| Divide and Conquer 05:53 - Jun 5 with 8246 views | RonaldStump |
Is Covid 19 a side track to the real agenda at play here?
The great reset?
Anybody with a brain knows there is something not right with everything going on this crazy world at the moment.
Simple question and hoping for some constructive answers instead of the usual conspiracy theory comebacks?
Gracias [Post edited 5 Jun 2021 5:58]
|  |
| |  |
| Divide and Conquer on 20:29 - Jun 6 with 883 views | Professor |
| Divide and Conquer on 20:08 - Jun 6 by A_Fans_Dad |
Now you have pissed me off.
I pointed out what in reality happens to so many kids in populations without wealth and you talk about it being "very humanitarian of me".
You are the one denying them what I want to give them, a better life through more cheap reliable energy, wealth, health and education which they won't get by wasting money on renewables.
It is a very good name for them because they have to be "renewed" every 15 to 20 years.
Now what about these "millions of refugees heading for Europe,
So you tell me why you do not know the difference between "Migrants", " Economic Migrants" and "Refugees".
Here are some hints.
https://euro-babble.eu/2020/01/12/migracion-africana-a-europa-hechos-y-ficcion/
Then you can explain what the refugees are fleeing from that has anything to with what we are discussing? [Post edited 6 Jun 2021 20:09]
|
You have no idea. You read stuff on the internet, but have you been to Sub Saharan Africa,
Asia or Latin America? Industrialisation is Africa is horrible. Extending slums, massive pollution, congestion and crime. Much like our cities were in the Industrial Revolution where more people were put into poverty. We don’t need to go the same route. What people want are food security, health and education before anything else. You know what these are as likely to be driven by local solutions using small scale renewable tech. Mechanisation is not much use when it is extremely difficult to get vehicles to a village for parts of a year (wet seasons) . | | | |
| Divide and Conquer on 20:44 - Jun 6 with 858 views | A_Fans_Dad |
| Divide and Conquer on 20:23 - Jun 6 by Catullus |
I'm not denying them anything butt. The reasons for what has and still is happening across Africa are many but they include countries being raped of natural resources, used, taken advantage of by the industrialised nations and then abandoned when there's nothing left to take.
Be as pissed off as you like but still the Amazon has not been a Savannah since mankind arrived. Pollution is not over estimated and the cheap, reliable energy you want to give them comes with a much bigger long term cost. The industrialised nations have poured billions into Africa in aid and what has happened? Where are the schools and hospitals? Why are people going blind from drinking contaminated water?
I do know the difference, the migrants heading for Europe do so hoping for a better life, they do so because their countries are ruined AND/OR run by greedy politicians and/or dictators who live lives of luxury and excess (largely funded by foreign aid) and treat the people like an annoyance or vermin to be controlled by any means.
The thread is titled divide and conquer, that's exactly whats gone on in Africa. I know you will have seen the stories about species being hunted to extinction too, more of those pesky animals that "somebody" thinks not important. |
Yes, I agree about Africa, especially despots syphoning of money meant to improve the lives of their people and the UN is no help.
Less so about being destroyed by industry as I am not sure what has been taken with nothing left
I think more is destroyed by religious, tribal and terrorist wars.
Oh, someone thinks those animals are important, as weird Medicine for Asians and not for themselves as animals.
Me I love animals, except those designated as pests like destructive Rats.
ps re population in the last hundred years the family size in the UK has gone from 3.5 down to below 2, which is what better conditions brings about. [Post edited 6 Jun 2021 20:48]
| | | |
| Divide and Conquer on 20:50 - Jun 6 with 861 views | Scotia |
| Divide and Conquer on 19:15 - Jun 6 by A_Fans_Dad |
No comments on our polluting of other countries for our so called "green Energy" then?
No comments on our decrease in pollution by improved controls, which are now available to anyone considering using fossil fuels? |
As I said I'm having a relaxed afternoon in the sunshine.
So I'm just going to deal with one of your nonsense statements at a time. Cut the diversion.
When did the Amazon rainforest revert back to being savanah? | | | |
| Divide and Conquer on 20:53 - Jun 6 with 849 views | A_Fans_Dad |
| Divide and Conquer on 20:50 - Jun 6 by Scotia |
As I said I'm having a relaxed afternoon in the sunshine.
So I'm just going to deal with one of your nonsense statements at a time. Cut the diversion.
When did the Amazon rainforest revert back to being savanah? |
When they cut down the trees and turned it in to farmland.
Which is of course no longer Forest or Jungle. | | | |
| Divide and Conquer on 21:13 - Jun 6 with 849 views | Scotia |
| Divide and Conquer on 20:53 - Jun 6 by A_Fans_Dad |
When they cut down the trees and turned it in to farmland.
Which is of course no longer Forest or Jungle. |
As I said when has this occurred?
"back to the savanah conditions it used to be". That's a direct quote.
So basically when was the Amazon savanah and when did / do humans change it back to exactly that ecosystem? | | | |
| Divide and Conquer on 21:28 - Jun 6 with 836 views | A_Fans_Dad |
| Divide and Conquer on 21:13 - Jun 6 by Scotia |
As I said when has this occurred?
"back to the savanah conditions it used to be". That's a direct quote.
So basically when was the Amazon savanah and when did / do humans change it back to exactly that ecosystem? |
Read my comment at 16.35 re Wiki description of history.
It is now in the process of being returned to a savanna
Definition of savanna.
" A flat grassland of tropical or subtropical regions."
" A treeless plain"
"a mixed woodland-grassland ecosystem characterised by the trees being sufficiently widely spaced so that the canopy does not close. " | | | |
| Divide and Conquer on 22:00 - Jun 6 with 836 views | Catullus |
| Divide and Conquer on 21:13 - Jun 6 by Scotia |
As I said when has this occurred?
"back to the savanah conditions it used to be". That's a direct quote.
So basically when was the Amazon savanah and when did / do humans change it back to exactly that ecosystem? |
Scotia, I alreay pointed out to him that the Amazon rainforest has been there since 55 million years ago, long before humans were around. | |
| |
| Divide and Conquer on 22:09 - Jun 6 with 827 views | Catullus |
| Divide and Conquer on 20:44 - Jun 6 by A_Fans_Dad |
Yes, I agree about Africa, especially despots syphoning of money meant to improve the lives of their people and the UN is no help.
Less so about being destroyed by industry as I am not sure what has been taken with nothing left
I think more is destroyed by religious, tribal and terrorist wars.
Oh, someone thinks those animals are important, as weird Medicine for Asians and not for themselves as animals.
Me I love animals, except those designated as pests like destructive Rats.
ps re population in the last hundred years the family size in the UK has gone from 3.5 down to below 2, which is what better conditions brings about. [Post edited 6 Jun 2021 20:48]
|
Low childbirth rate sdidn't happen entirely because of better conditions though,
https://www.nber.org/digest/jul09/cost-low-fertility-europe#:~:text=Several%20fa
Besides, too low a birth rate will actually cause more trouble than it prevents. A steady birth rate is better.
In Africa the birth rate is still high at around 4.7 births per woman and that can cause problems, we see children starving, families suffering. It seems we can't find a happy medium. | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Divide and Conquer on 22:12 - Jun 6 with 827 views | Scotia |
| Divide and Conquer on 21:28 - Jun 6 by A_Fans_Dad |
Read my comment at 16.35 re Wiki description of history.
It is now in the process of being returned to a savanna
Definition of savanna.
" A flat grassland of tropical or subtropical regions."
" A treeless plain"
"a mixed woodland-grassland ecosystem characterised by the trees being sufficiently widely spaced so that the canopy does not close. " |
I'm still having a lovely evening. But what you said is, and again a direct quote from your wiki quote.
"There is a debate, however, over how extensive this reduction was."
There is no debate now, and that refers to a natural process.
It's not being returned to Savanah, its being hacked down by man. Nature has no say in the matter. We are destroying, it not undertaking some kind of ecosystem enhancement. | | | |
| Divide and Conquer on 22:20 - Jun 6 with 823 views | Professor |
| Divide and Conquer on 22:12 - Jun 6 by Scotia |
I'm still having a lovely evening. But what you said is, and again a direct quote from your wiki quote.
"There is a debate, however, over how extensive this reduction was."
There is no debate now, and that refers to a natural process.
It's not being returned to Savanah, its being hacked down by man. Nature has no say in the matter. We are destroying, it not undertaking some kind of ecosystem enhancement. |
Being hacked down often for monoculture systems like soya to feed cattle in feedlot systems or to provide biofuels in Brazil. Over fertilisation leading to run off s causing algal blooms and killing everything else. So far up right-wing nut job conspiracy theory it should make your nose bleed. | | | |
| Divide and Conquer on 14:23 - Jun 7 with 772 views | A_Fans_Dad |
| Divide and Conquer on 22:12 - Jun 6 by Scotia |
I'm still having a lovely evening. But what you said is, and again a direct quote from your wiki quote.
"There is a debate, however, over how extensive this reduction was."
There is no debate now, and that refers to a natural process.
It's not being returned to Savanah, its being hacked down by man. Nature has no say in the matter. We are destroying, it not undertaking some kind of ecosystem enhancement. |
Nice to see that you expanded the text to include the part about debate over the last 21,000 years.
So why didn't you expand it to include some of the other text?
