Go Back   I-Mockery Forum > I-Mockery Discussion Forums > Philosophy, Politics, and News
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #23  
O71394658 O71394658 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: A theater near you
O71394658 is probably a spambot
Old Jul 12th, 2003, 12:30 PM       
I believe the best way to save the rainforests is to teach the natives the value of the rainforests. The slash n' burn cultivation techniques require mass migration every couple of years for farming families. Rainforest soils have poor nutrient levels that are only maintained by various tree species. When the rainforests are cleared by farming natives, the nutrient levels are decreased to the point that the farmer gets little or no crop yield. Thus, he must move along and cut down another portion of the rainforest, and the cycle continues.

Rain forest destruction has various hidden and external costs that aren't normally taken into account. Oxygen level would readily not be affected. As another poster pointed out, algae in the ocean produce most of the oxygen. The primary effect that environmentalists use of rainforest destruction is global warming. (Though I believe global warming is WAY too overdone). In actuality, increase in global temperatures would probably help global food production. An experiment I've read about in a journal points to the fact that crop yields actually increase in the face of increase carbon dioxide levels. Also, global climate belt shifts would allow for increased production levels in areas currently unsuitable for crops due to unfavorable weather and climactic conditions. Such areas are massive land areas, including land masses in both Russia and Canada. But, the United States crop yields would probably decrease, or the U.S. would have to shift to other crops due to a change in weather patterns.

Though none of this really justifies rainforest destruction, it is in fact true. The loss of biodiversity in the rainforest would probably wreck havoc on global food chains...maybe even causing large "chain reaction" type consequences, resulting in species extinction worldwide. The question has also arisen of potential medical properties or crops for undiscovered rainforest plants. In addition, I would also like to point out oceans. Recently, its been discovered that a fish (I can't remember the name) venom used to paralyze its prey can be used as a very effective painkiller. It is 10,000 times more potent than morphine and has shown no adverse side-effects (like addiction). It is currently undergoing testing by the FDA. I do in fact support that such medicinal or crop potential lies in the rainforest.
__________________
Do not click here.
Reply With Quote
 


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

   


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:19 PM.


© 2008 I-Mockery.com
Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.