SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Arthur T Knackerbracket has found the following story:
The Mauna Loa Observatory in Hawaii recorded an increase of 2.4 parts per million (ppm) of carbon dioxide (CO₂) to a total of 471.1 ppm in May 2020.
[...] In 2015, fires ravaged 2.6 million hectares due to slash-and-burn methods to clear areas that were dominated by peatlands. A dry season influenced by El Nino climate variability also contributed to the increasing spread of hotspots.
That year, NASA satellites detected more than 130,000 hotspots.
These fires in peat area released 802 million tons (Mt) of CO₂e (carbon dioxide equivalent) in 2015, making it one of the worst emission events in the country.
[...] The average annual emission from peat fires from 2000 to 2016 was 248Mt of CO₂e.
Approaching peak dry season in August, peatland will still be vulnerable to fires.
[...] The country has been struggling to control these fires, which are becoming an annual event.
[...] However, the coronavirus pandemic is challenging climate change commitments. Nations will be focusing on bouncing back economically.
With predicted cuts to economic growth resulting from this virus, concerns are growing that Indonesia will clear more forests and depend on cheap fossil fuel to buffer the financial impacts.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 21 2020, @07:01PM (1 child)
Well, when NYC won't even ask those positive whether they went to a protest, it's quite easy to know the data is crap.
You lot spinning science to support ideological agendas is the greatest threat to science. It was easy to dismiss religious nutters but when you let your own brand of religious nuttery infect data collection, that makes you an actual danger to objectivity, knowledge, and progress. Get off your high horse and put on some clothes.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 21 2020, @08:10PM
Yet if the protests contributed in any significant way to coronavirus cases, we should see an increase in the number of cases anywhere significant protests occurred. That just hasn't happened. While some states are seeing surges in coronavirus cases, many others where there were large scale protests aren't seeing such increases. If the protests had a significant effect, we should see an increase in the number of new cases regardless of whether contact tracers are explicitly asking about attendance at protests. That's just not occurring.
I agree that NYC's contact tracers aren't inquiring about protest attendance, and here's an article discussing it: https://www.thecity.nyc/coronavirus/2020/6/14/21290963/nyc-covid-19-trackers-skipping-floyd-protest-questions-even-amid-fears-of-new-wave [thecity.nyc]. However, that article also says that only 2-3% of tests are coming back positive.
The 2-3% of positive tests is pretty low and it suggests that limits on the availability of tests aren't causing large numbers of cases to be missed. That means we can have reasonable confidence that there isn't an undetected surge in cases. If you believe that testing simply cannot be trusted, the rate of people being hospitalized is another way to measure trends in the infection rate. Here's NYC's data, which includes hospitalization rates: https://www1.nyc.gov/site/doh/covid/covid-19-data.page [nyc.gov]. There hasn't been an increase in the rate of hospitalizations.
There were very real concerns both that the protests and NYC's method of holding arrested protesters could spread infection: https://newyork.cbslocal.com/2020/06/03/protests-coronavirus-new-york/ [cbslocal.com]. But the data suggest that hasn't materialized at all.
Your theory is that the protests would result in rapid spreading of infections. The data do not support your hypothesis. There are multiple sources of data, coming from different parts of the country, with different state and local authorities involved in collecting and aggregating the data. After all, there were large scale protests throughout the country. There is no evidence that the protests had a significant role in spreading the coronavirus. At this point, your hypothesis should be rejected. But you're unwilling to do so, instead arguing that somehow the method of collecting data is preventing new cases associated with the protests from being detected. This would require widespread coordination because there are many agencies throughout the country responsible for collecting data. When the data don't support your theory, instead of behaving like a scientist and discarding the theory, you're concocting a conspiracy theory.
You've provided a great example of how conspiracy theories can be started. Thank you again for clearly demonstrating what I've described in my comments. You've been most helpful!