Like some other vast forest around the world, as the Siberian forest or Alaskian forest, some portions of the Amazonian rainforest is actually on fire. The Amazonian Rainforest spreads through at least 8 countries.
2
Most of the Amazonian Rainforest lies in Brazilian territory, so Brazil has a kind of special bond to it. Although most of Brazilians never approached it and the area is sparsely inhabited, since the 19th Century there are some patriotic claims and passions about it.
3
Traditional agriculture activities in South America use fire as a tool for terrain clearance and it goes back to Indigenous practices as well to medieval European practices. Currently, small-scale/familiar agriculture often uses fire as a tool, triggering wildfires accidentaly
4
Bolivia's promotion of traditional, small-scale/familiar agriculture triggers wildfires systematically. Most of large-scale, high-tech imbued Brazilian agrobusinesses do not use fire as a clearance tool. And most of it is not so close to the Rainforest, to begin with.
5
As with our neighbours, small-scale agriculture, habitational pressure, poachers, illegal mining, illegal logging, etc, are the main culprits for the wildfire, although there are some large-scale agriculture also involved in it.
6
In the past, most of government concerns about Amazonian Rainforest preservation were a little more than mere rhetorical tools to appease (inter)national environmentalist activists. Brazilian laws are hard to impose in the vast wild territory.
7
But still, deforestation and wildfires were somewhat controled in the last 15 years, after decades of alarming predatorial consumption of Rainforest area. Looking to the recent past we are now so much better when the matter is Rainforest preservation.
8
To illustrate that, here are the official data of deforestation area concerning our legal definition of Amazonian Rainforest. The current graph stops at 2017, but still, the deforestation records remain on the past.
9
That's also true: there are a RELATIVE increase in the RATE of deforestation and wildfires on 2019, but the ABSOLUTE numbers still far from the past and much closer to the previous years.
Concerning yearly wildfires' burned area (km²):
10
The previous graph shows the burned area between January and July each year, since 2013. Even with the amazing rising rates of wildfires in 2019, we still much better than what we were in the recent past.
11
The annual amount of burned area is presented below, without 2019, as the current year is not finished (obviously):
12
The January-to-August wildfire spots are presented below. We can note an increase in absolute numbers, and that's very bad, but these numbers are not even close of what they were some decades ago.
13
So, currently Brazil is not in its worst time when the matter is Rainforest preservation. But we have a big problem, and it is called Bolsonaro, our Brazilian "orange-man-bad".
Bolsonaro is setting himself as an enemy of conservation.
14
Although he is not acting so dissimilar from the previous Brazilian presidents, he is talking in a unique way implying his government will not help conservation issues. That has a (really stupid) reason to be: he only knows how to run an ellection, not how to rule a country.
15
While running for ellection, he just remains in a kind of "perpetual attack mode", being rude and blaming anything he identifies as "leftwards". And for more than three decades he was successful doing that, even winning presidential run on his first attempt.
16
There is so hard to any Brazilian government enforce the country's laws in its vast inner territory, far from the big cities near the coast. Aside from see the wildfires from space, there are not so many things really effective to stop or prevent them.
17
If fighting against wildfire and deforestation is so hard when the government is PRETENDING to fight against it, the case gets worse when the government stop even the pretending and rhetorical tools.
18
It is even worse when the president call himself "Captain Chainsaw" — and while the massive wildfire is happening !!!
Bolsonaro probably thinks he is doing really, really well with his ellectoral base. Perhaps that's it. But he is ruining foreing relaionships.
19
Our Agrobusiness is one of the most advanced, productive and technologically embued in the entire world. Even during our long and deep economical crisis, this sector is almost untouched by the economic stagnation... Until Bolsonaro opened his mouth.
20
The ways Bolsonaro speaks, the things he does or doesn't are harmful to our Agrobusiness image. Our great-scale agriculturalists do not want to be identified with deforestation or wildfires, and most of them actually have not to do with these things.
21
Being one of the greatest food producer of the world, our agrobusiness is getting its image damaged by the ways Bolsonaro acts about preservation. And various countries, specially Eruopeans ones, highly protecionist in agricultural issues, are using the opportunity.
22
Bolsonaro created the "perfect storm" against our only economical sector that was doing well. And he made it simply saying nasty things.
