digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

See the original image at news.bbc.co.uk

Amazon's future in delicate balance

news.bbc.co.uk — In January, the Brazilian government announced that the rate of deforestation in the Amazon jungle had soared in the last half of 2007, just months after officials had celebrated three years of steep falls.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • mudpuddle, on 05/13/2008, -10/+71DON'T WORRY, YOU MISUNDERSTOOD! AMAZON IS FINE! YOUR DVD BOX SET WILL STILL ARRIVE ON TIME!
  • Gorshun, on 05/13/2008, -10/+4When I first read the title I thought of the interwebz Amazon...
  • adml_shake, on 05/13/2008, -5/+43Is it bad that I saw the headline and immediately thought that it was talking about the website?
    • teddyrux, on 05/13/2008, -1/+5Well, this IS a tech site.
      • lcarsdeveloper, on 05/13/2008, -0/+2Yes it is a tech site, and the year is 2005.
    • mciampa1214, on 05/13/2008, -1/+19Is it bad that I was less concerned once I realized it wasn't?
      • Tanath, on 05/14/2008, -0/+1Yes. The Amazon rainforest is very important. Every day we lose countless things of incalculable value.
  • yuutokun, on 05/13/2008, -7/+1My Harry Potter collection!!!111
  • TheAkolyte, on 05/13/2008, -1/+6Too many people, not enough food, these things happen.
    • dave11980, on 05/13/2008, -1/+2E85 is more to blame than food demand. In fact E85 is to blame for a lot of the increased food prices as well.
    • lukeev, on 05/13/2008, -0/+2Food 'demand' is a myth. Plenty of food, just more state intervention in the free market and monopolistic protectionism raising prices and distorting the free distribution and flow of resources.
      • TheAkolyte, on 05/14/2008, -0/+1So these starving impoverished Brazilians slashing and burning the amazon for farming land are doing it because they can get food?
    • Tanath, on 05/14/2008, -0/+1We are a species. Species go extinct. These things happen.
  • ChrisfromNL, on 05/13/2008, -0/+12Is it bad that I came to the comments page to make a "clever" comment about the amazon website and some lame joke about books or dvd's, and every other comment already here is about amazon.com?
    • zolthar, on 05/13/2008, -0/+1How about, all of the Amazon's trees are being sold as paper by Amazon.com?
  • JSager, on 05/13/2008, -4/+2Thank God Wonder Woman is safe. I was worried there.
  • joshak, on 05/13/2008, -7/+3Thanks biodiesel.
  • Barnolde, on 05/13/2008, -1/+13Rainforest: This item ships for FREE with Super Saver Shipping.
  • KnightWhoSaysNi, on 05/13/2008, -0/+4Would've been nice if the title had read "The Amazon ...".
  • wowsah156, on 05/13/2008, -8/+6Its got to the point where the Amazon forest needs to be taken out of the hands of the corrupt incompetent Brazillian politicans who are taking money to destroy a global treasure to the planet. It would be better if the politcal form of Brazil never existed. Brazillians are such stupid vain wretched people. The Amazon needs to be put under the authority of the UN, and have UN troops place around the area of the Amazon forest. UN soldiers should have the legal mandate, to shoot on sight any form of logging in the Amazon basin. All legal and political decisons on the Amazon need to be taken away from the Brazillian government and placed with the UN. The Brazillian government has been shown to be incompetent , corrupt and just plain stupid. The Amazon needs to become a world heritage site with UN military protection. If not the planet will lose a major producer of oxygen, carbon absorption and bio diversity. Has far has i am concerned Brazilians are ditytanned longpigs who have given up any legal or moral rights to the Amazon. Amazon for UN control.
    • plugues, on 05/13/2008, -0/+9once there were forests in the usa and europe too, you keep that in mind. and that was long before the 70's, when the ecological movement took force. and long before people realized the value of biodiversity in economical terms (and THAT's the biggest reason corporations want to de-nationalize the amazon.)

      i'm from brazil and i agree that the amazon is not top priority for the current government, despite the efforts of secretary of environment marina silva. but the urgency is on the rise. i don't think that putting it under UN control would do any good (iraq war anyone?)

      if you want to help, i suggest you boycott brazilian beef, that would be a good start. and to counterbalance (so that the br people don't suffer from the economical loss), i suggest you buy other cool brazilian stuff. we make good shoes! and, oh yeah, come visit us, this place is the best for tourists!
    • Jun1obcx, on 05/13/2008, -0/+2No, not really.
      Some "perfect good nations" may buy/control several countries, never ever here. I wish the UN (a real one, not a puppet from some other countries) could clean the mess these "perfect good nations" have spread around the globe, mess supposedly made in sake for "the good of the mankind".
      We have issues, but do throw the first stone if you do not.
      Worried with environment? How about some "major country" signing the Kioto Protocol???
      • lukeev, on 05/13/2008, -0/+1Kyoto and the U.N won't do squat, dude. Just making things worse if anything. And Spaghetti Monster FORBID Gore's carbon tax 'scheme'. New-environmentalism, as a movement, is just another opportunity for socialists and central planners to have their way within the corrupt political system of lobbying, subsidies and endless regulation. BTW, do you know how much profits the corn farmers and biofuel startups were posting?! No-one bats an eyelid at that yet most were up in arms about gas prices etc. Pisses me off.
    • bosssmiley, on 05/13/2008, -0/+3"All legal and political decisions on the Amazon need to be taken away from the Brazillian government and placed with the UN..."

      Would this be the same UN that ran the infamously corrupt Oil-for-Food program? The same UN that let its officials in the Congo run paedophile prostitute rings? The same UN that stood aside and allowed genocide in Rwanda (1994) and Srebrinica, Bosnia (1995)? The UN that elected *Libya* and *Sudan* to their Human Rights Commission?
      Or are you talking about some other (mythical) UN that actually does the right thing once in a while?
  • aflaks, on 05/13/2008, -2/+4this is a job for... CAPTAIN PLANET!
  • keozen, on 05/13/2008, -1/+2Dug partly because this is an issue we should be aware of, but mostly (I'll admit) because of mudpuddle's first comment
  • orlyfactor, on 05/13/2008, -1/+3I'll alert Jeff Bezos. To the red phone!
  • mychaleg, on 05/13/2008, -4/+4All your .com jokes are trite and below fail.
  • liuite, on 05/13/2008, -0/+6greed and poverty are only two reasons people need to destroy the environment, but more of the former than the latter...some poor people learn to live in a sustainable environment once they understand the delicate balance
    • gravityboard, on 05/13/2008, -0/+2Doesn't that just illustrate how education is the most important global issue as we enter a new era of globalization?
      • lukeev, on 05/13/2008, -0/+1State run schooling has done a real bang up job so far! The environmental issue, IMO (and frankly, based upon a heap of logic and evidence) is an issue of property rights, at its core. That's what the 'greens' are missing, by a mile. I do agree that education is important - but not the shoddy, coercive state brain assylums we lock our kids up inside for c.16 years or more today...
    • hairydotus, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1I agree with your comment most poor people have learned to live off the land in a sustainable way because they don't want a lot they just want what the need to survive. the only problem is that greedy people are exploiting the poor and having them destroy habitats and ecosystems to benefit wealthy societies. ex: illegal animal trade, palm oil plantations, coffee plantations, etc.
  • TheImaginator, on 05/13/2008, -2/+1Say goodbye to it, it is gone already.
    As I have been told, people need food and money now, not the Amazon later.
    Screw the future.
    • hairydotus, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1you're an idiot. There are ways to provide food and money without destroying a rainforest. It would just take a little time and effort to educate the people who live there and teach them ways to live with the environment not survive by its demise.
      • TheImaginator, on 05/16/2008, -0/+1Wow - strong reply, guess you didn't digg my sarcasm?
        Well I asked for it, sarcasm is the lowest form of wit or so they say.
  • lorductape, on 05/13/2008, -1/+1For a second I thought it was amazon.com and was temporarily excited that digg had a tech story

    and then...
    • crichards7, on 05/13/2008, -0/+1Even that wouldn't have been a tech story; more, business news.
  • LucasVB, on 05/13/2008, -2/+2Here in Brazil, the people love to claim the Amazon for themselves, but I never see anyone doing anything to save it. Hypocrites.

    Maybe if it were protected, neutral, international land there would be someone fighting against the loggers.
    • hairydotus, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1The only problem is that it is too massive. A forest almost the entire size of the United states is a very hard area to patrol. Ibama (not sure on the spelling) is trying, they work everyday to stop illegal logging and poaching, I am sure you are aware of this. the only problem is it is too easy for illegal loggers to get themselves lost. I mean I can walk into my woods and cut down trees without anyone knowing if I wanted and I live in a suburban area of Connecticut. So imaging how easy it must be in the amazon
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.