the least.

rick crooks , ensenada, Mexico/ Baja California

Good infomation:

Only found one glaring error. There are no Polar Bears in Antarctica and no Penguins north of Galápagos. Perhaps this is was to verify just how ill informed the save the Polar Bear club is.

Dan from Alaska

Dan Brower, PRUDHOE BAY, USA/Alaska

Go to google video, Ben Floyd, Carlsbad, CA,
and watch the documentaries 'The Global Warming Swindle' and 'Global Warming Called Off'....documentation proves there is no 'man-made' global warming, and that the global warming
movement is nothing more than big-business.

Sue, Davenport, IA

Global warming or not, wouldn't it be nice if this one thing did what nothing else has ever been able to do? To have all or at least the majority of the countries of the world, agreeing on something, and collectively working towards the same goal? I don't see this as a bad thing at all. In fact, it could be the beginning of a great future for the people of our world.

Elizabeth, Massena, NY

Somebody wondered why burning petrol (gas) resulted in about 2 1/2 times the weight of CO2 being released. I hope a competent chemist will check this, but dredging up long past chemistry lessons, petrol is composed of many hydro-carbons. To take the simplest, Methane is CH4. When burnt with Oxygen, CH4 + 2(O2) = CO2 + 2(H2O). The atomic weight of a CH4 molecule is 16. The atomic weight of a CO2 molecule is 44, which is 2.75 times the CO4, because Oxygen has been added from the atmosphere. Petrol may give a slightly different result, but this is the reason.
I am very depressed that so many people are not prepared to accept the overwhelming consensus of climate scientists, and are in deep denial. Risk depends not only on probability but also the likely consequences. We may accept a high probability of risk if the outcome may be minor inconvenience, but not even a low probability if the possible outcome is catastrophic - & climate change could be totally disastrous.

Dave, Wrexham,

I'm a scientist, but I'm not famous...
Do you know where scientists get their research money and salary? Governments and large corporations.
Can you guess what happens to scientists who don't go with the flow (ice or propagandist)? They starve like those poor little polar bears...
Good readers, the history of the Earth's climate is surprisingly well documented, so if you don't mind a little dry prose, do your own research.
And if you really want to fight against global catastrophies - always use condoms.

mary, tromso, norway

For those of you who didn't get the penguin joke - they are a biscuit - aka cookie in individually wrapped packages & polar bears can't open them - JOKE - polar bears would eat them with the wrappers on if you ask me.

The planet is not a joke however - but WE CAN'T KILL IT. It will be here long after we are gone.

We may be gone sooner rather than later - and not due to global warming. The planet isn't warmer. Ski lodges are opening weeks earlier than ususal, there are record COLD temps in Antartcia and the Southern Hemisphere, spring was later coming & winter was weeks earlier starting here in the US with crop losses throughout the country - all blamed on this warming.

NASA says the "warming" we have seen is an effect of EL Nino, not the other way around and the ocean currents have shifted to La Nina with much cooler weather ahead.

NO CONSENSUS among scientists anywhere about this. Follow the money to the politicians & their agenda.

Alexandria, Hillsboro, USA

Could it possibly be, that the whole idea is government(s) way of taking the populations mind off 2030? Now that is (possibly) a real threat to human survival, even if it only comes a little too close to planet Earth.

Imagine its 2020 and people think they may only have another ten years to live..........

Ooops!

Rod Hall, Bradenstoke, Wilts UK

wonderful article.. at last the sunday times shows some ***** and prints a more non-conformist view. keep it up, keep telling the truth not the blair madness.

peter jones, moscow. c.i.s.,

You guys are just regurgitating the crap that politicians with capitalist agendas are coining. These denials are not being generated by scientists. "Man has had no effect?" You must be blind and stupid. I suppose the hole in the ozone would have appeared anyway, all on it's own huh?

Margarita, Austin, Texas

Would all of you folks who spent your time dreaming up fantasies please do a live search at "TIMESONLINE" for the name of David Bellamy then read his article on "Today's forecast: yet another blast of hot air". It has to be one of the most well stated arguments on Global Warming that I have read and he is one of the most respected scientists on 'earth' matters. Like him or loath him you have to read, mark, learn and inwardly digest his narrative, especially the paragraph concerning his survey of all papers on the subject published between 2004 to 2007, when all this new religion started, by Klaus-Martin Schulte of Kings College Hospital.
And ..... Penny of Newcastle, may I remind you that just because someone doesn't happen to agree with you does not give you the right to tell them to keep their mouths shut on the subject as that does tend to tell folks which way you vote.

Dinoz, Brisbane, Australia

Everyone saying that polar bears live at the north pole and penquins at the south pole are mistaken. Polar bears colonised the south pole when an 8th century joint Norse/Celtic war party sailed there on an iceberg. Wait til the ice melts from the south pole and you will see... there's an irish pub and a very early volvo 1200 feet down. My dar told me. So there. Morons.

Peter, Plymouth, England

We are always bombarded with statements about man made global warming and CO2 emissions. What I am having real problems with is finding any information on measured data to show this. All the scientists appear to be offering is a raft of computer models based on no statistically significant number of temperature or CO2 measurements in specific areas rather than randomly distributed arond the world.
It seems to me they are adopting Goebbels method of, the lie shouted loudly enough and often enough becomes the truth.
Let us have some data instead of pontificating all the time please.

D Cage, Highworth, Wilts UK

I suspect, from the comments, that not everyone knows, that in England, as well as being a cute, flightless bird, a 'Penguin' is also a foil covered biscuit.

John, Oldham,

the sheer number of foreigners who failed to get the penguin joke has made me laugh so much. more british based jokes please :)

incidentally, the times recently had a good article about how using your car was better than walking > based on the calories you burn and the replacing of those calories with food that is generally imported from around the world. surey a time to tax those that walk and reduce fuel tax?

joseph, london,

The planet will not die because of us. We will die because of our ways, but the planet will be just fine. perhaps a bit warmer for a while, but as soon as our influence is gone, then that will soon be forgotten.

J Allen, Moscow, Russia

I can't get over the amount of people moaning about the 'ignorance of the writer' over the penguins comment.
Have they missed the point or what!?

Amanda T, West Midlands, UK

The Vikings were amazingly wise and accurate people so it puzzles me why they would name Greenland that when it certainly must have not been so - or could Al Gore possibly not know what he is spouting off about? Is it possible that c. 900+/- AD that Greenland was actually green?

Linda, New York City, USA

Some of you raise some valid points. Others are obviously just idiots. Admittedly, I haven't read every single comment here, but it seems that all of you are missing the big picture. The ONLY thing that could ever save this planet is the extinction of the human species. The beginning of the end was when we climbed down out of the trees and started building houses. It would appear that the polar bears (God love' em) are aware of this and are doing their part to make it happen, rather than just talk about it, which is what people typically do.

Tim, Cumberland, MD

The scientific consensus nonsensmus. There are many brilliant scientists who argue that if there is global warming it has little or nothing to do with man's actions and is normal and cyclical. Global warming is primarily a result of differing climate on the sun's surface resulting in warming of not only the earth but all the sun's planets.

Paul Friesen, Detroit Lakes, Mn., USA

Paul Friesen, Detroit Lakes, Mn.

well sillys...,
actually,,,
polar bears live in the Arctic,
penguins live in the Antarctic,,,,
silly,,silly................

