Map of Earth’s Fire Scars [pic]
environmentalgraffiti.com — The map graphically illustrates the destruction of roughly 4.5 million km2 of vegetation that is caused by fire every single year. To put this in perspective, the area is bigger than a country like India, which is enormous!
rtknox00- 598 diggs
- digg it
- db0255, on 05/23/2008, -13/+6so who's doing it? cause I didn't RTFA.
- AmaDaden, on 05/23/2008, -0/+5They don't say. They hint at it being locals by saying "One our previous contributors Richard Rhodes witnessed influential locals creating forest fires in Thailand. You can see what damage they caused below:" and then show a video. Part of the phrase links to another article on the site but they both don't at all talk about WHY they started the fires.
This sounds like eco-FUD. Forests NEED fires to clean them self up. It's a natural part of the cycle. Am I saying all forest fires are good? Hell no, but saying that all forest fires are bad is just as stupid a statement if you understand the forest life cycle. The natives who live there might know all this and started the fire before it happened naturally so that they could prevent it from damaging property or people.
- AmaDaden, on 05/23/2008, -0/+5They don't say. They hint at it being locals by saying "One our previous contributors Richard Rhodes witnessed influential locals creating forest fires in Thailand. You can see what damage they caused below:" and then show a video. Part of the phrase links to another article on the site but they both don't at all talk about WHY they started the fires.
- paperfrog, on 05/23/2008, -10/+3> In many cases, fires are good for forests.
True, but in many cases, these fire scars will reflect grevious damage to old growth forest caused by slash-and-burn clearing.- thentro, on 05/23/2008, -0/+6Both good points. This map is almost useless because there is no way of understanding what fires are normal, and what are destructive.
- macweirdo42, on 05/23/2008, -1/+1From the article, it would appear that most of the fires are simply destructive - burning down forests for argriculture.
- thentro, on 05/23/2008, -0/+6Both good points. This map is almost useless because there is no way of understanding what fires are normal, and what are destructive.
- FutureisDubious, on 05/23/2008, -11/+2***** THING NEEDS ACNE LASER RESURFACING!
- FutureisDubious, on 05/23/2008, -3/+1Did I offend the diggers? Hit too close to home? :(
- JosefH, on 05/23/2008, -0/+3If my fire scars could talk...
- legendxx, on 05/23/2008, -1/+26I like how the legend includes the color used for water.
- IAmTheGuy, on 05/23/2008, -11/+2Oooo look at Mr. Elitist. All of us may not have had $80,000 in cartography lessons. We may not know what color is used for water. Don't try to patronize what I'm sure is a majority of the public.
- legendxx, on 05/23/2008, -1/+11If you're serious..
I see a shape that looks like Africa I'm going to assume the area around it is water.
- legendxx, on 05/23/2008, -1/+11If you're serious..
- zantos420, on 05/23/2008, -1/+3i am sure he is not serious
- IAmTheGuy, on 05/23/2008, -11/+2Oooo look at Mr. Elitist. All of us may not have had $80,000 in cartography lessons. We may not know what color is used for water. Don't try to patronize what I'm sure is a majority of the public.
- Gryffydd, on 05/23/2008, -4/+4So?
- arcticsoft, on 05/23/2008, -2/+40Fires are good for forests. This is why California fires are so bad. The environmentalists declare no cut zones and old timber just sits and drys out into great fuel for fires. Then when a large fire happens in these areas and take out a bunch of homes, we declare it a natural disaster. We did it! Look at the amount of large fires of southern California vs north-western Mexico. They have very small manageable fire becuase residents are allowed to cut dead wood for personal use and don't leave it to become fuel for a raging inferno. I live in Colorado and they have areas near residential communities that is full of dead timber and do not allow cutting. Stupid people.
- OffPiste, on 05/23/2008, -0/+3The bark beetle will destroy EVERY pine tree in Colorado in the next 5 years. That's a lot of dead wood. What's Colorado doing? Nothing.
- mcquitty, on 05/23/2008, -0/+5Hey, the bark beetle needs to be protected, too!
- down4six, on 05/23/2008, -0/+1Both good points. People don't the concept of fuels for fires, and how old growth is great feed for parasites. I felt sorry (kinda) for those who lost their houses in the Lake Tahoe area because they weren't allowed to clear debris for defensible space. And those same Californians are now the ones in Colorado's western slope that are preaching the same word, so it's inevitable that history will repeat itself. What a shame.
