How China Changed to world... It is known that Genghis Khan killed nearly 40 million people and created the world's largest slave empire. But new research by Julia Pongratz of the Carnegie Institution's Department of Global Ecology tries to explain how his genocide "actually helped the Earth"???
Monogabay "It's a common misconception that the human impact on climate began with the large-scale burning of coal and oil in the industrial era," says Pongratz, lead author of the study in a press release. "Actually, humans started to influence the environment thousands of years ago by changing the vegetation cover of the Earth's landscapes when we cleared forests for agriculture."
The answer to how this happened can be told in one word: reforestation. When the Mongol hordes invaded Asia, the Middle East, and Europe they left behind a massive body count, depopulating many regions. With less people, large swathes of cultivated fields eventually returned to forests, absorbing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.
"We found that during the short events such as the Black Death and the Ming Dynasty collapse, the forest re-growth wasn't enough to overcome the emissions from decaying material in the soil," explains Pongratz. "But during the longer-lasting ones like the Mongol invasion and the conquest of the Americas there was enough time for the forests to re-grow and absorb significant amounts of carbon."
The Mongol invasion had the most significant impact. According to the study's accounting, re-growth of forests during the Mongol invasion absorbed 700 million tons of carbon from the atmosphere, equaling the amount of carbon global society now produces annually from gasoline.
Pongratz argues that her study has relevance for the world's current climate crisis: "Today about a quarter of the net primary production on the Earth's land surface is used by humans in some way, mostly through agriculture. […].
In the past we have had a substantial impact on global climate and the carbon cycle, but it was all unintentional. Based on the knowledge we have gained from the past, we are now in a position to make land-use decisions that will diminish our impact on climate and the carbon cycle. We cannot ignore the knowledge we have gained."
Of course, before society can even consider global reforestation, global deforestation must be halted. Despite worldwide concern and numerous initiatives over the years (both local and global) forests continue to fall at staggering rates. Currently around 10% of the world's greenhouse gas emissions come from deforestation.
She is not advocating genocide... She is explaining the impact of deforestation 
What you should take from the article is her inarguable point of how much of an impact has on deforestation through historical information... NOT the massive mistake of individuals wanting to "target" reduce our population. This is often a catalyst of religious and racial hate. The true solutions to a sustainable living and population are compassion, empathy and education. As I recently posted in a comment on "The population timebomb is a myth" over at Peak Energy.
'Population Bomb' or 'Humanity on a Tightrope'
Is the world overpopulated? Indeed, but it won't be in a few decades if we educate our people to value each life and inch of this world as its own.
Do you really think an educated, loving, compassionate person would have another child when they can not care or provide for themselves? Hardly, and while the reasons they make those mistakes are vast, the answers to solving them remain clear.
Do you really think an educated, loving, compassionate person would have another child when they can not care or provide for themselves? Hardly, and while the reasons they make those mistakes are vast, the answers to solving them remain clear.
If we lead and treated are world with the same compassion and empathy we show our family, pets, parks and friends... there would never be overpopulation.
People who care:
Pick partners and plan families that cherish their local resources and communities and protect and preserve them.
It is really that simple.
As a world:
Look at how we treat animals globally...
Would you do those things to your farm?
Look at how we ignore basic human rights and life preservation in nations we enable as our "labor" partners…HTML clipboard
Would you treat your children or family this way?
Look at how we treat oceans and global water...
Would you treat your lake, stream or pond this way?
Look at how we treat global forests and land…
Would you treat your park or backyard this way?
Look at how we treat animals globally...
Would you do those things to your farm?
Look at how we ignore basic human rights and life preservation in nations we enable as our "labor" partners…
Would you treat your children or family this way?
Look at how we treat oceans and global water...
Would you treat your lake, stream or pond this way?
Look at how we treat global forests and land…
Would you treat your park or backyard this way?
No we would not, because most of us have a choice... And when we do not make the right choice in our modern democracies we enact policies, laws and regulations to ensure people who are unable to understand or care enough have more than a moral obligation to do so.
But there are nations who do not...
They have rich governments and vast resources yet enslave their people on pennies a day "build their economies". Forcing these people to do horrible things… not by choice, but by force, fear and basic survival.
But there are nations who do not...
They have rich governments and vast resources yet enslave their people on pennies a day "build their economies". Forcing these people to do horrible things… not by choice, but by force, fear and basic survival.
- Populating to increase workforce, not family;
- Selling off natural resources to sell as commodities not as necessities;
- Dumping the ravages of their unsustainable industrialization into the very life giving landscapes and habitat they need to survive;
Sound preachy? Judgmental? Us better than them?
Hardly, all great nations have made the same mistakes during the growth of democracy. And at the right point nearly all modern societies reach a population plateau based a balance of on care, education and resources.
We would never again treat our people, resources or environment like that but we expect the majority of the world too...when modern nations reached their "balance of resources", they took advantage of impoverished and oppressed nations, leading them with the false pretense they would have equal prosperity someday with better leaders who never came.
And it IS our fault.
It is our disassociation with that world that amplifies this condition. Watching them make the same environmental, energy, worker, wage and human right mistakes... decade after decade.
Only opposing those who are not major trade players.
Sorry, for the empathy rant.
It is frustrating to watch the whole world continue to play the blame game of "to many of them and not enough us."
Like the global warming chicken egg debate, the over population scare is simply a lack of global care.HTML clipboard
IF we cared for their families as ours;
Worried about their land as ours;
Understood that their animals are ours;
And that all children are children...
Sorry, for the empathy rant.
It is frustrating to watch the whole world continue to play the blame game of "to many of them and not enough us."
Like the global warming chicken egg debate, the over population scare is simply a lack of global care.
IF we cared for their families as ours;
Worried about their land as ours;
Understood that their animals are ours;
And that all children are children...
We would be in a lot better shape and have around 4 billion people. Protecting the environment is caring about the world and ALL its inhabitants. That includes people.
----end empathy rant---