Consequences be damned apparently

[necronomous]

Breitbart


lol

ok

MSN
CNN
Rueters
Lol
Ok

[necronomous]

BBC
Fox
Al Jeeze Christ they are terrible
AP
Lol
Ok

[necronomous]

https://www.reuters.com/artic ... it.com

[Wut]

Breitbart


lol

ok

Not only Breitbart but Breitbart reporting on an online poll, which has no statistical value.

[Stapes]

Breitbart


lol

ok

Not only Breitbart but Breitbart reporting on an online poll, which has no statistical value.

I know. It's exhausting trying to get this guy to dig a little deeper. A swedish tax "efficency" group does a poll of its own membership and the skewed results get pushed out to all the usual suspects as all "swedish people"

[CHEEZY17]

So many inconvenient truths. There are more trees in California now than there were in the days of Lewis and Clark.

That is such a ridiculous statement you must still be drunk.

Wanna bet? The pointy heads managing California's forests supplanted those for whom good management was critical. Mother Earth was pushed to the margins. The fauxcahantas tribes did pretty well too. Setting fires on a regular basis to help keep the game populations up. Now there's nobody except Cal-Fire, mopping up one mess after another.

I'd provide a link but there's really no point to it, is there.

Come on man...seriously. Think of all the land now underneath cities, towns, suburban housing tracts, golf courses, land cleared for millions of acres of farming and grazing...….there were trees there once and they aint coming back. Please use your brain instead of you "gut feelings' for once.

Earth has more trees now than 35 years ago
https://news.mongabay.com/2018/08/earth ... years-ago/

More trees than there were 100 years ago? It's true!
Protection, responsible harvesting are key to this success story.
https://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/wilde ... o-its-true

Global tree cover has increased 7% since 1982, finds biggest ever study
Forests chopped down in tropics outweighed by more trees in regions which were previously too cold
https://www.independent.co.uk/environme ... 86096.html

[Stapes]

So many inconvenient truths. There are more trees in California now than there were in the days of Lewis and Clark.

That is such a ridiculous statement you must still be drunk.

Wanna bet? The pointy heads managing California's forests supplanted those for whom good management was critical. Mother Earth was pushed to the margins. The fauxcahantas tribes did pretty well too. Setting fires on a regular basis to help keep the game populations up. Now there's nobody except Cal-Fire, mopping up one mess after another.

I'd provide a link but there's really no point to it, is there.

Come on man...seriously. Think of all the land now underneath cities, towns, suburban housing tracts, golf courses, land cleared for millions of acres of farming and grazing...….there were trees there once and they aint coming back. Please use your brain instead of you "gut feelings' for once.

Earth has more trees now than 35 years ago
https://news.mongabay.com/2018/08/earth ... years-ago/

More trees than there were 100 years ago? It's true!
Protection, responsible harvesting are key to this success story.
https://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/wilde ... o-its-true

Global tree cover has increased 7% since 1982, finds biggest ever study
Forests chopped down in tropics outweighed by more trees in regions which were previously too cold
https://www.independent.co.uk/environme ... 86096.html

I don't see one pertaining to California having more trees than there were in Lewis and Clarks day. Count on Cheezy to not be able to stay on point as usual

[Wut]

So many inconvenient truths. There are more trees in California now than there were in the days of Lewis and Clark.

That is such a ridiculous statement you must still be drunk.

Wanna bet? The pointy heads managing California's forests supplanted those for whom good management was critical. Mother Earth was pushed to the margins. The fauxcahantas tribes did pretty well too. Setting fires on a regular basis to help keep the game populations up. Now there's nobody except Cal-Fire, mopping up one mess after another.

I'd provide a link but there's really no point to it, is there.

Come on man...seriously. Think of all the land now underneath cities, towns, suburban housing tracts, golf courses, land cleared for millions of acres of farming and grazing...….there were trees there once and they aint coming back. Please use your brain instead of you "gut feelings' for once.

Earth has more trees now than 35 years ago
https://news.mongabay.com/2018/08/earth ... years-ago/

More trees than there were 100 years ago? It's true!
Protection, responsible harvesting are key to this success story.
https://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/wilde ... o-its-true

Global tree cover has increased 7% since 1982, finds biggest ever study
Forests chopped down in tropics outweighed by more trees in regions which were previously too cold
https://www.independent.co.uk/environme ... 86096.html

Good, the environmentalists need to keep up the good work.

[Charliesheen]

Tree science perfessor pens article for right wing rag SF Chronicle.

It’s right there. Too many trees per acre.

https://www.sfchronicle.com/opinion/ope ... 385872.php

[necronomous]

https://www.dailywire.com/news/ ... imony

[VinceBordenIII]

Years ago I read a piece that there is more forested area now in the US than there was 100 years ago, because of the changes in farming.

Also, one of the problems in the Amazon is that the soil is so poor. The nutrients are in the rain. Like hydroponic. So they have to keep cutting and burning more acreage as the soil is exhausted.

That is all I have to add to this convo.

[necronomous]

Years ago I read a piece that there is more forested area now in the US than there was 100 years ago, because of the changes in farming.

Also, one of the problems in the Amazon is that the soil is so poor. The nutrients are in the rain. Like hydroponic. So they have to keep cutting and burning more acreage as the soil is exhausted.

That is all I have to add to this convo.

Wouldn't dead trees refurbish the nutrients?

[Stapes]

Years ago I read a piece that there is more forested area now in the US than there was 100 years ago, because of the changes in farming.

Also, one of the problems in the Amazon is that the soil is so poor. The nutrients are in the rain. Like hydroponic. So they have to keep cutting and burning more acreage as the soil is exhausted.

That is all I have to add to this convo.

There are more trees in the US now than there were 100 years ago due to conservation and reforestation efforts started in the 1920- 1940's. There certainly aren't as many trees as there were in the 1600's when European settlers reshaped the landscape for lumber and farming. The forests and plant growth today don't resemble what they looked like before.

[Charliesheen]

Yep. The forests were more like parks. From fires going through and clearing underbrush. Many trees can’t get their seeds to germinate without first being exposed to fire.

Face it. Man can’t manage forests. Not without massively labor intensive plans to clear and thin. Controlled burning works, but there’s so much building in and next to overgrown forests that it’s nay impossible to fix the natural way.

The forest service had the right idea, but tree-huggers snuffed their attempts out using politics.

[VinceBordenIII]

Yep. The forests were more like parks. From fires going through and clearing underbrush. Many trees can’t get their seeds to germinate without first being exposed to fire.

Face it. Man can’t manage forests. Not without massively labor intensive plans to clear and thin. Controlled burning works, but there’s so much building in and next to overgrown forests that it’s nay impossible to fix the natural way.

The forest service had the right idea, but tree-huggers snuffed their attempts out using politics.

Remember the hissy fit the media had when (Yosemite?) burned quite a few years back?