/kc/ - Krautchan

Europe is seeing a continuous reforestation for a century now. I welcome this ofc.
What impressing for me is the reduction of the agricultural lands.

Yes, Macron is a grannyfucker.

>>325
interesting gif, did Britain chop down every tree for their fleet?

>>327
I think so.
https://www.citylab.com/environment/2018/01/northern-forest-united-kingdom/550025/

>>318
>Link somewhat related, Bolsonaro called Macron's wife an old ugly hag.
this is simply lower class thrash behaviour.

>>325
me on the right

São Paulo had a "daytime night" as the smoke combined with a cold front to create particularly gloomy weather.

http://queimadas.dgi.inpe.br/queimadas/portal-static/estatisticas_estados/
This is where satellite data on the number of fires is shown. For the Amazon you can filter by region for Amazônia Legal -basically the entirety of a list of states and everything west of a line on another state, and including a lot of savannah at its edges and, depending on how biomes are counted, scattered through the middle. Other minor non-rainforest biomes also exist but are likely counted as either savannah or rainforest. You can also filter by biome for Amazônia which is closer to what you as a gringo is thinking of.
This should put it in context. The historical peak in the number of fires (and deforestation) was last decade, and there's an overall trend of decrease. This year there has been a sharp increase and the average number is above the January-August average for the whole period, but so far it's still below the historical record. Why didn't smoke reach all the way to São Paulo in the mid-00s? Maybe the size of fires was smaller despite the greater number, or a fluke in the weather directed the smoke to the civilized parts of the country. If it's just the latter, then what's happening right now may not be as dramatic and historically relevant as it is said.

Bolsonaro being rude is common, some of his base likes it. He's like Trump sometimes.
Macron is making a big deal about this. I don't think it's imperialism, he's just using it as an excuse to torpedo the EU-Mercosul trade deal and thus gain favor with French farmers fearing Brazilian competition.

As seen in the last picture fires are always highest in August-September, almost matching with the driest period of the year. Relatively dry, that is. In Belém it is said that there are two seasons, when it rains all day and when it rays every day. Temperature graphs are provided for curiosity. At the Equator they're redundant.

>>333
>daytime night
that's Mordor tier, Brazil is turning into Russia

>>342
>Brazil is turning into Russia
It always was

>>356
Worried laughter

Since related what would happen if we cover entire sahara desert ground with mirrors and tell the sun go kys?

How much global colding can we receive?

>>369
How about building big heat exchanging pipe and siphon the heat into the space? Like a fridge.

>>370
It would look ugly.

>>370
space is cold but is almost a vacuum
would be negligible heat transfer
thats why a warm dead body in space would stay warm for like, weeks
only heat transfer it has is from radiation output

>>370
radiative cooling is actually a thing.
>So the Stanford team designed a special panel made of ultrathin metal oxide layers that absorbs heat and emits it at a wavelength that passes through the Earth’s atmosphere and escapes out into space. The panel also bounces back nearly all the sunlight falling on it, so it can still work on hot, sunny days.
http://www.anthropocenemagazine.org/2017/09/new-cooling-method-literally-sends-heat-out-of-this-world/
https://www.sciencenewsforstudents.org/article/how-chill-object-sending-its-heat-space

>>359
why worry, have an ice cream and make Putin pay for it

>>371
>>372
>>374
How about installing reflective stuff into space? We should dump more garbage out there. Then we shall have our battle in the shade.

>>379
you could but it would be a big project
like, theres been thought experiments about placing mirrors or shades at the lagrange point to deflect or block radiation coming to earth
i dont really give a shit, im hoping the incoming horde of sub-humans will push real humans to actually make real space developments

>>375
you wouldn't pay for erdo's icecream?

>>381
ice cream should be free

>>382
This. We should abolish ice cream slavery and allow them to be free.

>>333
Yes. Keep feeding gringos' hysteric stupidity moved by political reasons.

