Bees Are Losing Their Habitat Because of Climate Change

by Justin Worland | TIME
July 10, 2015

As if pesticides, disease and habitat loss were not enough, there’s more bad news for bees. Changing temperature and weather conditions due to climate change has restricted the area where bees can survive, and the pollinators have struggled to adapt, according to new research published in the journal Science.

“They just aren’t colonizing new areas and establishing new populations fast enough to track rapid human-caused climate change,” said study author Jeremy Kerr, a professor at the University of Ottawa, on a call for journalists. “Impacts are large and they are underway. They are not just something to worry about at some vague, future time.”

For the study, researchers looked at 110 years of data on 67 bumblebee species to track their movements over time. Activity between 1901 and 1974 was compared to movement in recent decades when climate change accelerated. In the northern end of their range, bees have failed to migrate closer to the North pole. In the southern end, many populations have died. Altogether, bees have lost a range of up to nearly 200 miles in both North America and Europe. The study, which evaluated land use changes and pesticide application in addition to weather conditions, attributed the drop to climate change.

18 Comments - what are your thoughts?

  • Joseph L. Light says:

    Someone should tell the BEES, in my front yard, they didn’t know that. They tell me that God controls that.. The rest of you idiots need to learn that.. Have a nice day.

  • nonstopca says:

    What a load of crap.

  • VirgoVince says:

    MORE libprog bullshitt, they’re killing off the bees, because that’s what they do!!
    Everything they do is bullshitt!!

  • KentS says:

    A large colony of honey bees just set up shop about 100 yards or so from my residence last summer; they were swarming for three weeks. I guess they didn’t get the memo.

    1. I Seigel says:

      I heard there were still people living in Africa! Can you believe it?!?! I guess they didn’t get the memo about Ebola.

  • teaman says:

    Scientist Confesses: “Global Warming a $22 Billion Scam”

    Latest Breaking News from

  • teaman says:

    This is bull crap and they know it! It’s just another EPA Wacko tactic to tie anything and everything to Global Warming lies!

    John Coleman,
    meteorologist and co-founder of the Weather Channel, wrote a letter
    to the Hammer
    Forum – which held a
    climate change symposium Thursday night in Los Angeles – outlining
    his position on the topic of man-made climate change. The
    main points from the letter,
    which was picked up by the British publication The

    has not been man-made global warming in the past, is none in the
    present, and there’s no reason to fear that there might be any in
    the future.

    Efforts to prove
    the CO2 emissions cause climate change have failed.

    There has been no
    warming over the last 18 years.

    There is no
    climate crisis, the oceans aren’t rising, polar ice is increasing,
    polar bears are increasing, and heat waves and storms are not

    Climate change
    is a political and environmental agenda item without basis in

    University climate expert William Happer added
    the following:

    “The incredible list of supposed horrors that
    increasing carbon dioxide will bring the world is pure belief
    disguised as science.”

    In 2010 a high-level inquiry by the InterAcademy
    Council found there was “little evidence” to support the IPCC’s
    claims about global warming.

    It also said the panel had purposely emphasised
    the negative impacts of climate change and made “substantive
    findings” based on little proof.

    related and interesting fact that came to light this week on this
    topic: the President’s assertion last month that the U.S. has cut
    greenhouse gases was proven to be wrong by data that show that
    greenhouse gas emissions actually increased
    last year.

    the problem: CO2 emissions have increased dramatically over the last
    two-hundred plus years yet temperatures have varied. Or, in the case
    of the last 18 years, haven’t moved at all. Regardless of arguments
    about “climate sensitivity,” CO2 simply cannot
    be the driver of global temperatures with such fluctuations.

    A 2013 NOAA
    article “Why did Earth’s
    surface temperature stop rising in the past decade?” hosted at poses:

    “The most likely explanation for the lack of
    significant warming at the Earth’s surface in the past decade or so
    is that natural climate cycles—a series of La Niña events and a
    negative phase of the lesser-known Pacific Decadal Oscillation—caused
    shifts in ocean circulation patterns that moved some excess heat into
    the deep ocean.”

    here is NASA nearly one year later blowing
    that theory out of the

    The cold waters of Earth’s deep ocean have not
    warmed measurably since 2005, according to a new NASA study, leaving
    unsolved the mystery of why global warming appears to have slowed in
    recent years.

    is the important point: the IPCC predicted that as CO2 level
    increases, temperatures will consistently increase as well, but they
    have not.

    thing seems to be certain among the many re-evaluations going on
    and that is that CO2 (and furthermore, manmade CO2) seems to not have
    the dramatic impact on global temperatures some scientists assert.
    Considering this, perhaps John Coleman has a point.

  • libsrtheh8ters says:

    Since the climate has been changing since the beginning of time how did they ever survive?? This is nothing more than fear mongering, it is complete BS along with the global warming scam & the climate “science” that has been completely WRONG since its inception.

