AMAZON (The Rainforest, not Retailer) IS BURNING

If the Brazilian government will not accept international aid, is there nothing that we can do about these raging forest fires?

The G7 offering a measly £22 million was laughable, btw.

Doesn't help when Carl Sagan's evil twin Bolsonaro is at the helm either.

Also, supposedly the Amazon supplies 20 percent of the Earth's oxygen. All I can say is that we need to plant more trees ASAP.

I bet the Amazon Fire Sticks aren't selling too well at the moment ...

  On 8/27/2019 at 12:40 PM, Soloman Tump said:

If the Brazilian government will not accept international aid, is there nothing that we can do about these raging forest fires?

The G7 offering a measly £22 million was laughable, btw.

well to be fair, i think most governments would rather keep their money and use it for something more useful like making sure they keep their power.

besides, aren't those fires rumored to have been started deliberately? maybe people can do some crowd funding and save the amazon themselves- or ask bezos if he's got any bright ideas

  On 8/27/2019 at 12:40 PM, Soloman Tump said:

If the Brazilian government will not accept international aid, is there nothing that we can do about these raging forest fires?

The G7 offering a measly £22 million was laughable, btw.

  On 8/27/2019 at 5:06 PM, Nebraska said:

well to be fair, i think most governments would rather keep their money and use it for something more useful like making sure they keep their power.

besides, aren't those fires rumored to have been started deliberately? maybe people can do some crowd funding and save the amazon themselves- or ask bezos if he's got any bright ideas

Canada and other nations have offered aid separately from the G7 package. But it is on Brazil as a sovereign nation to accept the funds or not. Which is very shitty.

^^^ well, think of it like this. bolsenaro had the fires started to create more farmland. so the fires were the solution to a problem. what's this international aid supposed to do?

Maybe instead of nuking hurricanes we could nuke the forest fires?

  On 8/27/2019 at 5:33 PM, chenGOD said:

Maybe instead of nuking hurricanes we could nuke the forest fires?

the reaction to this situation has been ridiculously overblown.

according to the most recent NASA survey of the amazon, the current fires are about average for this time of year.

according to a slightly more recent Brazilian survey the number of fires is greatly above average, but the NASA survey was related to area not counting individual fires, we'll have to wait and see if the next NASA survey after the end of the fire season (after September) if there really was any real increase, but given that most of the current fires seem to be happening in already cleared agricultural land, not old forest, it's unlikely it'll be greatly above average, if at all.

Bolsanaro isn't helping matters when it comes to amazon deforestation, which has increased slightly since he was elected. It's still at pretty low levels compared to the peak deforestation rates of the 60s or something (and significant reforestation has happened since then). At the current rates of deforestation the amazon will lose a 5th of it's forested area in about a hundred years (a 5th of the area is significant as it's predicted to be a tipping point where dieback leads to accelerated losses). 

TL;DR: deforestation is bad, we should probably do something about it in the next hundred years.

  On 8/27/2019 at 4:28 PM, ambergonk said:

Doesn't help when Carl Sagan's evil twin Bolsonaro is at the helm either.

Also, supposedly the Amazon supplies 20 percent of the Earth's oxygen. All I can say is that we need to plant more trees ASAP.

I think it's 6%, if that helps...

was funny to see Ireland and France leading the European criticism of Brasil, threatening to prevent the signing of the EU-Mercosur trade deal. Ireland and France are probably the two countries who benefit most from the EU CAP, presumably that's just a coincidence, nothing to do with being wary of increased competition... 

Weren't the fires in Russia a bigger thing recently? Something silly going on here...

Its just all adding to the global warming rhetoric.

Green Peace having a field day and presumably raking in the donations

  On 8/27/2019 at 5:40 PM, caze said:

the reaction to this situation has been ridiculously overblown.

according to the most recent NASA survey of the amazon, the current fires are about average for this time of year.

according to a slightly more recent Brazilian survey the number of fires is greatly above average, but the NASA survey was related to area not counting individual fires, we'll have to wait and see if the next NASA survey after the end of the fire season (after September) if there really was any real increase, but given that most of the current fires seem to be happening in already cleared agricultural land, not old forest, it's unlikely it'll be greatly above average, if at all.

Bolsanaro isn't helping matters when it comes to amazon deforestation, which has increased slightly since he was elected. It's still at pretty low levels compared to the peak deforestation rates of the 60s or something (and significant reforestation has happened since then). At the current rates of deforestation the amazon will lose a 5th of it's forested area in about a hundred years (a 5th of the area is significant as it's predicted to be a tipping point where dieback leads to accelerated losses). 