Michael , Doha, Qatar

How could anyone believe these so - called experts? They claim to predict the temperature in 15 years when they can't get the forecast right five days from now! Temperatures have naturally fluctuated on earth for millions of years, but some phony, wannabe "scientists" looking for grant money have created a "problem", and government has become involved because they see an opportunity to tax us even more to fix a problem that doesn't exist! They are in a win - win situation. If the earth naturally warms in the next few years, they can tax us more and tell us we are not doing enough, and if the earth naturally cools, they will tell us they were right and they did the right thing. I can't believe anyone could look at global temperature information over the past million years, and come to the conclusion that we are responsible for temperature changes on earth!!

Chris, CL, IN

On July 1994 I stood at 90 degres 00-00 at the North Pole. I got there on the Russian Nuclear powered ice breaker Yamal. We also broke ice for the diesel powered "Capitain Dranitisin". A historical first.The ice was 7 meters thick and required all of our 75000 horsepower to break it. Today the ice is now 1 meter thick. Any US Coast guard ice breaker can make it through. In 1983 I was in Antarctica where there was thick snow at all of the places our ship took us. All of the Penguin rookeries were full of birds by the tens of thousands. The headlines in the papers in Punt Arenas, Chile were breaking stories about the newly discovered hole in the atmosphere which was causing some animals to go blind. The papers gave dire warning about the effects of global warming . No politicians listened. It's real folks. If you have'nt been there you are not entitled to an opinion. We have helped screw up the world. Lets all work together to avoid natures armagedon. Jerry Sierra Madre Mtns, Mexico

Jerry Sherman, San Miguel de Allende , Mexico/Gto.

If god didn't want us to have cars that "pllute" he wouldn't have put iron or aluminum in the ground!!! Get a life people. You will all be dead by the time global warming affects you.

This really doesn't affect me at all. I live in Michigan. We have all the water and could use warmer winters. Maybe everyone with forsight will want to move here and our economy and property values will increase.

Keep up the warming!!!!!!!

Ed, Wixom, MI

Polar bear numbers at present are not the question. The rapid disappearance of summer sea ice in the Arctic is a looming threat the may undo all the good conservation work of recent decades. Global warming is not a laughing matter. /quote/
maybe not a laughing matter but this was a humorous way to bring to light the fact that we have major problems with focusing on the wrong thing. Poor Polar bears, let me hop in my hummer and drive thousands of miles to take part in a love in to save them. This is our world, no one cares enough to act, just to complain and shout. Undo the good conservation work of recent decades? We have bigger gas guzzling vehicles and more air polluting factories and no end in sight! Alternative fuel sources that would work but are too darned inconvenient for us to bother with. Wake up!

Dawn, Keeling, VA

Have you read of the story of Glacial Girl, a P-38 Lightning recovered from beneath 268 feet of solid ice and brought to the surface piece by piece? Recovered in 1992, lost in 1942, exactly 50 years. That is over 5 feet of solid ice per year over this plane. Global warming? Look it up yourself. Here I am living less than a meter above mean high tide. Not worried.

JohnnyUSA, St Simons Island, USA

Why don't polar bears eat penguins? Because polar bears live at the North Pole and penguins live at the South Pole!!!

Gerry Kay, Canberra, Australia

I think the science behind global warming is extremly flawed. We are begining to understand but still do not understand fully, the effect of ocean currents and cloud cover and rainfall as it pertains to warming trends. There is also recent research showing that sun cycles play a big role in the temperature increases over time on earth. This would help but doesn't fully explain the warming trends that are occuring on other planets like Mars. There is also a comment about the Larson Ice Sheet earlier on this page melt in in fourty years. Well according to the Glacier Program at Rice University in the U.S., the response time to climate change on glaciers is at least a hundred years for a small valley glacier much less 35 days for an ice shelf. Nice try!! There are more scientists out there not convinced but are afraid to speak up because of losing funding from the gov. I find it odd that Gore's and other socialist's fixes to this is the same for every other problem. HIGHER TAXES!!

Chris, New Orleans,

I don't want to pay any of my money in taxes to save any planet. if the planet is getting warmer, it's because of those green idiots blowing hot air.

Samuel Young, Paris, France

Polar bears live in the Arctic and penguins live in antartica....worlds apart, wouldn't you say only the very ignorant would have the polar bears eat penguins to sustain themselves?

Chris Gallegos, Las Vegas, New Mexico

my favorite comment from the "enviromentalists" is how buring one gallon of gas in your car adds 25 pounds of carbon in the atmosphere.... gas weighs 7 pounds per gallon.... where is the magic that makes it weigh 25 pounds??

dont get me wrong.. i am all for "saving" the planet... just state the facts and not the hype..

pete, goodyear, az

The facts show that the earth has been much warmer in the past. To say that those in disagreement of an anthropologic cause should stand complacent on the sidelines would be to ignore the enormous cost of the alarmist''s actions. Punishing the economies of the richest nations will have a disastrous effect on the poorest because of the diversion of reources away from food programs, poverty relief, ecologcal preservation, etc...

Steve Irminger, Concord, NC USA

Polar bear numbers at present are not the question. The rapid disappearance of summer sea ice in the Arctic is a looming threat the may undo all the good conservation work of recent decades. Global warming is not a laughing matter.

Richard, Santa Fe, NM, USA

To Paul Elkins, Bethlehem, Pa., USA:

Junk science = any science that you disagree with.

Junk science = any science that if true requires you to change your way of life, which you don't wanna.

Gary, Pittsburgh, USA

I don't know about you but I am still worried about the big freeze predicted in the late 70's. With all the carbon dioxide polluting the planet we were supposed to experience global freezing. The reality is that we do not have the ability to change the natural ability of our planet to morph. The problem is not really global warming or global freezing it is clearing up pollution so that we can breath, eat and drink without worrying about shortening our lifespan.
The real issue here is money. How can one profit from all of this baloney. Well from what I can see is that this topic has created a new market for fanatical environmentalist snake oil sales consultants.
I don't know how they thought could change from north pole climate to the gates of hell in only 30 years. That's only one blink of God's eye.
As my father in law used to say there is one man's opinion and another man's opinion and then there is the truth.

BaltoMoron Bob

Bob, Highland, USA / MD.

Yes, global climate does change in natural cycles and changing coastlines are also natural. Carbon levels have gone sky-high in recent years. Natural? I don't think so! Global waming is a little more extreme than the natural cycles. If you don't understand the basics, keep your uninformed opinions to yourself, you are encouraging unwarranted complacency. If you think anthropogenic climate change is a myth then there is no need for you to worry, so again keep your opinions to yourself, nothing will happen and no harm will be done. If you think climate change is unlikely then take steps to prevent it anyway, again no harm will be done. The only people who are entitled to any outcry here are the people who want to save our world. So why are the sceptics so loud? Looked at logically, it's pretty obvious which group has the hidden agendas.

penny, newcastle, uk

H. Sterling Burnett and Mitchell K. Taylor. Burnett made the original claim that the population of polar bears had increased. This is a "wacko" fact. It is now regarded that the population of bears was 20,000 to 40,000 in the 1970's and has been reduced to 20,000 to 25,000. Both these experts are employed by right wing policy advocacy group. Obviously there was political impetus for their fudging of the facts.

Dave, Portland, USA/Oregon

Are you serious? Unfortunately it's the people that have little to no knowledge of the science surrounding global warming that are the most boisterous in professing that there's nothing wrong. I do not think that a person can be intellectually honest and come to the conclusion that humankind has NOT had a significant impact on global warming. Do a simple google search, even for those that are not atmospheric scientists, the information is pretty darn clear and the impact is pretty darn real.

Joe, Atlanta, Georgia

The scientists of the ENTIRE world have spoken today, November 17, under one voice to say, that yes, Global Warming is happening. The polar bear is one species example, of 30 percent, that will be greatly impacted by the year 2020. It is ironic that the scientific community is in 100 percent agreement, yet people like the journalist above, writes against it - without understanding a single researched fact.

