To: Ma3lst0rm
They say the Amazon forest is relatively recent. If it were converted (or reconverted) to agriculture would it be a net loss?
2 posted on
01/25/2006 7:05:39 PM PST by
RightWhale
(pas de lieu, Rhone que nous)
To: RightWhale
That is something that you should mention to evolutionists. A big question is how did such diversity come about in such a relative short period of time? It is hardly a picture of a passive process that is often passed off. What it is a picture of is an active genetic algorithm producing periods of abrupt differentiation in species.
You do bring up an interesting point that if we want to increase the net diversity of the Amazon we could just chop it all down which should allow the soil's ph to become more appealing to bacteria which would soon become more diverse than the typical eukaryotic multi-cellular life. Maybe the bacteria safaria Business would boom!
4 posted on
01/25/2006 7:20:03 PM PST by
Ma3lst0rm
(The government definition of diligence is drowning oneself in a teaspoon of water.)
To: RightWhale
Without "the Rain Forest Is Vanishing!" and it's corollary "Give, Give Give!", "pass laws", "more regulations" there well could be a net loss - of income to Communism Lite NGO's.
The Horror, The Horror!
;-)
7 posted on
01/25/2006 7:53:54 PM PST by
GladesGuru
(In a society predicated upon Liberty, it is essential to examine principle)
To: RightWhale
Ask these guys postin this "stuff" and pluggin in keywords like "GLOBALWARMING" how they explain the "global warming" that is occuring on Mars right now. No jungle bungling or internal combustion engines on that planet, right???
Obviously, it's cause by the star we live next to and nothing else!!!
29 posted on
01/26/2006 9:04:15 AM PST by
SierraWasp
(GovernMental EnvironMentalism... America's establishment of it's unconstitutional State Religion!!!)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson