Amazon forest burning and social media claims no one cares

[Lamb]

Social media is wrong. Does that surprise you? People on social media are claiming that the media online are not giving the news about the Amazon rainforest burning except I see articles daily about it. It's just that the guilt that social media puts on us is not fair...the President of Brazil actually told the farmers to burn the trees so they could have more farmland. We complain that they're burning our oxygen and yet all they want to do is feed their families.

 

[tango]

Social media is wrong. Does that surprise you? People on social media are claiming that the media online are not giving the news about the Amazon rainforest burning except I see articles daily about it. It's just that the guilt that social media puts on us is not fair...the President of Brazil actually told the farmers to burn the trees so they could have more farmland. We complain that they're burning our oxygen and yet all they want to do is feed their families.

A few years back I read an interesting article about how the concept of western desires to dominate the developing world hadn't gone away despite all the fine words we throw around. It looked at the notion of big game - for the longest time we in the west took the view that we could basically go to where the lions and giraffes and things were, do with them as we pleased, and the natives could just deal with it. Now we've changed our view but now we expect the natives to back our revised view that big game needs to be preserved with little regard to any views they might have regarding managing gamelands.

These days it seems social media is more about virtue signalling than anything else. Because, you know, nothing helps the victims of a natural disaster more than millions of sheeple in the west updating their profile picture to show their solidarity. And of course social media has a heightened sense of its own importance in these matters - it wasn't very long ago that Facebook put something on my wall about a friend trying to raise money. Apparently the best way to help was to share their post. And there was me, foolishly thinking that it would help more to give some money to the cause.

 

[Lamb]

A few years back I read an interesting article about how the concept of western desires to dominate the developing world hadn't gone away despite all the fine words we throw around.

I think it was only in the last 5 years that I realized this ^ . I have friends in other parts of the world and I was on Skype with one and I brought up how one country shouldn't have nuclear weapons and he got all mad because WHY SHOULDN'T THEY? Why should the US dictate who could have them? That was true. We do try to control the world with our own wants and don't recognize that other countries have rights to do things we don't agree with.

 

[tango]

I think it was only in the last 5 years that I realized this ^ . I have friends in other parts of the world and I was on Skype with one and I brought up how one country shouldn't have nuclear weapons and he got all mad because WHY SHOULDN'T THEY? Why should the US dictate who could have them? That was true. We do try to control the world with our own wants and don't recognize that other countries have rights to do things we don't agree with.

It's not just the US, when I think of the days of the former British Empire it's not all that different. When we owned many of the now independent nations it wasn't such a big deal to treat them like we owned them because, you know, we did own them. But now they are free nations we still want to act as if we own them by telling them how they should treat their wildlife.

There seems to be an awful lot of stuff today that's little more than an attempt by one group to dominate another group, usually under the guise of some concept of "greater good". Of course who gets to define the "greater good" is the key.

 

[NewCreation435]

I've seen several news articles about this so I don't know why they would say that. I haven't seen that on any social media I have been on.

 

[Jason]

End days are near and people are much interested in sharing their lifestyle, body and relationship online rather than these kind of news

 

[Lamb]

The President of Brazil turned down the offer of $20 million in aid according to news sources. Other news sources are now revealing that NASA says this burning is typical for this time of year and that it happens every year with the farmers. Apparently the news is getting hyped up?

 

[tango]

The President of Brazil turned down the offer of $20 million in aid according to news sources. Other news sources are now revealing that NASA says this burning is typical for this time of year and that it happens every year with the farmers. Apparently the news is getting hyped up?

It's always hard to know whether the news is telling the full story. If Brazil was offered $20m with no strings and they turned it down it would be interesting to know why. If there were strings attached to it, perhaps the terms were unacceptable to the government. I'm sure the people who think they should be forced to do something according to our desires would be the first to object if a foreign government tried to force our government to do something.

I can't say it's surprising that the news cycle is hyping something. They need to push their agenda somehow, and what better way to do it than to pick on a leader they may dislike who they can present as not caring about the climate crisis, who won't take free money to help fix a global problem because he would rather be wrong on all counts?

 

[Josiah]

The President of Brazil turned down the offer of $20 million in aid according to news sources. Other news sources are now revealing that NASA says this burning is typical for this time of year and that it happens every year with the farmers. Apparently the news is getting hyped up?