Propoganda? NO. Fact. This planet is in serious danger. When there isn't enough water for your children's children someday, or animals to enjoy, I will shake my head and say "I told you so."

This is why I'm not having children. Funny, I thought London journalists were more educated than Americans, apparently not.

Dr. Lana Montaubo, Malibu , CA

The increase in carbon dioxide has not been established as a cause or an effect. It is most likely that global warming is a natural earth cycle and that the increase in CO2 is the result rather than the cause. It is well documented that the earth has previously been much warmer and in fact had no polar ice caps!

Rather than spending billions to stop global warming, humanity should be planning on ways to adapt to the "new warmer world".

Steve Irminger, Concord, NC USA

The polar bear population census takers in 1950 did not have the capabilities the modern counters do, so I'm personally guessing the figures could have been very underrated. But stating that 1950 compared with today is also using irrelevant statistics. Give me a graph showing 'accurate' figures over the last 60 years and how the population grew and now is being diminished is the pattern I would expect.

Brian Shipley, Loudon, NH, USA

If we don't practice birth control, Mother Nature will practice population control. We are each leaving a huge carbon foot-print. The world is like a HUGE orange. In it are hundreds of straws each sucking out millions of gallons of oil each day. It cannot go on for too much longer. God may have told Adam and Eve to go forth and multiply, there were only the 2 of them then. Centuries later, God said, " A man who giveth ( children ) in marraige doth good, but a man who giveth NOT doth better!" He was saying way back then to cut back a little on that multiplying thing. Children may be a blessing, but lets not be selfish and claim too many blessings for ourselves .If we want to live longer, we must quit having so many children. Picture the planet like a big ship. Soon it will be standing room only. But Mother Nature won't let that happen. Pollution, shortages, floods, droughts, wars, crime, illnesses, will thin out us overpopulated peoples. Sterile people will artificially impregnate!

Anonymous, please, Fond du Lac, Wi

where do we get the info that "virtually all the world's scientists " agree we are being destroyed by global warming? And why if polar bears are five times more plentiful than they wre fifty years ago, are they aout to b eexterminated?

charles jones, towson, md

polar bears= North pole
penguins = South Pole

that;s why, Stupido.

alley, ajijic, Mexico

I do not think that a person can be intellectual honest and come to the conclusion that humankind has had a significant impact on global warming.

Mert, Anchorage, Alaska / USA

I agree with the first commentator. The guy that wrote this article would be still screaming if he were drowning. There are still guys in congress calling Gore a liar, in spite of the fact that virtually all the world's scientists now agree we are heading for a global catastrophe. Or maybe it is nature's way of eliminating millions of humans as an answer to the onslaught on nature we have brought with our pollution and overpopulations. Who are we to think that we can't become extinct? The dinosaurs survived for 50 million years and vanished, we have only been here for about 3 million years and have just been plain too successful. The comment about the penguins explains the ignorance of the writer.

Rudi Johnston, Toronto, Canada

Climate change can cause problems, as it had in the past.

Polar bears are not one of them.

Michael Ejercito, Long Beach, California

I imagine that those who have commented here were around 10 years ago and since then the evidence that the Earth is warming in conjunction with increased CO2 levels has been verified and strengthened. I also assume that you will be around for another 10 to 20 years which then there will be even more evidence. At that point I am sure you will still have your heads in the sand complaining about taxes, paranoid that this will result in a big brother new world order, while real consequences manifest (by the way there is plenty of evidence now, but I know your type, you will need to be 10 feet under water before you admit it). By the way I am sure you still believe that world is really flat and the center of the universe. You can explain yourself to your children and grandchildren, which are the ones who will suffer because of feet dragging worrying about taxes. And to the person who complained about some making millions on the average guy's back, I ask what about oil companies?

The Boogie Man, Philadelphia, USA

Good science or junk science? Recently there was a new report in the U.S. that breast feeding results in obese children. The report was published, and I presume peer reviewed, in a scientific journel of merit. I don''t know for sure because I turned off the radio.

What has this got to do with global warning? Junk Science!

I accept the fact that the earth's climate is warming and that it is, or may, be a problem. I also am of the opinion that the issue is so salted with special interests that any piece of junk science that proves a special interest point is reported or published as valid research. This makes an assessment of the problem and the determination of a couse of action very difficult for the rational reader and listener.

"Perfumed crap, is still crap".

Paul Elkins, Bethlehem, Pa., USA

But wait a minute. I thought Polar bears are only found in the north pole and penguins in the south pole?

intrgo, Houston, Texas

I love people with the buffalo hunter mentality! In a matter of decades herds of millions were gone while the great white hunters slaughtered them for their hides and tongues leaving the carcusses to rot. Others would return later to gather the bleached bones for fertilizer. The consensus was that there were so many they could never die out and the pursuit of the almighty buck prevailed. While polar bears are high profile for their perilous future, the world loses dozens of species of plants and animals every year due to mankinds poor stewardship and lack of foresight as well as their failure to learn from history. As far as I'm concerned modern humans as a whole are no less a parasite to the Earth than a tick is to a dog and the world would be better off without us as we have a history of destroying everything we touch. Those that continue to deny the very existence of global warming ala the Imbecile Bush should be fed to hungry polar bears and strengthen the gene pool.

Edward C. Wyman, Fort Worth, TX

I believe over harvesting through hunting was the cause of the polar bear's population crisis in the 1950's, loss of habitat is a slightly less reversable problem. As long as we all, as humans, don't take into account our responsibility to care for this planet we may find ourselves without suitable habitat as well.

Daniel Gocken, Burleson, USA

To Kirby, Lampasas, Texas,

To help you get some return on your tax money, ask the politicians to send you a few bears. They're delicious with a good BBQ sauce- just don't eat the liver. Too much Vitamin A.

Tex

J W Ritter, Ft Worth, USA/Texas

At first global warming came for the frogs, but i said nothing...
then climate change came from the polar bears...
then..etc etc

jim, new york, SUA

What could it hurt to stop dumping pollutants onto the earth and into the atmosphere?

A new report now says that climate change is occurring much faster than had been thought recently.

I don't know about you debunkers and cynical and sarcastic people (but I'm glad I don't have to listen to you if I don't want to); however, I would rather be safe than sorry.

I have two grandchildren who will inherit whatever we leave behind. I would prefer it would be better or at least the same, but not worse, for God's sake.

Liz Ursitti, Klamath Falls, U.S./Oregon

Global Warming = Carbon Credits = Global Tax

Let's not let facts get in the way of another tax! God forbid!!! Our poor politicians need more of our money so they can help us even more.

Kirby, Lampasas, TX

I Have to comment, as being an American, who knows how to not listen to opinion and conjecture (IE: —n.
1. the formation or expression of an opinion or theory without sufficient evidence for proof.
2. an opinion or theory so formed or expressed; guess; speculation.
3. Obs.the interpretation of signs or omens
I might suggest the following information to be read, if you are so interested: U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service -Species Profile: Polar bear (Ursus maritimus) Genetic research has confirmed that polar bears evolved from grizzly (brown) bears (Ursus arctos) 250 to 300 thousand years ago.Polar bears are the largest of the living bear species. Polar bears are characterized by a late age at sexual maturity, small litter sizes, and extended parental investment in raising young, factors that combine to contribute to a very low reproductive rate. Current Listing Status: Proposed Threatened 01/09/2007 72 FR 1063 1099. Please read for yourself, http://ecos.fws.gov/. Super!

