• stifle867@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    72
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    For those looking for a source, I looked into it and yes the source is the CCPs claims. We all know how trustworthy CCP statistics are.

    https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-017-07732-5

    According to the Chinese NFI, national forest coverage has increased by 2.15% in the 7th NFI and by 3.41% in the 8th NFI

    By contrast, the GFC dataset, which is considered to be more accurate than previous remote sensing datasets due to its unprecedented global high spatial resolution, showed that the change in forest area of China between 2000 and 2012 was a net loss of 38,743 km2, equivalent to a decline of 0.40% in national forest coverage

    Basically, satellite imagery seems to “strangely” conflict with CCP figures.

  • YaBoyMax@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    41
    ·
    1 year ago

    This article is nearly two years old. Also, I implicitly distrust any source which depicts Taiwan as part of the PRC.

      • YaBoyMax@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’m not sure why you would assume I’m American. I mean, you happen to be right in this case, but I’m still not sure why you’d assume that.

        Anyhow, there’s an irony in your assertion that disagreeing with the position of one’s government is “brainwashed.”

        • zerfuffle@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          33
          ·
          1 year ago

          Americans are very ease to distinguish based both on their political stances (which tend to be rather unique) and how they express them (which IS unique).

          Y’all are like those pickup trucks with LED lights. Once you realize they exist, you can’t miss them.

          • YaBoyMax@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            Anti-China/pro-Taiwan sentiment isn’t exactly unique to the US. I think you’re alluding to an incendiary tone with respect to how you say Americans express their views, but that doesn’t seem to quite fit so I’m a little lost there.

            • zerfuffle@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              21
              ·
              1 year ago

              I mean, clearly people can tell that you’re American, so maybe it’s time for some introspection?

              • YaBoyMax@programming.dev
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                1 year ago

                You made an assumption and you’ve yet to expound on how you justified it beyond some vague assertion about American political discourse. Give me something to introspect on, then, for crying out loud.

        • 420blazeit69 [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          22
          ·
          1 year ago

          You don’t disagree with your government; you didn’t know what your government’s position was until right now.

          You still don’t really know what your government’s position is, otherwise you’d understand that here, as in many cases, there’s an official stance for diplomatic relations and then a bunch of propaganda (for both domestic and foreign consumption) that undermines that official stance.

          • YaBoyMax@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            1 year ago

            Bold of you to assume what I do and don’t know about geopolitics. I’m well aware of the fine line that the US government walks, but I don’t speak for the US government and my views aren’t informed by “propaganda” but by the simple observations that 1) the PRC is a totalitarian regime, and 2) that Taiwan is a de facto sovereign state which broadly speaking doesn’t particularly want to be assimilated into the PRC. Where is the propagandistic angle here?

            • GarbageShoot [he/him]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              15
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              my views aren’t informed by “propaganda” but by the simple observations that 1) the PRC is a totalitarian regime,

              lol

              Just because you agree with it doesn’t mean it isn’t propaganda

                • Dolores [love/loves]@hexbear.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  12
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  you’re only allowed to call the PRC “totalitarian” or undemocratic if you condemn the “democracies” of the english speaking world. the US president isn’t even the person who gets the most votes🤡

                  Taiwan does not “generally” have a stance against reunification, some independence parties are a bit more popular than they used to be, but them becoming a legally independent state requires vast constitutional and international changes no government has even begun to implement

        • ikiru@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          19
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’m not sure why you would assume I’m American. I mean, you happen to be right in this case, but I’m still not sure why you’d assume that.

          che-smile

        • GarbageShoot [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          15
          ·
          1 year ago

          You aren’t brainwashed, you are just enculturated to a very reactionary ideology. I actually agree that it’s better to analyze them as separate countries for the purpose of something like this graph, but this thinktank (which, to be clear, is very Atlanticist, i.e. aligned with your geopolitical views) is almost surely gunning for having their little infographics be diplomatically palettable in hopes that they get used by important bodies.

          • YaBoyMax@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            I understand what you’re saying here and I agree that that’s what’s going here, but making something “diplomatically palatable” is for all intents and purposes equivalent to appeasement and (in my view) automatically makes any other claims made subject to suspicion.

            • GarbageShoot [he/him]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              13
              ·
              1 year ago

              I mean, Atlanticists are imperialists and should be condemned, but your view is rather unhelpful since it means the vast majority of statements connected to the UN since ~1980 fall under the same view. It’s not like the PRC denies that the RoC government exists and effectively controls the island of Formosa, in our context it is just a rhetorical affectation to the effect of the RoC government not being legitimate, which is a pretty fair stance to take given the RoC’s own positively absurd territorial claims.

              • YaBoyMax@programming.dev
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                The ROC’s territorial claims are a side effect of the PRC’s stance on Taiwan. I don’t remember the exact details but essentially the PRC has previously declared that it would interpret any change in the ROC’s territorial claims as a declaration of war. It’s a matter of pragmatism.

                • zerfuffle@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  7
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Given that the civil war never technically ended, I’m pretty sure a “declaration of war” just reinforces the status quo.