- elliotys, on 05/23/2008, -0/+1It's not the environmentalists that are against forest fires. It is the developers, land owners, and timber companies. Most environmentalist understand the natural cycle of the forest and the vital part that forest fires play in maintaining a carbon rich soil. In fact numerous studies have been done to show the benefits of forest fires. When forest fires happen on a regular basis, there is no accumulation of dead debris/fuel, so the fires are relatively short lived and have very little effect on healthy trees. However when we continually put out fires, usually because somebody has a house nearby, it allows the dead debris/fuel to accumulate, creating the potential for a dangerous, unhealthy forest fire.
- simg, on 05/23/2008, -0/+2in Australia they start controlled fires on a regular (every few years) basis. This prevents the bush from getting too dense and then being at risk of a much more dangerous fire (usually started by lightning)
- elliotys, on 05/23/2008, -0/+1Sounds good to me.
- simg, on 05/23/2008, -0/+2in Australia they start controlled fires on a regular (every few years) basis. This prevents the bush from getting too dense and then being at risk of a much more dangerous fire (usually started by lightning)
- KingGorilla, on 05/23/2008, -0/+1Take things from the woods people We are essential to the ecosystem
- MacSuxWindozSux, on 05/24/2008, -0/+1Seems you have two options in California...
Leave the forest alone and get fires, or cut down the forest and the fires go away.
And you are asking which is best for the environment?
Why would you ever choose to cut the forest down...
- OffPiste, on 05/23/2008, -0/+3The bark beetle will destroy EVERY pine tree in Colorado in the next 5 years. That's a lot of dead wood. What's Colorado doing? Nothing.
- macweirdo42, on 05/23/2008, -0/+3I am oddly reminded of Age of Empires - I remember one particular game with a few of my friends in which we basically ended up in a stalemate, and so we'd send armies after each other, the armies would be slaughtered, and we'd have to rebuild without anyone getting anywhere near taking the upper hand. Kept going until we had armies of ax-men fighting over the last little cluster of trees, because all other wood on the map had been used up and we couldn't build anything else.
- kenrayd, on 05/23/2008, -12/+2That's nothing. 2 Peter 3:7-12 says that the whole earth will be burned up on the day of the Lord. But the positive side is that out of the ashes will rise a new earth and new sky (3:13)
- zyl0x, on 05/23/2008, -0/+5Facts?
- kenrayd, on 05/23/2008, -4/+1Facts are that the Bible has predicted scores of events well in advance up to as much as 2300 years which have all been fulfilled on time as confirmed by archeology and the facts of history. Statistically, that points to a higher than human source.
In addition the Bible as a historically accurate book has survived untold criticism for 250 years only to be successfully defended mostly by archaeologically discoveries, time after time.- zyl0x, on 05/23/2008, -1/+4lol
- bgrah449, on 05/23/2008, -1/+4Like that one time when that dragon rose up from an ocean, and it had four heads, and fire came out of its mouth and burned up a bunch of forests and *****. I was skeptical before that, but that kind of sealed the deal for me, when that happened.
- kenrayd, on 05/23/2008, -1/+1Actually it had 7 heads and didn't breath fire (Revelation 12:3; 13:1). If you knew that Revelation's companion book Daniel explains that beasts in prophecy represent kingdoms (nations), then you would know what the red dragon/beast represents, Rome given power by Satan, Rome being the beast and Satan being the dragon.
As long as you're a surface reader, you'll never make it.
http://www.bibleuniverse.com/ - bgrah449, on 05/23/2008, -0/+3I was satirizing your style of belief, not looking for a real explanation.
- ApokalypseNow, on 05/23/2008, -0/+3The argument is worthless with the accompanying (and unspoken) presumption that if any part of a story is true, all other parts of the story must be true, as well. We know that this presumption is definitely not true in the case of Sherlock Holmes stories (the city of London exists, but Holmes himself never did), among a near-infinite number of counterexamples; therefore, why should this presumption ever be true of any story?
