Selective and Misplaced Outrage at Brazil’s President Bolsonaro over Amazonian Fires

August 28th, 2019 by Roy W. Spencer, Ph. D.

No, I’m not in favor of burning down all of the rainforest in Brazil (or neighboring countries, which are being given a pass for some reason). But the recent outrage over increased fire activity this year in Brazil during the annual burn season seems pretty manufactured to me. And it’s largely political, placing blame at the feet of Brazil’s President Bolsonaro, who took office at the beginning of 2019.

The widespread reporting on this makes it sound like fires in Amazonia this time of year are a new thing. With 50 million Brazilians living below the poverty line, many take up farming which involves clearing land to grow grass to feed cattle, pigs, chickens, etc. They make about US$5.50 a day.

Here’s just one of hundreds of headlines making the rounds lately: The Amazon rainforest is on fire. Climate scientists fear a tipping point is near.

This then gets everyone whipped into a frenzy. For example, here’s what noted environmental expert and Toto guitarist Steve Lukather tweeted:

THIS IS THE MOST IMPORTANT ISSUE IN THE WORLD RIGHT NOW !
We must stop EVERYTHING and deal with this NOW!

So, just how bad is it this year compared to previous years for rainforest destruction in Brazil? Well, here’s the official data:

Graphic from Brazil farmers deforesting Amazon ‘to survive’

Now, tell me exactly what about that graph suggests that things have suddenly gotten worse in terms of rainforest destruction?

If you say, “Well, that’s only through July of this year. Maybe August is much worse!”, then I will point out that the original news article from The Guardian about the “88% rise” in rainforest destruction “under Bolsonaro” was way back on July 3!!

In that article they were comparing June of 2019 to June of 2018, which sounds like cherry-picking to me, when a much more extensive and complete history in the above graph suggests 2019 will not be exceptional for rainforest destruction compared to previous years.

This year’s dry season (June-August) has indeed been exceptionally dry, though. Brazil’s rainfall is tied to sea surface temperature patterns in both the Pacific and Atlantic, especially related to El Nino and La Nina activity. NASA satellite data show that the fires there, mainly set for agricultural purposes, are burning exceptionally hot, probably due to a lack of moisture in the fuel. Anyone who has a wood burning fireplace, or has tried making a campfire with wood that is not thoroughly dry, is familiar with this effect. The fires are burning hotter and “cleaner” than usual. If you look at NASA’s daily satellite imagery of smoke you will see that many previous years were smokier in Amazonia than this year is.

This is just one more example of the media controlling the narrative and selectively and hypocritically placing blame on a particular (and almost always right-leaning) political party.

To be clear: I’m not supporting President Bolsonaro’s policies. I’m pointing out the hypocrisy of the media in its environmental reporting.


102 Responses to “Selective and Misplaced Outrage at Brazil’s President Bolsonaro over Amazonian Fires”

Toggle Trackbacks

  1. Thank you!!! I am glad you wrote this and I am not the only one who thinks this is more about Bolsonaro than the environment!

    The NASA report has shown less of the rainforest has burned than in previous years – they just don’t like him because he opposes globalisation. It is always the same, the MSM using environmentalism as a stick to beat their political opponents or anyone they don’t like

    Brill blog post!

    https://ethicalbunny.blogspot.com

  2. studentb says:

    A related issue:
    “results indicate that the decreasing trend of atmosphere O2 is significant, which has been much neglected by the public. Here we emphasize that the current O2 that has accumulated in the atmosphere and dissolved in the oceans throughout a billion-year Earth history is not limitless. This O2 inventory is strongly threatened by humans’ aggressive activities. Increasing amounts of O2 are being consumed by increasing fossil fuel combustion along with population growth, and accelerated deforestation [26]; moreover, the expansion of drylands [27] will also reduce the O2 production of terrestrial ecosystems. The O2 in the ocean also faces severe threat”

    https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S209592731830375X

    • Roy W. Spencer says:

      Ah, yes, the disappearing oxygen scare.

      Atmospheric O2 has been monitored since the early 1990s. Primarily as a result of fossil fuel burning, it has been decreasing at a rate of 0.0019% per year: http://scrippso2.ucsd.edu/faq

      If continued, that would be a 0.19% decrease by late this century. That is equivalent to an increase in 60 ft. in elevation at sea level, or the difference in oxygen abundance between 6 floors of a building.

      Yes, O2 is not “limitless”. But neither is anything else.

      • studentb says:

        Nice analogy.

        • Stephen P Anderson says:

          On submarines they keep it above 19% and below 23%. Start getting concerned when it drops below 16%-some mental impairment might occur. Above 23% concerned about fire hazzards.

          • Stephen P Anderson says:

            Also, CO2 levels can get to 1000ppm and above.

          • Gordon Robertson says:

            stephen…altitudes above 8000 metres on mountains are called the death zone. It means no one can survive for long at that altitude where O2 levels are about 1/3 of the level at sea level.

            I take that to mean the level of O2 could drop to about 7 or 8% of the sea level O2 content before breathing issues become critical.

            There is another problem at altitudes above 8000 metres. The pressure is so low it affects the ability of the lungs and the brain to function well. The killers are HACE (High Altitude Cerebral Edema) and HAPE (High Altitude Pulmonary Edema).

            Edema is medical jargon for swelling. Apparently, at high altitude, that is related more to low air pressure.

            I wonder if we could live on less than 7% O2 at atmospheric pressure. The body adapts to low levels of O2 if introduced to it gradually.

          • Adam Gallon says:

            The oxygen content is exactly the same as at sea level, so 21%. Air pressure & thus density, has fallen from 100kPa, to around 35kPa, so you’ll need to breathe 3 times as much air, to get the same amount of oxygen.

    • coturnix says:

      Well, it natural to fear oxygen exhaustion given that there is much more of the reduced carbon and hydrogen in the earth crust than there is oxygen in the atmosphere. Fossil fuels otoh, they will never get truly exhausted. But as dr. spencer has pointed, we’re waay waay far from the point where oxygen depletion becomes even noticeable, not to say macroscopically significant; though that rate is still much more than the natural oxygen depletion due to rock oxidation, which from memory is something on order of less than 0.1 ppm.

  3. Nate says:

    From what I’ve read, Brazil had been working to reduce deforestation up until 2012.

    Then that reversed and it has been increasing again. That is consistent with your plot.

    2019 looks like it will continue that trend.

  4. Nate says:

    Also from what I understand, this was brought to the world’s attention by the Brazilian NASA, INPE, who monitor the fires annually, and observed a drastic increase in number of fires this year, more than any since 2013, the year they started monitoring.

    Are they wrong?

    • argus says:

      I’m way more concerned with how much of the Amazon is swamp and how much is farmable. I’m hoping its way more swamp.

      But Dr Spencer is right, this is hysteria for the sake of it. If that burning helps them spray less pesticide and keeps the land more fertile, burn away I say.

  5. curious skeptic says:

    speaking of el nino and la nina activity… quite the temperature swing in 2 months https://www.tropicaltidbits.com/analysis/ocean/nino34.png

  6. Roy W. Spencer says:

    Number of fires is NOT rainforest destroyed. Look at the plot in my post, from INPE. Most of the burning is on annually burned farmland.

  7. Stephen P Anderson says:

    How many first world countries are below the equator? Australia, New Zealand,???

  8. gallopingcamel says:

    Thanks Dr. Roy for applying facts and reason to the “Amazon Burning” meme.

    Sadly in “Post Modern” climate science facts and reason don’t matter. What matters is beliefs and feelings stoked up by “Fake Media”. This used to be called “Propaganda” when Fascists invented it. Now Marxists are doing it.

    • Gordon Robertson says:

      cam…”Now Marxists are doing it”.

      No such thing as a Marxist. There are idiots who call themselves Marxists but they are weenies who stole the doctrine of Marx as a front for brutality and oppression.

      The Bolsheviks fit that description but Mao was a lot different. He was rightly po’d at imperialists raping China. He was not a Communist at heart, in fact he was kicked out of the Russian-based communist party.

      His fight was with Chiang Kai Shek, a brutal bastard who represented the Kuomintang, a load of brutal right-wingers. Mao watched from a distance as they brutally executed his wife by strangulation. Eventually Mao got his own back by defeated the bastards and running them off.

      Mao did a lot of good for China, like introducing rights for women, an education system, and an agrarian society.

      And no, I am not a communist sympathizer looking for a Utopian system. I find truthful history to be better and more entertaining than the right-wing version.

      I’d be po’d too if I had ben Mao.

      Mao’s dogma was not politically based per se. He was fighting a civil war and that movement required a Marxist-based communism where everyone shared and were treated equally.

      He got carried away later and admitted it. When interviewed about his purgea he asked what else he could do. He was facing a nation of billions who were peasants, ingrate right-winger war lords, murderers and thieves. It’s not exactly like he could hold an election and give them their say.

      Ironically, democracy was offered to the Chines circa 1915 by Sun Yet Sen. He appealed to the imperialists like the UK, the US. and Germany and they turned him down. It was not in their interest to have a democratic China. Besides, Chinese peasants were distrustful of democracy.

      It’s never as simple as it seems.

      • NAte says:

        Gordon,

        “But if you go carrying pictures of Chairman Mao
        You ain’t gonna make it with anyone anyhow” John Lennon

        “When interviewed about his purges he asked what else he could do.”

        ‘what else could he do’ besides starving and killing millions of people in the countryside? Besides locking away, torturing, killing or ‘reprogramming’ hundreds of thousands of educated people?

        Hmmm.

        No wonder you seem unconcerned about Trump’s authoritarian tendencies..

        • Gordon Robertson says:

          nate…”what else could he do besides starving and killing millions of people in the countryside? Besides locking away, torturing, killing or reprogramming hundreds of thousands of educated people?”

          Could you supply a link to your claims? There is a lot of propaganda out there about Mao and the story of his life is hard to come by.

          I am not claiming he was in any way an angel, but he was a university student and an artist as a young man. He joined in student protests against a far more brutal Chinese government than is found today. They executed his wife by strangulation for essentially nothing.

          I think Mao is misunderstood largely due to right-wing propaganda.

          When Canadian, Dr. Norman Bethune, went to China to offer his services to Mao’s movement, Mao was deeply moved. He thought it was cool that a foreigner would go to China to help with medical issues. He was used to Imperialists plundering China and giving nothing back except opium.

          He gave Bethune a free hand to set up his medical practices.

          I suggest you broaden your horizons and try ready widely about him and his struggles.

  9. Norman says:

    The really sad thing about posts like this is it supports Trump declaration “Fake News!”.

    News agencies have access to the same graph Roy Spencer posted. It clearly shows that the hysteria generated by the media is false and misleading. It makes me sad that news should be unbiased fact based information but is now just whatever.

    It is like reading a Gordon Robertson post. They make up whatever they want because they don’t believe anyone will research the issue to show them wrong. The problem is Roy Spencer is clearly pointing out how terrible the global news media has become in reporting truth, only a sliver of people will see these types of posts. The rest will go on believing the news media is giving them good honest information.

    • Gordon Robertson says:

      Norman…”It is like reading a Gordon Robertson post. They make up whatever they want because they dont believe anyone will research the issue to show them wrong”.

      You’re an idiot. I agree with almost everything Roy writes in his essays. I don’t agree with him in his interpretation of the 2nd law or his use of a generic form of energy as a net energy.

      That’s it!! I agree with everything else he writes about including this essay.

      Your problem is that you cannot follow my views on science because you have never studied it formally. Rather than try to rebut what I write with scientific sources, you throw out any old bs then claim it as fact.

      • Norman says:

        Gordon Robertson

        As usual you lie and make up stuff that you can’t support. I have a degree in Chemistry and have far more actual physics than you ever have. I took an actual year of physics (not my major) which is much more than you ever have. So you are totally wrong on that point.

        It is not just the 2nd law. It is your total distortion of how EMR is created in the IR band. You can’t grasp how the Inverse Square law works. How you can’t grasp or calculate the downwelling energy from a measured spectrum. How you reject textbook physics because they told you current flows from positive to negative so that means all textbook data is fake. I already explained why they did that but you reject the valid reason behind it.

        You make claims of what Clausius says that are not true at all and then many posters give you direct quotes from his own books and you distort those to fit your made up narratives.

