Dear Editors,
This concerns realism about climate, Antarctica and Amazon and to inform your readers about what is realistic measures to allow a stable economy that can continue to take advantage of opportunities. And here the illusion and presedence from tone and attitude concerning cattle and soy bean farming. That given current political climate, that these fires can lead to a reduction in production when realitites set in.
Everyone knows the Amazon rainforest is an oxygen lung and that forests are carbon deposits.
But clouds reflect sunlight, and water contains heat that can be exchange in higher altitude.
Since 1968 it has been a question if fossil or deforestation had the most impact, but what about algae in oceans.
Modern science has quite a bit to say about cloud formation that involves catalysts or seeding of clouds.
As something need to initiate the process, and there needs to be a catalyst.
In nature this is biomass in form of dead cells, fungus, dead leaves algae and the like.
When the sun is shining things heat up towards the optimal temperature for photosynthesis.
This brings with it lots of activity for life, and more things comes out into the air.
When dry and hot, there is decay and light particles rise up into the sky more than usual.
When clouds form they reflect solar energy and colder water from temperature exchange higher up.
Cooling things down again, and in rainforests especially, there is lots of circulation of water and biomass in this process.
This ties plant life and its optimal temperature to the climate as a central process in cloud and fog formation.
This does not only apply to rainforests, but also algae in the ocean that also swim up and down in the water column depending on temperature and solar exposure, when they reach high enough sea spray can send it into the air for much of the same effect, and requires iron among other things in carbon rich oceans. When it is too hot, less algae rise to the surface, so it needs to be below 27 degrees celsius, in fact, northern and southern regions get more clouds as a consequence from this.
These processes are central in theory for a self-regulating planet and ecosystem a theory called Gaia by the same person that managed to inform the world that CFC gasses and the Ozone layer.
Another central part is how the global climate is a thermodynamic system with energy from the sun and thermal exchange with space. The more you heat up, and the more greenhouses gasses there are, the more water reach high altitude where it is extremely cold, the higher it goes the further it travels before coming down. Right now we are in a situation with not enough forests or life in the sea around equator. Causing water to travel North as it goes up and down the Hadley cell, to the Ferrel cell, and then Polar Cell/Vortex, heating polar regions the most. The polar cell is now called the polar vortex depending on your area of interest, and this can beome extremely bad, and is one mechanism involved in the Gaia theory at the physics and thermodynamic level. What we need more of is the part of the ecosystem that have photosynthesis that naturally prefer optimal temperatures and have this interaction with the circulation of carbon and water.
So while Antarctica is melting, the Amazonas is burning, and this is not two negatives that play well together as we spend natural resources like drunk and coked up Yuppies.
What is happening in the Amazon and the effects it will have on the Antarctic with a high chance of even more warm rain is the equivalent of pissing on climate conerns and growing frequency of extreme storms while bombing Antarctica with Napalm.
Testing for, and making sure there are enough trace metals in the ocean for algae is also economical wise, it's trace amounts in carbon rich oceans.
Something along these lines are "balanced" as far as climate is concerned when it comes to Antarctica and Amazons and being realistic about the ecosystem and things that work.
This entire argument can be fact checked, or all the parts that builds up the argument, all of it put together is more of a challenge as the scope and bigger picture here is the entire planet. This being said, Amazon needs to get larger again as instability can threatent existing agriculture in addition to it taking less time to regrow the Amazon than building rainforests in other conintents where Ethiopia seems to be the most eager.
This is at the level of threaten with war or help, and if it goes nowhere, just invade and put an end to what's being done with the rainforest. Those fires will have an almost immediate effect and it will not be good.
YEE-HAW,
