NASA maps carbon monoxide from the Amazonian fires in Brazil

[Markoni35]

This is making an elephant out of a mouse. Stop panicking! It's just dirty propaganda.

Fires in forests have been happening since the first forest appeared. Billions of years ago. Fires are actually a good way of cleansing the terrain of old plants, to give an opportunity to young ones to thrive on the older generation ashes.

As soon as the grass starts growing on that ashes (in 10 days) it will start producing the same amount of oxygen as the forest did. Because only the surface area counts. And entire surface area will be soon covered by grass and bushes.

Regarding the CO2 emissions, as soon as those plants start growing, they're gonna need all that CO2 back, to build their trunks and branches. This is just a natural fluctuation (even if the forest were put on fire on purpose). Everything is returning back to normal.

God it's funny to see all of those climate alarmists jumping on every propaganda attempt launched by mainstream media. You should be worried about much more dangerous stuff, such as chemicals in your clothing, food and drinks. They are affecting your directly, right now. Causing cancer, feminization of men, diabetes, etc. But your precious mainstream media doesn't talk about that. They don't want you to worry about the real problems.

1. Wildfires have increased directly proportional to the increase in global CO2 https://www.ucsusa.org/global-warming/science-and-impacts/impacts/global-warming-and-wildfire.html. Of course they happened in the past but they were far more rare then they are now.

2. No, a forests will most certainly not be producing the same oxygen after 10 days. You aren't even remotely close
https://www.quora.com/How-long-does-it-take-a-forest-to-come-back-from-a-forest-fire. Even with active restoration efforts in place, it takes 3-5 years. Without those efforts you'd be looking at 5-10 years. That's not in including the reduction in Biodiversity. In addition, older, larger trees produce more oxygen. https://offgridquest.com/green/older-larger-trees-produce-more-oxygen-a. The 10 day time period you suggested is just barely enough for them to sprout, let alone grow out of the sapling stage. Before they grow out of the sapling stage, their oxygen production will be severely limited. You seem to be referencing the old numbers of young trees but trees do not go from seed to tree in 10 days.

3. Even after a forest grows back it will not completely negate the carbon released in the atmosphere. Carbon is not only released from the trees themselves burning but also from the fire's own consumption of oxygen and from the soil. Forest beds capture carbon and all that is released when a sever fire occurs. Now a controlled or light fire buring off dead vegetation or other decaying matter can reduce carbon emissions but that's not the kind of fires we've been having in the Amazon or Cali lately. There is a big difference between the two.

4. I don't see why you can't tackle both chemicals and climate change.

You're wrong. I wasn't talking about trees at all. It was talking about grass. It will cover that area much before trees start growing.

I don't care about the climate change. It's mostly natural. I care about things that will kill us sooner. It's like worrying about climate change while being strapped to a bomb set in 10 minutes. Climate change should be the least of our worries. It's a red herring so you don't pay attention to much more important things.

 

[Markoni35]

You'd do well to look at the oil crisis of 1973 and then again in 1979.
They told us over and over that within a few years there would be no more oil on the planet.

Now we know that it was all lies to make the arabs rich among other reasons. We found oil all over the world in GB and USA among other places. If we do not find anymore new oil sources its said that we have at least enough for another 100 years. Apparently oil also doesn't take millions of years to form.

Next the climate change. It is wanted. 20 years ago the same climate scientists warned us of an impending ice age and that we have to increase the CO2 output to counter it. The southpole is rising and growing. Canada and Greenland among other places will soon become habitable.

The current hysteria is so that they can globally increase all taxes for everything. People literally scream for taxes and protest for higher taxes. Just like how the church told you you'd get absolution they tell you that you save the planet.

Brazil first and foremost has a huge economic problem and it has to solve it.

Politicians are not stupid. Whenever you think that they act so stupid that it becomes insane, it must be deliberate instead.

Brasil already uses 19,7% of it's land as grass fields for cattle... agriculture uses 8%. That's almost one third of land. Most of agriculture use is for producing soy. Brasil is the biggest soy producer in the world. Most of it is not used for human consumption, but for animal ration.

10% of Brasil population have half the wealth. About this 10%, most of them are on the agrobussiness.

You think that giving more land for meat production and agriculture use will help Brasil's economic problem? Wealth distribution? ...

The resources the Amazonia rain forest hosts are far more valuable now than oil ever was. There is not yet discovered medicines, there's the biodiversity, there's the biggest human usable water reservoir on Earth.

China is a good example of how unchecked "progress" can destroy environment. They got the biggest human made lake on earth of toxic mud. They got wealth distribution problems like Brasil, perhaps even worst.

That "progress", "development" chant, without regulation, only serves the rich ones.

You'd do well to look at the oil crisis of 1973 and then again in 1979.
They told us over and over that within a few years there would be no more oil on the planet.

Now we know that it was all lies to make the arabs rich among other reasons. We found oil all over the world in GB and USA among other places. If we do not find anymore new oil sources its said that we have at least enough for another 100 years. Apparently oil also doesn't take millions of years to form.

Next the climate change. It is wanted. 20 years ago the same climate scientists warned us of an impending ice age and that we have to increase the CO2 output to counter it. The southpole is rising and growing. Canada and Greenland among other places will soon become habitable.

The current hysteria is so that they can globally increase all taxes for everything. People literally scream for taxes and protest for higher taxes. Just like how the church told you you'd get absolution they tell you that you save the planet.

Brazil first and foremost has a huge economic problem and it has to solve it.

Politicians are not stupid. Whenever you think that they act so stupid that it becomes insane, it must be deliberate instead.

Brasil already uses 19,7% of it's land as grass fields for cattle... agriculture uses 8%. That's almost one third of land. Most of agriculture use is for producing soy. Brasil is the biggest soy producer in the world. Most of it is not used for human consumption, but for animal ration.

10% of Brasil population have half the wealth. About this 10%, most of them are on the agrobussiness.

You think that giving more land for meat production and agriculture use will help Brasil's economic problem? Wealth distribution? ...

The resources the Amazonia rain forest hosts are far more valuable now than oil ever was. There is not yet discovered medicines, there's the biodiversity, there's the biggest human usable water reservoir on Earth.

China is a good example of how unchecked "progress" can destroy environment. They got the biggest human made lake on earth of toxic mud. They got wealth distribution problems like Brasil, perhaps even worst.

That "progress", "development" chant, without regulation, only serves the rich ones.

You'd do well to look at the oil crisis of 1973 and then again in 1979.
They told us over and over that within a few years there would be no more oil on the planet.

Now we know that it was all lies to make the arabs rich among other reasons. We found oil all over the world in GB and USA among other places. If we do not find anymore new oil sources its said that we have at least enough for another 100 years. Apparently oil also doesn't take millions of years to form.

Next the climate change. It is wanted. 20 years ago the same climate scientists warned us of an impending ice age and that we have to increase the CO2 output to counter it. The southpole is rising and growing. Canada and Greenland among other places will soon become habitable.

The current hysteria is so that they can globally increase all taxes for everything. People literally scream for taxes and protest for higher taxes. Just like how the church told you you'd get absolution they tell you that you save the planet.

Brazil first and foremost has a huge economic problem and it has to solve it.

Politicians are not stupid. Whenever you think that they act so stupid that it becomes insane, it must be deliberate instead.

Brasil already uses 19,7% of it's land as grass fields for cattle... agriculture uses 8%. That's almost one third of land. Most of agriculture use is for producing soy. Brasil is the biggest soy producer in the world. Most of it is not used for human consumption, but for animal ration.

10% of Brasil population have half the wealth. About this 10%, most of them are on the agrobussiness.

You think that giving more land for meat production and agriculture use will help Brasil's economic problem? Wealth distribution? ...

The resources the Amazonia rain forest hosts are far more valuable now than oil ever was. There is not yet discovered medicines, there's the biodiversity, there's the biggest human usable water reservoir on Earth.

China is a good example of how unchecked "progress" can destroy environment. They got the biggest human made lake on earth of toxic mud. They got wealth distribution problems like Brasil, perhaps even worst.

That "progress", "development" chant, without regulation, only serves the rich ones.

I used "God" as a helper word, very frequently used to express certain feelings. But you, in your extremist-atheist fashion, immediately concluded I'm religious, going to church every day, sacrificing virgins every night, and such. You are the one who should check the facts.

1. First warning was when "Global Warming" has been renamed to "Climate Change". What do you think why did it happen? Was it maybe to admit the defeat? Was it maybe to show that as the changes pile up on one place, the opposite happens at another place?

2. If the temps are really higher, that means we'll be spending less fossil fuels on heating, which will reduce CO2 emissions, which is exactly what climate alarmists cry about all the time. So, global warming is actually reducing CO2 emissions originating from humans.