        No you are the “fake” poster on this blog. You do what the phony news does. You make up things all the time that are very untrue and other posters inform you of your many, many errors. You ignore them completely and continue with your false and intentionally misleading information. You would make a very good journalist in the current “fake” news system. You could make up anything you wanted to and never have to verify any of it and when confronted on how wrong it is you just ignore it.

        You are the same as the fake misleading news.

        • Dr Myki says:

          Hear ! hear!

        • JDHuffman says:

          Norman always makes big claims, but never delivers. In his head, he knows physics, but he never get issues right, and can’t learn. He is more concerned with attacking others, than with science, although he claims otherwise:

          “It is the one thing I hate about the climate science issue. It is being destroyed by politics and tribal thought process. I want to stick only to the science of the issue.”

          He makes big claims, but can’t stick to what he says.

          Nothing new.

        • Gordon Robertson says:

          norman…”It is not just the 2nd law. It is your total distortion of how EMR is created in the IR band”.

          I have given you amply opportunity to explain where EM comes from and you have failed. You have no idea where it comes from nor do you understand atomic theory. I think you are lying about having a degree in chemistry, you don’t even understand the basics of atomic structure.

          As for the 2nd law, I have stated verbatim the definition offered by Clausius and you respond with red herring arguments based on cherry picked lies from the words of Clausius.

          It’s clear Norman, heat can NEVER be transferred by its own means from a colder object to a warmer object. There are no exceptions yet you and your buddy swannie continue to issue crap conclusions from experiments wherein heat is transferred cold to hot without compensation.

          Meantime, your lapdog Mickey, who has the audacity to precede its name with a Dr., can offer nothing more than platitudes.

          If you had any proof that I am wrong, you’d supply it. But you can’t, relegating yourself to insults and empty statements.

          • Norman says:

            Gordon Robertson

            No I have not failed at all for providing you the answer to IR EM.
            So you are wrong on that point. That you are not capable of understanding the concept of molecular vibration is a flaw in your own mind not mine. What is absorbed by an electron with EMR is the energy of that EMR and this energy moves an electron to a higher energy level when it comes to visible light energies. When it comes to MID-IR, the bond is what is absorbing the IR and it produces a more intense stretch of the bond. The energy is what is absorbed. The IR energy increases the stretch, that is where the energy is stored, in the vibration. Ask yourself where the energy is stored when a spring is moving up and down with a mass attached. Does the mass absorb the energy? You are wrong and will continue to be wrong.

            What Clausius clearly said that you reject is that a cold object will send “heat” to the hotter object. A double exchange of energy. You reject this clear language. What he stated clearly is their is a double exchange of “heat” between hot and cold it just the hot object sends more heat to the cold than the cold sends to the hot. You are unable to process what NET energy exchange means and it seems you never will understand this.

            I have proven you wrong over and over. You reject all the material that clearly shows you are a fake pretender. Will you finally be honest and admit you never studied physics. You would have received a failing grade based upon your many phony posts about the subject.

          • JDHuffman says:

            Norman forgot to give the actual details about his educational background. He forgets to do that a lot….

            Someone did the research and discovered Norman’s chemistry degree is a Bachelor of Arts, not Science. His college was a liberal arts college that no longer even offers a chemistry degree. So Norman claiming he has a solid science background is like someone that looks things up on the Internet claiming they know science!

            Norman clearly does not understand physics. When I tried to explain “flux” to him, and why fluxes can’t be simply added, he couldn’t understand. When I told him about the Poynting Vector, he had never heard of it and accused me of making it up. When I told him about Wien’s Law, he then proceeded to act as if he were the “Wien’s Law” expert, and started teaching it. Only, he misspelled it three times in the comment!

            It’s bad enough that he tries to fake a knowledge of physics, but he can’t even think straight. He believes a racehorse rotates on its axis! One time he claimed a Ferris wheel chair does not rotate on an axel. There is example after example of his incompetence and ignorance–too many to list today. But someday it would be fun to go back and identify all of his blunders and inadequacies.

          • Dr Roys Emergency Moderation Team says:

            I believe he could have (for the first time in his life) conducted an experiment by buying a $25 toy Ferris wheel to settle the matter on the Ferris wheel chair, but he so despised the idea of doing an experiment that he refused. He absolutely detests experiments, as far as I’m aware.

    • Lisa says:

      “but now is just whatever”
      Actually, the news media has been outright lying to Americans for a very, very long time. In my teens and twenties, I thought they were just mildly biased and that it had gotten worse over time. But then YouTube happened… If you haven’t seen the movie JFK with Kevin Costner, I suggest you watch it, or at least watch the Zapruder film on YouTube. Then, watch this clip of Dan Rather, a local Dallas news anchor then, describe what he saw occur on the Zapruder film 3 days after the assassination. “… his head could be seen to move violently forward.” [with Dan lowering his head forward to demonstrate on camera]. The name of this short video is “Dan Rather’s account from November 25, 1963”. The part I’m talking about is at 02:10. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kiSoxFHyjGY&t=140s

  10. bohous says:

    The comparison of the first half-year to whole previous years can also be misleading. The dry season (when most burning occurs) is mostly timed in the second half-year. I do not criticize the post but I would appreciate some explanation.

  11. Lloydo says:

    “I’m not in favor of burning down all of the rainforest… But…”

    Ah, the old but, but, billygoat but.

    “This year’s dry season (June-August) has indeed been exceptionally dry, though. Brazil’s rainfall is tied to sea surface temperature patterns in both the Pacific and Atlantic, especially related to El Nino and La Nina activity.”

    Its also tied to the area of forest left.

    “indicate a tipping point for the Amazon system to flip to non-forest ecosystems in eastern, southern and central Amazonia at 20-25% deforestation.”
    https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/4/2/eaat2340

    Currently at 17%.

    Instead lets apologize for Bolsanaro and accuse the media. But nicely played Roy.

    • Roy W. Spencer says:

      And yet, maps of global greening since the 1980s show all of Amazonia experincing increasing trends in photosyhthetic activity. Eventually, if Brazilians can transition more toward 1st World jobs with less subsistence agriculture, these areas will be abandoned and will revert to the original forest type. I live in a subtropical forest and it takes very little time for it to expand back into where it has been cleared for houses and yards.

    • Nate says:

      Converting a forest to agriculture by burning releases ~ 100 y or more of sequestered carbon.

      So, it takes ~ 100 y to restore this.

      Meanwhile the feedbacks have already done there work to release more during these, possibly, critical decades.

      • JDHuffman says:

        Nate doesn’t have enough pseudoscience, so he has to make up some more.

        He’s going to make himself so scared he’ll be hiding under his bed during these “critical decades”….

        (Clowns are so funny.)

      • Nate says:

        Right on que, our trolliest responds with nothing of value.

  12. John Garrett says:

    I just love the thought that by continuously clicking on (without contributing to) the Environmental Defense Fund’s advertisements which pop up on Dr. Spencer’s website, I am helping to fund this website and Dr. Spencer’s extremely valuable knowledge, judgments and opinions.

    In sharp contrast to the EDF, Dr. Spencer is a voice of reason and reliable information on climate.

  13. Jim says:

    Im surprised that Brazil hasnt formally exited the Paris Climate hoax over this instead of meaningless tit for tat. Exiting that framework would do far more damage to Macaroon than any of this squabbling. I guess they think that redistributed money exceeds the value of what happened last week.

  14. Jos Dam says:

    Thank you, Dr. Spencer for your reporting. Day after day I’m baffled buy the sheer stupidity we have to deal with in this never ending climate alarmist bull crap. Please keep up the good work and know that there people out there who may not be able to vocally support you, but, just like me, by visiting your blog and leaving a supportive message. From The Netherlands, yours sincerely, -Jos Dam

  15. Jos Dam says:

    I just noticed my own typos… The correct message should read:

    Thank you, Dr. Spencer for your reporting. Day after day Im baffled by the sheer stupidity that we have to deal with in this never ending climate alarmist bull crap. Please keep up the good work and know that there are people out there who may not be able to vocally support you, but, just like me, by visiting your blog and leaving a supportive message. From The Netherlands, yours sincerely, -Jos Dam

  16. DocSiders says:

    NAte,
    What authoritarian tendencies has Trump displayed? Heck, he doesn’t have enough power to throw around any power. The Federal Government has been so screwed up that Trump can’t even order his own Executive Branch employees to do what he wants and needs them to do to execute his mandate (a mandate is the stuff voters voted for him about).

    The only Authoritarians in the public sphere are our domestic enemies, the elite globalists. Those are the ones using the lying propaganda press…to generate leftward political momentum with torrents of lies. They attempted a coup d’tat (the crazy Russian Collusion allegations backed only by an illegal and false affidavit) with the illegal actions of the Obama administration spying using GOVERNMENT ASSETS against political opponents.

    Then there are the leftists that are 95% of Academia who censor and limit the speech of anyone they don’t agree with. Leftists always abuse any (illegitimate) power they acquire. You lefties are natural born authoritarian totalitarian tyrants. Your first impulse after seeing any political opening is to abuse power to shut up the opposition and propagandize voters to act on lies (like the lies about the Amazon fires getting worse…lies are all you have).

    Your Mr. Obama was the Executive Order abuser. Launching his power way above his Constitutional authority.

    • Stephen P Anderson says:

      Doc,
      Nate is a leftist. He is a malcontent. He attacks Trump’s motives and actions which he describes as tyrannical when it is the left who are the only ones who’ve historically been tyrants. Stalin, Mao, Hitler, Castro, Mussolini were all leftist tyrants. The left are the planners and the masterminds who know they will achieve utopia if they can destroy their enemies. Who are their enemies? -the individual and the idea of individualism. And, who has displayed more individualism than Donald Trump?

      • captain droll says:

        Double LOL

      • Gordon Robertson says:

        stephen…”Stalin, Mao, Hitler, Castro, Mussolini were all leftist tyrants”.

        Stalin, Hitler, and Mussolini were leftists? They were murdering pigs. The only real left-wing governments this world has ever seen were in democratic countries. Just because a ninny, murdering pig calls himself a socialist does not mean he is a socialist.

        Mao has nothing to do with the rest of those murdering dweebs. He began as a true revolutionary with a legitimate cause. He helped the Allied cause against the Japanese far more than his right-wing counterpart, Chiang Kai Shek, who was a freeloading scumbag.

        He may have encountered problems along the way, as someone trying to run a country of several billion peasants, malcontent warlords, murders and thieves, might encounter but in the early days as a revolutionary the guy was fair and good for China.

        • Stephen P Anderson says:

          Gordon,
          Stalin, Hitler and Mussolini were all leftists. Mao was also a murdering leftist. Can’t believe you’re arguing that point. Nazi’s and Fascists are both from the left. Marxists are from the left. Mao was a Marxist.

          • Gordon Robertson says:

            stephen…”Gordon,
            Stalin, Hitler and Mussolini were all leftists. Mao was also a murdering leftist. Can’t believe you’re arguing that point. Nazi’s and Fascists are both from the left. Marxists are from the left. Mao was a Marxist”.

            Stephen…you are misinformed. You have swallowed right-wing propaganda hook, line and sinker before taking the time to research this for yourself.

            Yes…right-wingers are just as susceptible to spreading propaganda as the politically-correct left.

            The issue here is the meaning of Leftist. What the heck does it mean anyway? In politics it generally is a generic reference to a political spectrum with extreme capitalists on the right and extreme communists on the left.

            In that case, I am to the left of centre but I am a serious opponent of eco-weenies and their idiotic anthropogenic warming theory. I have no interest in their Big Brother intent of forcing us all into a big, happy family of tree-huggers.

            Neither do I have an interest in suppressing capitalism or the right of anyone to make a fair profit. In fact, I am a contractor. I think corporations should be good citizens who have an interest in the welfare of their employees and the country in which they do business. That is far from the case.

            You cannot tar every left-winger with the same brush just as you cannot tar every right winger with the same brush. There are major exceptions like Maurice Strong, the father of Kyoto. He is a multi-billinaire who believes in the corporate system but at the same time admits to being a socialist. He is also an eco-weenie and I can’t stand him for that reason.

            I can tell you from experience in unions that left-wingers cannot be pigeon-holed. The one thing they share is a focus on humanitarianism. To me, left-wing is synonymous with humanitarianism. You cannot claim Stalin, Hitler, or Mussolini were humanitarians. You can claim that to a good extent with Mao since he was a humanitarian in the beginning.

            Other than that, left-wingers are as diverse as right-wingers.

            In reality, there is no such political spectrum in the world since none of the people you have listed, except Mao, fit in that spectrum.

            Mao was not a Marxists. He was thrown out of the Russian-based Communist party in China, even though Russian communists are not Marxists either. Mao did affiliate himself with Russian communism but I don’t think he knew what he was supporting. It was not till the 1960s book by Solzenythchen, the Gulag Archipelago, that anyone knew of the excesses of Stalin and his brutality.

            None of that had anything to do with the dogma of Marx, who was reacting to the class system of his day in which the wealthy lorded it over the less fortunate in an extreme way. Marx protested against the system from within a Democratic country, the UK. None of his ideas were ever correctly implemented since he did NOT advocate the brutal enforcement of his policies.

            Stalin was a Bolshevik, a group of extremists who threw anyone in gulags who disagreed with them. They even recruited inmates by having neighbours snitch on neighbous, family on family. The point of gulags was to extract free labour from inmates as they were starved and beaten to death. Bolsheviks threw true socialists and communists in gulags, just as the Nazis threw them in concentration camps.

            Why the heck would leftists throw other leftists in concentration camps purely for their beliefs? They did it because the leftists did not see the left-wing dogma being practiced and protested. What they saw was brutality and oppression, which have nothing to do with left-wing dogma, whatever that means.

            Hitler was a malcontent and a nut job who could not get over Germany losing WW I. He forced his way into power, even though duly elected, by running a gang of thugs who beat and killed his opponents. While in power, his aim was to cleanse the world of all things non-Aryan.

            Do I have to draw your attention to the Draconian and pathetic concentration/extermination camps aimed to getting rid of undesirables? If you think that is the meaning of socialism or communism you are seriously brain-washed.

            What does any of the above have to do with true socialism or communism? We have only ever seen true socialism and that developed in Democratic countries.

            Mussolini, was similar to Stalin and Hitler, in fact, he immediately joined the Nazis in WW II. In the end, he was executed by Italians who were mortified by his brutality. The only good thing he ever did was control the Sicilian Mafia.

            Mao was the only one who tried to implement a true communism but it obviously got out of control. In the beginning, he had a just revolutionary society where women were treated as equals for the first time in China’s history. He introduced an educational system for everyone and I don’t mean the indoctrination centres. He introduced schools for all.

            What would you have done in his place? China was a country made up largely of peasants who were superstitious and very set in their ways. There were billions of them. The same peasants saw no value in female babies and many killed female babies. Those females who survived had no rights whatsoever.

            There were also War Lords used to doing things in the old brutal ways of the past. Murder and robbery were rife outside cities. In others words, China was a seriously corrupt place.

            The Chinese peasants had already turned their backs on Democracy circa 1915. How do you think they would have handled Mao’s vision for China?

            I cannot bring my mind to advocate purges and government-sanctioned murder. However, I was brought up in a civilized country where none of that ever happened. I lack the basis to understand it.

            Having said that, and given my knowledge of Mao as a young man and a warrior, I can only think that he faced a massive problem. His friend, Chou En Lai ran the government and he was a pacifist who tried to broach peace with the West.

            Do you think Mao would have tolerated someone like Chou if he was brutal at heart?

          • Stephen P Anderson says:

            Gordon,

            Your trouble is you don’t know what you don’t know. You don’t even understand the political spectrum. You have capitalist on both the right and left side of the political spectrum. Capitalist will align with fascists or Nazis on the left side of the spectrum of on the right side of the spectrum with republics which believe in limited government. The two sides of the political spectrum are the leftists which are the ones who believe government is the solution and total government authortarianism (Marxists or Communists, Nazis, Fascists, Socialists) or those on the left who believe in limited government, maximum individual liberties like speech, right to bear arms, property ownership, freedom of religion, etc. The Nazis and Fascists certainly didn’t believe in freedom of speech (they imprisoned people who spoke freely) right to bear arms (the confiscated arms), freedom of religion (they persecuted Jews and Catholics), property ownership (the confiscated property), etc. Mao did the same thing and he had his opponents murdered.

          • Stephen P Anderson says:

            Sorry, I meant those on the right believe in limited government. Sorry for all the typos my wife is rushing me.

          • Stephen P Anderson says:

            Gordon,
            Capitalism is an economic system. It isn’t a political system. It is intertwined with politics but it isn’t a political system. There is free market Capitalism on the right which means very little government involvement and then there is a socialistic capitalism like we see in Germany and France.

          • Gordon Robertson says:

            stephen…”Capitalism is an economic system”.

            So is socialism. The political side is whether they are democratic, fascist, autocracies, etc. The difference is in the degree of government control.

            Hence, you ‘could’ have a democratic communism but no one has ever seen one. Maybe Israel, in part.

            Canada is a democratic socialism. We have centralized pensions, healthcare, unemployment insurance, workers’ compensation, etc. Many up here would disagree, as they accept their government issued pensions, etc.

            You have a certain amount of socialism in the States with your government run minimal healthcare systems. I don’t know why you are so resistant to going all the way to a full Medicare program.

            I mean, you could pay so much a month if you insist on people paying their way but at least everyone would be covered. Or people could pay according to their means.

            The resistance to Medicare down there seems to be dogmatic and based on irrational fears. Private healthcare companies are spreading bs about the downside.

            We have wait times for surgery but there is no wait time for emergency surgery or critical cases. The only time you get bumped is if the ER is required for a more critical case.

            I’ve had three surgical procedures and had no waiting time. Whereas thoe procedures would have cost me thousands of dollars in the US, I paid nothing…zip…nada.

            It’s a good system up here but I would agree we have to do something about people heading to a doctor with every little ache and pain.

          • Gordon Robertson says:

            stephen…”I meant those on the right believe in limited government”.

            No insult intended but I find that reasoning kind of silly. With today’s heavily populated cities we need centralized control over infrastructure maintenance and construction. Same outside the cities. The US is famous for tolled highways whereas we have none. Highways construction and infrastructure should be paid by the public.

            Another thing, corporations should be taxed at the same rate as workers and they should not get handouts from the public.

            Previous right-wing governments in my province have tried to privatize government institutions but I fail to see the point. Privatization has done nothing but raise costs to the public.

        • Nate says:

          Hitler is not generally considered a leftist by anyone sensible.

        • Nate says:

          Stephen,

          Your views of LEFT/RIGHT do not match historically what these terms have meant. They appear to be some sort of re-invention of the terms from the far right blogosphere, so that Right = Good, Left = Bad.

          Wiki is pretty close to the historical definitions of these terms.

          “Generally, the left-wing is characterized by an emphasis on ideas such as Liberty, equality, fraternity, rights, progress, reform and internationalism, while the right-wing is characterized by an emphasis on notions such as authority, hierarchy, order, duty, tradition, reaction and nationalism.[17]

          Political scientists and other analysts regard the left as including anarchists,[18][19] communists, socialists, democratic socialists, social democrats,[20] left-libertarians, progressives and social liberals.[21][22] Movements for racial equality[23] and trade unionism have also been associated with the left.[24]

          Political scientists and other analysts regard the right as including Christian democrats, conservatives, right-libertarians,[25] neoconservatives, imperialists, monarchists,[26] fascists,[27] reactionaries and traditionalists.”

          Note Nazis were Fascists and on the right, certainly believed in authority, hierarchy, order, duty, tradition, reaction and nationalism.

    • captain droll says:

      LOL

    • Nate says:

      ‘What authoritarian tendencies has Trump displayed? ‘

      C’mon this is like shooting fish in a barrel.

      Just this week he ‘hereby ordered’ US companies to leave China.

      This week it was reported he dangled pardons to his people to get them to break the law and take land from people to build his wall.

      He issues State of Emergencies to fund non-emergency agenda items, to get around what Congress specifically refused to fund.

      He’s constantly drumming up fear of ‘invaders’, and looking for scapegoats to blame things on, usually brown people.

      He tries to interfere with the traditionally independent Fed, military, and Justice Department, seeking Loyalty to himself, over competence or integrity.

      He is a cheerleader for authoritarian leaders, while dissing leaders of free democratic countries.

      Speaking of the “lying propaganda press”

      He’s constantly saying the Press, which are essential to any free society, is ‘the enemy of the people’.

      He seems to believe a news channel should only heep praise on him, but even at Fox, journalists have integrity:

      “First of all, Mr. President, we don’t work for you. I don’t work for you. My job is to cover you, not fawn over you or rip you, just cover you” Neil Cavuto.

      He is perfectly OK with another country (S Arabia) assassinating journalists.

      He demonstrably lies to the public as often as he takes a piss.

      Because he has cancelled all White House press briefings and he holds no press conferences, he can rarely be held accountable for these lies.

      He now has a team of people specifically digging up dirt to take down journalists.

      I’ll stop, but I could go on all day…

      ‘The only Authoritarians in the public sphere are our domestic enemies, the elite globalists.’

      Who’s that? The Jews? Or the Illuminati?

      • JDHuffman says:

        Nate, you’re as confused about politics as you are about science.

        Was Obama your “hero”? Why are sea levels continuing to rise after he promised he would stop them?

        How many false beliefs do you have?

      • Gordon Robertson says:

        Nate…”Just this week he [Trmp] hereby ordered US companies to leave China”.

        I don’t care what he has done, he has already done the most important thing, he beat Hillary Clinton. For that, anything else he does has to be endured.

        I am hoping he will find a way to bring Russia onside, even though his motives would be far different than mine. I just want to see the Russian people get a break and secure some kind of world peace.

        I am hoping he wins the next elections as well. The Democrats have proved themselves to be a load of politically-correct horses’ asses.

        • Nate says:

          ‘I dont care what he has done’ ‘anything else he does has to be endured.’

          Luckily not by you, up there with your Canadian health care and low Debt/GDP ratio!

      • Stephen P Anderson says:

        Nate,

        You’re such a propagandist. Most of this is fake news.

        Just this week he ‘hereby ordered’ US companies to leave China.

        This week it was reported he dangled pardons to his people to get them to break the law and take land from people to build his wall.

        He issues State of Emergencies to fund non-emergency agenda items, to get around what Congress specifically refused to fund.

        He’s constantly drumming up fear of ‘invaders’, and looking for scapegoats to blame things on, usually brown people.

        He tries to interfere with the traditionally independent Fed, military, and Justice Department, seeking Loyalty to himself, over competence or integrity.

        He is a cheerleader for authoritarian leaders, while dissing leaders of free democratic countries.

        Speaking of the “lying propaganda press”

        He’s constantly saying the Press, which are essential to any free society, is ‘the enemy of the people’.

        He didn’t order US companies to leave China. In order to do that he would have to issue an executive order. But, he does have the right to do that. He is trying to protect our country. The Chinese steal intellectual property, produce counterfeit goods, deny their citizens liberty and freedom. Tyranny would be if he had the heads of corporations shot like China does.

        The pardon story is fake news.

        By invaders do you mean illegal immigrants? They have no right to be here. They are invaders. Read the definition of invaders.

        The border crisis is a state of emergency.

        The Attorney General works for the Executive Branch. It is a cabinet seat. The President is his boss. The President is the chief law enforcement officer of the land.

        The Fed has never been independent.

        He’s trying to negotiate with the authortarian leaders. That’s his style. Those democratic leaders have no problem firing shots at him.

        All your examples above of Trump being a tyrant have zero merit.

        • Nate says:

          ‘The pardon story is fake news.’

          According to the liar-in-chief, who defines ‘fake news’ to be any unflattering news about him.

          And the White House contradicted him, as they often do. He said it. But it ‘was a joke’.

          ‘They are invaders. Read the definition of invaders.’

          Sure, you guys must be afraid your shadows.

          How bout you read the definitions of Refugee, Family, and Asylum Seeker and see if any of these are defined as ‘invaders’.

          ‘The border crisis is a state of emergency.’ A humanitarian crisis created by Trump policies.

          And if you’re ok with that, then you better not bitch when President Warren declares a Climate State of Emergency and shifts funds to that from Homeland Security.

          ‘The Attorney General works for the Executive Branch. It is a cabinet seat. The President is his boss.’

          Sure, when deciding government policies.

          NOT when they are doing criminal investigations, particularly of people in the government!

          • Stephen P Anderson says:

            Nate,

            Your leftist colors are in full bloom. Where is this utopia?

            Are you a US citizen? Because you don’t know anything about our government.

            The White House contradicted him? The White House is an inanimate object. Oh, also they just fired the official who was leaking false and erroneous stories.

            Refugee? You’re not fooling anyone. Where does it say the United States has to be the depository for all the world’s refugees? Because someone claims refugee status they have a right to come here? Why don’t they go back and fix their shithole countries?

            Did Trump create the conditions in their countries? It is the lefts willingness to use these people as political pawns which has created the crisis.

            No, again the President is always the Attorney General’s boss. If the President needs to be investigated then the Congress and onluy the Congress have the power according to the Constitution to do that. The framers understand that the Justice Department can’t and should not do that.

            However now that Obama is out of office the Justice Department can investigate him.

          • Stephen P Anderson says:

            Nate,
            I hope Pocahontas is the left’s candidate. I’m afraid it is going to be Hillary again. I’d much rather Trump run against Ms. one onethousandth and sixty four than Hillary again. So do you really like Warren’s plan of Medicare for All, College for All, and the Green New Deal? You really think the nation is going to let the left bankrupt it?

          • Gordon Robertson says:

            stephen…”Refugee? You’re not fooling anyone. Where does it say the United States has to be the depository for all the world’s refugees? Because someone claims refugee status they have a right to come here? Why don’t they go back and fix their shithole countries?”

            I have to agree with you there. We have a similar situation in Canada where our weepie-eyed Prime Minister is begging refugees to relocate to Canada.

            The problem is the useless United Nations. They are supposed to be handling adverse situations in countries that abuse people but they are so useless they rely on the US to do their dirty work. Same with NATO. Trump is right on those issues.

            Why would anyone rely on the IPCC, run by the UN, to give a scientific, objective report on anthropogenic warming. The UN WANTS the outcomes predicted by the IPCC because it gives them leverage to get the world tax system they have yearned for.

            The system is fixed in favour of anthropogenic warming.

          • Gordon Robertson says:

            stephen…”You really think the nation is going to let the left bankrupt it?”

            They let the corporate right pick their pockets.

            Do you recall Nelson Rockefeller’s comment during WW II when Standard Oil was caught selling oil to the Nazis? He claimed, “Free enterprise must prevail above all”. Fortunately the US had FDR to boot his ass and get him in line.

            That’s what you guys are supporting blindly in the US. Free enterprise, like natural selection, is one of those terms no one can define yet it is used to beat people over the head who question it. It’s a generic term based on emotion, not logic or intelligence.

        • Nate says:

          ‘No, again the President is always the Attorney General’s boss. If the President needs to be investigated then the Congress and onluy the Congress have the power’

          Stephen, sorry but you are simply ignorant, and easily swayed by propaganda. Go back and look at Watergate history to see how obstruction of justice happens. See Saturday Night Massacre.

          ‘Because someone claims refugee status they have a right to come here? ‘

          No. Again you are ignorant and easily swayed by the fear mongering.

          Read up on asylum process, then come back and discuss based on facts.

          My point about Warren and the Emergency decree went way over your head.

          You think authoritarianism is fine when you like the results! Ends justify the means. That is what many Germans felt in the 1930s.

  17. I have being working with native forests since 12 years ago. We extract fruits in a high volume , process them and ship to the market w/o any deforestation( because it is expensive!).
    Mr Spencer we are witness that your comments are the reality in the Amazon:most of the burning are associate with already clean fields that need to be prepared for the next crop
    season!
    Also a forest burned will recover very shortly if let alone.
    kind regards
    Alcides Brum

  18. Gordon Robertson says:

    The size of the Amazon rainforest is roughly the size of the continental United States.

    Does anyone out there really think the fires are any threat to the rainforest?

  19. Aaron S says:

    Shouldn’t they chop down forest (like the west did a long time ago) to enable wind and solar? We judge them so unfairly.

    Fortunately high yield agriculture is enabling western countries to reestablish dense forest ecosystems. I am not sure where most green people are on priorities between the continental (say midwest US) windmills and reverting to natural ecosystems. Is there room for low energy density systems at scale to provide sufficient energy and natural ecosystems?

    • Nate says:

      ‘between the continental (say midwest US) windmills and reverting to natural ecosystems.’

      “Locating wind farms in forest areas was only made economically feasible in recent years by rapid progress in wind turbine technology. Turbine hub heights and rotor diameters are particularly crucial for forest areas, because the wind profile in a 15 to 40 metre-wide layer of air directly above the tree tops is massively influenced by the trees acting as obstacles to the wind. This zone is characterised by considerable turbulence and low wind speeds, and is therefore unsuitable for profitable exploitation of wind energy.

      Above this zone, at heights of between 30 and 60 metres, the influence of the trees becomes increasingly negligible. Wind speeds rise while turbulence decreases. Modern wind turbines with hub heights of over 100 metres, which only became the standard some years ago, now extend into these high-wind, low-turbulence layers of air high above the tops of the trees. Mean wind speeds reach up to 5.8-6.7 metres/second at a height of 120 metres, even in Bavaria and Baden-Wuerttemberg.”

  20. David Gray says:

    The main difference with this year’s fires is they are Trump’s fault.

  21. Bri says:

    In My view the problem is being ignored. The problem is poor substance farmers who have no way to live other than burn down the forest. This could be solved if peopl actually wanted to protect the forest.
    1. Training and equipment (loans) to teach them modern farming techniques.
    2.Identify resources in the forest peopl are willing to pay for an train the local peopl to harvest them in a way that is renewable.
    If these two steps were taken the number of acres needed to support a local family would be dramatically reduced and the local peopl would have an incentive to protect the forest.

    • Gordon Robertson says:

      bri…”This could be solved if peopl actually wanted to protect the forest”.

      If eco-weenies have their way, no one will be able to enter a forest for feer of disturbing the trees and their inhabitants.

      I was reading an article on an exploration of an African river. One of the eco-weenies suggested humans are not important, it’s the environment that is important.

      Eco-weenies are a special breed of the brain dead. Unfortunately they have infiltrated left-wing politics because no one would listen to them otherwise.

      Look at the Democratic Party, it is being run by Third World immigrants who are eco-weenies.

  22. Stephen P Anderson says:

    Nate,

    What do you think of Spygate? Was Obama’s corrupt administration OK with you? I guess as long as it is to further your leftist utopian ideals then it’s OK, right?

    • Nate says:

      I read the Huff post among other sources. But I know they have a bias, and that I cannot take what I see there as fact.

      I have to apply critical thinking and check other sources.

      You need to be skeptic about whatever you hear from, DT, and the right wing blogosphere.

      • Stephen P Anderson says:

        The right wing? Do you read John Soloman or DA Goodman? The FBI fired Christopher Steele and they then used his dossier at the insistance of someone to obtain FISA warrants to spy on the Trump campaign. Is this OK with you? Nellie Ohr, who is Bruce Ohr’s wife had him pass false information to the FBI that Trump was working with Russia to undermine Hillary’s campaign. Someone had to be orchestrating all of this. Do you want to know who it was? I think we will find out. Comey is too stupid to have been orchestrating it.

        • Gordon Robertson says:

          stephen…”The FBI fired Christopher Steele and they then used his dossier at the insistance of someone to obtain FISA warrants to spy on the Trump campaign. Is this OK with you?”

          Heck, it’s not even OK with me and I am a Canadian socialist. I think the Democrats have disgraced themselves and democracy in general with their tactics and sour grapes over losing the election.

          The so-called left-wing media have disgraced themselves as well with their politically-correct whining and emotionally-based rhetoric.

      • Nate says:

        You probably liked pizza-gate, think that D’s are all pedophiles, and cannibals who eat R children.

        Seriously, be a real skeptic and check the facts and various sources before mindlessly accepting what the internet tells you.

        • Stephen P Anderson says:

          Really, that’s your answer. You find a hit piece on Solomon? So, I guess anyone I bring up you’ll scour the internet to look for a hit piece. That’s always the left’s answer-attack the attacker. You are nothing but a hard core leftist hack-a malcontent. You stand around and look at your life and you see others who’ve bettered themselves by hard work and ingenuity and you think somehting must be wrong. You’re smarter than they are. It isn’t fair. How could I guy like Trump have done so well and especially become President? So you and your ilk look to the government to correct the wrongs that have been delt you. You claim Trump cheated. You try to influence the electoral college to change their votes. You call Trump a racist. You wear black, put on masks and call Trump a fascist. You use the power of corrupt officials to try to overturn a duly elected President. That’s the tactic of the left isn’t it Nate? You claim your oposition are all these things that you are.

        • Nate says:

          ‘Thats always the lefts answer-attack the attacker. You are nothing but a hard core leftist hack-a malcontent. You stand around and look at your life and you see others whove bettered themselves by hard work and ingenuity and you think somehting must be wrong. Youre smarter than they are. It isnt fair.’

          ‘attack the attacker’ you mean Trump’s signature move?

          This is your answer for anyone disagreeing with your views of Trump, and pushing back on your claims.

          Somehow that makes me ‘a hard core leftist hack-a malcontent’

          I must be an extremist, and a member of Antifa or something!

          Whereas, the reality is people with my views of Trump are a growing majority of the country.

          One of those ‘jerks’ who are simply fed up with the divisiveness, incompetence, narcissism, embarrassment, racism, demagoguery, and inhumanity of the current President. .

          • Nate says:

            ‘How could I guy like Trump have done so well and especially become President?’

            Clearly he is an excellent con-man.

            The 20% of America who voted for him, but are not part of his base, are slowly waking up to the reality that they were conned.

          • Stephen P Anderson says:

            Trump’s upcoming win in 2020 will be even bigger than in 2016.

          • Gordon Robertson says:

            stephen…”Trump’s upcoming win in 2020 will be even bigger than in 2016″.

            I hope so, after the insult to the US voters’ intelligence perpetuated by the Democrats since they lost in 2016.

      • Nate says:

        A couple minutes to find lots of criticism of John Soloman’s past investigative reporting.

        https://archives.cjr.org/politics/john_solomon_gives_us_less_tha.php

  23. Stephen P Anderson says:

    So we’ve all get to read the Huffington Post or The Guardian or the New York Times or listen to CNN to get the “real” news according to Nate.

  24. Aaron S says:

    Nate,
    At what cost? We are talking about 100m shafts with 30 or 40 m blades. It would be a decade or more for such a design to repay the cost of manufacturing and installation in economics and CO2 footprint. Not to mention the infrastructure and disturbance to the forest ecosystems everytime maintenance is required. I really think idealists (whatever ideal an individual wraps their ego around) can believe absurd ideas. Why not just beef up natural gas infrastructure and go nuclear?

    In preparation I will likely be forced to reply at the bottom. Sorry.

    • Nate says:

      ‘At what cost?’ Well clearly it is cost competitive in the great plains.

      Ranchers see it is a win-win, since they can continue to use the pasture below.

      I would think the same could be true for farming, forestry.

      Environmental cost? Well, if it is relative to Oil and Coal there is no comparison.

      Im ok with Nuclear in the mix, and gas for now, as long as leaks are regulated.

  25. Ahem: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/sep/02/bolivia-evo-morales-wildfires-chiquitano

    “‘Murderer of nature’: Evo Morales blamed as Bolivia battles devastating fires

    “Thousands of fires swept through eastern Bolivia in August, to the fury of environmentalists and locals who accused the country’s president, Evo Morales, of incentivising the blazes after he passed legislation in July that encourages slash-and-burn farming to create pasture and arable land. Morales, who is running for a controversial fourth term of office, has refused to rescind the decree. His government says high winds and dry conditions are to blame for the worst fires in living memory.

    “Global opprobrium has been focused on Brazil’s far-right president, Jair Bolsonaro, over the record number of fires raging in the Amazon, the world’s largest tropical forest. Morales, Bolivia’s leftwing leader, is now facing similar anger.”

  26. Kamagra Gel rak patiknknl a legalacsonyabbak
    orszgos szinten, tovbb termkeink min_sgi szintjket tekintve prmium kategrisak mind!
    Kamagra Gel olcsn elad gygyszer kereskedsnknl egy munkanapon belli
    kzbestssel, diszkrt bortkban, pnz visszafizetsi garancival!

    Olcs Kamagra Gel rak elolvassa webes kereskedsnkben, valamint a gygyszerksztmnyek rendelse a
    _RENDELS_ menpont alatt trtnhet!

    http://Teddybearmindsupport.com/index.php?title=Unusual_Article_Uncovers_The_Deceptive_Practices_Of_Super_Kamagra

    http://kamagrarendeles.org

    Feel free to visit my page … Kamagra RendelS Budapest

Leave a Reply