It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Man-made rainforest baffles scientists

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 18 2004 @ 11:04 PM
link   
A great article well worth reading...




A Man-Made rainforest that should have taken millennia to evolve has baffled scientists by springing up in just 150 years.

Rainforests should take millions of years to develop the highly complex, interactive ecosystems for which they are famed, in which every species fills an essential niche.

But the forest on Green Mountain, Ascension Island, in the mid-Atlantic sprung up chaotically from a mixed bag of botanical scrap brought in by the Royal Navy in 1843.

And the introduced species have thrived at a rate that has stunned experts and could trigger a rethink of conventional ecological theory, New Scientist magazine reports today.

news.independent.co.uk...



Still takes well more than a few generations though. No quick fixes here. But encouraging, nonetheless.



posted on Sep, 18 2004 @ 11:09 PM
link   
Yep, I agree Great article. Great find loam.

Good to know that miracles do happen.



posted on Sep, 18 2004 @ 11:10 PM
link   
At the rate were destroying Earths Rain Forests It will just make it the job even harder and longer to restore the Rain forests.



posted on Sep, 18 2004 @ 11:17 PM
link   
There was a story not too long ago on the Science Channel about how surprised and really stunned scientists were at the rate the Mt.St.Helens area has rejuvenated after the large eruption. Apparently, the region is already showing signs of forest regrowth and species dispersal close to what it had been in the pre-eruption days. Of course, it will still take a hundred or so years for the new forest to be old growth, like what was there before, but interesting at how fast nature seems to heal herself, isn't it?



posted on Sep, 18 2004 @ 11:39 PM
link   
But this one is made made, which gives hopes to us creating new rainforests.



posted on Sep, 18 2004 @ 11:42 PM
link   
Hope Huh Maybe if the rain forests were in North America But there not, So until America threatens the 3rd world countries in south america to quit killing trees they will just continue on hacking.



posted on Sep, 19 2004 @ 11:01 AM
link   


And the introduced species have thrived at a rate that has stunned experts and could trigger a rethink of conventional ecological theory, New Scientist magazine reports today.

just goes to show you that if you give Mother Nature a helping hand ,she will do the rest!



posted on Sep, 20 2004 @ 09:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by RATT
So until America threatens the 3rd world countries in south america to quit killing trees they will just continue on hacking.


Jesh must we do everything? Lets let Russia fight for rainforests.

X



posted on Sep, 21 2004 @ 05:32 AM
link   
Just further proof that the environmental lobby has its collective head up its collective ass. I have been saying for years that the earth is not fragile and that humanity can not destroy it. When you think of all the cataclysmic events the earth has gone through and the way it and life always bounces back the idea of the greenhouse effect, and the futillity of the endangered species act shows how ridculous they really are. The only reason people buy into this crap is human arrogance.



posted on Sep, 21 2004 @ 07:37 AM
link   
Interesting article indeed.

mwm1331 for once i agree with your initial premise, however to then suggest that it is practically impossible to destroy Gaia (the earth sorting itself out like an organism is the Gaia hypothesis) is going too far i think.
It is very easy for us to wipe most life right off the planet at the push of a button.

Yes there will be some sort of recovery but to say there is nothing to do because we cant destroy it is putting it a bit strong.



posted on Sep, 21 2004 @ 08:11 AM
link   
No offense corinthas but even a nuclear war would not wipe most life off the planet. Keep in mind that anyone who starts a Nuclear war is (and they know it ) comitting suicide. I mean even in the height of the cold war when MAD was the dominant operational doctrine, even had it come to pass south america, europe, africa, and australia would have been virtually untouched. I mean really the fact is we just aren't that powerful no matter what some treehugger who never gets laid might want you to think. The fact is most species on this planet are evolving to cooexist with humans. In areas where elephant poaching is prevalent a very large porton of baby elephants are being born without tusks. Coyotes live in suburban areas, without, for the most part, disturbing local residents too much. yes some speare endangered but in truth if they are not adaptable enough to survive then by natures own laws they deserve to be extinct. Gaia as you put it is a far harsher master than humans could ever be.



posted on Sep, 23 2004 @ 07:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by RATT
Hope Huh Maybe if the rain forests were in North America But there not, So until America threatens the 3rd world countries in south america to quit killing trees they will just continue on hacking.


Threaten them with what? War? Sanctions? A spanking?

Who are we to threaten any country that is not attacking us? They ARE NOT our rain forests! They dont belong to you, or us, or U.S. How would you feel if I "threatend" you for not taking care a tree on property you owned because a bird I liked lived there?

It is none of your concern what any nation does with its own property, its own land. Who the hell are you to say that you know better than them.

If you want to help save the rain forest, become a capitalist, make alot of money, and buy some property in S. America. How much property do you own there? Have you aquired even an acre? Its really not that much. No? Well, dont you love the earth? You arent doing enough! I think the gov. should "threaten" you in order to make you buy rainforest land in
S. America. Yeah, we can just take it out of your paycheck. Of course, if you dont want to let us, we can just go to war with you, or put sanctions on you so you can never find work.

This feeling that "the gov. should do something about it" is one of the main problems in America today. Mabey, if you feel so bad about it, you should do something about it. But dont bring the rest of us into it, cause I dont give a crap about the rainforest. Ill start to get upset about it when I run out of wood to burn in my fireplace or there is a wide spread TP shortage.



posted on Mar, 24 2006 @ 09:39 AM
link   
Maybe the US should use some of our precious tax dollars to buy the amazon rain forest and make it part of the US



posted on Mar, 24 2006 @ 09:58 AM
link   
I clicked on the link, but couldn't find information on the rainforest.

Did find an article about the Chinese putting a tax on chopsticks so as to save trees.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't a lot of the slashing and burning going on in the rainforest so crops can be grown?

And the land only has a one or two year yield thereby requiring more slashing and burning of the rainforest for crops?
Which seems a little strange since the soil ought to be very rich in nutrients to start with.

Seems like it's a year or two until very young trees start filling in on their own after the croplands are abandoned.
Granted, getting back to a proper rainforest after the last crop harvest and new species of the larger trees coming in after the initial small tree growth is going to take quite a while until things are as they were.

It doesn't make it right and I don't have any easy answers, but I do note that the rainforest is one of if the very largest oxygen producers on the planet and at least these younger trees coming in would do their part in oxygen production.


JAK

posted on Mar, 24 2006 @ 10:04 AM
link   
The Article can still be found here: Jak



posted on Mar, 24 2006 @ 10:17 AM
link   
It's not a new discovery. Whatever 'scientist' made those claims is not of a very good reputation.

Old growth conifer forests in the western U.S. are created by intensive silviculture in less than 70 years. Have been throughout the 20th century. Large dams across rivers create fully functioning lake ecosystems in less than 15 years.

Nature adapts far faster and far better than most people give credit. The title of this forum is 'Fragile Earth'. It is a misnomer. The earth and all its ecoystems are very robust and dynamic. They are not fragile at all.



posted on Mar, 24 2006 @ 03:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Desert Dawg
And the land only has a one or two year yield thereby requiring more slashing and burning of the rainforest for crops?
Which seems a little strange since the soil ought to be very rich in nutrients to start with.


The problem is that people plant species that are not for that type of soil, and sometimes the rain (they call them rainforests for some reason) destroys the upper layers of the soil because the protection from the forest was gone.

The substitution of native species by others is one of the greatest problems in some regions of the globe, all the surrounding environment gets modified because of that.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join