The existence of the ancient city of Troy, mentioned in the Iliad and Odyssey, has been verified by archaelogical research. If the Bible's stipulated accuracy on some factual matters is indeed evidence of its overall accuracy, the Illiad's and Odyssey's verified accuracy as regards the city of Troy must, equally, be evidence of their overall accuracy. Therefore, if "it's accurate on some factual matters" is a valid reason to accept that Creationism is true, it's equally a valid reason to accept that the Olympian pantheon exists.
In point of fact, the Bible gets many scientific points wrong, including:
In John 12:24, Jesus says that wheat seeds die before sprouting. However, at no point during seed germination does a seed die.
Leviticus 11:22-23 states that grasshoppers and locusts are 'flying creeping things, which have four feet'. Orthopterans (grasshoppers and locusts) have six legs and thus six feet, just like all other insects.
Both Leviticus 11:13-19 and Deuteronomy 14:11-18 list the bat, a mammal, as a bird.
Genesis 30:37-43 says that it's the things seen during mating, not genetics, that controls traits.
Archaeology supports at most the general background of the Bible and some relatively recent details. It does not support every biblical claim. In particular, archaeology does not support anything about creation, the Flood, or the conquest of the Holy Land. If occasional scientific accuracy shows overall accuracy of the Bible, then the same conclusion must be granted to the Qur'an, Zend Avesta, and several other works from other religions, all of which can make the same claims to scientific accuracy.
- kenrayd, on 05/23/2008, -4/+1Facts are that the Bible has predicted scores of events well in advance up to as much as 2300 years which have all been fulfilled on time as confirmed by archeology and the facts of history. Statistically, that points to a higher than human source.
- bgrah449, on 05/23/2008, -1/+3I was ready to believe St. Peter the Climatologist right up until the end - how can we have a "new sky"? Wouldn't the sky be the same, even if the planet was replaced, or if there was no planet? It's just space.
- sindex, on 05/23/2008, -1/+41 Cor. 13:11 says "When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put childish ways behind me."
- macweirdo42, on 05/23/2008, -0/+3I remember Revelations 7:12... And I looked, and he opened the sixth seal, and behold, there was a great earthquake. And the sun became as black as sack cloth, and the moon became as blood."
- kenrayd, on 05/23/2008, -4/+1earthquake - Lisbon earthquake 1755
sun black and moon blood 1798
stars fell Nov. 13, 1833
(That one Jesus added in Matt. 24:29.)
Now we are in the time of the end.- bgrah449, on 05/23/2008, -0/+3Yeah, end of your career on digg.
- ApokalypseNow, on 05/23/2008, -0/+3Ever notice how all prophecy is vaguely worded? Almost as if it was meant to be interpreted by the reader to correspond to events that happen frequently in order to lend credence to an outrageous claim... Nah, couldn't be!
- kenrayd, on 05/23/2008, -4/+1earthquake - Lisbon earthquake 1755
- zyl0x, on 05/23/2008, -0/+5Facts?
- SoIcanDigg, on 05/23/2008, -4/+5Is that the pangaea?
- EdmontonEh, on 05/23/2008, -1/+1LOL
- bgrah449, on 05/23/2008, -0/+10"bigger than a country like India, which is enormous!"
I had no idea India was enormous until this description educated me. Learn something new every day!- drastik21, on 05/23/2008, -2/+2You do realize thats a map of Africa right, and Africa is not a country.
- bgrah449, on 05/23/2008, -1/+2I'm not sure you read the description of the article, then read my comment ... I never said that Africa was a country.
- drastik21, on 05/23/2008, -1/+1Iseewhatudidthere : )
- bgrah449, on 05/23/2008, -1/+2I'm not sure you read the description of the article, then read my comment ... I never said that Africa was a country.
- macweirdo42, on 05/23/2008, -0/+1Now you know. And knowing is half the battle!
- drastik21, on 05/23/2008, -2/+2You do realize thats a map of Africa right, and Africa is not a country.
- kidathinnes, on 05/23/2008, -0/+9Do we really need to know the color blue is "water". come on.
- IAmCuteKitty, on 05/23/2008, -0/+26title should be Map of Africa's Fire Scars [pic]
- IAmCuteKitty, on 05/23/2008, -2/+0No!