>São Paulo had a "daytime night" as the smoke combined with a cold front to create particularly gloomy weather.
You should be ashamed for ever believing such thing. A child outside of that effeminate hysteria bubble you were in would have a better sense of scale, climate and geography. That was just storm clouds and Brazil's wind direction is all messed up in your minds. Even if the winds would run from the Amazon area to São Paulo, the smoke would be dissipated since there's more than enough air, by the distance, to make it hardly detectable.
The last similar retarded thing I saw in the hysteria bubble is the Amazon smoke was reaching Uruguay's shore. Again, you get to be completely retarded or hysteric to believe such bullshit.
>muh smoke scent
Paulistanos smell smoke and breath smoke the whole fucking year. Some local fires in empty terrains, to clean them, are common this time of the year. Not healthy, but definitively not from Amazon fires.

>I don't think it's imperialism
Yes, it is. And there's more. There's a lot more.

>>393
There's no surprise at all in the fires in the Amazon area. Nothing much abnormal. There was a concentration of organic matter from the last two years, which were rainy years, so this year the fires are slightly more common and stronger. The dry season is from August to October, peaking in September.
There was also a small rise in deforestation in comparison with the last years, but nothing big. The deforestation could happen after wood – WHICH WE SHOULD BE LEGALLY EXPLORING LIKE PEOPLE DO IN OTHER COUNTRIES, BUT WE ARE NOT, AND I BLAME TREE-HUGGERS FOR THIS ILLEGAL DEFORESTATION – or after opening space to create free range cattle – don't think it's the same meat you import from us, because it's not, our regulations are way heavier than it should, retardly heavy in everything, any militancy for a boycott would only hurt who LEGALLY creates cattle, and a healthier cattle than you could ever get in your own countries.
When they deforest an area by cutting down trees, they need to clean the terrain. So they cut trees before the dry season and let the dead vegetation die. So then they set fire to it. The green, wet, forest, will barely be burned. When they burn it's because there's a lot of dead trees already in there – and it's a natural phenomenon: around 30% of the trees in the forest are already dead by default, standing there hollow and drying as the time passes. So… One of two things will then happen when they set fire:
—When the rains come back (around November), if let alone, the forest will healthily start to grow back, healthier and now younger than before, the flora and fauna (who had run away from the area) will somewhat be reestablished after 10 years, the trees will be in a big size in 20 years, then you barely will notice that area had been burned. So setting fire to it ASAP is a better choice than leaving it dry and accumulating dead biologic matter. Tree-huggers are insane and, if it depended on them, we would see truly huge natural fire preceded by a dead forest, fucked up and taking a long time to recover. Fires in this case are a good thing.
—Or… If the intention was to clear the terrain for other uses, then the fire will be used for this. The problem is what happens next, they will plant grass so the forest won't grow back. But let me tell you it needs some dedication to keep pastures in place of the forest. The forest will spread like plague if the terrain is let alone. Our legal colonization of the region kind of failed in the 80s because of that. Anyway, illegal cutting down of trees and illegal creation of pastures are two things that should be fought (not the fires). And it is fought. The reason all of this bullshit propaganda started is because the government wanted to fight better against such deforestation. Will explain this in other post.

Point here is, most of the fire was natural, unintentional, non-criminal. The fire uses to be good to the forest. Animals will run away from it, to wetter areas, they won't simply die, they are not retarded, there's enough green forest for them to run into; then the fires will naturally be extinguished by rains or because it got out of dry fuel. There's nothing outside of control and the proportion of areas burned are so small I don't even have the percentage to give you, but it's way way way way way way lower than a single percent.

