Extra:

It's not in a particularly wet place aside from the river. The common rains happen due to the plants sweating what they absorb very quickly due to heat.

It's also worth noting that even if floods and general problems due to too much water don't happen, problems with too little water WILL happen. Locking the depository due to the lack of deep roots as well as tossing the water into the atmosphere is going to lower the water levels in a good chunk of the country, causing - at the very least - a mass scale energy crisis, since we essentially run on hydroelectric powerplants: http://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=16731



This has happened in the recent past, mostly in the southern regions (graph's in portuguese, but blue means major energy crisis while greenish gray means mild energy crisis):



The cause, as mentioned? Low water levels on reservoirs.



You probably don't care about this last bit (at least I personally don't, so I wouldn't expect you to either), but in the case you do, this also means a large scale genocide of river-based indigenous tribes, which are visibly focused on the amazon:



Edited 1/10/2017 06:03:07

higher co2, higher temperature, better conditions in cold countries such as canada scandinavia russia

Global warming is going to cause a temperature rise in Scandinavia and Russia?
If you do not know anything about either global warming nor the way rainforests work I wouldnt start this discussion.

Edited 1/10/2017 07:24:27

Wow Zephyrum, I'm impressed. I didn't expect someone would be this knowledgeable about the topic.

Min34 at least I got many new perspectives. Now I know that perhaps still viable, or perhaps not, my idea is not as perfect as I thought at first.

Now I know that perhaps still viable, or perhaps not, my idea is not as perfect as I thought at first.

Not perfect as thought at first??
Are you kidding us? Admit your defeat already.
Zeph showed that your idea is litterally TERRIBLE.

I didn't expect someone would be this knowledgeable about the topic.

Thats why you brought it in first place. But never start a discussion when you have a Brazilian around.


Well done Zeph, by the way!

Edited 1/10/2017 16:11:12

To be honest, I think amazon rainforests could feed a lot of cats

( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

berdan, you should better give up now; You´re just a Polackian....You really should give up...You don´t even know what you talk of....If I start a thread, I always know something about the topic...But you are just being a bloody idiot and very silly....

I won't fall for https://img.memecdn.com/i-realised-there-was-a-lack-of-puns-and-bait_o_4164567.jpg

my german friend

You're a savage

You

You're worse than Tabby

You're Taggy

True. I cannot rename you, Taggy

World hunger is objectively only an issue because Africans and other non-whites cannot manage resources. There is enough food, water, etc in the world if only Africans could not waste it.

Feed the world is easy if we reduce meat consumption. Brazil, in this situation, has more then 70% of its agricultural lands producing meat (not considering lands unused), and almost 20% used to produce animal feed. The other 8-10% is used to produce vegetable, fruits, grains, whatever brazilians eat thats not meat.
10k m^2 of land used to produce meat is producing 54 kg/year in Brazil. The same to any fruit or grain goes from 2000 kg/year to 50000 kg. Some regions that produce meat using soybeans or corn produce about 200 - 300 kg/year (considering the land to keep the animal and the land to produce the grains).
(i could send links in portuguese if you want)

In the 90s meat that the US was eating was consuming enough to feed 800 million people.
(http://www.news.cornell.edu/stories/1997/08/us-could-feed-800-million-people-grain-livestock-eat)

and we could feed 10 billion (Council for Science and Technology, How Much Land Can Ten Billion People Spare for Nature?, Feb. 1994, pg. 13.)

And these numbers are getting higher . Amazon forest is already becoming a barbecue.

Global warming is going to cause a temperature rise in Scandinavia and Russia?

actually Siberia and the north Canadian islands are some of the most warmed by global warming. It's not an argument either way, though.

World hunger is objectively only an issue because Africans and other non-whites cannot manage resources.

here come the far-retard. maybe you should talk about Africain governments*, and the governments themselves aren't bad just since they're Africain. And you're likely saying this as an upholder of unsustainable and hazardous energy. And it's not as if whiteskins aren't starving, too, although you'd likely say the only reason they're starving is since they didn't eat the Africans yet. You're objectively wrong on this, don't wield "objectively" so care-free.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/africa/zimbabwe-seized-white-farmers-land-now-some-are-being-invited-back/2015/09/14/456f66d6-45d2-11e5-9f53-d1e3ddfd0cda_story.html?utm_term=.8fc5a237423c


WE WUZ KINGZ

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/mtsa0MT2H4I/maxresdefault.jpg

Climate change doesn't exist. But cutting down the whole Brazilian rainforest would mean less oxygen and the destruction of animals' habitats. You could make farms in deserts etc.

I'm a flat Earther and not even I deny climate change.

By volume, dry air contains 78.09% nitrogen, 20.95% oxygen, 0.93% argon, 0.04% carbon dioxide, and small amounts of other gases. Air also contains a variable amount of water vapor, on average around 1% at sea level, and 0.4% over the entire atmosphere.


Oh, indeed, we are short on oxygen, hmm.....

berdan, you've been expliqued why your plot here would fail awfully in much detail by Zephyrum thrice, so I don't know why you keep on going here other than closed-mindedness.