Your Fault: Polar Bear Kills Two In Alaska

Unsurprisingly, Newsweek climate cult writer Robyn White leaves something out. Or, just didn’t bother to do any research

Climate Change Possibly a Factor in Fatal Polar Bear Attack

Climate change may have been a factor in a recent fatal polar bear attack in Alaska.

Summer Myomick, 24, was walking through a snowstorm on Tuesday with her 1-year-old son, Clyde Ongtowasruk, in the western village of Wales when the polar bear attacked. The incident occurred near a school, Alaska’s Department of Public Safety said.

The polar bear reportedly chased multiple residents before killing the mother and child. During the attack, the animal was shot and killed by a resident.

This was the first fatal bear attack to occur in Alaska since 1990. A necropsy of the bear has not yet taken place, but it appears the attack was unprovoked. There could be several reasons for the bear’s violent action, according to one expert, and climate change is one of them.

It either did or didn’t play a factor. This whole “may have” fearmongering is complete mule fritters

David Meanwell, director of the Bear Conservation nonprofit, continued: “Where attacks take place, they are most commonly made by young and inexperienced bears or by bears that are nearing the end of their life; in other words, by inexperienced bears or desperate bears. In both cases, the usual reason for the attack is predation.

“In short, if this was a young or old bear it could well be that the animal was hungry and the attack predatory,” Meanwell said. “That is unusual at this time of year, so if the bear was healthy, it is indeed possible that climate change may have been a factor.”

Robyn essentially spoke with (probably emailed) Meanwell and one other person, and, then decided to run this scaremongering cult piece, without waiting for the autopsy on the bear to see if it was old, young, diseased, or hungry, the usual causes of the attack. Of course, there’s this one thing

That red arrow points towards Wales, Alaska. The highlighted area is the range of polar bears. The full map comes from Alaska Fish And Game. So, this is in range of polar bears.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

20 Responses to “Your Fault: Polar Bear Kills Two In Alaska”

  1. Elwood P. Dowd says:

    Teach and conservatives once again victims…


    Alaska scientists at the U.S. Geological Survey in 2019 found changes in sea ice habitat had coincided with evidence that polar bears’ use of land was increasing and that the chances of a polar bear encounter had risen.

    and from the cited article:

    Climate change is increasing the number of polar bear and human confrontations in Arctic communities. This is because the warming temperatures are causing less ice to be formed and fragmenting the polar bears’ habitats. As a result, the bears will wander into populated communities more frequently.

    The killing of Summer Myomick and her baby by a polar bear is not your fault! But it is possible, if not likely that the global warming contributed to the bear’s presence in Wales AK.

    In addition, grizzly – polar miscegenation is yielding Griz-Polar hybrids (grolars or pizzlies). Grizzlies are migrating farther north in search of food and polar bears are spending more time on land since the ice floes break up earlier. Look at that – global warming has begat a new sub-species of Ursus!

  2. Bruce_in_AZ says:

    May I say bull shit.

  3. Nolan Parker says:

    There could be several reasons for the bear’s violent action, according to one expert, and climate change is one of them.

    Oooboy! Another Expert!! I’ve Never seen an Expert be wrong..

  4. ST says:

    New York Giants Vs Philadelphia Eagles Live Stream NFC Divisional Playoffs Reaction Score PlayByPlay

  5. Jl says:

    From Polar Bear expert Susan Crockford-“more bears and restricted hunting means more bears (as well as old ones and sick ones) become food stressed b/c they can’t compete with big mature males for food”. In other words more bears, the opposite of alarmist fear porn..

    • Elwood P. Dowd says:

      Susan Crockford is a self-proclaimed polar bear “expert” whose “findings”, i.e., opinions, are contrary to actual scientific findings. She does no research and has not published about polar bears in the scientific literature.

      Here’s a critique of Crockford’s opinions by actual experts.

      She’s been on the payroll of the global warming denier org The Heartland Institute.

      There is no credible evidence supporting the notion that polar bears are on the increase.

      • ruralcounsel says:

        Polar bear population booms amid global warming hysteria
        Story by Las Vegas Review-Journal • Dec 3, 2022

        As author Bjorn Lomborg detailed recently, the world polar bear population went from around 12,000 in 1965 to an estimated 26,000 last year. The trend is unmistakably positive.