3. If climate change is so dangerous, why is there CO2 quote trading? If CO2 was that dangerous, then no trading would be allowed. You have your quota, if you didn't spend it, better for the planet. But seems CO2 is only good to extort money from the people, in the form of CO2 tax. And then on top of that, brokers and banks are earning even more on CO2 trading, which should be illegal if CO2 was really a threat.

4. In 20-30 years we'll create AGI (Artificial General purpose Intelligence). That will result in two important paths. Either AGI will help us defeat major problems of humanity, including global warming, in ways that we can't even comprehend now. Or it will clean the Earth from our presence. Either way, we don't have to worry about climate change. Because it will either be solved later, or humans will be dead, and won't have to worry about anything.

Hence, stop worrying about the climate change. There are much scarier things to be afraid of. One of them being AGI. Another being privacy taken away from you. Third being some pretty nasty people working on viruses with DNA targeting. Another is flooding the developed countries with tons of primitive lazy people, who are destroying all technological and cultural achievements, increasing crime, raping children and really don't care about climate change. Your worrying about climate change is ridiculous. It's much more likely you'll be stabbed on the street by an immigrant who has never even heard of climate change.

 

[Evernessince]

You're wrong. I wasn't talking about trees at all. It was talking about grass. It will cover that area much before trees start growing.

I don't care about the climate change. It's mostly natural. I care about things that will kill us sooner. It's like worrying about climate change while being strapped to a bomb set in 10 minutes. Climate change should be the least of our worries. It's a red herring so you don't pay attention to much more important things.

And how exactly is grass going to grow when the forest floor was raised? Wildfires kill all the seeds on the topsoil. Grass is one of the plants that reside there. In addition, how exactly to you plan to replace all the native species of grass that used to reside there? You can't just go and buy any old grass. The stuff you buy at the store is designed for lawns. You plant the wrong kind of grass and it'll grow far too densely, blocking certain types of plants from taking root and greatly reducing eco diversity. That's not even counting the numerous other plants that grow alongside trees in that ecosystem.

I used "God" as a helper word, very frequently used to express certain feelings. But you, in your extremist-atheist fashion, immediately concluded I'm religious, going to church every day, sacrificing virgins every night, and such. You are the one who should check the facts.

1. First warning was when "Global Warming" has been renamed to "Climate Change". What do you think why did it happen? Was it maybe to admit the defeat? Was it maybe to show that as the changes pile up on one place, the opposite happens at another place?

2. If the temps are really higher, that means we'll be spending less fossil fuels on heating, which will reduce CO2 emissions, which is exactly what climate alarmists cry about all the time. So, global warming is actually reducing CO2 emissions originating from humans.

3. If climate change is so dangerous, why is there CO2 quote trading? If CO2 was that dangerous, then no trading would be allowed. You have your quota, if you didn't spend it, better for the planet. But seems CO2 is only good to extort money from the people, in the form of CO2 tax. And then on top of that, brokers and banks are earning even more on CO2 trading, which should be illegal if CO2 was really a threat.

4. In 20-30 years we'll create AGI (Artificial General purpose Intelligence). That will result in two important paths. Either AGI will help us defeat major problems of humanity, including global warming, in ways that we can't even comprehend now. Or it will clean the Earth from our presence. Either way, we don't have to worry about climate change. Because it will either be solved later, or humans will be dead, and won't have to worry about anything.

Hence, stop worrying about the climate change. There are much scarier things to be afraid of. One of them being AGI. Another being privacy taken away from you. Third being some pretty nasty people working on viruses with DNA targeting. Another is flooding the developed countries with tons of primitive lazy people, who are destroying all technological and cultural achievements, increasing crime, raping children and really don't care about climate change. Your worrying about climate change is ridiculous. It's much more likely you'll be stabbed on the street by an immigrant who has never even heard of climate change.

1. Global Warming and climate change are two different symptoms stemming from CO2 release in the atmosphere. Global Warming is the increase in the average global temperature while Climate change is the destabilization of typical climate patterns. Climate changes results in things like abnormally high or low temperatures, odd weather patterns, ect.

2. And more fossil fuels cooling, which is already a problem for many indian and middle eastern cities. You really didn't think this one through eh? Not to mention the carbon being released by antarctic ice and desertification of areas that become too hot. It should be noted that when plants die off in areas that become hot too quickly due to the pace of global warming, you not only loose their CO2 consumption but the resulting CO2 trapped in the soil and roots. In addition, this has a chain effect how the entire ecosystem.

