The Amazon is burning

(You knew there was going to be a big "but," didn't you?)

But Bolivia's President is a *drumroll* Socialist! You know, someone who doesn't give a shit about people, at least according to some of the folks here.

The Amazon is not people.

If climate change is really going to be a major factor in the future, shouldn't the U.S. drastically increase the size and capabilities of its aerial firefighting fleet for use both home and abroad?

Remember that is something I suggested in "If I Were President" thread.

Sounds like time to reboot it.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/worl...-amazon-rainforest/ar-AAGd2xy?ocid=spartandhp

But a whole lot of people are going to die if the Amazon burns, including the indigenous folks. Morales has sworn to protect them.

Good. While I’m grateful for that, it’s extremely important for humanity and the planet that the Amazon itself to be protected.

This whole thing with the Amazon burning is fake news in the sense that it's now a huge deal. It's only being turned into a huge deal because of whose President. Same way that Trump gets blamed for everything as well.

News flash: It's always burning each year. They have fire season the same way California has fire season.

https://nypost.com/2019/08/23/celeb...ng-photos-of-amazon-wildfire-to-social-media/

https://www.express.co.uk/news/worl...-latest-emmanuel-macron-fake-picture-backlash

Like someone said, they'll probably blame President Trump for burning down Cheryl's she-shed.

This is why you don't get your news from celebrities. Here's what NASA has to say.

That's the issue. Many of these fires have been illegally started after Brazil's President said he basically didn't give a shit about the rainforest.

As NASA goes on to point out, there are presently more fires burning in the Amazon than any time for about a decade. Regardless of how they started this isn't a good thing at all. Because the term "rainforest" is inaccurate. It makes you think that it rains a lot there. It doesn't, the forest gets enough water to survive due to the massive amount of dew which forms on the leaves. This then falls to the forest floor and waters the plants. Lose too much of the forest, and it can't grow back. Additionally, and I know this is hard to believe, but it's true: The soil in the Amazon is actually quite poor. This means that after only a couple of years of being used to grow crops, it's basically worthless. And, despite what one might have seen in movies like Ferngully, it takes a very long time for it to grow back. On the order of centuries, not just a few years.

So, I don't give a fuck what any celebrity says about the fires in the Amazon, the experts say this is a really bad thing, and I'm going to trust them. Just like I'm going to trust your word over what happens in a prison over Tererun's. Because, you know, you actually work in one.

I saw on CNN (I think it’s the linked article in the OP) that at some point it won’t grow back and basically turn into a desert and if that happens, we’re truly fucked.

but soylent green is!

Along the lines of my god is bigger than your god, this is how nature will fuck us up. All these stupid baby making climate change science deniers are going to get culled. Society will pass on knowledge and whether or not mankind survives is up to his own creativity. However, this burst of life will be wiped out as others have been in the past, and it will only be the smart ones that survive if any at all.

Idiocracy does not happen for long in nature. My god, nature/physical universe, is cruel and does not give a fuck about your prayers and your individual lives. Science has given plenty of warning of upcoming troubles and at some point humanity will have to exist without the earth's protections or it will die.

Not sure why this got neg reps because it makes a lot of sense, the impact of those planes would be vastly offset by their value in dealing with situations like this.

All countries with significant forest coverage should really be prepared, as should their neighbours.

That is cool, but we should really just take the idea and give it to better people. If you let @Dayton Kitchens handle it we will have them using nukes to incinerate the forest before the fire gets there.

Don't dumb rep that @Dayton Kitchens , we all know you have thought about nuking a fire out. That would be one of your top ten sexual fantasies.

1) I don't contemplate using nuclear weapons. If I had my way the world would be rid of them.
2) I'm 52 years old. Not 15 or even 25. I don't have "sexual fantasies" any more.

That is not what your donkey says

But only after the United States is attacked by them, as per your latest fantasy, right?

Actually unless it was to prevent further attacks I would say not.

When do they stop?

I assume it is different for everyone.

Hopefully I've got a few decades left then

BULL MOTHER FUCKING SHIT! You don't have sexual fantasies any less either. There isn't a human on this planet that doesn't have sexual fantasies in some way, shape or form. Sell that shit somewhere else, I'm not buying it.

when they pry them from my cold, dead hand!

Good thing you have two good hands or you wouldn't have a sex life at all.

if you say so! And as the old BK commercials used to say....it takes two hands to handle a whopper! That ad was better than "how do handle a hungry man? The MAN HANDLER....."

So now you are saying you are a homosexual? At least you won't be lonely on this discussion board. We have several. Plus at least one who thinks he's a woman despite having the chromosomes and all the equipment of a man (so he says).