L A Times anti-science propaganda campaign hyping Amazon fires

Guest essay by Larry Hamlin

The L A Times is at it again pushing climate alarmist propaganda distortion, deception and dishonesty hyping the recent fires burning in the Amazon region.

clip_image002

The Times reporter drones on about the magnitude of deforestation underway in the Amazon with the following inaccurate and hyped discussion:

“Flames are spreading across the Amazon rainforest this summer, spewing millions of tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere each day. But scientists say that’s not their biggest concern. They’re far more worried about what the fires represent: a dramatic increase in illegal deforestation that could deprive the world of a critical buffer against climate change.

More than a soccer field’s worth of Amazon forest is falling every minute, according to Brazil’s National Institute for Space Research, known as INPE. Preliminary estimates from satellite data revealed that deforestation in June rose almost 90% compared with the same month last year, and by 280% in July.

The Amazon is a key component of Earth’s climate system. It holds about a quarter as much carbon as the entire atmosphere and single-handedly absorbs about 5% of all the CO2 we emit each year.

But if such rapid deforestation continues, it will foil efforts to keep global temperatures in check. Scientists fear parts of the Amazon could pass a critical threshold and transform from a lush rainforest into a dry, woody grassland. And that could bring catastrophic consequences not only for people in South America, but also for everyone around the world.”

The Times presents its “scientific evidence” of the grave “tipping point” increases in deforestation underway with the following graph:

clip_image004

But as always with the dishonesty of alarmism fabricated by the L A Times reality presents a quite different picture when a more complete analysis is undertaken with the result clearly demonstrating the propaganda focused objective of the Times.

A more complete and objective assessment of the deforestation issues in the Brazilian Amazon provided by another article shows a much more comprehensive picture of the history of declining deforestation that was astoundingly ignored by the alarmist Times as noted below.

clip_image006

The article notes:

“Interestingly, when NASA released the satellite image on August 21, it noted that “it is not unusual to see fires in Brazil at this time of year due to high temperatures and low humidity. Time will tell if this year is a record breaking or just within normal limits.”

So why are there so many fires? “Natural fires in the Amazon are rare, and the majority of these fires were set by farmers preparing Amazon-adjacent farmland for next year’s crops and pasture,” soberly explains The New York Times. “Much of the land that is burning was not old-growth rain forest, but land that had already been cleared of trees and set for agricultural use.”

It is routine for farmers and ranchers in tropical areas burn their fields to control pests and weeds and to encourage new growth in pastures.

What about deforestation trends?  Since the right-wing nationalist Jair Bolsonaro became Brazil’s president, rainforest deforestation rates have increased a bit, but they are still way below their earlier highs.”

So once again we have the L A Times fabricating phony alarmist issues and making false claims based upon its complete lack of honest news integrity while displaying its total focus on manufacturing alarmism propaganda.

Forbes published an article addressing the fact that just about every hyped up account of these fires is wrong.

clip_image008

The article chastised at length the unjustified alarmist news coverage and provided a graph that puts the recent number of fires in perspective.

clip_image010

The article offered the following enlightening discussion about the absurd alarmist campaign present in much of the world’s media regarding these fires:

“One of Brazil’s leading environmental journalists agrees that media coverage of the fires has been misleading. “It was under [Workers Party President] Lula and [Environment Secretary] Marina Silva (2003-2008) that Brazil had the highest incidence of burning,” Leonardo Coutinho told me over email. “But neither Lula nor Marina was accused of putting the Amazon at risk.”

Coutinho’s perspective was shaped by reporting on the ground in the Amazon for Veja, Brazil’s leading news magazine, for nearly a decade. By contrast, many of the correspondents reporting on the fires have been doing so from the cosmopolitan cities of São Paulo and Rio de Janeiro, which are 2,500 miles and four hours by jet plane away.

“What is happening in the Amazon is not exceptional,” said Coutinho. “Take a look at Google web searches search for ‘Amazon’ and ‘Amazon Forest’ over time. Global public opinion was not as interested in the ‘Amazon tragedy’ when the situation was undeniably worse. The present moment does not justify global hysteria.”