- EffYoo, on 05/23/2008, -1/+5Forest fires are an important part of the ecology of areas, how does an environmental blog maintain its credibility when it's 'horrified' by a natural and beneficial process? It's like being disturbed when a predator kills something and eats it, stfu, that's the way its supposed to work.
- NJank, on 05/23/2008, -0/+1No no... the lion lays down with the lamb, remember?
- macweirdo42, on 05/23/2008, -0/+1Unless that predator is a BEAR! Bears are nature's terrorists.
- googooly, on 05/23/2008, -0/+9Thats not "EARTH" its map of Africa
- TimeLincoln, on 05/23/2008, -2/+2WHERE ARE THE EARTHS BONERS!?
- Beevo, on 05/23/2008, -0/+9Buried. Africa != Earth
- MacSuxWindozSux, on 05/24/2008, -0/+1Africa Є Earth
- joeycerone, on 05/23/2008, -0/+5Um, thats not the world. Dumbass.
- elliotys, on 05/23/2008, -1/+4Since a bunch of ***** are using this article to attack environmentalists, let me say this. I am a "liberal Tree-Hugging Environmentalist" and I am 100% for natural forest fires (which most are). Any environmentalists knows that fire is just part of the natural cycle and is important for maintaining a healthy forest. If anything we put out fires far too often.
- tweedius, on 05/23/2008, -0/+2I would consider my self an environmentalist, but using an article like this for one more stupid "global warming" pitch is pretty painful to take. Forest fires and plain type fires are part of a natural cycle. If anything, humans have gotten in the way of these regenerative fires, especially in places like my home region the midwest. An ecology professor that I had the pleasure of taking a class with told us that prairie fires used to happen almost yearly, caused by lightning, and would cause a natural regeneration of the prairies and oak savanna's that used to be a part of our landscape here before us humans decided we were going to inhabit these lands.
In short, wtf is the point of this article? To pitch global warming crap one more painful time? Fire is natural and necessary to nature. - Aliwalla, on 05/23/2008, -0/+1whatever carbon is released by these fires will be sucked right back when the plants grow back. plants burn, and then they grow back, deal with it.
- jiazu, on 05/23/2008, -1/+1dugg for FIRE SCARS
- plonko, on 05/23/2008, -0/+1dugg for the "world map"
- TheKorn2, on 05/23/2008, -0/+1What? No Springfield tire fire!?!??
- mnemy, on 05/23/2008, -0/+4So Africa is the world now? Good to know
- bag2p, on 05/23/2008, -0/+0soo, what do i do with this?
- blackgt93, on 05/23/2008, -0/+1Apparently the world ended and Africa is all that's left. I'm gonna go jump off the roof since we've all apparently been unknowingly eradicated and we're all enjoying the afterlife. I hope I fly, but bouncing off the ground unscathed would be neat too I guess.
- MrAckbar, on 05/23/2008, -0/+7THE EARTH.....now with 90% less Earth.
- jarbarf, on 05/23/2008, -0/+0The map graphically illustrates the destruction of roughly 4.5 million km2 of vegetation that is caused by fire every single year. To put this in perspective, the area is bigger than a country like India, which is enormous!
Buried. - Dunnix, on 05/23/2008, -0/+1"but it is also vital for understanding the effect the fires will have on global warming." lol, I can see the logic, but... no, nevermind I cannot.
- MrScience, on 05/23/2008, -0/+2Ok. I went looking for the actual global picture.... But be careful what you ask for; Can your system handle it?
The project page can be found here: http://www-tem.jrc.it/Disturbance_by_fire/products ...
Once there, on the right under "Downloads", click on "Global Burned Areas 2000-2007 (L3JRC)".
Enter some information, then grab your 40200x14600, 560MP, 1GB TIFFs. :)
Here's the research paper from his 2000-2007 results (but no pretty pictures):
http://www-tem.jrc.it/PDF_publis/2007/Tansey_etal_ ...- clickwir, on 05/23/2008, -0/+1"Can your system handle it? "
That doesn't really help me. What are your specs? What was your experience?- MrScience, on 06/20/2008, -0/+1Nothing that I used could open the image. Of course, I was at work, so I was limited in my options (Paint.Net, Windows, et. al.)
- clickwir, on 05/23/2008, -0/+1"Can your system handle it? "
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2008 —
Content posted by