I said about the legal exploration of the Amazon. Our legal land owners are the ones who mostly preserve the forest. Well… The part that people can interact with, because the forest is truly huge, people outside of Brazil seem to have no idea of the size of it. You get huge areas of forest that will live, die, and never see a single human being in their life (good, right?). The part that is explored is kept safe mostly in private properties. Our laws demand 80% their lands are kept untouched. FUCKING EIGHTY PERCENT. We already live in a tree-hugging dictatorship here, there's no need for more of it – and I also place the blame of this sudden hysteria about the Amazon in our usual complacency with tree-huggers and globalists, we give them a hand, they want both of our arms to them. And by that 80% I'm not talking about preservation areas, these should be kept entirely untouched, with few exceptions for "sustentable developing", which means some tree-hugging inefficient bullshit used to grab money from the government, international donations or for money laundering. It's 80% by default, everyone has to keep 80% of their property as useless forest.

>>394
So… Given the proportions, the fires are irrelevant to the "big picture". Eurotards keep thinking about their own fires – and the picture on OP also points to their mistakes and unfair retarded mentality, planting inflammable eucalyptus and thinking they are "reforesting" anything, or reforesting stuff to cut it down for wood (which is not wrong, as long it's controlled; but that's where the unfairness and retardness comes in comparing it with the Amazon) –; and their fires are deadly, people die because of it, it gets our of control, far from what happens here. The Amazon is far, far away, from being at any risk. Retarded hysteric gringos were crying in the Internet as if it were to end.

There's more: the official statistics given by our government you use to see about Amazon deforestation don't even count the natural reforestation which is the norm. Some gringo retards were talking about "replanting trees". God damn it. This kind of stupidity makes me wish I could punch people in the face through my monitor. I wish I could beat them in the head until their brain forcefully starts working. THE FUCKING FOREST JUST REGENERATES NATURALLY. LIKE A FUCKING PLAGUE. Despite some completely out of reality theories (and which every Brazilian is used to since we are told a lot of lies in school, like the "lungs of the planet" thing), the Amazon Forest is resilient as fuck. As long as it rains (and, for fucking geographic reasons, it rains despite the retarded theory of the forest being necessary for them), as long as it rains, there will be the Amazon Forest. The shallow fertile soil, in most of Amazon, will manage to stay fertile without the forest as long as people don't really fuck up with it by planting something that leaves the ground unprotected to rain and wind (and planting grass to create cattle is safer to the terrain than the forest itself, grass is good to preserve it), and it's recoverable, far from being at risk of becoming a desert. The "flying river" narrative is bullshit. It only helps the center of Brazil, of cerrado (savanna-like) biome, and in a few months of the year. It's good for us to keep having three harvests a year, as it's common in Brazil – and farmers fully buy the flying river narrative and wouldn't want the surrounding forests down. The Amazon Forest, as long as the Earth keeps spinning on its usual direction and as long as the Equatorial Atlantic keeps being warm, as long as the sun keeps shining, and with the help of the existence of the Andes to block the winds back to Brazil, the Amazon Forest will keep existing, healthy, big and all. The only realistic way I can think for the Amazon to shrink due to lack of rains is by a global cooling, and we are supposed to go, slowly, back into a glacial era, so expect the Amazon to shrink some thousands of years in the future.

>>395
It all started for a few reasons, and keep in mind these below were Bolsonaro's campaign promises:

—Strong position of Bolsonaro over the Amazon sovereignty.

—Signals of Nationalism from Brazil, which should be crushed by the globalists.

—Refusal from Bolsonaro to accept globalist terms. Our ex-president Temer opened his legs to them and signed a retarded immigration deal and also the Paris Deal, which is completely unfair to developing countries. I'm not even telling you why the CO2 hysteria is wrong and how the growth of fuel usage is important to develop a country (even more important when the fuel prices are kept artificially expensive and they shall go down in the future); and if you disagree with me on this, just fuck off. Bolsonaro wanted to GTFO of it, but protectionists on other countries would use this as an excuse to boyccot our products, and the farmers asked Bolsonaro to don't leave it. Obviously, globalists didn't like Bolsonaro's "spiritual dissidence" from the deal, as it risked Brazil's future on it, which would induce other developing countries to leave alongside us.