TL;DR: deforestation is bad, we should probably do something about it in the next hundred years.

Expand  

interesting take, will have to read up on this.. cheers!

  On 8/27/2019 at 5:48 PM, Soloman Tump said:

Its just all adding to the global warming rhetoric.

Green Peace having a field day and presumably raking in the donations

yeah, tbh this kind of overblown pessimism, alongside that spouted by those shitheads in Greenpeace and Extinction Rebellion, is part of the problem. it's leading to a sense of paralysis among many, an increase in eco-fascism from others (see recent manifestos from those cunts in NZ and El-Paso, a long thread of which goes back to Brevik and Kaczynski), and in people who genuinely want to do something about the problem it's usually motivating them towards non-solutions (see Germany cutting down old growth forests to mine for coal when they could have just left their nuclear plants running, or wasting time on trivial nonsense like banning plastic straws).

  On 8/27/2019 at 5:43 PM, tec said:

I think it's 6%, if that helps...

But doesn't the Amazon hold a shitton of CO²? If it continues to burn, more and more carbon into the atmosphere, exacerbating global warming...

I'm just here to keep the topic hot.

  On 8/27/2019 at 6:08 PM, Joyrex said:

But doesn't the Amazon hold a shitton of CO²? If it continues to burn, more and more carbon into the atmosphere, exacerbating global warming...

yeah, storage and release of CO2 is a far bigger problem. The oceans would absorb a lot of that excess CO2, but that would lead to it's own set of problems (increased ocean acidity). Most O2 is generated by algae (between 70-80%), global warming leads to an increase in plant growth worldwide though, which has a damping effect on CO2 emissions, and is one of the many reasons the most extreme predictions around climate change promoted by the likes of extinction rebellion are unlikely to be true

https://climate.nasa.gov/news/2436/co2-is-making-earth-greenerfor-now/.

so when will it become socially acceptable to kill these "leaders" who actively help destroy this planet.  because strongly worded press releases isn't cutting it anymore. cunts the lot of them.

a limited amount of continued deforestation in Brazil might actually be a good thing in the long term. if it leads to increased growth and prosperity then it will likely tail off naturally as has happened many times before in other countries and other periods of development (increased prosperity also leading to decreased population growth). it's called the Environmental Kuznets Curve, basically a U shaped curve that tracks for increase in income and deforestation initially, and then the rate of deforestation decreases after a certain level of growth.

  On 8/27/2019 at 5:45 PM, goDel said:

Weren't the fires in Russia a bigger thing recently? Something silly going on here...

i thought it the ones in angola and congo

https://www.aljazeera.com/ajimpact/fires-burning-angola-congo-amazon-maps-190827012619287.html

  On 8/27/2019 at 6:25 PM, azatoth said:

so when will it become socially acceptable to kill these "leaders" who actively help destroy this planet.  because strongly worded press releases isn't cutting it anymore. cunts the lot of them.

good question. we should start a change.org campaign asking the leaders to change

  On 8/27/2019 at 5:15 PM, chenGOD said:

Canada and other nations have offered aid separately from the G7 package. But it is on Brazil as a sovereign nation to accept the funds or not. Which is very shitty.

before brasil accepts any funds, bolsonaro would first like macron to apologize. "then we can talk"

but like i suggested: maybe it's better to just keep the monies in europe since "macron can't even prevent a foreseeable fire in a church that is a world heritage site"

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/brazilian-president-demands-apology-accepting-20m-help-fight-amazon-fires-n1046716

surprise surprise. donnie supports bolsonaro. stupidity reigns.

  Quote

“I have gotten to know President @jairbolsonaro well in our dealings with Brazil,” Trump tweeted. “He is working very hard on the Amazon fires and in all respects doing a great job for the people of Brazil - Not easy. He and his country have the full and complete support of the USA!”

  On 8/27/2019 at 7:04 PM, Nebraska said:

before brasil accepts any funds, bolsonaro would first like macron to apologize. "then we can talk"

but like i suggested: maybe it's better to just keep the monies in europe since "macron can't even prevent a foreseeable fire in a church that is a world heritage site"

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/brazilian-president-demands-apology-accepting-20m-help-fight-amazon-fires-n1046716

Plus, 20 million is a drop in the bucket, and Brazil has enough money to fight the fires (although they're not really trying, despite what they're saying).