Why is noone talking about the rain forests?

Question

I hear all this talk on global warming.What about the rain forests.You want to talk about climate change.The destruction of our rain forests will attribute to how our climate reacts.
Does this issue need addressed?

Answer 1

You may want to do some research.

I recently did a bit of research on the subject the lumber industry in most developed areas of the planet are "tree farming", that is crop raising trees. I read an article about the equatorial forest in which described that the encroachment into virgin timber has lessened and in many areas halted in favor of farmed timber.
The doomsday machine is way off base as far as this topic as well.

Google UN report on Sustainable Forestry. Read the report. It's not all bad and not all good. But, I am one that believes development and the environment can co-exist.
Fear is what politicians that don't have facts use to create control for themselves. Be smart, reduce fear with knowledge.

The eco-marxist religion is clearly agenda driven. It lacks scientific validity. It is a "belief" not fact.

One fact they have correct, the earth's mean temperature has risen 7/10s of 1 degree over the last hundred years. That is the end of their factual evidence.

There is no evidence it is human caused.

Here are two websites that contain a large compendium of valid scientific climate information.

http://www.oism.org/pproject/s33p36.htm...

http://www.junkscience.com

Any time the word "BELIEF or BELIEVE" enters the conversation think "RELIGION". It is cult of epic proportion. The only way to deprogram yourself or others is with facts and understanding.

I am a lifelong student. when I first heard of "Global Warming" I recall in my environmental studies in college the "prevailing" wind was around a new Ice Age.

With certainty climate changes, and has been doing so for 4.6 billion years. Sometimes quickly sometime slowly.

Man is inherently narcissistic and our cultural shapers have found ways to manipulate this for the purpose of gaining power.

The validity of IPCC report fails based on inadequate peer review, Most of the supposed 2500 scientists involved are saying the content of the report is NOT what they recommended of even wrote.

What we can do about it? nothing. Don't believe it. Use your common sense. If there is money involved, someone's pocket will be lined.

Al Gore's is definitely one of the primary pocket liners of the ecomarxist religion.

I'd also suggest r

Answer 2

Actually the Kyoto Protocol had a contreversy:

- how to value forest as a carbon sink (with all the side effects: biodiversity, local climate, etc...)

In a first time, only reforestation over land that has not been a forest for the last 20 years could count. Why? To avoid companies to cut down the forest and replant it years later just to get the credit. So nothing was done to stop deforestation.

Thanks to the work of CostaRica, a methodology has been approved now to count avoided deforestation as a sellable carbon credit (like for everything in life you need money).

As such, instead of reforesting with a poorer ecosystem we will be able to put a price on (and make the money flow into) this avoided deforrestation. The resulting carbon credits will be well appreciated by the market and the exective board of the UNFCC since they have strong ancillary effects (biodiversity, local native tribes, etc...)

Answer 3

I would call this a BIG question, one that seriously needs to be addressed. Rain forests were a "hot-button" issue back in the 60's and a little bit in the 70's and 80's. There were many problems; people become weary hearing people harp on a subject over and over; many of the non-profits would say send them money and they would buy rain forests to protect (and sometimes they just had a good time with your money); and another big problem was that there is really little that a lone person can do about the situation.
We are all to blame here; it is human tradition to cut down forests to raise grains (even though acre for acre, forests provide more food than fields); people are still afraid of forests (hard to tell now-a-days with most of the forests gone) but surely you have heard those old fairy tales about the Black Forest? People like to live in the places best suited for forests and for growing crops; the best farm lands have disappeared under millions of miles of roads and highways and under cities. But, certainly, the disappearance of rain forests is not only diminishing the variety of plant and animal life, removing so many chances to find medications to cure serious illnesses, but it is also removing one of the chief sources of oxygen, contributes to globa warming and increases the severity of storms, weather changes, droughts, floods, etc.

Answer 4

Simply because it's a real issue and no-one benefits from saving rain forests besides the rain forests. Yes indeed, we all benefit, but no Politician or Multinational Corporation can benefit from saving the rain forests.

There is no way one can tax carbon emmisions and pocket the money. There is no way of stifling economic developement in the Third World. You can't scare people to do something stupid like you can with the "War on Terror" and "Global Warming."

We live in a political world and we are but the pawns. In this world, consenses reality is more important than the truth. The environmental movements have been highjacked by political interest groups. Can't blame them because it helps them get their funding.

Such is our world.

Answer 5

OISM is a scam

Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine


The Marshall Institute co-sponsored with the OISM a deceptive campaign -- known as the Petition Project -- to undermine and discredit the scientific authority of the IPCC and to oppose the Kyoto Protocol. Early in the spring of 1998, thousands of scientists around the country received a mass mailing urging them to sign a petition calling on the government to reject the Kyoto Protocol. The petition was accompanied by other pieces including an article formatted to mimic the journal of the National Academy of Sciences. Subsequent research revealed that the article had not been peer-reviewed, nor published, nor even accepted for publication in that journal and the Academy released a strong statement disclaiming any connection to this effort and reaffirming the reality of climate change. The Petition resurfaced in 2001.

Spin: There is no scientific basis for claims about global warming. IPCC is a hoax. Kyoto is flawed.

Funding: Petition was funded by private sources.

Affiliated Individuals: Arthur B. Robinson, Sallie L. Baliunas, Frederick Seitz

Answer 6

You are 100% correct. The deforestation efforts by corporate cattle farming is just as much to blame for global warming as any other human activity causing greenhouse gas accumulation.

It should also be noted that the Mt. St Helens eruption in 1980 released more CO2 than ALL that has been produced by mankind throughout all of history. Our best efforts to reduce our impact on the environment are easily wiped out by a single natural disaster. We should be spending much more effort reducing nuclear weapons worldwide, they can end our reign on Earth very, very quickly.

Answer 7

This issue is a HUGE issue. It needs to be adressed. What will happen is when the humans on earth destroy all the rain forests, there will not be enough gasses for oxegeon which is produced by trees. Then the earth won't have any air. And will die. This is a major issue and must be adressed. That's a great point!

Answer 8

Rain forests are being depleted at an alarming rate as natives clear land so cattle can graze so McDonald's can sell us billions and billions more cheap hamburgers. It's a tragic event that will, indeed, force severe climate changes over the next few decades.
Mangrove forests are being destroyed which are vital to the survival of sea life.
Oil companies search for oil in the paths of migrating whales and other sea creatures without regard as to how it affects the fragile ecological balance between man, plants and animals.
Smoke-belching factories and vehicle emissions from millions of automobiles and trucks threaten the very existence of polar ice caps, which will result in coastal flooding, hurricanes and treacherous weather conditions on both coasts of both major oceans.
The depletion of our ozone layer will have a dramatic impact on how we survive on this planet.
As we allow more animal and plant species to become endangered, or extinct, we absolutely, positively also face the threat of our own extinction as a species.
ALL of this needs to be 'talked about' in depth. Man is destroying the very world over which he was given 'dominion'. -RKO- 05/21/07

Answer 9

In fact, the destruction of forests were greatly exaggerated. The amount of rainforest destruction is unfortunate but not as bad as some have suggested. There is a need for governments to protect these forests from wasteful slash and burn but the governments are usually afraid of revolts following any restrictions even reasonable ones. Also, these governments are often tempted with large sums of money for short term gain to companies that clear cut large swaths of forests.

Answer 10

i remember rain forests were talked about a few years ago. when i was still in elementary school, we'd have all these debates y cutting down forests is bad. i guess now were talking about a more pollution-wise global warming