    1. Luke says:

      You’re right, when I read the headline I knew it was written by some dumb liberal.
      A mite that attaches to the bees is what they say is killing them..

      1. I Seigel says:

        Did you actually read the article? The story doesn’t say anything about mites or what is killing the bees. What the article talks about is the reduced areas that the bees are living in, because the areas are becoming inhospitable to them and to the plants they need to feed from. What’s so difficult to understand?

        And what would be the point of “fear-mongering”? To what end? Who would gain? Companies other than Monsanto and Cargill?

        1. Luke says:

          OK, it was global warming, climate change, man made products and just the general public for living on the earth and polluting it

          1. Wolfman says:

            Luke, next time don’t give up so easy! He is pretty smart but he bullies people rather than just explaining what he means. And besides ‘fear mongering’ generates public concern, which then gives the alarmists the permission to legislate and control us all even more. Both the Gov. and the Corporate welfare recipients will gain the public’s cost of living goes up “They are the Princes, the middle class becomes the Paupers”.It is all about money ( anymore it is always about money statesmanship and morals in government hasn’t existed for at least 50 years.

          2. Luke says:

            Thanks but I haven’t given up. I prefer to be short and sarcastic with ignorance like that.
            I’m looking forward to war with people like that..

    2. Centurion says:

      You have to understand the source: Time Magazine. It’s just a has-been fraudulent, sanctimonious, snarky, hypocritical rag sheet that tows the demon-communist-cRAT party line.

    3. I Seigel says:

      How many times are you going to copy and paste this same comment into any discussion involving climate change? Don’t you have anything new to contribute?

      1. adbj102 says:

        Even IF it was true? Did you notice the study was supposedly done on Bumble bees, A solitary species. Not very important in pollenation. He is just earning his grant, granted on the conditions “that he prove climate change”.

        1. I Seigel says:

          No scientist has “proved” climate change. Most have been very very careful to be very conservative in their statements. What they do claim, though, is that the small bits of data and evidence gathered in many studies, by many scientists, in a wide variety of locations over time, taken together all point to a long-term shift in climate. This “bee news” is just another piece of the puzzle, not a smoking gun.

          1. Wolfman says:

            The last mini Ice Age ended between 1850-1870. At that point in time there were three things that could happen; First Temperatures stabilize, mini ice age continues; second, temperatures decline,ice age gets worse;third a warming trend occurs. So we are in the warming trend cycle.
            The IPCC ‘s records indicate that the mid 1980’s were about .6 degrees Celsius cooler than the the 30 year avg. ( 1.1 degree Fahrenheit). The late 1990’s about .7 degrees Celsius warmer ( 1.2 degrees Fahrenheit ). Since 2000 it has been ranging from about +.1-.2 deg.C ( +.2-.4degF) with a max. departure of -.3degC ( -.6degF) in the years 2000 and 2008. In2010 there was a spike of +.5deg.C ( .9deg.F). The IPCC climate model that appears to predict the temperature changes best to this point is the MR12 with the GFDL_R30_c mimicking the higher spikes more accurately in the beginning, but the GFDL model appears to be trailing upward from the actual high spikes in the past 5-10years and its predictive accuracy is more questionable .
            In any event,the MR12 predicts temperatures may be about +.8deg.C higher ( +1.8degF) by 2100. if the GFDL model can predict spikes they may be +2.0degC higher ( +3.4degF) .
            These rises are no where near the commonly spouted +7-8degF that alarmists typically spout out. Also CO2 is used by plants to grow. it is not always necessary to look at the CO2 producer side of the equation to lower CO2. The user side of the equation ( ie primarily plants ) may be able to be increased in significant numbers or GMO technology may be able to create plants that use way more CO2. However, with all that being said, there have been many times in the earths past that CO2 was way over 350-400ppm and it was cool. Also , what is so different about a warming trend following a cooling trend that just ended about 150 years ago. Very few of the predictions made 20 years ago have even come true. In 2004, when temps. were about +.4degC , we had back to back hurricane hits here in Florida. In 2008 ,when were about -.3degC below the 30 year avg. we had Faye drop 30 inches of rain. So my own experience with the intensity and number of tropical weather events is different from the doom and gloom predictions. In fact there are several greenhouse gases of which methane ( 20 times the greenhousiness power of CO2) is not even mentioned by Yo-Mama and his sycophant press. The fact that their beloved wetlands are a prime producer of methane i’m sure has no bearing on this , since their goal is to increase wetland acreage for other purposes….. but that’s a discussion for another day

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Keep the Fake News Media in check.

Don’t let the MSM censor your news as America becomes Great Again. Over 500,000 Americans receive our daily dose of life, liberty and pursuit of happiness along with Breaking News direct to their inbox—and you can too. Sign up to receive news and views from The 1776Coalition!

We know how important your privacy is and your information is SAFE with us. We’ll never sell
your email address and you can unsubscribe at any time directly from your inbox.
View our full privacy policy.