And while fires in Brazil have increased, there is no evidence that Amazonforest fires have.”

“Amazon forest fires are hidden by the tree canopy and only increase during drought years. “We don’t know if there are any more forest fires this year than in past years, which tells me there probably isn’t,” Nepstad said. “I’ve been working on studying those fires for 25 years and our [on-the-ground] networks are tracking this.”

“What increased by 7% in 2019 are the fires of dry scrub and trees cut down for cattle ranching as a strategy to gain ownership of land.

Against the picture painted of an Amazon forest on the verge of disappearing, a full 80% remains standing. Half of the Amazon is protected against deforestation under federal law.”

“Few stories in the first wave of media coverage mentioned the dramatic drop in deforestation in Brazil in the 2000s,” noted former New York Timesreporter Andrew Revkin, who wrote a 1990 book, The Burning Season, about the Amazon, and is now Founding Director, Initiative on Communication & Sustainability at The Earth Institute at Columbia University.

Deforestation declined a whopping 70% from 2004 to 2012. It has risen modestly since then but remains at one-quarter its 2004 peak. And just 3% of the Amazon is suitable for soy farming.”

The L A Times article of course was silent on any rational assessment of the history of declining deforestation and related fires in favor of pushing its usual climate alarmist propaganda campaign garbage. 

Get notified when a new post is published.
Subscribe today!
5 1 vote
Article Rating
63 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Mark Broderick
August 27, 2019 2:46 pm

“RICO Racketeering Probe Beckons After Michael Mann’s Court Defeat”

https://principia-scientific.org/rico-racketeering-probe-beckons-after-michael-manns-court-defeat/?fbclid=IwAR1xgnFvRLIi-ebfk9XS4z9hyuXH7yVx3xgybH50ZxzAFNc1G-1hG0_8Jb8

“Graham Spanier, the Penn State president forced to resign over Sandusky, was the same cove who investigated Mann. And, as with Sandusky and Paterno, the college declined to find one of its star names guilty of any wrongdoing.”

Interesting…..

August 27, 2019 3:13 pm

The hyper-promotion needs action and the fire season in North America is not generating headlines.
So they are hyping brush burning in Brazil.
Looked up British Columbia, where I live. It is divided into six regions.
And all six are —“No fires of note”.
Found a fire-risk map of Canada–only small regions on either side of James Bay are marked red as dangerous.
No comments on a conflagration of nothing-burgers.

August 27, 2019 3:18 pm

But on a different subject a potential weather-cooler seems to be underway.
Yesterday, Shiveluch in Kamchatka erupted. Ranked as a VEI of 5/6 and continuing.
Worth watching the news on this one.
Ash and aerosols up to 70,000 feet.

Earl Hackett
August 27, 2019 3:37 pm

Search Google Maps for “Tupana, Amazonas, Brazil” and select Satelite view to see a current image of the fires. They are all within a few hundred feet of the road.

Herbert
August 27, 2019 6:14 pm

Larry,
The claim by President Macron that the Amazon provides 20% of the Earth’s oxygen is complete rubbish.
See “ No, the Amazon fires won’t deplete the earth’s oxygen. Here’s why.” at PBS.org.
The article is from Scott Denning, atmospheric scientist on The Conversation.

August 28, 2019 6:34 am

“single-handedly absorbs about 5% of all the CO2 we emit each year.”

I’m very curious how one reaches such figure. They say that up to 85% of generated oxygen is due of oceans (I would expect something similar for the absorbtion of CO2). The amazonian forest is just a fraction of the whole forests of the Earth, less than a third, that’s sure. How could it absorb 5%? Especially since it’s not growing, but decreasing in size…

August 28, 2019 3:13 pm

For climate alarmists that can’t face science reality results from two new studies utilizing NASA satellite data show that in the last 35 years global forests have increased growth by over 2.2 million square kilometers due to increasing CO2 and that global fires have declined by 25% since 2003.