        One of the major factors in this population boom has nothing to do with climate. In the mid-1970s, the five countries with the largest number of polar bears signed a treaty to limit polar bear hunting. As a result, the number of harvested polar bears dropped from more than 1,000 annually in the late 1960s to around 700. Saving 300 polar bears a year may not seem like a lot, but as a percentage, it’s a significant amount.

  6. Dan says:

    This isn’t complicated. A Polar Bear is WAY above humans on the food chain.
    The ONLY way to NOT become dinner for such a creature is to possess, carry and
    USE a weapon capable of killing such an animal. This isn’t rocket science and
    there’s no reason to overthink this.

    • UnkleC says:

      Large bears (Browns, Grizzly, and Polar etc.) are alpha predators and look at most any other creature as a meal. Maybe the GlowBull Warming nutters should interview a few to get their opinion on “climate change”.

      • CarolAnn says:

        So basically UnkleC those predator bears look at most any other creature like a demofascist looks at a voter. Especially a minority voter. Something to be used and abused at their leisure for their own benefit. Makes sense.

      • Elwood P. Dowd says:

        Which is why you don’t want polar bears walking through your village looking for a meal.

        Global warming deniers (GWDs) should bus polar bears down to their shithole burgs and feed them there.

  7. joe anon says:

    Global population size estimates for polar bears clash with extinction predictions

  8. Jl says:

    J-do you get your gw “info” from the same place Johnny does? It shows. But it’s news to me that one needs to write a peer-reviewed paper to simply count objects….

    • L.G.Brandon!, L.G.Brandon! says:

      It takes a special kind of idiot to base their views on “experts” who almost always turn out to be wrong.

  9. Elwood P. Dowd says:


    Did Dr Crockford count bears, LOL? No, she did not.

    BTW, PolarBearScience is the blog of, wait for it… Dr Crockford.

    You may not realize this but not a lot of people live where polar bears do. That makes them harder to count than one might think. And they move around!

    The fact is it’s hard to know how many polar bears there are now. Estimates from WWF are in the 22,000 – 31,000 worldwide in 19 subpopulations. Most live in the Canadian arctic. Six of the subpopulations (all in NE Canada are stable), one (Canada) is increasing, two are decreasing (Canada), and there is insufficient data for the remaining subpopulations (mostly Arctic Ocean, Russia and Greenland).

    Mr Lomborg’s 1965 guess of 12,000 is a guess. If bears are hard to count now, imagine how hard it was over 50 years ago.

    As arctic sea ice becomes less available for polar bears, the bears will migrate in search of food.

    Let me guess. You deny that arctic sea ice is on the decline, right?

    • drowningpuppies says:

      Rimjob: Let me guess. You deny that arctic sea ice is on the decline, right?

      You could look it up yourself, Chubby.

      Bwaha! Lolgfy

    • Jl says:

      So in other words, by that logic, there’s no evidence of a decline, either. Interesting, in that it was the alarmist camp that first spread the gloom and doom about Polar Bears evidence. Funny, that. “Arctic sea ice on decline..” The issue of course would be the effect of that on PB, which so far is none. “Polar Bear Science is the blog of Dr. Crawford…”. So, should she be writing in someone else’s blog? And that refutes the bear estimates…how? It doesn’t.
      But in the big picture it’s typical of the alarmists-they’ve claimed doom for PB for a long time now, with no evidence to back up that assertion, then whine with their claim that there’s no hard evidence their numbers have been increasing. Maybe they should look up “projection” in the dictionary

  10. Professor Hale says:

    It’s a shame we, with our huge brains, can’t figure out a way to protect ourselves from polar bears, as well as from other predators. One really needs to question the motives of people who want to preserve the polar bears and increase their populations. I suspect those few people who live near them have a vastly different opinion.

  11. Elwood P. Dowd says:

    Humans have long history of extirpating plants, animals and other humans, often to extinction of entire species and genocide of peoples.

    The objective is to protect the habitat of animals such as polar bears. It’s legitimate to question if Ursus maritimus has a “right” to exist. On the one hand, God valued polar bears enough to put a pair on Noah’s ark! On the other hand, God gave humans dominion over the Earth to exterminate to satisfy human wants and needs.

Pirate's Cove