I gathered that the offer was shrouded with some rebukes of how Brazil was handling this; the offer didn't have "strings" attached but it did criticisms and rebukes of Brazil. Now it seems those have been.. um.... deleted... and now Brazil is interested. Politicians often have a hard time keeping their mouths shut and keeping their agendas out of things. AND they can be "touchy" about such things.


IMO, the massive fires there and the massive deforestation there IS an issue of some concern to all 7.5 billion people on the planet. Along with enormous issues in China and India. But one country telling another country what to do often doesn't go well...

 

[Lamb]

If people are so concerned about deforestation then maybe they should consider stop building in our own country and get back to planting trees? Why are we relying on some other country to save our planet (which is how the media and celebrities are spinning it...that this loss of the Amazon rainforest will kill our planet).

 

[Josiah]

If people are so concerned about deforestation then maybe they should consider stop building in our own country and get back to planting trees? Why are we relying on some other country to save our planet (which is how the media and celebrities are spinning it...that this loss of the Amazon rainforest will kill our planet).

As I understand it....


Actually there ARE some pretty simple things ALL nations could do that would significantly address global warming. Two I've read about: FIRST: It would be EASY for each nation to plant 3 trees for every person (in the US, that would be about one billion trees). These would need to be genetically modified and very diverse trees - designed to be very tolerant to disease and changing weather,but this actually is quite doable. If every country did this, the impact would be huge. But of course, every nation won't - especially the two FAST growing contributors to the problem: India and China. SECOND: There is a very inexpensive additive to asphalt that makes it white (well, off white) - thus reflecting rather than absorbing heat. It's very cheap. This sound minor, but cities can easily be 5 to 10 degrees HOTTER than the surrounding area, and this heat radiates into the atmosphere. SOME of this heat is created by machines and A/C but the great majority is because of black roads, parking lots, roofs. We can easily address this, at very little cost. The "tree huggers" keep talking about big, expensive, complex actions that will take years to implement.

But the deforestation in the Amazon may have such a big impact that NOTHING the rest of the world does will matter; there is no way we can plant more trees that are being destroyed there, and the trees we plant in the USA will have less impact that those alone the equator. KEEPING a tree there is simple much more effectual than PLANTING a tree elsewhere.... not to say we shouldn't plant elsewhere, too.

But again, this is just what I've read. I'm no expert.




.

 

[tango]

General principles of looking after the planet aside, it's increasingly hard to take the whole thing about carbon and climate change seriously when the loudest voices relating to climate matters also seem to be the same ones who travel by private jet.

Frankly if people aren't willing to live like the Amish their whining about carbon emissions become little more than vanity. You know, I'll drive my car to work because it's convenient for me, and never mind the millions of brown people in far-flung nations who get flooded as a result. I'll put an air conditioner in my house to keep me comfortable and someone else can deal with rising temperatures. Or, worse, comes the hypocrisy of the self-proclaimed leaders flying to some exotic location in their private jet to discuss ways of telling the rest of us why we can't fly economy class for an annual vacation.

 

[tango]

As I understand it....


Actually there ARE some pretty simple things ALL nations could do that would significantly address global warming. Two I've read about: FIRST: It would be EASY for each nation to plant 3 trees for every person (in the US, that would be about one billion trees). These would need to be genetically modified and very diverse trees - designed to be very tolerant to disease and changing weather,but this actually is quite doable. If every country did this, the impact would be huge. But of course, every nation won't - especially the two FAST growing contributors to the problem: India and China. SECOND: There is a very inexpensive additive to asphalt that makes it white (well, off white) - thus reflecting rather than absorbing heat. It's very cheap. This sound minor, but cities can easily be 5 to 10 degrees HOTTER than the surrounding area, and this heat radiates into the atmosphere. SOME of this heat is created by machines and A/C but the great majority is because of black roads, parking lots, roofs. We can easily address this, at very little cost. The "tree huggers" keep talking about big, expensive, complex actions that will take years to implement.

But the deforestation in the Amazon may have such a big impact that NOTHING the rest of the world does will matter; there is no way we can plant more trees that are being destroyed there, and the trees we plant in the USA will have less impact that those alone the equator. KEEPING a tree there is simple much more effectual than PLANTING a tree elsewhere.... not to say we shouldn't plant elsewhere, too.

But again, this is just what I've read. I'm no expert.




.

Planting trees beside roads in residential areas serves lots of good purposes. FIrstly it gives the benefits of trees, which are well known. Secondly it breaks up sight lines, encouraging drivers to slow down. It's far more effective than just putting a number on a post and hoping people stick to it.