—Refusal form Bolsonaro to keep funding Amazon NGOs. They were used for money laundering; for animal trafficking; for illegal activities in general; to indoctrinate indians to hate us and never assimilate with Brazilians, but with the NGOs aliens; and for "saving" Brazilian soil (with mineral reserves) so it can be explored by their own business, not Brazilian ones. That's nothing new, but it got worse after the Military Regime ended and internationalist social-democrats took over the country. We have 17 thousand NGOs "working" on Amazon. Most of them are ways to earn money illegally. In total, in Brazil, we have 400 thousand NGOs; most useless and laundering and sucking government's money.

—Interest of Bolsonaro to buy some anti-deforestation program, with AI, to increase our surveillance over the Amazon Area and to partially replace our INPE system (both would work alongside; INPE = National Institute of Spacial Research). The corporatists on INPE, Worker's Party (Lula)'s whores, got buttmad and decided to sabotage the country over this. The former president of INPE was spreading false information and narratives about the increase of the deforestation and moving hysteria about it. He allied himself to the Globalists you know well. Macron decided to act because of it. His alarmism and alliance to take away our sovereignty over the Amazon can be called a single thing: TREASON. If it depended only on me, he would be hanged on live tv, alongside the all the liars from mainstream media of Brazil (and everyone spreading hysterical misinformation would have their heads beaten until they start working). The MSM started to spread false statistics based on that faggot's false interpretation (that was forbidden by the documentation) on data from an Amazon surveillance program. You must have read all of these false statistics, completely outside of reality, like 200% increase, or any bullshit like that. The program was supposed to make readings in a bigger space of time than a year, because there are areas that can't be measured because of clouds, rains and crap like that (remember the Amazon Forest is really rainy). That faggot decided to compare some region one month in the year with the previous month which wasn't well measured. And also statistics about the Amazonas state was spread as being from the Amazon Forests. We had some trouble with Bolivia as well, where there was way more fires than the usual. So a lot of false information, intentional disinformation, was being spread just to create anti-Bolsonaro narratives. And what that faggot from INPE did? Did he apologize? Did he point out where the errors were? No. He joined them in their narratives. Then he got fired. After he got fired, more and more anti-Bolsonaro disinformation was spread about it. As if we were trying to sweep our deforestation under the carpet, which we were not. But the real statistics, these were swept off of MSM mouths.

>>396
—So, the Anti-Bolsonaro interest of the MSM and Globalists, who don't give a fuck to lie as long it's a narrative against him.

—European lobbyist interests to protect their own farmers and to expand European and globalist bargaining power over the future EU-Mercosur deal. Macron saw it as very convenient to expand his bargain power over us. Specially the globalists one, so they would control us better.

—And the usual globalist plans and capitalist/corporatist neo-imperialism. These want to "save" the Amazon for them, not respecting our sovereignty. Nothing new. Nothing new. This have been a threat to us for a long time. Our "indigenal reserves" are big the way they are for this sole reason. They have the size of a whole European country for some hundreds of indians, so the minerals can be held. So the soil/climate able to create biofuel easily is held. So the development of the countries gets concentrated with the older ones. I don't intend to enter in details about the globalist's parasitic strategy that fucks the whole world by one side and fucks their own host countries by the other. But the creation and upholding of "castes" and chaos are important.

The forest fires? It is a non-problem that was solved by non-solutions (fighting the fires by extinguishing it is worse than leaving it alone, we will pay the price in the next years, and there will be more non-problems and non-solutions making it even worse). The forest fires were never a real issue. What I listed above were the relevant things. It's all about Brazil's right to own its own land and electing whoever we want. It's all about making globalists and corporatists angry. It's not about the safety of the Amazon Forest.

>>395
>picture on OP
My bad. Actually I meant this picture here: >>325

Posting everything here for exercising and archival purposes, so I can copy it back when I get home and then post it somewhere else, since there's still a lot of misinformation going around about the Amazon. And I also get a preview of the post. It got too big.