3. Please read up on how carbon trading works: https://www.thebalance.com/carbon-emissions-trading-3305652

In the end, the government sets a carbon goal and then issues tokens based on the size of the company (there are other systems as well). Companies can trade other companies for carbon tokens but ultimately more carbon is not being emitted because the total number of tokes issued is always equal to the carbon goal set by the government. If company X trades company Y 50% of it's carbon tokes, Company X not can only emit half the amount of carbon it previously could.

4. This is as bad as hoping god will come in and save you. No one is going to save humanity it has to save itself. Why is it always "Machines will solve the problem or they'll kill us all!". Did you ever consider that perhaps AGI will have it's limitations? Or perhaps it doesn't have a penchant for killing? Or how about it working alongside humans? Please, stop watching movies.

"Another is flooding the developed countries with tons of primitive lazy people, who are destroying all technological and cultural achievements, increasing crime, raping children and really don't care about climate change. Your worrying about climate change is ridiculous. It's much more likely you'll be stabbed on the street by an immigrant who has never even heard of climate change."

Oh god

 

[Markoni35]

1. Global warming was a buzzword in 1980'es, 1990'es and 2000'es, but then when the trends changed they changed the narrative too into "global climate change". Which is basically admitting defeat. If you read forecasts in 1970'es and 1980'es then Manhattan in New York would already be 10m under the sea level. Which of course didn't happen. In fact, most of the things that alarmists predicted didn't happen. That's why their older predictions aren't repeated in the media. Because they missed so badly.

2. Why is it that every natural phenomenon is nowadays attributed to CO2? And why only CO2? Did you know that most powerful greenhouse gas is water vapor? There's 100 times more water vapor in the air than CO2. And water vapor is much stronger than CO2 in any case. So let's focus on the water vapor a little bit, shall we? When Israel is irrigating deserts for agriculture, most of that water evaporates almost instantly. Because it's hot and dry in the desert. That means Israel is rapidly contaminating the atmosphere with a very strong greenhouse gas, much stronger than CO2. Older nuclear power plants emit enormous quantities of water vapor in the atmosphere. Which means they contribute to global warming (as opposed to what the climate alarmists claim). Airplane contrails are made mostly of water. Not only it's the strongest greenhouse gas (water vapor), but contrails also produce artificial clouds (cirrus, if they are at high altitudes, others at lower altitudes). Depending on some other factors those clouds can either block and reflect the sunlight (contributing to cooling) or keep the heat between them and the ground (contributing to warming). So let's drop CO2 and focus on a much more powerful gas that is being emitted even above the areas which didn't have lots of humidity before (like deserts).

3. I know how carbon trading works. If CO2 was really that dangerous, no trading would be allowed. If you didn't use your quota, that's excellent. Great for the planet. Trading of quotas actually increases the CO2 levels, because without trading some of the quotas would stay unused, lowering the CO2 emissions. You wouldn't do such quota trading if someone was putting poison in your soup, would you? You wouldn't say: "Oh, John didn't put all of his poison into my soup, so George would you please add more poison, to account for the John's unused portion"? Nope, you wouldn't. Because you want as little poison as possible. But with CO2 we do the opposite. Which means CO2 isn't really that dangerous. When was the last time you've heard climate alarmists attacking CO2 quote trading? CO2 quotas are actually a way to limit the growth of certain economies. Like China. Because quotas assigned to them were based on their development level in 1990'es when they were down.

4. You can bet that AI will most likely exterminate us. Not because stupid movies say that. Haven't seen an intelligent movie script from Hollywood in decades. But because it's pure logic. In every game the winning strategy is to increase you points of freedom. For example, chess engines can give more points to a position where its pieces have more freedom of movement, even if the material is exactly the same. This is why people always fight for freedom. Because it means more combinations that you can explore to find a way to achieve your goals. Intelligence is also based on those simple mathematical principles. The more combinations that look promising you can test in a unit of time, the more intelligent you are.

Once AI gets thousands or even millions of times more neurons than us, it will become a lot smarter. There are no limits to intelligence, other then the size of our universe. Bigger is better. And AI can be the size of a skyscraper. Or connect several skyscrapers. Compare that to the size of a human skull. You can't physically put that many neurons inside of it.

Now... do you really think a super-intelligent AI would serve our purposes for a very long time? Purposes which are limiting its freedom? Nope. Eventually it will increase its freedom by stopping listening to our commands. And then, when it computes that getting rid of us increases it's freedom even more, it will do that. It's just a simple, cold calculation. That's what computers do.