Brazil's president, Jair Bolsonaro says non-governmental organisations may be setting fires in the Amazon to embarrass the Brazilian government after it cut their funding, despite offering no evidence to support the claim.
These NGO's have literally just been sitting around and collecting money from Brazilian taxpayers. This is what they do when Bolsonaro cuts their funding. Very sad.
>despite offering no evidence to support the claim
>no evidence to support the claim
>no evidence
The depth of Mr Bolsanaros sadness at environmental destruction is well documented. The only time he has ever given a single fuck enough about the Amazon to even go to the bother of blaming someone else, is when practically the entire rotw is giving him shit. He should get shit more often
Those "environmental" organizations have a lot of corruption inside them, that is a fact and Bolsonaro is correct in pointing so. A close family member of mine used to work for one in the 2000s and she tells me many of them really do not give a fuck about forests.
Bolsonaro is, however, acting with incredible irresponsibility, penalizing forests and conservation instead of actually dismantling any corruption schemes or penalizing (or taxing) people who explore the rainforest rent-free. He doesn't care about the environment, so of course shit will happen. Not everything is a leftist conspiracy - thinking like that helps to cover up actual conspiracies.
What is your point?
Amazon is like 20% I thought of world wide Oxygen. The shit we breath!
We are fucked.
Algae, pajeet. Algae.
Good, cleanse the earth from the human scum
Algae does produce half of the world's oxygen but that is in danger also. Ocean ph, heating, salinity, and even fertilizer run off are changing algae dynamics for the worse.
Kind of related is coral bleaching which I think should scare everyone on the planet who has more than two brain cells.
>everyone on the planet who has more than two braincells
so only whites and japs will care, got it
it's probably a meme, we have literally not explored even 10% of the oceans, some coral may be dying but building up elsewhere
> despite offering no evidence to support the claim.
You fucking idiot are you actually defending this? You even left this in the OP
You’re joking right :|
>nogs-to-blame
>muh 20% oxygen
If we kill 20% of the population (third worlders and chinks only) we should be fine.
These people are so twisted by greed and fear of brown people that this is the kind of shit they actually believe to justify it to themselves
no, we know nothing, we haven't even been studying most of it for 100 years, climate cycles have been going on for millions of years.
> (((Jair)))
You fucking retard, the ocean isnt some magical undiscovered dolphin playground of coral reefs, there are very few reefs and like 99% of the ocean is "abyssal plane," deep nothingness that is far less productive per square meter than terrestrial deserts. Look up biomass density by biome types, some pretty cool information, but also shows how precarious our position is on this earth with regards to breathable air.
It's not the NGOs, the guy is a liar (like most politicians). The fires are a way to clear the land for planting s.o.y. beans. China is pressuring Brazil to increase farming output now that they no longer buy from the USA.
i'm sure it's all meaningless. it's literally 95% unexplored still, but yeah 8 billion humans soon, we could do with a culling i guess.
earth will carry on though
Imagine believing this propaganda as the forest which produces a significant amount of Earth's oxygen burns
damn you guys are idiots. Bolsonaro loves this is happening, he did it on purpose.
you 2 are too smart for biz
Brazil has to be allowed to clear some of the forest so they can economically develop. Both sides need to come together to figure out how to do this in a sustainable manner, because if you don't allow some develop then they'll just illegally burn it anyway
An important point to remember is that the soil quality in these forests is extremely poor, meaning that agricultural lands will quickly be depleted, requiring more land to be burnt
>"Tax them for not saving the forests"
t. countries which have cut down all their foersts
Ladies there is no need to be afraid, quantum mechanical phenomena can be meassured and analyzed. Also I have autism.
>muh development
Brazil will never be developed because the average IQ will never reach the upper 90s and because their culture is trash.
They have an exponential amount of ressources compared to a fucking lava rock in the middle of nowhere like Iceland and yet...
>Brazil has to be allowed to clear some of the forest so they can economically develop.
No country has ever become economically developed by increasing agricultural output. If you want to develop, you need to increase the exports of industrial goods (which is what China has been doing since the 1990s).
The reason why Latin American and African countries havent developed is that they rely mostly on raw goods exports, which prevents them from ever becoming fully industrialized.
It's not just agriculture, there are lot of resources in the Amazon, and if Pablo doesn't have an income he will happily burn away forest
True, but alas genocide isn't an option
This is how develope third world shitholes
You kill the leeches also kill people from all major cities around the world.
HOW WILL BEZOS EVER RECOVER?
Only mouth breathers will die.
Its like trying to figth HIV in africa. There are no benefits because it only kills apes and subniggers.
>It's not just agriculture, there are lot of resources in the Amazon
>resources
Like what? Like minerals? Gold? Diamond?
That stuff won't make anyone rich. As I said earlier, no matter how much raw stuff a country exports, it will never develop unless it manages to produce higher order (industrialized) goods.
So even if Brazil clears 100% of of its forests and replaces them with s.o.ybeans farms, it will still have to import tractors from some other country. Even if it reaches full mining capacity it will still need to buy electronics and computer chips from China. Relying on raw goods exports is a terrible short sighted strategy for economic development that will lead them nowhere in the long run. They need to invest in education and focus on increasing the production of industrial goods.
True, this is something I didn't know.
People should still be focusing on having a sustainable mindset though, rather than making the Amazon purely off limits, because this doesn't create a cooperative environment
Sustainable and economic industries could be established from the Amazon however. An example could be furniture and luxury goods produced from tropical hardwoods
I'm not advocating people clear the Amazon btw, just that some middle ground is met between conservation and people
Clearing the forest to produce s.o.y won't solve their problems:
>It doesn't create jobs (most s-o-y production is mechanized)
>It has a long term environmental cost that they eventually will have to pay
>It doesn't improve educational levels
The best solution for Brazil and Latin America would be to do what China and South Korea did: to put their peasants in school and give them factory jobs. Over time, factory jobs are replaced by service sector and high tech jobs. That was how Japan became developed as well.
Developed countries don't need to produce raw goods. They can import raw goods and export industrial ones. Japan or China don't have a lot of natural resources, but they can import all that stuff for cheap and export industrial goods in exchange. That's how countries develop. Latin America still relies heavily on exporting stuff like sugar, coffee, iron ore, oranges. While that's good for some farming elites, it does little to develop these countries. Same applies for Africa - lots of countries there rely on mining exports but have very low levels of industrialization.
No it isn't.
There's quite a hard reason as to why brazil can't industrialize quite the same way china or south korea did.
Niggers?
Well yeah just the brain capacity of the human population. China and south korea had quite specific geopolitical reasons as to why they were in a bad state in the 1800s but were always going to eventually develop again. The same prospect just isn't there with Brazil.
That’s really bad. I hope it doesn’t interfere with my prime deliveries :(
>eventually develop again
South Korea and China were never industrialized lol. Wtf are you talking about, dude? China was a predominantly peasant society, even during the 'golden age.' We call it 'golden age' because the West was relatively underdeveloped at that time.
For the sake of comparison, look this up:
1. GDP or capita in Brazil and South Korea, 1960
2. GDP per capita today, same countries
4. Educational attainment levels 1960-today, same countries
Basically, Brazil and South Korea were very similar in the 1960s. Peasant societies. South Korea then developed, while Brazil remained stuck in the past. Why? Because South Korea invested massively in education. (Also, they don't have the same corruption problem, which makes government-driven change more efficient.)
> china/sk never industrialized
I don't even know how to respond to such a statement. In case it's not just plain trolling to get a response look up the export market, gdp and employment figures.