English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

People, Please,,, Let's get it together. There are alot of different things we could use besides wood for so many different things. I know I'm not the only one that knows this but when you extinguish one type of insect it causes a chain reaction that could kill many species of animal. Also, one species of insect could occupy only a small segment of forest. There is no telling how many meds and new unexplored ideas we've destroyed and will never know.Please comment.....

2007-01-13 05:43:50 · 7 answers · asked by Carl Ray 1 in Science & Mathematics Botany

7 answers

ok, first, you have your facts wrong. the wood we commonly use is NOT from the rainforests. It is from renewable sources, in fact by law, it MUST be replanted.

What is going on in the rainforests has little to do with the world population's use of wood. What is going on, is the idigenous people art burning the forrest to grow crops on. they get one meager harvest and have to burn more because the layer of areable soil is so thin, it will only support one years crops, and not well at that. If in fact they lumbered the forrest, they would make much more than they ever could get growing crops. There are many species of rare woods they are destroying for no good reason. SELECTIVE harvesting would give them all they need to survive and even thrive, and actually be beneficial to the rainforrest.

in point of fact, when you do not harvest the lumber, you invite fires that cause more damage to the enviroment than logging them ever would. Point of reference, Yellowstone burning. because no harvesting at all, not even fire roads was allowed, it all burnt up, and was wasted. polluting the air and so forth. Eventually, the forrest came back, better than ever. Selective harvesting and even controlled burns could keep the forrest in good shape, without everything going to waste and endangering lives and property.

WE did not destroy the rainforrest. certain people did, if you want to save the forrest, load them up and move them the hell out of there to somewhere that can support them.

fact is, the earth is always changing and goes in cycles. what worries me more than the silly rainforest, is taking up all the good farm ground for housing. the idea of buying farm land and turning into housing developments is crazy. they do it because it is easy. why not use the ground that is not fit to grow anything on? it is difficult, thats why.

Even the global warming crap being put forth now is bogus. I spoke with a scientist working on the problem myself. He admits that global warming has taken place before, 470 million years ago, before man was even around to have any impact. I also know that even the moutains of Colorado were once underwater, and at another time were tropical. I found the fossil evidence myself. So, even if it is true, the evidence suggests that it is not man that is the cause, but rather a natural phenomenon. the guy that originally proposed the therory, was the same guy that proposed the therory that another ice age was coming. The scientist i spoke with, someone supposedly respected in the field, points to PLANT LIFE as one of the culprits. DUH?? So, dont believe the crap you are spoon fed by the media. INVESTIGATE, find out the truth.

2007-01-13 07:21:28 · answer #1 · answered by tootall1121 7 · 0 0

You are very right. People say that one species is no big deal, but it is, especially if we don't know all of the ways it interacts with it's surroundings. For example, I saw a documentary on PBS about an animal that was disappearing, and it turns out that it was because of a type of flower that was being destroyed from deforestation. There was a type of insect that needed that flower to survive, and that insect was the animal's major food source. Because of that one flower disappearing, the insect and the animal were disappearing as well. People also say that there is still plenty of forest left, but there is a principle called fragmentation. As the forest becomes split into a lot of small forests, the animal populations in each fragment are not able to migrate between sections, and you are left with smaller populations that are more likely to go extinct. And like you said, there could be so many medications out there that we do not know about yet. For instance, in the Amazon forest there is a plant whose oils actually killed the AIDs virus in a test tube. The only problem is that if it were used as a medication, it would be needed in such large amounts that it would be toxic to humans, but it is the idea that there is still much to be discovered, and if we cut down the forest it will be gone forever. Once the trees are cut down, it is very difficult to replant anything because the nutrients are not in the soil, they are all stored in the trees, which are usually burned. We must stop before it reaches a point where it can't be reversed.

2007-01-13 06:54:23 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

U are not old enough to think u even have a few answers. I lived in Ecuador 12 in the jungle and the rain forest is doing fine without your help. The cutting of the trees is so small it is like an ant dean attacking the trees , after their life is over it will be almost no time before there is no trace that u were ever there.

2007-01-13 05:58:22 · answer #3 · answered by JOHNNIE B 7 · 0 0

guy has been ingesting meat on condition that cave circumstances , an selection to soya could be got here upon the rainforests are chopped down so new properties might properly be equipped , new furnishings for the prosperous im not a huge meat eater yet i merchandise to all of the blame at meat eaters door fruit and vegetables can shuttle thousands of miles why are some vegetables so boastful , such dry hair and dermis too ewwww there's a bigger photograph

2016-12-16 03:47:34 · answer #4 · answered by tollefson 4 · 0 0

once the rain forests are destroyed we will have a lot more beef... Also, what you are describing is not necessarily true- if you remove one species it will not necessarily cause a cascade effect unless they play a big role in the interactions of the community.

I think that it will really suck. I agree with you for the most part, we need to be looking at alternatives to cutting down the rain forests. This is our fate though- we inevitably destroy our environment. such is life!

2007-01-13 05:51:23 · answer #5 · answered by churnin 4 · 0 1

After they destroy the rainforests, they will have more time to destroy other types of forests, so we can have things that are more essential to human existence, such as iPods and pictures of Britney Spears without her panties.

2007-01-13 06:55:19 · answer #6 · answered by Anpadh 6 · 0 0

Gasp for air

2007-01-13 05:53:01 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers