Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Sounds like Brazil's problem. Maybe they would be best pursuing policies that make deforestation in their country not worth the effort.
On the other hand, when timber is treated as a renewable cash crop, as it is in America and elsewhere, there's no money in deforestation without replanting.
One motivation for clearing those rain forests is that American Beef has gotten so expensive (because of corn prices) that we cannot compete for export. And places like Brazil are filling the vacuum.. IN FACT --- the fast food industry in the US is IMPORTING more and more "rainforest beef" every year..
Gee THANKS enviro-nuts.... ANOTHER unintended consequence of your "plans"??
Would you care to explain how US environmentalists are responsible for Brazilian clear cutting in favor of raising cattle?
And as far as corn and cattle feed:
Different cattle feeding production systems have separate advantages and disadvantages. Most cows have a diet that is composed of at least some forage (grass, legumes, or silage). In fact most beef cattle are raised on pasture from birth in the spring until autumn (7 to 9 months).[citation needed]Then for pasture-fed animals, grass is the forage that composes all or at least the great majority of their diet. Cattle fattened in feedlots are fed small amounts of hay or straw supplemented with grain, soy and other ingredients in order to increase the energy density of the diet. The debate is whether cattle should be raised on diets primarily composed of pasture (grass) or a concentrated diet of grain, soy, corn and other supplements. The issue is often complicated by the political interests and confusion between labels such as "free range", "organic", or "natural". Cattle raised on a primarily forage diet are termed grass-fed or pasture-raised; for example meat or milk may be called grass-fed beef or pasture-raised dairy. However, the term "pasture-raised" can lead to confusion with the term "free range", which does not describe exactly what the animals eat.
Wikipedia, cattle feeding
Just like the huge dead zone in the Gulf of Mexico that's caused by environmentalists.Sounds like Brazil's problem. Maybe they would be best pursuing policies that make deforestation in their country not worth the effort.Whether or not they are being paved over is irrelevant, particularly in the tropics, such as Brazil. The soil is so poor there that once you cut down the forest, every little will grow back.
Deforestation Facts, Deforestation Information, Effects of Deforestation - National Geographic
On the other hand, when timber is treated as a renewable cash crop, as it is in America and elsewhere, there's no money in deforestation without replanting.
One motivation for clearing those rain forests is that American Beef has gotten so expensive (because of corn prices) that we cannot compete for export. And places like Brazil are filling the vacuum.. IN FACT --- the fast food industry in the US is IMPORTING more and more "rainforest beef" every year..
Gee THANKS enviro-nuts.... ANOTHER unintended consequence of your "plans"??
I'm not even convinced they mean well anymore.Just like the huge dead zone in the Gulf of Mexico that's caused by environmentalists.Sounds like Brazil's problem. Maybe they would be best pursuing policies that make deforestation in their country not worth the effort.
On the other hand, when timber is treated as a renewable cash crop, as it is in America and elsewhere, there's no money in deforestation without replanting.
One motivation for clearing those rain forests is that American Beef has gotten so expensive (because of corn prices) that we cannot compete for export. And places like Brazil are filling the vacuum.. IN FACT --- the fast food industry in the US is IMPORTING more and more "rainforest beef" every year..
Gee THANKS enviro-nuts.... ANOTHER unintended consequence of your "plans"??
Ethanol responsible for this year's expected record dead zone, researcher says | NOLA.com
But, hey...they MEAN well, and that's all that matters.
Another reason to get away from coal is it causes cancer.
Is that a better reason for you?
You all missed the major point there. Cattle are primarily fed grass, not corn. The ethanol program has not driven cattle production to Brazil. McDonald's might have, but McDonald's is not the responsibility of American environmentalists, is it.
No. The CO2 in the atmosphere will be there for a great long while. But so will the CO2 we put there ten, fifty, a hundred years from now. We need to take serious action, NOW, to reduce our GHG emissions.
The difference between the height of the little ice age and today is around 2c.
The difference between those mile high glaciers over Chicago and looking up at them on staten island is around 8c.
2c in 100 years is a oh shit moment!
The difference between the height of the little ice age and today is around 2c.
