If you would take the time to read the release, you would see there was no malfeasance involved. There are 19 identified bear sub-populations. Some are well studied; others not. As the release said, there are good estimates for some sub-populations, dated estimates for others, and little data for yet others. But people want to know how many, so scientists have to make an estimate somehow. They use the best information they have and make an educated guess for, say, the Arctic Basin based on area and feeding opportunities. The IUCN scientists have not been dishonest or deceitful on this. Their 2009 survey splits out the sub-populations and their status. Eight of the 19 groups are in decline, 1 is increasing, 3 are stable, and 7 have insufficient data. So while the number of polar bears is not known with 100% certainty, and scientific estimates have to be inferred in poorly-studied regions, this is a long way from saying the population as a whole is healthy and we can just forget about global warming.
 (polarbear20052009pie.gif)
Attachments
----------------
 polarbear20052009pie.gif (37KB - 78 downloads)
| 
can't even trust scientists these days