23/23
Most of the Graphs used here come from my firend Daniel V. Tausk, a mathematician and professor. I do not know if he has an Twitter profile.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Porque amadores automotivados fazem, DE GRAÇA, um trabalho MELHOR. E frequentemente mais impessoal, imparcial e objetivo.
E mais. Os serviços de inteligência de vários países deixa a desejar frente a alguns anônimos da internet.
Grandes portais de notícia, telejornais, etc, histéricos condenando Israel pelo incidente no hospital. Um ou outro veículo, timidamente, culpando de cara os terroristas. Em AMBOS os casos, péssimo trabalho.
À época, sabíamos quase nada. Tem de se ater aos fatos, não às ilações.
Em tempo real, anônimos automotivados fizeram, de graça, a confirmação da localização do incidente por geolocalização. Levantaram vários vídeos, de vários ângulos e começaram a discutir as hipóteses.
A tudo isso, temos acesso gratuito. Sem assinatura, sem paywall.
It's staggering how few the Sassanians knew about Cyrus (simply called "the great"). For ages we also didn't know a thing about the Hittites, despite their mention on the Bible, and to this day we call them "Hittites", although they called themselves Nessites.
Given the astonishing deeds during the Neolithic and the immense amount of time spent in relative complex societies, we probably have no direct names from that age — maybe some hints of them in very ancient tales and myths.
Literacy helped a lot to preserve names, events and biographies, but as I mentioned, we already lost knowledge about great names and nations of literated societies, like Akhenaten and Shuppiluliuma — and early Anglo-Saxon Britain had almost no hints of the Roman Britain.
A população em geral não se importa DE VERDADE com democracia, republicanismo, correção ética mínima ou corrupção. Caso se importasse, seriam simplesmente mal-sucedidas as candidaturas de Lula e Bolsonaro.
A ambos falta compromisso com a República e com a Democracia, a ambos falta uma correção ética mínima e ambos promovem um culto personalista a si próprios e o pior tipo de populismo. Entretanto, pra mais de 100M de eleitores, NADA DISSO IMPORTA.
Seria esperado que o histórico de Bolsonaro, já desde os anos 90, um sujeito repugnante que advoca fuzilar representantes eleitos, tortura e assassinato de "uns 30k" brasileiros, além de um sem-número de disparates, fosse repugnado a jamais ser elegível ao Planalto.
Aprecio muito o Laicismo: cada qual que seja, ou não, fervoroso em suas fantasias míticas, mas sem importunar os outros.
Há tempos sugiro ampliar isso para a política: Laicismo Político, sobretudo em termos Institucionais.
Da mesma forma como indivíduos podem optar por jejuar, se abster de porco, se submeter à circuncisão, etc, nenhuma Instituição (pública ou privada!) deveria poder EXIGIR a imposição destas coisas.
Em questões políticas, as Instituições (públicas e privadas!) não deveriam poder IMPOR suas profecias de fé às pessoas — mas ao contrário do relativo sucesso com o Laicismo original, religioso, estamos muito, muito longe disso!
Tolerar NÃO É preferir, gostar, apoiar. É algo como "deixar ser/estar". O tolerante pode até DESGOSTAR do que tolera, e expressar este desgosto, desde que deixe ser/estar.
Não gosto de pizza com ketchup: não coloco ketchup na pizza, desaconselho a fazer isso e ainda tiro sarro de quem faz. Mas quer botar ketchup na pizza? Bote, oras!
Não gosto, mas TOLERO que façam isso — ainda que por vezes expresse minha contrariedade e desgosto a respeito.
Só que o pessoal anda pervertendo o sentido de "tolerância", então qualquer opinião negativa, de desgosto ou desaprovação, confissão íntima de preferência, etc, é erroneamente considerada INTOLERÂNCIA.
É sempre bom lembrar que foram os doutos de seu tempo, os Acadêmicos, os letrados de Paris e afins, que perseguiram Galileu — e acionaram os Príncipes locais, os Cardeais e o Papa para fazê-lo se calar.
Na maior parte da História, a Academia é e objetiva ser isso!
Uma série de acidentes históricos fizeram de bolsões da Academia da Europa Ocidental e América do Norte terem o objetivo de promover "conjecturas e refutações" em um ambiente mais "Liberal". Noutros tempos isso ocorreu brevemente noutros cantos:
— em Kwarezm e nos oásis budistas do Taklamakan;
— em Bagdá
— em Córdoba
— em centros intelectuais helenistas