Isn’t Amazon Rainforest the “lung of the world”

Looking back on 2019, the haze of the Amazon rain forest fire has dissipated, but the shadow left in people’s hearts has not disappeared. The development of this event not only has its ups and downs, but its depth effects have also engulfed many fields such as science, environment, economy, and international politics. More importantly, it also allows us to revisit the famous philosophy and political proposition: “Philosophers just use Explain the world differently, and the problem is changing the world. ”

In August 2019, the fires in the Amazon rain forest in Brazil rose one after another, forming a “flaming forest”, reaching 36,771 fire points. From January to August 2019, there were 75,336 ignition points in the Amazon rainforest in Brazil, an increase of 85% over the same period in 2018. The fire has caused global anxiety, and the international community has continued to hear criticism from vehement criticism to fierce criticism. An important reason why people are willing and willing to stand up to speak is that the Amazon rainforest is the “lung of the world”. The “lung” is burned and everyone on the planet will be unable to breathe. During an avalanche, every snowflake has a responsibility, even if it is extremely small. Therefore, no matter how small the snowflake is, we must also bear the responsibility.

In order to fulfill his responsibility, the first thing to say was “heavyweight snowflakes”. Some well-known figures and environmentalists in the world, including French President Macron, US Senator Harris, American actor Leonardo, and former US astronaut Kelly, have criticized Brazil for ignoring forest fires and letting rain forests be damaged. They also pointed out an important issue. 20% of the oxygen on the earth is provided by the Amazon rainforest. Therefore, the Amazon rainforest is the “lung of the world” and cannot be allowed to be burned.

The saying that Amazon Rainforest is the “lung of the world” is actually a vivid interpretation of the world. However, this interpretation is correct, with or without scientific evidence, and few people think seriously and verify it. Later, as this argument spread, scientists of related professions finally stopped talking because the interpretation of “lungs of the world” was not scientific. Some well-known scientists, including Michael Coe, a geosystems scientist at the Woods Hole Research Center in Massachusetts, U.S.A., an ecologist at the Institute for Environmental Change, University of Oxford, U.K., and Deng Lin, an atmospheric scientist at Colorado State University, have pointed out that To be regarded as the “lung of the world” is a mistake and a distortion.

Is the scientific view of scientists’ “anti-common sense” valid? Of course it is, and it is full! According to a 2010 study, tropical forests account for about 34% of terrestrial photosynthesis. Based on this calculation, about 16% of the oxygen production on land comes from the Amazon rainforest. However, taking into account the oxygen produced by plankton in the ocean, this proportion will drop to 9%. Trees not only exhale oxygen, they also consume it. When there is no sunlight for photosynthesis at night, trees are completely absorbing oxygen, and the absorbed oxygen is more than half of the oxygen they produce during the day. At the same time, countless microorganisms in the Amazon rain forest will consume the remaining oxygen, so the oxygen generated and absorbed by the Amazon rain forest is basically the same.

Furthermore, oxygen, one of the basic elements for the survival of human beings and other living things on the earth, is not produced by forests, but is left behind by marine plankton. They have continuously accumulated oxygen for billions of years, forming a form for humans and humans. The atmosphere that other organisms breathe. Therefore, the oxygen in the earth’s atmosphere is now formed in a long geological age and is not affected by the current photosynthesis. There is also a simple scientific basis for comparing the Amazon rainforest and other forests as “lungs of the world” which deviates from the original meaning of biology, ecology and physiology. Human and animal lungs are used to breathe, inhaling oxygen and exhaling carbon dioxide. However, during the daytime, the forest releases oxygen due to photosynthesis and inhales carbon dioxide, which is exactly the opposite of lungs. If we compare the forest to the lungs, isn’t the order reversed and the meaning confused?

After scientists vocally corrected and reinterpreted the world, things changed. Although transforming the world is particularly important, environmental protection is transforming the world, but the premise of transforming the world is to explain the world, and to interpret the world correctly, we will design a beautiful and reasonable blueprint for transforming the world. The basis for a correct interpretation of the world lies in the results of scientific research, so scientists who conduct research have the most say and explanation.

Interestingly, politicians are also eager to cite the explanations of scientists, but they are also likely to be misplaced and lack logic. The most typical is the criticized Brazilian President Jay Bossonaro. Bosonaro has said that the Amazon rainforest is Brazil’s sovereign territory. “The argument that the Amazon rainforest is a human heritage is a fallacy. Scientists have confirmed that the Amazon rainforest is a ‘lung of the world’.” Apparently, Bosonaro is defending the practice of deforestation and burning of forests in Brazil to develop land. Whether the Amazon rainforest is a human heritage or a sovereign territory of Brazil requires international law experts and the United Nations to discuss it. However, it is obviously wrong for the international community to treat the Amazon rainforest as the “lung of the world”. The Brazilian president’s interpretation of scientists is not wrong.

However, even if the Amazon Rainforest is not the “lung of the world”, it cannot be denied that it is the largest forest in the world, and that it has a variety of functions, providing a rare source and guarantee of survival for humans and other living things.

There are actually more and better explanations for the Amazon Rainforest. It is the largest forest in the world, with an area of ​​about 7 million square kilometers, and has 20% of the world’s fresh water resources. It can exist as a “kidney of the world”, especially important in stabilizing the precipitation cycle in South America; it has 16,000 It is a kind of different trees, which absorbs about 2.2 billion tons of carbon dioxide each year, accounting for 25% of the global forest ’s carbon emissions. It is the “cleaner” and “carbon cleaner” of the world; %, The absorbed and released water vapor forms a natural earth cooling system, which is the world’s “air conditioner”; it has 10% of the earth’s species, up to 3 million species of plants and animals, and is the world’s largest treasure house of biodiversity. Kingdom of Fauna and Flora; it spans 8 countries (Brazil, Colombia, Peru, Venezuela, Ecuador, Bolivia, Guyana, Suriname, and French Guiana), nourishes and shades 1 million indigenous people, and is a huge and warm green home.

Like other forests on the earth, the Amazon rainforest can conserve water, protect against wind and sand, reduce wind speed, regulate temperature, sterilize and absorb haze, and absorb carbon dioxide, providing a large amount of production and living materials for human beings. Even though the Amazon Rainforest is not the “lung of the world”, its functions and importance in other aspects are second to none in the world’s natural environment and deserve special protection and cherishment.

After the Amazon rain forest was hit by fire, from the attitude and standpoint, Brazil and the international community interpreted the event quite differently. It is a lesson for the international community to cite Brazil’s protection of the Amazon rainforest by citing a lack of scientific evidence. Therefore, it is important to establish and adhere to a principle, and any interpretation of the world must have a sufficient scientific basis, that is, to make the world as objective and accurate as possible.

The Brazilian president has used scientific evidence and statements to justify forest burning. Although there are dislocations or generalizations, one of the main points cannot be ignored: how to solve the dilemma between survival and environmental protection. Fortunately, there is already consensus in the international community. In the past development, developed countries have made full use of the world ’s rich resources and emitted a lot of greenhouse gases. Developed countries need green assistance to help developing countries. This is also one of the spirit of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change . Green assistance to developing countries such as Brazil could reduce deforestation. The European Union, Switzerland and Canada have pledged to increase financial aid to developing countries to $ 100 billion per year by 2020. China also proposed in 2015 to provide developing countries with nearly $ 3 billion in economic assistance to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and combat climate change.

Obviously, this consensus is not only a scientific way to explain the world, but also a fair and just approach. Then it can be said to transform the world in the right way. In the future, the earth will be beneficial to human habitation and suitable for other living things.