See:

https://phys.org/news/2018-08-global-forest-loss-years-offset.html

https://earth observatory.nasa.gov/images/145421/building-a-long-term-record-of-fire

Kristi R Silber
Reply to  Larry Hamlin
August 28, 2019 8:58 pm

OK, I read the LAT article. I fail to see the “anti-science” propaganda in it. Why did you use the red graph, which apparently goes up to, but doesn’t include any part of August (or in some other way doesn’t represent the 80% you talk about), rather than the more illustrative one presented in the LAT? THAT seems like propaganda to me. You got a bunch of quotes from one guy who supported your views: ” Since the right-wing nationalist Jair Bolsonaro became Brazil’s president, rainforest deforestation rates have increased a bit, but they are still way below their earlier highs.” Did you even read the LAT article talking about the efforts made to decrease forest clearing? The article never denies that it was higher; the worry is that we are seeing a new trend.

“The Times presents its “scientific evidence” of the grave “tipping point” increases in deforestation underway with the following graph:” BS. That has nothing to do with the tipping point. The tipping point is about the fact that the Amazon creates its own climate. The scientists do not say a tipping point is underway, they say they fear it will come. You have to remember that the amount of clearing accrues over time. The clearing in the past was significant, and it certainly did draw attention. Sure, the media is more interested in climate change and POLITICAL change in Brazil now, but that doesn’t prove it’s lying.

“And while fires in Brazil have increased, there is no evidence that Amazonforest fires have.”

“Amazon forest fires are hidden by the tree canopy and only increase during drought years. ‘We don’t know if there are any more forest fires this year than in past years, which tells me there probably isn’t'”

Forest fires are an interesting issue, but different. The increase in Amazonian fires is not primarily in forest fires, it’s in cleared land – land that once was forest. The issues of deforestation and fires are related.

“So once again we have the L A Times fabricating phony alarmist issues and making false claims based upon its complete lack of honest news integrity while displaying its total focus on manufacturing alarmism propaganda.” What is fabricated? What false claims? You are doing no better (I’d say worse) than they in your presentation, so if theirs is propaganda, yours surely is, too.

Kristi R Silber
August 28, 2019 8:06 pm

The second graph does not include 2019.

The third graph makes no sense. It clearly doesn’t show an 80% increase from 2018 to 2019. And are you sure it’s for “forest fires”? The graph here seems more accurate:comment image

In any case, that’s for all of Brazil, not just the Amazon. Wikipedia breaks down the raw numbers and percentage increase in fires by Brazilian state, and highlights those in the Amazon. Shows a different picture.

One has to remember, too, that the Amazon extends beyond Brazil’s borders. And that Bolsonaro has opened the way for more deforestation, so that this may be just the start of a longer-term trend. “At one point in August 2019, Bolsonaro jokingly calling himself “Captain Chainsaw” while asserting that INPE’s data was inaccurate.[60] After INPE announced an 88% increase of wildfires in July 2019, Bolsonaro claimed “the numbers were fake” and fired Ricardo Magnus Osório Galvão, the INPE director” (Wikipedia)

Kristi R Silber
August 28, 2019 8:24 pm

Larry,

Who says “alarmists” don’t believe that?

If anything, that’s more alarming, since despite the increase in global tree cover (which is potentially different from forest) and greater area burned (which isn’t necessarily in forest), CO2 continues to rise.

Your second reference also says, ““There are really two separate trends,” said Randerson. “Even as the global burned area number has declined because of what is happening in savannas, we are seeing a significant increase in the intensity and reach of fires in the western United States because of climate change.” If you are going to trust it about one thing you want to be true, you should trust it about something you may not want to bring up since it tends to take the punch out of your enthusiastic condemnation of “climate alarmists.”

Matt G
August 29, 2019 9:40 am

climate scientists fear a tipping point is near

I have noticed many media articles are now making these type of claims yet fail to show any sources.

Which scientist or scientists claim this view based on fires at the moment?

The media are making things up as they go along even more than they use too.

Kristi R Silber
Reply to  Matt G
August 29, 2019 6:19 pm

Matt,

Did you read the article? That would be a start. Quotes scientists, and there is a link to a paper.