• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

The Brazilian gov is destroying the rain forest.

[DHT]Osiris said:
The amazon generates some 20% of our global oxygen.
Click to expand...
Who needs oxygen when you've got libtard tears!!!

Tears contain water...electrolysis to make hydrogen and oxygen...presto I've solved the world's energy crisis and the CO2 problem. Just need enough of these types of gov'ts elected to piss off the libs and we'll be off oil in no time. 😀
 
If the US is really itching for some regime change Brazil might be a better place to start. I mean it shouldn't be too hard since you know Bolsonaro is up to his eyeballs in corrupt shit that could be easily exposed.
 
Brazil is burning, and Greenland is melting.

How long until Batshit McBonespurs thinks we should acquire Brazil?
 
Great the fucking rain forest is on fire. But nothing to see here, instead let's berate Ford for agreeing to California's emissions plan and keep pushing that beautiful clean coal.
 
I’ve read that most of the fires are intentional, these are people burning down the forest for development and slash and burn farming. Fires are up 80% from last year. This is a man made disaster and Brazil needs to get this shit together and put a stop to it. I know that’s not fair for me to be wanting a different country to want to tell their people what to do, especially when it comes to them making a living, but what they are destroying is incredibly important and irreplaceable.

Map showing the fires

czsq4alsjth31.jpg
 
I honestly don't understand why anyone honestly thought the rainforest would survive heh. That's just silly.

South America is a shithole just like plenty of other places in the world. If you honestly expedcted people to uphold morals or think about the environment then I have a bridge to sell you.


UglyCasanova said:
I’ve read that most of the fires are intentional, these are people burning down the forest for development and slash and burn farming. Fires are up 80% from last year. This is a man made disaster and Brazil needs to get this shit together and put a stop to it. I know that’s not fair for me to be wanting a different country to want to tell their people what to do, especially when it comes to them making a living, but what they are destroying is incredibly important and irreplaceable.

Map showing the fires

czsq4alsjth31.jpg
Click to expand...

Of course they were ALL intentional..... It's a fucking RAINforest. Not a dry california forest. Starting fires is damn near impossible from natural means.
 
s0me0nesmind1 said:
I honestly don't understand why anyone honestly thought the rainforest would survive heh. That's just silly.

South America is a shithole just like plenty of other places in the world. If you honestly expedcted people to uphold morals or think about the environment then I have a bridge to sell you.
.
Click to expand...
Seems pretty hypocritical to knock South America when we have those same problems right here in the US.
Of course they were ALL intentional..... It's a fucking RAINforest. Not a dry california forest. Starting fires is damn near impossible from natural means.
Click to expand...

The Amazon basin has a monsoon climate with wet and dry seasons. Right now is the dry season.
 
Not necessarily for this situation, but maybe...? Does the world intervene in some way for the greater need of all humanity? Not sure what we do here otherwise, stand on the sidelines and enjoy the sweet oxygen while we have it.
 
France says it will oppose the EU trade deal with Mercosur over this. That's a pretty big deal.

Shoving back economically on Brasil is probably the only realistic way to get them to change course.
 
I think what Brazil needs is more people. We apparently think it is good for the US to develop, to strip both land and resources, to make room for hundreds of millions more - should also be a great "solution" for them, right? Just pave the Amazon for condos. /s

Fact is, stability and sustainability are the ONLY way humanity survives this century. That none / few of you actually want it, is part of the problem. To anyone who says "Save the rainforest", I ask you... NIMBY? Or will you join me in wanting to save OUR land as well? We need to take the lead in showing the world how to save itself. How to stop unsustainable growth.
 
Jaskalas said:
Fact is, stability and sustainability are the ONLY way humanity survives this century. That none / few of you actually want it, is part of the problem. To anyone who says "Save the rainforest", I ask you... NIMBY? Or will you join me in wanting to save OUR land as well? We need to take the lead in showing the world how to save itself. How to stop unsustainable growth.
Click to expand...

Pretty much. Depending on other countries while living in lofty subburbs from torn down forests is damn near equivalent of do as I say not as I do.
 
Jaskalas said:
I think what Brazil needs is more people. We apparently think it is good for the US to develop, to strip both land and resources, to make room for hundreds of millions more - should also be a great "solution" for them, right? Just pave the Amazon for condos. /s

Fact is, stability and sustainability are the ONLY way humanity survives this century. That none / few of you actually want it, is part of the problem. To anyone who says "Save the rainforest", I ask you... NIMBY? Or will you join me in wanting to save OUR land as well? We need to take the lead in showing the world how to save itself. How to stop unsustainable growth.
Click to expand...

This is simple, disallow sprawl and push up densities in existing cities/suburbs. You're presenting a false choice.
 
K1052 said:
This is simple, disallow sprawl and push up densities in existing cities/suburbs. You're presenting a false choice.
Click to expand...

While I agree that places like San Fran could use more density, that concession is mostly for the existing job market to become healthier. You undermine any benefit that brings if, after you move everyone out of the suburbs, you simply replace them with MORE people.

You ultimately present 1: a bad choice of living, and 2: a fantasy that it can solve this. As if resource consumption will not increase if 100+ million people are added to a country. We can aim for efficiency all we want, but at some point people will revolt against the loss of quality of life. You won't save the planet if the conditions to do so are intolerable. No body wants to live like sardines in Tokyo. And what if we did accomplish that? The next 100+ million will always be waiting to come in and make things worse.

Growth must end. That is the ONLY way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top