The difference between those mile high glaciers over Chicago and looking up at them on staten island is around 8c.
2c in 100 years is a oh shit moment!
Chicken Little lives.
Tell me exactly what will happen. You can't. You can't even say with any certainty that the 2 degree prediction is accurate.
The fact that the GW crowd keeps upping the ante tells me they don't know what's going to happen. But the more they scare you the more you can be controlled.
First of all, we cannot say 'exactly' what will happen. But we can say that it will not be good for a population of over 7 billion humans that depend on a stable climate for food. And that 2 degrees figure is an optimistic one, one that does not consider the feedback effects we are seeing in the Arctic.
The difference between the height of the little ice age and today is around 2c.
The difference between those mile high glaciers over Chicago and looking up at them on staten island is around 8c.
2c in 100 years is a oh shit moment!
Chicken Little lives.
Tell me exactly what will happen. You can't. You can't even say with any certainty that the 2 degree prediction is accurate.
The fact that the GW crowd keeps upping the ante tells me they don't know what's going to happen. But the more they scare you the more you can be controlled.
Does it make you comfortable knowing that we can't predict all the effects? If so, why?
AGW is a farce just like Obama is for hope and change.
CO2 does not drive climate, never has.
On what evidence are you basing your conclusion?
Any concern they may have had has been trampled down by their need to control individual lives with the threat of government violence.I'm not even convinced they mean well anymore.Just like the huge dead zone in the Gulf of Mexico that's caused by environmentalists.One motivation for clearing those rain forests is that American Beef has gotten so expensive (because of corn prices) that we cannot compete for export. And places like Brazil are filling the vacuum.. IN FACT --- the fast food industry in the US is IMPORTING more and more "rainforest beef" every year..
Gee THANKS enviro-nuts.... ANOTHER unintended consequence of your "plans"??
Ethanol responsible for this year's expected record dead zone, researcher says | NOLA.com
But, hey...they MEAN well, and that's all that matters.
If they truly meant well, they would recognize the harm they have caused and cease their foolishness.
You all missed the major point there. Cattle are primarily fed grass, not corn. The ethanol program has not driven cattle production to Brazil. McDonald's might have, but McDonald's is not the responsibility of American environmentalists, is it.
No. The CO2 in the atmosphere will be there for a great long while. But so will the CO2 we put there ten, fifty, a hundred years from now. We need to take serious action, NOW, to reduce our GHG emissions.
The residence time of CO2 is at maximum, 15 years. Try again silly person.
Ask him what the "correct" temperature of the planet is.Chicken Little lives.
Tell me exactly what will happen. You can't. You can't even say with any certainty that the 2 degree prediction is accurate.
The fact that the GW crowd keeps upping the ante tells me they don't know what's going to happen. But the more they scare you the more you can be controlled.
First of all, we cannot say 'exactly' what will happen. But we can say that it will not be good for a population of over 7 billion humans that depend on a stable climate for food. And that 2 degrees figure is an optimistic one, one that does not consider the feedback effects we are seeing in the Arctic.
Who depends on a "stable climate"? The climate has NEVER been stable no matter what propaganda you try and spew. Further, doing nothing, the population is going to continue to rise to perhaps 9 billion and then drop back down to around 6 billion.
You all missed the major point there. Cattle are primarily fed grass, not corn. The ethanol program has not driven cattle production to Brazil. McDonald's might have, but McDonald's is not the responsibility of American environmentalists, is it.
You're not an environmentalist. You're a fascist who joined a cult claiming to save the world.
No. The CO2 in the atmosphere will be there for a great long while. But so will the CO2 we put there ten, fifty, a hundred years from now. We need to take serious action, NOW, to reduce our GHG emissions.
The residence time of CO2 is at maximum, 15 years. Try again silly person.
Because you people are using dubious predictions to impose controls on millions of people
How does that make you comfortable?
I am neither comfortable or uncomfortable.
No. The CO2 in the atmosphere will be there for a great long while. But so will the CO2 we put there ten, fifty, a hundred years from now. We need to take serious action, NOW, to reduce our GHG emissions.
The residence time of CO2 is at maximum, 15 years. Try again silly person.