Jay Berrie, hoboken, usa

NASA just came out and said that the Arctic ice melt has more to do with ocean circulation than with any global warming - the circulation patterns are going back to the 1990's patterns - so we can put away our NW Passage cruise line brochures for awile yet. Antacrtica is still at its largest since we started keeping track - underwater volcanoes in the West notwithstanding. Why do you folks keep on believing what the politicians tell you when your belief is making them into multimillionaires and the rest of us into paupers.

Alexandria, Hillsboro, USA

Harry from Dublin

The Larsen B Ice Shelf collapse was definitely not caused by volcanic activity. The sheet was destabalised by increasing temperature - take a look at the British Antarctic Survey data over the last 40 years, and their conclusions.

It would be great if it were due to a volcanic event, but we are not that lucky.

The two active volcanoes on that side of the continent are Deception and Penguin Island. The last eruption of Deception Island was in 1987 - about 15 years before the collapse of the sheet, The last known eruption of Penguin Island was in 1905 - sorry, can't blame these for the collapse.

The next nearest volcano is on the other side of the continent, Mount Erebus, which has been in constant erupton since 1972 - again, your volcano theory does not hold water.

However, sea temperature records show a clear link - the collapse was due to temperature increase.

Peter , London,

Larsen B breakup was caused by volcanic activity, thats why it was so rapid

Harry, dublin,

Hmmm, is this a classic case of the much mis-understood British humour (I use the term humour very broadly)?
Tone of the article was wonderfully cynical even if, like a couple of other readers, I do question the sources of some of the facts.
I personally believe that, like most mass hysteria, this issue is born out of someone's political ambition and is lining someone's pockets. I don't think that the complex relationship between CO2 and temperature rise has been adequately explained by anyone yet. How can one set of scientists say that CO2 creates heat and another group say that heat creates CO2? Anyone who believes that this is not mass produced mass hysteria should query the hugely varying consequences of rising sea levels - so far I've been led to believe that anywhere in the region of 3m and 7m in the next 100 years. This would leave the Pennines and some isolated parts of yorkshire and Cumbria left in England. Holland and Bangledesh would cease to exist, to name but two.

Ed, Swindon, England

is it wrong that frankly i don't care about polar bears? what purpose do they actually serve? at least seals can balance balls on their nose and impersonate clapping. poler bears just seem a little surly to me.

Ed, Newcastle, Uk

With regards to claims that the Antarctic ice sheet growing - it seems most commentators have never heard of the Larsen B Ice Shelf - why haven't they heard of it? Because it's not there anymore - it melted....in 35 days in 2002 - guess that is a bit of an inconvenient fact for those who wish to bury their heads in the sand.

How do you manage to use 3,500 km2 of 220 m thick ice disappearing in a month as a sign of Antarcic ice increasing?

Presumably the disappearance of Larsen B is part of the great conspiracy, and just confims the moon landings were filmed in a studio, the earth is flat, and global warming is a conspiracy dreamed up by the UN.... Meanwhile, back on Planet Earth....

Peter, London,

The IPCC report is a corrupt foundation on which to base the global warming scientific theory, especially as its dissenters were totally ignored. However it was seized upon as convenient for the politicians to use as a vast source of perpetually increasing tax, with a time span well into the future. Al Gore should have called his film 'A Convenient Untruth'

David Thijm, Stourbridge, UK

We are expected to leave our cars at home, yet Gordon Brown takes a 5l Range Rover to the airport to catch a plane to a climate change confrence 200 miles away!

Paul, Newcastle,

Just for the benefit of transatlantic readers. Mr Dellingpole knows that polar bears don't eat penguins. He almost certainly knew before he wrote the article that one group lives in the southern hemisphere and one in the northern - but I am sure that he is grateful for the reminder anyway.

In the UK a "penguin" refers not only to a kind of flightless avine life form (bird) but also to a brand of chocolate covered biscuit which is universally popular with all those people who like chocolate covered biscuits. Hence the reference to "because their paws are too big to get the wrappers off". You see a penguin biscuit has a wrapper that needs to be removed before it is eaten, whether by a polar bear or anybody else, whereas a penguin bird does not have a wrapper at all and can be eaten by anybody , regardless of how big his paws are - with the obvious proviso that the eater needs to be in the same hemisphere. This is, therefore a literary device called a "joke".

Ian Barley, Woking, UK

Keep this column pinned on your mirror, James Delingpole. You'll have occasion to blush about it yet.

pete ess, durban, south africa

A Penguin is a type of individually-wrapped, chocolate-coated biscuit (cookie) in the UK - hence the (very) old joke that polar bears can't eat them as they are unable to remove the wrapper.

I realise this point has been made by a minority already, but repeating it will hopefully keep it towards the top of the comments where some of the "OMG they live sooo far apart you moron?!"-inclined people may spot it.

Yes, maybe a UK-centric joke wasn't the best lead-in to the article, but surely reading that "their paws are too big to get the wrappers off" would make you stop and think "but penguins don't have wrappers, they have skin" and recognise it was not an ecological observation. Sheesh!

Chris Davies, Manchester, UK

Clearly, weather and climate are intimately related, despite climatologists and others (like Tim Rowledge below) claiming they are completely different.

What they really mean is that climatologists are currently unable to develop a model which embraces both in a unified theory.

Paul, Munich , Germany

Global Warming... Climate Change... What a laugh. 97% odd of so called Greenhouse gases are nothing to do with man.
Holding back THE SUN will take more than fraudulent taxes.
Now take on the corporations producing and distributing all the rubbish and we're talking. Carbon Banking... HaHa. Al Gore and the IPCC are less than honest and certainly not professional, and, obviously, neither are the Nobel Peace Prize adjudicants. CO2 GW is one gigantic proveable lie.

Rob O'Loughlin, Presteigne, Powys

"We were heading for another ice age according to scientists in the seventies and early eighties,what went wrong?"
No. They. Did. Not. Say. That.
I know that most people have the intelligence of gnat on mogadon but really, this is just getting annoying. A few of the dimmer newspapers (like Newsweek for example) printed that loopy idea based on a musing by a climatologist that it looked like it had been a bit longer than usual between ice ages.

"The weather forecast day to day is rarely right so why do these same people tell us what will happen in 50 or 100 years time? "
If you are unable to appreciate the difference between weather and climate then perhaps you might like to go away and try learning something? If your car is idling it is doing 0 mpg. If you boot it past a slow driver it might be doing 5mpg for a moment. If you coast down a long grade it might do 200mpg for a short while. But in the long term you know it is likely to average 35mpg (or 12 in the US, of course).

tim Rowledge, qualicum Beach, bC

Mr. Delingpole is certainly correct that polar bears, like more common black or brown bears, are so numerous in some areas and so willing to eat anything that they can be BIG problems. When I worked in Churchill, Manitoba, Canada on a US National Science Foundation project, we were constantly reminded to be careful when they raided the dump or wandered into town. Polar bears do not eat penguins in the arctic because there are not any. But give then half a chance, and they will eat you!

As to the Antarctic ice shelf: it appears to be stable or increasing. With winter temperatures hovering near -100F at the South Pole, it is NOT melting! The Southern Hemisphere is just coming out of an unusually cold winter in many areas.

Mr. Delingpole's satirical suggestion that polar bears be relocated to Antactica probably would not work because it is just too cold. Recent research shows that a colony of elephant seals was wiped out by climate change: it turned far TOO COLD for them.

Gordon J. Fulks, Ph.D., Troutdale, Oregon, United States

Polar Bears eating Penguins?
Let's see, Polar Bears are only in the Arctic.
(Northern Hemisphere)

Penguins are only in the Southern Hemisphere.

So of course Polar Bears don't eat Penguins!

Being ignorant of such a simple fact implies the author is too ignorant to see the larger picture.

