this post was submitted on 03 Jul 2026
83 points (97.7% liked)

Slop.

873 readers
438 users here now

For posting all the anonymous reactionary bullshit that you can't post anywhere else.

Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.

Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.

Rule 3: No sectarianism.

Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome

Rule 5: No bigotry of any kind, including ironic bigotry.

Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.

Rule 7: Do not individually target federated instances' admins or moderators.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

Yea, for real. If you wanna see for yourself, they start talking about it around the one hour mark. I could stomach about five minutes of it. Their main argument seems to be that the tree monoculture uses up all the water and thus changes rainfall patterns and since that does mean a little less rain in some places, that's bad and unsustainable and the trees are basically already dead because of the hydrological debt incurred... I don't know all too much about hydrology and the situation in China specifically, but from a layperson's perspective they do seem to oversimplify most of it, really. Like, their monoculture point is kinda valid until you consider that there are probably a very limited amount of species that can even have a hope of establishing themselves in desert sand and it's not like they won't eventually form a habitat for a more diverse set of species. Idk, it's all very smug liberal coded with a thin veneer of ecological concern