Words of Advice:
"If Something Seems To Be Too Good To Be True, It's Best To Shoot It, Just In Case." -- Fiona Glenanne
“The Mob takes the Fifth. If you’re innocent, why are you taking the Fifth Amendment?” -- The TOFF *
"Foreign Relations Boil Down to Two Things: Talking With People or Killing Them." -- Unknown
“Speed is a poor substitute for accuracy.” -- Real, no-shit, fortune from a fortune cookie
"Thou Shalt Get Sidetracked by Bullshit, Every Goddamned Time." -- The Ghoul
"If you believe that you are talking to G-d, you can justify anything.” — my Dad
"Colt .45s; putting bad guys in the ground since 1873." -- Unknown
"Stay Strapped or Get Clapped." -- probably not Mr. Rogers
"The Dildo of Karma rarely comes lubed." -- Unknown
"Eck!" -- George the Cat
* "TOFF" = Treasonous Orange Fat Fuck,
"FOFF" = Felonious Old Fat Fuck,
"COFF" = Convicted Old Felonious Fool,
A/K/A Commandante (or Cadet) Bone Spurs,
A/K/A El Caudillo de Mar-a-Lago, A/K/A the Asset,
A/K/A P01135809, A/K/A Dementia Donnie, A/K/A Felon^34,
A/K/A Dolt-45, A/K/A Don Snoreleone
19 comments:
"Satellite data shows fires - mostly in the Amazon - are burning at record levels."
except it isn't true:
https://www.globalfiredata.org/forecast.html#elbeni
It is actually about HALF of what it was not so many years ago.
And, BTW, most of the smoke and fire is farmers burning off the stubble from their fields, not old growth forest.
You are being lied to by the media.
Much like they lie when they say each year is a record year for temperature.
Data says differently.
B, I'll leave this non-media report here.
https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/145498/uptick-in-amazon-fire-activity-in-2019
The link you posted says "highest fire count since 2012"
https://youtu.be/bkaV2jJMqe4
As you can see, it is more than farmers burning off stubble.
Then there is the incentive angle: The stupid, stupid trade war has China shopping around to places like Brazil for the soybeans they aren't getting from us any more, and Brazil needs arable land with which to capitalize on the opportunity.
-Doug in Oakland
Doug, I have to agree with your assessment. Our family farm here in the Thumb of Michigan (run by my younger brother) has seen the drop in soybean prices due to Trump tariffs and a drop in corn prices due to the Administration's repeal of laws that require ethanol in the gasoline. He and other area farmers have said that the Amazon fires are for clearing arable land to fill the vacuum created by Trump. And before anyone says it isn't Trump's policies, just look at history. During the Carter administration wheat was embargoed. It was supposed to punish Russia for invading Afghanistan. But it did little to harm Russia, only to hurt the US farmers.
Some history
Dale
Fox News, record number of fires since 2013, does not address the area burning, just the “number”: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.foxnews.com/science/amazon-fires-why-is-the-rainforest-burning.amp
Fox News, “as the Amazon burns at an unprecedented rate”: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.foxnews.com/science/satellite-imagery-amazon-rainforest-fire-carbon-monoxide-pollution.amp
Note for B., “unprecedented” has a very specific meaning, look it up, why don’t ya.
Brooking Institute, again “unprecedented”: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.brookings.edu/blog/future-development/2019/08/23/for-growth-and-well-being-climate-crisis-overshadows-all-else/amp/
I could go on, but the previous three stories from some bastions of the Right all agree, B. is deluded.
OK, let’s use B’s type of data:
And look at the prices of Soybeans (and corn) BEFORE the trade issues:
They were low then as well. There are more than 2 years supply in the elevators. Prices are set accordingly.
Trump's Trade War didn't cause pricing to be low.
But like the fires, don't let facts get in the way of your reality.
Did y'all bother to follow the link I posted? Pretty good historical data there.
Oh, and from the New York Times:
"Scientists studying satellite image data from the fires in the Amazon rain forest said that most of the fires are burning on agricultural land where the forest had already been cleared."
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/08/24/world/americas/amazon-rain-forest-fire-maps.html
Next yer gonna tell me that the Times is a "Murdoch Rag" and isn't to be trusted....
Some residents in fire-scarred areas expressed alarm. José Macedo de Silva, a cattle farmer near Porto Velho, the capital city of Rondônia, said most of the fires in his area were started by people involved in land disputes.
“I’m against illegal deforestation, against invading environmental protection areas,” he said, as he stood by a patch of his own land that had been scorched. “People who do that need to be punished. Brazil is going to pay the price over our incompetence in dealing with these people.”
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2019/08/26/world/americas/brazil-amazon-rainforest-fire.amp.html
Who said anything about the price of soybeans, B? China won't buy them any more.
-Doug in Oakland
Doug, that’s B. teaching me economics, and that because prices were down before, they won’t go down anymore when a major world buyer stops buying them, because...it’s not Donnie’s fault?
He’s also having a hard time with “unprecedented”.
Dinthebeast:
Dale said something about the price of corn and soybeans. I responded. Try to keep up. I know it is hard if there is no headline.
And a question: Why isn't anyone complaining about all the fires in Africa, and all the burning of the forest taking place there? Why is the press concentrating on South America?
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-08-23/more-fires-now-burning-in-angola-congo-than-amazon-maps
And the source is Bloomberg, so, again, you can't say it is a "Murdoch Rag".
facts matter more than headlines to thinking people.
Both are bad, B. Why can’t we be concerned about both? Cause we’re soshalist libruls?
B, shifting your argument from "there aren't more fires burning in the Amazon" to "well why aren't you concerned about Africa too??" is a red herring. You've gotta get better at rational debate if you want to be taken seriously.
It is possible to be concerned with two things at once. Discussing one of those things does not negate the other. This is pretty basic stuff...
Just use nuclear bombs to put the fires out! Or rake the entire Amazon forest thoroughly!
Bert, you accuse me of cherrypicking articles to emphasize my position, then you do the same thing to emphasize yours. The whole pot-kettle thing. You can continue to believe your facts that reinforce your position and I’ll believe my facts.
I would assume you don’t take the disagreements as an attack on you. Just trying to refute your erroneous opinions, which are obviously wrong (jk).
Dale
Dale: No anger involved here. We can both be as wrong as we wish to be.
Honest disagreement is one thing. Hateful snarky responses (which YOU never do) are another.
All good.
As to Cherrypicking, I am simply looking on websites that you might not find biased. The fact that they support my point, even from liberal leaning websites, should tell you something.
Post a Comment