What is Digg?91 Comments
- yellowsnowcone, on 12/01/2008, -6/+29It's all due to free shipping and one-click shopping.
- wildest, on 11/29/2008, -3/+17ridiculous.... scary
- StewVader, on 12/01/2008, -3/+16Damn, right when you think Amazon is a great place to find deals, they go and do ***** like this...
- Pzycho, on 11/30/2008, -4/+17http://www.amazon.com/Willowstreet-Fir-Artificial- ... ?
- moolcool, on 12/01/2008, -3/+12When i first read this headline i spent almost a minute wondering why amazon.com did deforestation studies :(
- mfc5200, on 12/01/2008, -1/+9Are you retarded? How about we start by letting our own forests grow back to their original magnitude instead of telling other countries what to do.
- odiego, on 12/01/2008, -0/+8I must say I agree with you. As a Brazilian citizen I feel ashamed of Brazil's government in refusing to get help from UN to prevent deforestation. I hope someday they will swallow their pride and make this a high priority.
- PeteDavis, on 12/01/2008, -2/+10I don't think it matters what the cause is....it just has to be stopped!!
- MacBookForMe, on 11/29/2008, -2/+9"Base of a 100-year-old tree in the jungle near Belem, Brazil. Brazil's Amazon jungles, known as the lungs of the world, lost almost 12,000 square kilometres (4,800 sq. miles) in just 12 months, a rise of almost 4.0 percent, new figures showed Friday."
- FasterGun, on 12/01/2008, -0/+7Do you even understand how plants work? You're skeptical about trees being vital for life on earth? What the hell? I know they teach basic earth science in high school, if not elementary school. And someone actually dugg you up?
- blackanode, on 12/01/2008, -0/+7yeah cause the oceans are so much healthier?
Protip: They are not health at all. - GovernmentsGun, on 12/01/2008, -1/+8Lack of natural resources, other than the forest and the mines underneath it, and bad political policies, contribute to the poverty of the people in the forest. Until you address their politics, and the economy, you'll never save the forest.
- the2989, on 12/01/2008, -0/+6Deserts, eh? You must be stupid.
- afflusso, on 12/01/2008, -0/+5A lot of people might think this sounds radical, but is there a better solution? The only thing is that the US would be the biggest hypocrite in the world, so maybe we should clean ourselves up first. Irreversible deforestation that causes global warming affects other countries and should be an act of war. This isn't a domestic issue.
- Daniel591992, on 12/01/2008, -0/+5Yeah, I'm a citizen of both countries, but is he serious? Invade Brazil and steal the Amazon?!? Since when is the US's job?
- Khast, on 11/30/2008, -0/+5How about try the fact that cattle herding has become more profitable, and the farmers are needing more grazing...so they are clearing area for their cattle....
- TruthforAll, on 12/01/2008, -0/+4What happened to the huge "Save the Rainforest" movement? Guess that fad was out 5 years ago. Makes you wonder if the current "Green" movement will have the same longevity. I swear we have the attention span of a chihuahua.
- Ozzsanity, on 12/01/2008, -0/+4Kindle!
- roxgod666, on 12/01/2008, -0/+4We need to kill oxygen in order to live? Maybe if so much paper wasting wasn't going on and there was more recycling, we wouldn't need to destroy rain forests as much. You do realize other things are dying besides trees too?
- LucasVB, on 12/01/2008, -0/+4As a Brazilian, I also agree with getting this issue international treatment. The Amazon should be protected international territory. Only a joint effort by all countries can ensure the safety of the forest in the long run and keep any particular country or people from exploring or damaging it without any punishment. If these damn livestock farmers were subject to international laws and punishment, they wouldn't be getting the slack they do now from Brazilian authorities.
- LocalDocal, on 12/01/2008, -1/+5I'm not so sure about that myself. Remember when the Brazilian government demanded something like $11 billion dollars from the rest of the world with no strings attached allegedly to protect their rainforest? From some reports I read, they supposedly wanted money because it was costing them money to protect the rainforest with no profits in return.
- Paulorific, on 12/01/2008, -1/+5How about...that would never happen and probably not even cross the minds of most sensible people. I'm a big science guy and all for alternative energy and cleaning up the environment but the truth of the matter is that, although the Amazon is called "the Earth's lungs", the way deforestation is happening right now we will NOT feel the effects. Oxygen levels are not down anywhere on Earth.
Deforestation does have to be controlled, but not even stopped completely. Brazil just has to set a boundary and make that area untouchable, allowing people to do what they want with the rest. What most people don't understand (idiots like you) is that the amazon by itself is bigger than most countries. It would take almost a deliberate effort to harm the earth for you to actually get that effect.
Also, what the balls does America have to do with this? The United States has no place in pretty much anything internation right now. As a Brasilian I'm offended by the way you're talking about the Brasilian people. Lastly, most of the rainforest DOES belong to Brasil and always will. It's our land and we have the legal right to do whatever the ***** we want with it.
Simply, you're a prick. - LucasVB, on 12/01/2008, -0/+4Dude, I'm also a Brazilian, but no offense, you're being irrational and pathetically nationalist.
