Mk
- 2,040
- 4
I'm still looking on deforestation. In North America, it is definitely false, but what about in Africa, and in South American tropical rainforests. Anyone want to help me look?
Is Deforestation a Growing Threat in South American Rainforests?
- Thread starter Mk
- Start date
Join the discussion
Registration is free. Start your own thread to ask a follow-up.
8 replies · 7K views
Discussion
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
- 8,252
- 2,666
Mk said:
A tree farm is not a forest. There is no diversity.
matthyaouw
Gold Member
- 1,125
- 5
Mk said:
Care to elaborate?
Mk
- 2,040
- 4
I don't feel like it. Maybe tomorrow. Sorry.
I saw a tree farm one time. It was all Christmas trees. Its like a forest of Christmas.
So beautiful. Actually it wasn't.
I saw a tree farm one time. It was all Christmas trees. Its like a forest of Christmas.
So beautiful. Actually it wasn't.
Mentor
- 4,789
- 3,854
As an aside - a myth is a story that humans use explain the world to each other. At least that wass the primary meaning - now it's degenerated into a derogatory term - it means a completely false tale, in a perjorative sense.
You do realize that cultural anthropologists categorize any story that explains how we (us humans) came to be as a creation myth. That includes the story in Genesis.
-- just a pet peeve about words going down the sewer... :)
You do realize that cultural anthropologists categorize any story that explains how we (us humans) came to be as a creation myth. That includes the story in Genesis.
-- just a pet peeve about words going down the sewer... :)
Mentor
- 4,789
- 3,854
Oh - I meant to answer - desertification and deforestation are quantifiable.
That means we can get real numbers - in this case percent of land that has gone from 100% vegetative cover and remain at 10% percent over time, using infared satellite imagery taken over longer periods of time.
For example, tropical rainforest soils (lateritic soils), when they experience clearcut over very large areas actually turn into something akin to ceramic.
They become much less permeable, and plants have a tough time repopulating those areas. So they stay pretty much bare for long periods of time. If you do this to several hundred thousand acres of land every year and it does not grow back, why, then this shows up in satellite images.
Just because you don't see it personally does not mean it has no substance to it.
That means we can get real numbers - in this case percent of land that has gone from 100% vegetative cover and remain at 10% percent over time, using infared satellite imagery taken over longer periods of time.
For example, tropical rainforest soils (lateritic soils), when they experience clearcut over very large areas actually turn into something akin to ceramic.
They become much less permeable, and plants have a tough time repopulating those areas. So they stay pretty much bare for long periods of time. If you do this to several hundred thousand acres of land every year and it does not grow back, why, then this shows up in satellite images.
Just because you don't see it personally does not mean it has no substance to it.
- 7,534
- 3,056
Mentor
- 4,789
- 3,854
Thanks robphy, I "mythed" putting up some links.
Mk
- 2,040
- 4
Thanks for the links robphy, it looks like the Amazonian rainforest is shrinking slightly. What about data from before 30 years ago?