sourcesaregoodfolks [none/use name]
Genuinely a case where size matters, at least in terms of carbon sequestration.
More specifically in this case, primary forests (untouched by human activity) are more diverse than secondary forests. This matters not only in the context that flora and fauna diversity is something to value for its own sake, but also because diverse forests are more productive (accumulate biomass more rapidly) and more resilient/resistant to external shocks such as extreme weather events, invasive species introduction, etc. This matters because as climate crisis events escalate in frequency and intensity many of the ‘new forests’ being planted right now are going to be completely fucking bodied, whereas older forests have a much better chance of riding it out.
Just gonna reply to my own post and not delete since I’m not a coward.
I got this wrong, the author is actually POC and does have some genuine critiques with elements of the climate activist space in Germany—not US. Why was this posted in c/dunk tank?
With that said, the article itself has some disingenuous takes on the face of it, though I’m willing to be corrected. There’s this bait and switch in which promoting low or no meat diets is equivocated with neglecting the harm done by palm oil production. I absolutely agree that western activists can do much better jobs at highlighting where their corporations are causing harm through environmental degradation and violence against indigenous peoples, but the framing used was weird, claiming that vegans promoting a plant-based diet was neglecting leveling critiques at palm oil production.
There’s other things too, but the general trend is a fairly surface level critique when I know there’s more complex aspects to a lot of the issues raised. Also a degree of naïveté about how power is going to respond to genuine criticism— trust me, everyone is dismissed and sidelined if they target the sacred cows of capitalism
Lmao go to an indigenous protest you fucking dweeb.
By definition you can’t actually say this confidently. A young forest may hold equivalent water for now, but you don’t have longitudinal data to back that up.
Also, young forest are less diverse and more susceptible to shocks, so my guess is that a lot of the features that allow them to hold water are less stable.
Folks, I think they might be CIA
As further evidence I point out the asiatic skull shape and the inscrutableness of the celestial mind.
I dunno this seems kind of… bad faith.
YEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAH
:sicko-speeeeen:
The only dignified solution is to leave main around, but make it impossible to post there.
However, 1% of the time a post in another community gets redirected to main and mods delete any attempts to repost normally as doubleposting.
I will be taking no questions.