We've tried all that already. It doesn't work because the system is corrupt and our authorities are easily bribed by lobbyists. It's no ***** wonder that Marina Silva gave up on the issue. Marina Silva, for *****'s sake! Even our Environment Minister, huge friend of Chico Mendes, gave up because nobody really cooperates in this damned country. The Brazilians and their stupid Amazon pride can go ***** themselves. This is NOT our personal problem. - kinerry, on 12/01/2008, -0/+3and frustration free packaging
- linagee, on 12/01/2008, -0/+3I never thought their one click model would lead to this!
- Oatlord, on 11/30/2008, -2/+5I highly doubt that is "mostly" the cause. I'm all for ending the war on drugs, but am getting tired of seeing people blame America for all the world's problems:
http://www.mongabay.com/brazil.html
http://news.mongabay.com/2007/0126-amazon.html - LucasVB, on 12/01/2008, -0/+3The issue is not global warming, at least it shouldn't be. The Amazon Forest plays a huge role in Earth's ecossystem, and its destruction beyond a certain unknown point could have catastrophic consequences.
- mkNix, on 12/01/2008, -1/+4Even though i do find this harmful etc for our planet, do they really have to use a "4.0" percent figure? A 4% will suffice.
- inactive, on 12/01/2008, -2/+5save blanka!
- Paulorific, on 12/01/2008, -0/+3The Amazon has many species of insects and animals...and what would happen if they dissapear? Unless of course there are weather controlling Pokemon in there, we'd be fine if they go extinct. A tragedy, but we'd be fine. I'd say the Amazon is THE largest ecosystem in the world.
Ecosystem: A community of plants, animals and micro-organisms (biotic) that are linked by energy and nutrient flows and that interact with each other...
An ecosystem is a closed system. The only things that leaves the Amazonian ecosystem are the oxygen and the water. If deforestation gets to, or near to, the point at which these two things are effected, the world is fine. - SkittlesUSA, on 12/01/2008, -1/+4This is sad, but it is important to note for the sake of knowledge that phytoplankton (protists) produce more oxygen than plants, so it would be more appropriate to call them the "lungs of the world."
- wizzroom, on 12/01/2008, -0/+3You would think that a well-funded government in one of the largest economies in the world could come up with an effective way to put a stop to this. The future of humanity is at stake and the best they can come up with are fines? These people already show a disregard for law.
I don't think a US lead UN invasion will ever be a reality. The US has a lot of credibility building to do after 8 years of Bush. We are by no means the 'greenest' country either. As a US citizen, I don't think we are fit for such a role. I do however believe a EU lead coalition would be received better.
The only people who have business in the Amazons are the Indians. Any farmer or rancher should be prohibited from even stepping foot. They've shown themselves to be the worst kind of people to be managing these lands. - BoneStamp, on 11/30/2008, -0/+3and...
http://www.amazon.com/Amazon-com-kindle/dp/B000FI7 ... - supersonicjim, on 12/01/2008, -1/+4It's the new hip 'web 2.0' way of saying it.
- phreak79, on 12/01/2008, -0/+2Sad thing is that deforestation is imo the key environmental issue of our time. The climate impact alone is enough to warrant urgent action but when you throw in the biodiversity benefits inherent in rainforests and they really are crucial things.
- inactive, on 12/01/2008, -0/+2http://letmegooglethatforyou.com/?q=blanka&l=1
- recycleraccoon, on 12/02/2008, -0/+2This is so sad! I know a lot of the virgin aluminum comes from bauxite fields from the Brazilian jungles as well. While there are clearly really big issues at play, it seems as though if everyone did simple things like recycling their aluminum it would help because we only recycle 50% (on average) of our aluminum consumption.
- humanstruggle, on 12/01/2008, -0/+2Hemp is the best paper option.
- ltchimpo, on 12/01/2008, -0/+2The nonce is used to explaining his 4.0 GPA
- Paulorific, on 12/01/2008, -0/+2UN help is cool. Threats of military action is not.
- ltchimpo, on 12/02/2008, -0/+2TOASTY!
- beauley, on 12/03/2008, -0/+2Most of us traditionally do a spring clean up to discard the accrued yearly waste from previous wintry storms. We seem to try outdoing the neighbors in the bag count we can fill, being oblivious of their true contents. Maybe we don’t realize the value and worth of it all.
http://www.gomestic.com/Gardening/Gold-is-in-Those ...
Gold is in Those Yard Clean-up Bags - ltchimpo, on 12/01/2008, -0/+2esplain.
- ltchimpo, on 12/01/2008, -0/+2they grow back.
- barthrh, on 12/01/2008, -1/+3I just think that it's cool that they named a rainforest after an on-line store. Long live the internets.
- GlitchEnzo, on 12/01/2008, -1/+3You are completely correct. Algae produces around 75-80% of the world's Oxygen.
When looking at trees, the Taiga (the conifer forests in Canada, Alaska, and Russia) produce the most. The Amazon rainforest produces less than 1% of the world's Oxygen. - LucasVB, on 12/01/2008, -0/+2When I used "within", I was talking exclusively about the equilibrium WITHIN the biodiversity. Of the entire planet. Read it again.
"So please enlighten me if there is some other variables in the rainforest that actually affect something other than it's own ecosystem."
I already did.
But look, I'm not your private teacher. Go read on the global environmental roles of vegetation and rain forests, especially the Amazon Forest, before you say something silly again, like the "stop the wind" comment. Seriously, read on the topic before commenting again, please. - inactive, on 12/09/2008, -0/+2Man's life is vital on Earth. Trees are the means to HIS life. Plants have no rights.
-
Show 51 - 97 of 97 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is