Like this
"Climate fluctuations during the last 34 million years have allowed savanna regions to expand into the tropics. During the Oligocene, for example, the rainforest spanned a relatively narrow band. It expanded again during the Middle Miocene, then retracted to a mostly inland formation at the last glacial maximum.[12] However, the rainforest still managed to thrive during these glacial periods, allowing for the survival and evolution of a broad diversity of species.[13]" | | | |
| Divide and Conquer on 14:26 - Jun 7 with 769 views | A_Fans_Dad |
| Divide and Conquer on 22:12 - Jun 6 by Scotia |
I'm still having a lovely evening. But what you said is, and again a direct quote from your wiki quote.
"There is a debate, however, over how extensive this reduction was."
There is no debate now, and that refers to a natural process.
It's not being returned to Savanah, its being hacked down by man. Nature has no say in the matter. We are destroying, it not undertaking some kind of ecosystem enhancement. |
I din't say that "undertaking some kind of ecosystem enhancement.".
But as you and prof point out they slash and burn, over use the soil and move to a new area to begin the cycle again
Just what do you think will happen to the area they have left behind?
Well it won't be Jungle and Forest it will be grasses, weeds and low brush, the description of a Savanah. | | | |
| Divide and Conquer on 10:23 - Jun 8 with 731 views | Catullus |
| Divide and Conquer on 14:23 - Jun 7 by A_Fans_Dad |
Nice to see that you expanded the text to include the part about debate over the last 21,000 years.
So why didn't you expand it to include some of the other text?
Like this
"Climate fluctuations during the last 34 million years have allowed savanna regions to expand into the tropics. During the Oligocene, for example, the rainforest spanned a relatively narrow band. It expanded again during the Middle Miocene, then retracted to a mostly inland formation at the last glacial maximum.[12] However, the rainforest still managed to thrive during these glacial periods, allowing for the survival and evolution of a broad diversity of species.[13]" |
Ok, I'll bite, 34 million years ago.....no humans to feed. 300,000 years ago when humans appeared it was all rainforest and it was that rainforest that fed and supported the people who lived there, in fact scientists say the Amazon population lived there sustainably for 5000 years,
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-57388939 | |
| |
| Divide and Conquer on 11:12 - Jun 8 with 722 views | Scotia |
| Divide and Conquer on 14:26 - Jun 7 by A_Fans_Dad |
I din't say that "undertaking some kind of ecosystem enhancement.".
But as you and prof point out they slash and burn, over use the soil and move to a new area to begin the cycle again
Just what do you think will happen to the area they have left behind?
Well it won't be Jungle and Forest it will be grasses, weeds and low brush, the description of a Savanah. |
You portrayed it as being a naturally occurring substitute ecosystem.
That may be a very brief, ambiguous and almost child like description of a savannah but it's nowhere near a definition. A savannah is a complex ecosystem in it's own right with biodiversity adapting to suit that ecosystem over 10's of thousands of years. So when in the last 300,000 years of history has the Amazon been a savannah?
You're still avoiding this very simple question. | | | |
| Divide and Conquer on 11:50 - Jun 8 with 707 views | Scotia |
| Divide and Conquer on 16:35 - Jun 6 by A_Fans_Dad |
Wiki.
"There is evidence that there have been significant changes in the Amazon rainforest vegetation over the last 21,000 years through the last glacial maximum (LGM) and subsequent deglaciation. Analyses of sediment deposits from Amazon basin paleolakes and the Amazon Fan indicate that rainfall in the basin during the LGM was lower than for the present, and this was almost certainly associated with reduced moist tropical vegetation cover in the basin.[16] There is a debate, however, over how extensive this reduction was. Some scientists argue that the rainforest was reduced to small, isolated refugia separated by open forest and grassland"
How about Air pollution in UK ( I can't speak for ther USA, but I know it is similar).
Since the 1970, note not the really bad period between 1900 and 1965, the majority of air pollutants have been reduced by 60% to 95 %.
UK Government figures.
https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/emissions-of-air-pollutants/emissions-o
ps I hope you are going to also tell me how many sharks there are in the seas. [Post edited 6 Jun 2021 16:46]
|
I've only just seen this. Thanks for the Wiki definition.
"Some scientists argue that the rainforest was reduced to small, isolated refugia separated by open forest and grassland"
Do you really think that comprises a Savannah?
Do you know what is meant by refugium?
Is this what man is currently doing in the Amazon?
Our air quality has largely improved in many areas. Environmental legislation and regulation is a wonderful thing. | | | |
| Divide and Conquer on 17:25 - Jun 8 with 635 views | A_Fans_Dad |
| Divide and Conquer on 11:50 - Jun 8 by Scotia |
I've only just seen this. Thanks for the Wiki definition.
"Some scientists argue that the rainforest was reduced to small, isolated refugia separated by open forest and grassland"
Do you really think that comprises a Savannah?
Do you know what is meant by refugium?
Is this what man is currently doing in the Amazon?
Our air quality has largely improved in many areas. Environmental legislation and regulation is a wonderful thing. |
Definition of Savanna from wiki where I first read about it.
"A savanna or savannah is a mixed woodland-grassland ecosystem characterised by the trees being sufficiently widely spaced so that the canopy does not close. The open canopy allows sufficient light to reach the ground to support an unbroken herbaceous layer consisting primarily of grasses."
So yes it sounds just like a savanna.
No, it is not what man is currently doing, but will result in the same conditions when they finish. | | | |
| Divide and Conquer on 17:31 - Jun 8 with 629 views | A_Fans_Dad |
I know that is why I asked the question, if they have difficulty in counting them then they also have difficulty on just how endangered they are.
I am not saying that some of them aren't mind you, because many species face extinction for many reasons and always have.
Polar Bears were/are supposedly endangered due to climate change, even thought their numbers have increased drastically since they stopped hunting them to extinction.
They do still hunt them mind, they are allowed to kill 1200 a year, but they are still increasing despite that. | | | |
| Divide and Conquer on 17:32 - Jun 8 with 627 views | A_Fans_Dad |
| Divide and Conquer on 11:12 - Jun 8 by Scotia |
You portrayed it as being a naturally occurring substitute ecosystem.
That may be a very brief, ambiguous and almost child like description of a savannah but it's nowhere near a definition. A savannah is a complex ecosystem in it's own right with biodiversity adapting to suit that ecosystem over 10's of thousands of years. So when in the last 300,000 years of history has the Amazon been a savannah?
You're still avoiding this very simple question. |
Since the last Ice Age 12,000 years ago, according to that original wiki peice I posted. | | | |
| Divide and Conquer on 19:35 - Jun 8 with 614 views | Scotia |
| Divide and Conquer on 17:32 - Jun 8 by A_Fans_Dad |
Since the last Ice Age 12,000 years ago, according to that original wiki peice I posted. |
That is absolutely not what that wiki definition says.
It may have been different and even reduced in size due to differences in Climate, but the entire Amazon was not savanah. It also regenerated, naturally, to its current extent as climate conditions became more suitable.
The last glacial period was not 12000 years ago either. | | | |
| Divide and Conquer on 20:20 - Jun 8 with 602 views | A_Fans_Dad |
| Divide and Conquer on 19:35 - Jun 8 by Scotia |
That is absolutely not what that wiki definition says.
It may have been different and even reduced in size due to differences in Climate, but the entire Amazon was not savanah. It also regenerated, naturally, to its current extent as climate conditions became more suitable.
The last glacial period was not 12000 years ago either. |
Last Ice Age lasted from 2.5million years ago up till 10-12 thousand years ago
https://www.amnh.org/explore/ology/earth/ask-a-scientist-about-our-environment/h
Where did I say that the entire Amazon was Savanna, perhaps you could point out where I wrote that.
Because I thought I quoted wiki to make the point that what those farmers were doing by clearing jungle & forest and leaving open areas it would be returning it to Savanna conditions.
So where did I say it turned the entire Amazon Rain Forest in to savanna? | | | |
| Divide and Conquer on 20:26 - Jun 8 with 600 views | A_Fans_Dad |
How many times do I have to tell you CO2 is plant food, it causes Greening of deserts. I showed you the NASA article on it.
CO2 has been 6000ppm 15 times higher than now in the past and did not change any natural balances and was purely natural.
It did not cause excessive warming, in fact it did not even stop the onset of Ice Ages.
Tell me how that works. | | | |
| Divide and Conquer on 20:34 - Jun 8 with 595 views | Scotia |
| Divide and Conquer on 20:20 - Jun 8 by A_Fans_Dad |
Last Ice Age lasted from 2.5million years ago up till 10-12 thousand years ago
https://www.amnh.org/explore/ology/earth/ask-a-scientist-about-our-environment/h
Where did I say that the entire Amazon was Savanna, perhaps you could point out where I wrote that.
Because I thought I quoted wiki to make the point that what those farmers were doing by clearing jungle & forest and leaving open areas it would be returning it to Savanna conditions.
So where did I say it turned the entire Amazon Rain Forest in to savanna? |
That was the end of the ice age, glaciation impacting the Amazon ended thousands of years before hand.
You alluded to it being all Savanah. The same direct quote "returned to the savanah conditions it used to be".
You didn't mention part of the Amazon, or distinct areas. An attempt at diversion because you are wrong. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