The world's climate is changing.

Since evolution is still in force - it's time to evolve (live with the climate change, instead of fight it) or die off like the dinosaurs.

Mark, West St. Paul, USA / Minnesota

Wow...hidden agenda here. Unsupportable statement #1, "In 1950, let us not forget, there were about 5,000 polar bears." Per who? Reference please? kind regards, kg Irvine, CA

Kevin, Irvine, CA

Why don't people worried about Polar Bears do something about the dolphin and baby seal slaughters........not something they no control over!

dave quintana, los angeles, USA California

Things change! That's life! We only now have the technology and information to actually see it changing in front of us, that scares us as human beings. As powerful as we like to think we are... we ain't.

We need to relax and realise that we are only along for the ride, we are not in the driver's seat.

PS they used to grow wine in England without fancy techniques or using technology. Can they do that just now... no.

Graeme, Edinburgh,

If things didn't change and species go extinct then we'd still be living with dinosaurs.

Graeme, Edinburgh,

Yes, the world is heating up! Shock, horror, gasp! Of course it's heating up in comparison to when we have the first standardised measurement, which just happens to coincide with Britain coming out of an ice age. Well, hot dang isn't that coincidence we're warming up!

If we use the birth of our planet when life first surfaced as microbes, we are significantly cooler. Life will prevail! More recently, especially since we are nowhere near the highs of that massive coal burning era (sarc) of Roman Britain where wine grapes (think North France temperatures) were grown in York. Having lived in Sheffield and Blackpool I can tell you it's nowhere near that warm yet!

I think far more useful time could be spent on the horror of famine rather than we suspect we might wipe ourselves out. If we do so, we deserve to all go anyway!

Alistair Kipling, Birmingham,

James Delingpole really needs to get his facts in order: Polar bears do not eat penguins and the Antarctic ice shelf does appear to be loosing mass (http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/03/060302180504.htm). I can only assume that this is nothing less than a deliberate attempt by another climate change denier to convince the ignorant masses to believe in their simple minded view of the world. I guess that is why Al Gore (who did not win the Nobel Prize alone, but rather shared the Nobel Prize with the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) called climate change “An inconvenient truth.”

R. Marsh, Ph.D., Grand Forks, North Dakota / USA

We were heading for another ice age according to scientists in the seventies and early eighties,what went wrong?The weather forecast day to day is rarely right so why do these same people tell us what will happen in 50 or 100 years time?
We are being conned into increased taxes etc so the rich get richer and the money will be used to support wars and oppression around the world to keep the elite on the gravy train for their desired world order. Why are humans so gullible? Do a bit of simple research before believing everything you are told, look at real history and not what governments want taught in school.
Why listen to multi millionaire pop and film stars telling you to mend your ways while they climb back into their private jets to fly back to their Ferraris and mansions. Global climate change is cyclical and there is nothing that you or I or our children can do about it. WE ARE BEING DECEIVED WAKE UP!
James , Cornwall, UK

james , Cornwall, england

All this hype about global warming killing the polar bears is just that. Nobody seems to think what the polar bears did when the Vikings were farming in southern Greenland around the year 1000? It was much warmer then than now and they survived! The main problem facing polar bears is pollution and destruction of their habitat through resource exploitation. I don't trust big anything; big government, big environmentalism, or big corporations. They all have their own agendas which are in opposition to spreading the truth about the earth and what is really happening.

Ole Olafsen, Tromso, Norway

Have your joke and hopefully tonge in cheek story.
Polar bears have made a remarkable recovery, as at 5000 alive worldwide, they were in a precarious position and could easily have become extinct, even at 25,000 they are not completely out of danger and don't underestimate global warming, if humans don't recognise the real threat and deal with it appropriately,
it won't only be the polar bears that are possibly in trouble!

John Gauci, Mosta, Malta

Wow, 5 times as many Polar Bears since 1950 and a 5 degree rise in arctic temperatures since 1950 -- coincidence???!

Sounds like trouble bruin... :)

Carl Street, San Francisco CA, USA

Why don't polar bears eat penguins? Because there are no penguins in the arctic, silly.

Why are polar bears threatened? Because they depend on having sea ice from which they can hunt seals and walrus.
With half the ice gone in summer these bears are having a tougher time hunting.

They hunt by grabbing a seal through a hole in the ice, not by swimming after one. Polar bear numbers vary--but there are far fewer bears in the Western arctic in Alaska & Canada than in Svalbard. And why do you find so many of them in the town of Churchill? That's because the people leave their garbage food out, not because the bears are looking for a screen test.
And with the increased arctic melting, white is not exactly the right camouflage polar bears need to hunt well on snow free land on the arctic coast during the summer.
Except maybe to dig up squirrels. You'd need alot of those to feed a half ton polar bear. Arctic climate change is no joke!

Bo Boudart, Homer, Alaska

"Natural cycles in the climate are dwarfed by what we are doing to it."
What an arrogant remark, Milne. We produce less than 5% of a minor component which itself accounts for <0.0004% of the atmosphere and you seriously think that anything we do to reduce that is going to make the slightest difference?
The power of the sun is "dwarfed" by what we are doing?
Come on. Take a reality check (spelt c-h-e-q-u-e, perhaps?)

Harry Houdini, White Pigeon, Indiana

Something's changing - the northwest passage recently opened for goodness sake!

Polar bears need sea ice to hunt seals on which they depend to survive. 25,000 or even 40,000 sounds a lot but you get that many people at a single footy match! Imagine dispersing the crowd into an area several times the size of Europe!

Polar bears need Arctic ice, period. And not right at the pole either - the seals aren't there!

Al Gore's film made hundreds and hundreds of points. Only a handful have been found to be potentially misleading. It's all about weight of evidence. 'Scientists' aren't some homogenous group all working together. It's a catch-all term for thousands or researchers working in all sorts of fields. When lots of very different research all starts to point to the same direction its our duty to take it seriously.

WB, Leeds, UK

So the polar bears are dying? I suggest all you alarmists need to go to the Arctic and verify this.

P.S. No need to carry a gun or anything since they're dead! Happy getting eaten!

M. Thompson, Brampton, Canada

I wonder where you saw a polar bear eat a penguin. One lives in the North polar region and the other lives in the south. They don't exactly cross paths.

Larry, Montreal,

Am I the only one to get the joke about Penguins? The author does not actually say the Polar Bears should eat them but refers to an old joke, where penguins stand for the biscuit/snack of the same name and not the creature...

Francisco J. Bernal, Brigg, N Lincs

I spent 2 years on a US Coast Guard icebreaker that summered in the Arctic in the 1960's, The amount of energy that an icebreaker has, even the nuclear ones, in comparison to the ice is insiginificant. It could be compared to running a bulldozer through a field that self repairs. Icebreakers are few in number as there is little real need for them and they are expensive to operate.

The polar bears near Churchill go without food for several months each year. Polar bears in that area fast until there is ice, they are farther south in a warmer area. The rest of the bears will probably learn to do the same. I doubt the people on shore who now must live with these rather large dangerous pests are happy about it.

John Kincaid, Seattle, usa

Global warming sceptics seem to be just as 'shrill' if not shriller than the so-called doom mongers.

Nice (if limited) fact about the polar bears. So the eco-worriers have got it wrong. But the point seems to be missed that an explosion in the polar bear population could be almost as bad as extinction for the whole Artic eco-system (including mankind).

Then again, unforeseen changes at the bottom of the food chain, say, could wipe them out pretty quickly.

And once and for all, if the planet isn't warming and I'm being shrill, well we can look back and laugh. But if it is and we don't do as much as we can (and just bicker), the consequences will be much worse.

Andrew, Lincoln, UK

Excellent article. If I am going to have someone tell me the only way to save the planet is to put up taxes, I want to hear a balanced and reasoned debate from both sides.

Oh, and to the swivel-eyed reader who began foaming at the mouth at what you thought was an error by James Delingpole in his reference to Polar bears eating penguins, read his final paragraph and the one that precedes it properly and how you will laugh at your mistake.

Rachel, Rochester, England

Mark (of Boston), I'm sure that you have no idea quite how spectacularly you have failed to 'get' the gist of what has been written!

Marlboro Man, LINCOLN, England

Great article and comments. I thought a lot more people were taken in by the "man made" global worming, glad to see that isn't the case.

The fact the government dare give us a tax on our CO2 emissions is a joke, it's just another way for them to swindle money out of us and put fear into our hearts and minds. They need us to think that we need a savior.

Don’t they say that Egypt used to be a lush land of green? errr yes... now it's a desert and in the future it will probably be covered in foliage again, it's just part of earths natural cycles.

The reason oil seems so expensive is because our government put so much tax on it. But the real reason oil is $100 a barrel is because the Bilderberg group aimed to get it to that price by 2008, which they have achieved. It's not complicated and has NOTHING AT ALL to do with "global warming".

Another thing to add is that oil is also NOT running out and NEVER, EVER will run out, just another excuse to push the price up.

Andy , Hartlepool,

The world is running out of oil, so by 'making a change and saving energy' we will prolong our scarily low natural reserves. Isn't it true that the polar caps have a lot of oil?

I think world leaders would secretly find it convenient if all wildlife (including polar bears) disappeared over the next couple of decades. Then we wouldn't feel so bad for drilling up their habitat.

Gary, Brighton,

Everytime I hear from one of the global warming priests or zealots, I can't help but think of the old Monty Python sketch where a crowd of idiots is holding a woman as a "witch" with the crowd chanting "Burn Her!" and the Knight asks 'How do you know she's a witch?" One of the idiots states: "She turned me into a newt!" The Knight replies; "But you're not one now" to which the idiot replies; "I got better"..............................which will be the enviroreligious whackjob answer after they bankrupt the worlds economies and sent us back to the dark ages.........

han reardon, phx,

James, I have checked your facts and they are not. The US National Biological Service article you cited: http://www.fws.gov/species/species_accounts/bio_pola.html is twelve years old and indicates 5000 polar bears in Alaska and 28,000 worldwide. There is no evidence of a census of 5000 polar bears worldwide in 1950. It is absurd to posit a 5 fold increase in a species suffering unprecedented habitat loss and you provide no sources to back up your outlandish claims. Please spare us the rhetorical excesses and get your facts straight.

John McParlane, Pittsburgh, PA

Everyone is surely aware that ‘climate change’ or global warming’ has been used as a vehicle of doom by the environmental lobby, and has been a huge propaganda success story for so far. But the cracks in this massive deceit can not be papered over forever.

At least our forebears were more philosophical about the slowly changing natural environment. For instance, the coast of Kent and East Sussex has changed quite dramatically in historical times. The Cinque Ports, once the home of the Royal Navy, are now silted up or drowned. Winchelsea was totally rebuilt on a hill in 1288 when Old Winchelsea was finally inundated in a great storm and the Rother changed its course completely.

The IPCC was set up to try and pin some blame on man-made CO2 emissions, and it is incredible that the pronouncements of such a politically motivated organisation are still accepted as gospel without any truly independent scientific audit.

Dick J, Rye, UK

Polar Bears don't eat penguins because they can't reach them. They would have to swim from the North polar regions to Antarctica, where penguins live. Penguins only live on the North Pole in Hannah Barbera.

Mark, Boston, MA USA

Be as snide and dismissive as you wish. Some inconvenient truths simply will not go away. For example, it is now established beyond doubt that the mortality rate for polar bears has reached 100%! That's as high as it can go! It means every polar bear born will die, if it hasn't died already.

This statistic should be enough to convince everyone of the need for radical change in our way of life. Even if you only care about humans and not a wit about polar bears (How you could feel that way after comparing that cute creature on the mint package with the likes of Dick Cheney is beyond me.) you have to take facts like this seriously. All life is intertwined. Mark my words: now that the polar-bear mortaility rate is at 100%, it won't be long before you read that the mortality rate for humans has maxed out at the same figure!

In fact, you're going to read right now. It is clearly established that the mortality rate for humans is now 100%! If we continue on this path we are all doomed!

S. Quinn, Detroit, MI, USA

Ron - Roman vineyards? This one always comes up. There are currently over 360 vineyards in the UK (some quite a bit further north than London) (stat from www.englishwineproducers.com). That rather nullifies your argument, I think.

The relationship between CO2 & temperature is not the same now as in the past - in the past there wasn't anything comparable to the current rapid CO2 emissions. CO2 / temperature form a coupled positive feedback system - rise in one leads to a rise in the other. Temp rose first in the past, due to variations in Earth's orbit, but that's not what's happening now.

As for the original article - the author doesn't give any support for his claim of a 5-fold increase in the polar bear population - the original 5,000 figure was an estimate based on insufficient data and can't be regarded as reliable.

Giles King-Salter, Hereford, UK

Yes Paul, much like our current bunch of Long-Term Weather Forecasters (Climatologists). If they were trained in statistics, I might pay attention to what they say (see the Wegman report for further information). But as they are not and frequently make basic statistical errors in their papers and models (see www.climateaudit.org for more information), I will not be applauding their nobel prizes just yet.

There is a mass extinction going on as we speak, but it has nothing to do with "warming". It's caused by overpopulation. Unfortunately, the global warming hysterics are diverting both resources and political capital away from this extremely important issue, with their ridiculous fantasy catastrophism.

On the plus side, Climatologists are having a field day with all the new government grant money!

Robert, London, UL

There are lies, and then there are statistics. I think a closer look at the "facts" in this article is illuminating.
It's a bit misleading to portray polar bear numbers as having somehow miraculously surged since 1950, whereas what we have seen is merely a recent recovery from near-extinction, which had been brought about by intensified hunting pressure. Not only did the 20th century arm native hunters with rifles rather than spears, the 1940's also saw the advent of trophy and "sport" hunting from aircraft. It wasn't until the 1970's that polar bears were given partial protection, since when, not surprisingly, their numbers have recovered to something approaching natural level (which, as with all predators, is limited by food availability).
The global population of 25,000 or so (the human population of a small town) spread over the entire polar region is hardly in danger of overcrowding, and is dependent on the existence of sufficient pack-ice hunting habitat for continued survival.

Gary Clarke, Cadiz, Spain

Dear Ron, allow me to jump the gun and reply on Dr Milnes behalf on the two points that trouble you.

1. I don't know how many vinyards there were around London in Roman times but if you want to know how many there are today visit the English Wine producers website (http://www.englishwineproducers.com/vineyardregional.htm) to verify that there are indeed lots in England today, with more being added as the climate warms.

2. It may well be true that carbon dioxide increase follows warming (CO2 is less soluble in warmer seas for a start), but Arrhenius demonstrated that it is a greenhouse gas in the 19th century (adding . It's us burning fossil fuels that's upped its concentration from 280ppm to 380ppm since the industrial revolution.

There was an interesting article in the New Scientist about your points:
http://environment.newscientist.com/channel/earth/climate-change/dn11652

paul newbold, sheffield, uk

I'm no expert, but no-body seems to mention that an ice-breaker ship is the one other reason why the ice cap is shrinking!

Take this for an example - If you have a big ice sheet and drop it on the floor, the smaller fragments will melt quicker than a bigger fragment.

And with alot of people using an Ice Breaker continuously on the ice cap (which has been used for over 30 years, I believe), will slowly melt or chip away the Ice Cap. That, I believe is the cause of the diminishing ice cap. So, Yes there is a threat for the polar bears.

Shame on the greenpeace people who even use an ice breaker themselves.

Jamie, Preston, England

Wow, I can't believe the vehemence and nastiness when it comes to - god forbid - trying to save what's left of our natural world, ie. the planet, i.e. the thing that not only allows us to live, but when healthy, maintain our health as well. Go ahead, spew vitriol, say incredbily stupid, ignorant things motivated by guilt, ignorance, greed, stupidity, all of the above (for example: polar bears don' t eat penguins, you moron, because polar bears live in the northern hemisphere, penguins in the far southern hemisphere) and in them meantime, ask why so many more people than ever are sick and dying of cancer and other autoimmune disorders caused by environmental toxins (yes, tons of proof, if you ever read anything of merit, that is), why quality of life has gone down for the majority of Americans, and why you idiots are writing to argue with a man who just won the Nobel Peace Prize. A bit suspect, methinks.

Renee, San Diego, CA

Anyone any idea how much filth a good going volcano spews into the air? This has concerned me since Mts. Ruapehu and Pinatubu blew a few years back. I can't seem to find anywhere to find how volcanic debris compares with our own contributions. Could anyone enlighten me?

neil, waterford, ireland

What about - if a penguin in a zoo escaped and got into the polar bears reach? Maybe we could find out the answer with a computer simulation. I'm drawing up a research proposal right now.

Sir Ranulph Fiendish, London, UK

"Doctor" Richard Milne is a simple economist -- far, far removed from anything in the hard physical sciences.

He's just another charlatan selling Al Gore's globaloney snake oil.

Smokey, Santa Clara, California, USA

"Natural cycles in the climate are dwarfed by what we are doing to it." 'DR' Richard Milne says.

Nothing could be more ridiculous and further from the truth.
Man's contribution to climate change is like a fly on a camel's back.

'DR' Clarence Clapsaddle, London, Ca

So I see that we cannot possibly accept the archaic 1950 technology to measure polar bear populations, but we certainly can use archaic 1950 weather technology to prove climate change. Very interesting, and quite ironic.

AEM, Colorado, USA

Ron - Roman vineyards? This one always comes up. There are currently over 360 vineyards in the UK (some quite a bit further north than London) (stat from www.englishwineproducers.com). That rather nullifies your argument, I think.

The relationship between CO2 & temperature is not the same now as in the past - in the past there wasn't anything comparable to the current rapid CO2 emissions. CO2 / temperature form a coupled positive feedback system - rise in one leads to a rise in the other. Temp rose first in the past, due to variations in Earth's orbit, but that's not what's happening now.

As for the original article - the author gives no support for his claim of a 5-fold increase in the polar bear population - the original 5,000 figure was an estimate based on insufficient data and can't now be regarded as reliable.

Giles King-Salter, Hereford, UK

DEAR TERENCE HALE,the reason polar bears dont eat
penguins is because there are no penguins in the artic and
too all you sad people out there which cant be bothered to do
your little bit to maybe help our planet ,I FEEL SORRY TO
SAY PERHAPS MAYBE IT IS TIME MANKIND GAVE UP
THE RIGHT TO REMAIN HERE.

george william taylor, HULL, UK

The scary part is how many of our politicians want to tax us to death to 'fix the problem'.

Don't vote for anybody who believes this rubbish.

Ron, camp verde, az usa

Heres another fact they don't shout loudly

"Humans ONLY produce 5% of the CO2 emitted each year -the other 95% is from natural processes"

Yeah lets cut it to 2.5% and save the world

Bernie, Akld, NZ

All right then. If the polar bears and other Arctic fauna are not really endangered, can we have the ice-cap declared as endangered. Something has to be endangered otherwise we'll have to come up with more tax money to support all the unemployed greenie lobbyists on the DHSS (or whatever its politically correct title is these days).

KR, Stockport,

If there weren't so many Climate Change researchers (flying) up to the North Pole and poking about trying to prove their points and maintain their grants there might be even more Polar Bears.

Everytime you see a bunch of beardies on TV sticking their little measuring rods in the ice, I've noticed that there's an additional chap hovering around about 10 feet behind them looking nervous. He's always carrying an enormous rifle in case the cuddly little creatures come to play with their would be saviours. So I guess the citizens of Churchill, Manitoba can thank the scientists' mates for taking the odd pot shot at the bears to help keep the population down a bit.

Kevin Browne, Reading, England

So an increase in polar bear population means that the ice caps aren't melting? So the destruction of their habitat doesn't matter because there is more of them to suffer from it than 50 years ago? Is that your argument?
The deserts are growing in africa, the floods are getting more severe...but so is the population is bigger than it was 50 years ago so what's the problem? I'm so fed up of these make poverty history "doom-mongers" and humanitarian-fascists!

Olly, London,

Q: What is the difference between the people that believe Al Gore and those that believed the propaganda of Joseph Goebbels
A: Nothing
There was a time when we thought the Germans of the 1930’s had some special susceptibility to the message, which lead them to kill 6 million Jews. Now we defend a 600 pound white carnivore that eats cute little seals. So who is guilty of “Crimes Against Humanity”?

Ivan Ivanovich, Howell, MI

What a welcome antidote to the propaganda the BBC World Service serves up on climate change.

Patrick Moore, Prague, Czech Republic

Thank you ! An article on climate change displaying some common sense and without the usual shrill hysteria and dodgy science.

George Harris, cape town,

I entirely agree with you Tommy, the problem with the eco nutters is that they hardly possess a scientific brain cell between them, and have no knowledge of history. As you say too many scientists won't let the truth stand in the the way of their next research grant.

John, Cornwall, UK

Strange to say, I don't think about polar bears from one day to the next. And if I visited the Arctic Circle, a polar bear would be the last thing I would want to come across. Polar bears need to understand there's no such thing as a free lunch. The days when tiny numbers of animals (and people) needed huge areas of the Earth's surface to live their hunter-gatherer lifestyle are over.

Eugene, Chester, England

But i like polar bears

L Stokes, Norwich, England

Why are they still around after all the other times the Arctic ice melted in warm periods?

JLG, Houston, Texas

It's typical of conservatives to focus on t he crumbs on the floor but miss the cake on the table. The poles are shrinking - period. No dispute. Sooner or later that bodes ill for humans who live there, as well as polar bears.

Jim Mooney, Tempe, AZ

"Natural cycles in the climate are dwarfed by what we are doing to it."

The human impact on the earth is relative minor when compared to the natural cycles of the planet. The ocean produces more ozone in a day than humans have ever contributed in our entire existince. Over crowding - The entire population of earth could fit into the state of Rhode Island giving each person four square feet to inhabit with room left over to spare. "Global Warming" is the greatest myth proposed by cowering scientists worried about losing their goverment grants. Any credible researcher not on the goverment dole willl be the first to admit it. Trouble is - most are weenies hiding in their goverment funded programs who can't or do not want to survive in the real world. It's a myth and iit's making a lot of money for those who propagate it. So livestock are responsible for the levels of methane that "plague" the planet?
Get real - the earth produces more methane in a second than any group of animals will

Mike U, Livonia, USA/Michigan

Dr Richard Milne appears to be using his Dr for effect, could he tell us what he is a Dr in? Lets look at some historical facts: the last ice age ended some 10,000 years ago, it ended because of natural changes in the earths temperature; during the middle ages sea levels were a lot higher than they are now and this country was a lot warmer than it is now, all caused by natural changes in the earths temperature; during the 19th Century there was a mini ice age, caused by........well, I think you get the gist. The earths temperature has been fluctuating since the earth began, some several billion years ago and will carry on fluctuating for some several billion years in the future, until the sun burns out and takes earth with it. I'm not sure where the argument about petrol prices came in!

