The greenies are the ones pressing that the destruction of the Amazon is bad, unsustainable etc, but as I pointed out 80% is still there, and there's not a whole lot of rational argument including compensating a country for remaining undeveloped.
Maybe if your country (Australia, USA, England etc) did wipe it's flora for farms you should embark upon reestablishment there of such not inhibit another country from doing what they do? Or is it on some-ones agenda to invade Peru to liberate the forest?
It is very easy for a bunch of people to stand around saying save the Amazon ... however they're not exactly full of funding to offer options/alternatives.
When a scam such as the above enters the arena for support I see it as necessary to present the complete debate about it's authenticity. It is easy to sucker fools on the internet, have them throw money at things they have no idea about. Like a salesman selling snake oil the website owner collects and fails to deliver.
Pay close attention to the goal written.
Quote:
|
to give the surrounding communities the opportunity to economically take advantage of it in a conscious and ecological way. Then there will be planted trees, fruits and wood of which could immediately benefit both the environment as well as the ecosystem.
|
Hello, they're building a business, a farm, an orchard, and a log-able forest. They're not to different from other developments.
The recent discovery of herring bone clearing increases precipitation, they are trying to balance the scene I'm sure, they wouldn't want a barren wasteland either.
Again observe the quote:-
Quote:
|
to give the surrounding communities the opportunity to economically take advantage of it in a conscious and ecological way.
|
Does this insinuate that other developments do not try to do the same? But it does say that development will continue, economically fuelled.
Now some math, 1 million trees divided by 205 hectares equals 4878 trees per hectare.
10,000m2 in a hectare and that then means 1 tree per 2m2 ... I wonder what the tree density is in the rain forest, I doubt that high and I doubt that sort of over planting is rational or sustainable and it leaves no room for "crops" unless of course the trees are the crops.
So, this is how I think when analysing scams.