David Leslie, Perth, Scotland

The hard evidence for anything other than natural warming and cooling cycles is virtually nonexistent - a matter of faith, rather than science. Therefore, anybody who refuses to believe that man has sinned against Nature and must make atonement is a heretic and must be in league with the oil-company devil. If polar bears were truly endangered, they'd have gone extinct during the medieval warm period, when the ice virtually disappeared from around Greenland.

S. Raiguel, PhD., Leuven, Belgium

James, old chap, you really do need to develop a little more understanding of the issue before hitting the keyboard - "drink deeply or not at all" and all that.

If the polar bear population were 100 or 1000 times what it was 20 years ago they would still be vulnerable today. The issue is a very simple one of habitat destruction: the bears are quite literally skating on increasingly thin ice and, being gigantic white monsters (not at all cute and fluffy), they are one of the most obvious indicators of a very significant change in a very important patch of the planet.

However, can we perhaps question your facts. The 5 fold increase in polar bear numbers since the 50's is described in Bjorn Lomborg's latest book, citing a reference to The New York Times rather than a peer reviewed journal. Unfortunately, we have no reliable data at all on polar bear populations in the 50's and 60's, so the reported increase is somewhere between guesswork and fiction.

Paul Schleifer, Chiswick,

If you put 6 people into a cell designed to accommodate 2, it will become hot and airless.
We have so far put 6 billion people onto a planet which may now be becoming hot and airless.
Let's have a cull, starting with the ones who produce the most hot air.

Jonathan Wilton, Bukit Timah,

Dr Richard Milne, (in what are u a doctor, incidentally?), and the rest of the doom mongers!
You are simply plain wrong, the price of oil is up because of proffitiering by the oil business and governments, not forgeting the 70 odd pence tax put on it by a certain little Bureaucrat, Chairman Brown.
Anyone born in a dictatorship, will recognise this histeria as the propaganda so loved by the communists and the Nazi-fascist machines. It is a very sad fact that western people, are it seems very easily duped into forgeting they supposedly live in a democracy, a fact we all are going to regrett, history is proof of that.
Incidentally, have a look at this planet, look at how imensely big and complex it is, look at just how little we, as a species know about it, or indeed anything, and then o' you almighty arrogant saver of the earth, allow an independ thought through your brain matter!

Jondi Saka, London,

The best way for mankind to save polar bears would be to stop shooting them, 500 are shot every year. Global warming accounts for far less polar bear deaths.

Mark, Newcastle,

Dear Dr Milne,
At one point the area where I live was under a mile of ice (the last ice age, a few thousand years ago). Please explain the vineyards around London during Roman times, how many are there today?
Also, the FACT that carbon dioxide increase follows warming rather than the enviro doctrine that human produced CO2 causes warming.
Start with explaining those couple of minor points and we'll have a dialogue.

Ron, Freeland, USA/ Washington

Yes! Someone telling the truth again. Well done The Times! The facts about the polar bear population has been known for quite some time but its only now that newspapers are breaking rank with the lying eco-nutters! Melting Artic ice is not the big deal its made out to be. Its the Antartic and Greenland ice sheets that matter and the Antartic one is thickening!! Opening of the Northwest passage? Well it was almost certainly open when the vikings went to Greenland to farm. Why was Greenland named so? Maybe it was green with grass and vegetation? Or perhaps the Vikings were being ironic? The data about Arctic ice is only as old as satellite monitoring - about 30 years. By frightening everyone with their lies the eco-nutters are doing us great harm. They will be found out. Then no-one will believe it when a real eco problem / catastrophe looms. C'mon you scientists in influential positions stop worrying about your research grants and tell it as it is - we might then get the real facts.

tommy, agen, france

Hi,
It would interest me who counts polar bears ? and a biological question why do not polar bears eat penguins?
Regards Dr.Terence Hale Zandvoort

Terence Hale, zandvoort, Holland

Awww. So if the arctic is actually overcrowded with the polar bears and I adopt one as requested then might it end up on my doorstep?
Maybe I'll hang fire on the direct debit form for the moment.

Bernardine Kennedy, Southend-on-Sea, UK

"But never let the facts get in the way of a good story".
Polar bears don´t eat penguins, actually. Polar bears live in the Arctic and penguins in the Antarctic, two parts of the globe as far away from each other as possible.

Björn Bergström, Västerås, Sweden

Great column, I've been trying to tell people this fact and many other obvious environmental truths over the past couple of years only to fall on deaf ears! People are really being conned left, right and centre atm by the media, greedy green minded politicians and the main source a corrupted scientific/environmentalist community hell bent on forcing their evidence lacking agenda on climate change (panic and hysteria; Melting ice caps/ mass extictions etc etc) and of course the starving polar bears....These same 'environmentalists' are now creating *real* devastation by promoting biofuels etc that lead to rapid deforestation and poverty through loss of food crop... What a crazy world we currently live in!

Sam, Glasgow,

Are you saying Al Gore is a liar? Shurely shome mistake.

I am still celebrating his Nobel Peace prize, for heavens sake, although from what you have written here, the poor penguins would probably disagree with the award.

Stephen Rothbart, Prague, Czech Republic

Actually, some of the papers I've read estimate a global population of betwen 25000 to 40000, so you could have heaped even more riducule upon the 'doom-mongers' and al gore. Mind you, I'd hypothesize that at least part of the discrepancy is due to more accurate counting techniques and resources (the 5000 figure was estimated nearly 60 years ago after all).
On a more general point, the global warming sceptics/business as usual crew seem to be resembling creationists in their efforts to 'disprove' evolution by leaping on any apparant loopholes, and claiming it as proof that the whole theory is wrong, in the face of a mass of evidence that it's not.
C'mon James, you don't really think that the retreat of the artic sea ice is going to be good for indiginous species?

paul newbold, sheffield, uk

This is the best thing I have ever read about 'climate change' and how its such a sham.
When the the the great storm happened in 1987 I didn't hear anybody scream 'oh my god we must change our ways! We are sending the world into a catastrophic apocalypse!', the only thing which was news worthy on that fateful night was the fact that Ian McCaskill and his team got the forecast wrong!!

Gary, Brighton, England

Thank goodness there are still voices of reason in the world. The hysterical rantings of the climate change lobby are in danger of leading us all into a totally unnecessary economic and social decline.

Grahame Veale, Newton Abbot,

Yep drive your 4x4 into a ice cap melting middle east buring hell
hole, don't mind the rest of us .

Simon, brighton, uk

The danger to Polar bears is what'll happen in the future. If the ice caps disappear, as current evidence indicates they will, the bears will either die out or survive only by raiding towns like Churchill for food. They may not be dying yet, but it doesn't automatically follow that they're not in danger.

As for the comment by Ian Skidmore, this is the sort of deliberate ignorance that is propagated by Climate Change Deniers in the hope of getting petrol prices reduced. Natural cycles in the climate are dwarfed by what we are doing to it.

Dr Richard Milne, Edinburgh,

Absolutely right and very timely. The climate is changing. It keeps changing or we would still be buried under tons of ice. The coast has been eroding since we were joined to Africa. and we are surrounded by drowned villages.They are headline news in the Mabinogion.Scientists are the manifestation of Pickwick's Fat Boy. They want to make our flesh creep. How else would they get research grants ?. Governments love phoney problems. For one thing they can huff and puff in the certain knowledge they won't blow the house down.,