    • axont [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      27
      ·
      1 year ago

      Every single country on Earth except like seven (I only remember the Vatican and Paraguay) acknowledges that Taiwan is a dependent province of the PRC, including the USA and just about all of Europe.

      • YaBoyMax@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yes, but as you know in many cases it’s for purely diplomatic reasons since acknowledging Taiwan’s sovereignty means basically severing ties with the PRC, and most countries do far too much trade with it to make that in any way appealing.

          • YaBoyMax@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            The end result here being the non-acknowledgement of Taiwan’s de facto sovereignty, which is decidedly not a reflection of reality. I dare you to tell a Taiwanese person that they live in a dependent province of the PRC because other countries serving their own interests said so and see how they respond.

            • GarbageShoot [he/him]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              21
              ·
              1 year ago

              The bulk of Taiwanese support the status quo, including that being their official diplomatic position, so I think it would go over better than you imagine. The diehard separatists are a minority faction.

              • YaBoyMax@programming.dev
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                1 year ago

                The status quo has broad support because it keeps the peace, and the Taiwanese people generally don’t want to fight a war against China. That doesn’t equate to the majority of the Taiwanese people holding the view that they’re a part of the PRC and it should be fairly obvious that they don’t believe nor want that.

            • axont [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              19
              ·
              1 year ago

              The reality is the Taiwan isn’t broadly recognized as a sovereign country, so it doesn’t wield the same authority as an independent nation in terms of international agreements, trade, etc. It doesn’t have allies who would defend potential sovereignty, and it doesn’t have enough guns or money to leverage itself as independent. That’s way more important than some abstract discontent some people feel. At best you could say Taiwan is a Chinese client state.

              Countries don’t exist because some people feel like they should be one. I could ask you to talk to a Texan secessionist and tell them their cause is hopeless.

              I will tell a person living in Taiwan they live in a province of China, sure. I don’t care. Their government is the remnant of the defeated nationalist faction and I have no sympathy for it. Taiwan will hopefully get reabsorbed into the mainland within my lifetime.

              • YaBoyMax@programming.dev
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                Texas is de fact and de jure a part of the United States. It’s not a valid comparison and you know it.

      • jackpot@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        me when china threatens to abuse the living shit out of anyone if they recognise an 85 year running independently functioning island just so meatheads like you can spew obvious fat horseshit: 🙁

      • azertyfun@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        So fucking what? My government’s official stance is not that they are a bunch of dickheads, yet here we are.

        Outside of SOME official government communication (Western governments will happily send official delegations to Taiwan from time to time just to piss off the CCP) and other matters of strategic ambiguity like the Olympics, Taiwan is a country. Everybody but China and a few lonesome tankies agrees on that.

        So when a private entity shows Taiwan as part of the PRC, it can only be assumed that they are tankies, Chinese propagandists, or incompetent. Either way, probably not trustworthy.

    • zerfuffle@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      1 year ago

      The unofficial consensus between the KMT/PRC was that Taiwan and China are one country. The NED-funded DPP has been trying to break that status quo, though.

  • jupyter_rain@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    1 year ago

    I am always happy to hear about reforestation, but has somebody understood out of which source the numbers from china are coming? I mean they are sometimes quite the enthusiasts talking about their successes

    • axont [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Pretty bad drought and floods over the past 20 years, and the country is too mountainous to support most effective reforestation strategies. So it’s mostly climate change, economic isolation, and only 17% of the land can support forests in the first place. It’s not a good time right now.

  • HowMany@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    1 year ago

    Yay China. Say… isn’t this the same country that turns out 68% of the world’s air pollution?

    What have they done about that?

    • GorbinOutOverHere [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      34
      ·
      1 year ago

      wow lemmy is full of liberals

      Ya think maybe producing most of the world’s shit has anything to do with that pollution, buddy? Like wow the west outsourced most of its manufacturing to China, no fucking shit it’s going to produce more pollution. What’s their per capita #s look like, frienderino?

      • HowMany@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Hey pal… I’m not your buddy. Bro. Spud. Palsy Walsy. Your rock. You’re out from under it. Oh my.

    • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      29
      ·
      1 year ago

      They’ve done a lot about that, like becoming the global leader in pretty much every renewable sector as well as nuclear. Also, worth mentioning that smooth brained liberals have all their stuff produced in China. It’s absolute idiocy to bleat about pollution without considering where consumption is happening. Per capita energy usage in China is far lower than in the west.

            • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.mlOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              1 year ago

              That’s a nice straw man there buddy. I never said anything of the sort. It’s the capitalist system in the west that’s responsible for creating western lifestyle and the consumption that goes along with it. Nowhere did I say that I expected this system to work either. Keep trying there.

      • HowMany@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yes, and still the air in China’s major cities and regions can be cut with a knife on a bad day. And you’re right - the U.S.'s ‘green’ push came to a screeching halt most places when oil and gas and coal said “fuck this shit - y’all can’t have that green stuff” … and here we are; some states even penalizing criminally being “off the grid”.

        Those fuckers are not going to go quietly. Don’t blame the common people of the country because of corporations running governments passing laws for corporations.

    • zerfuffle@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      1 year ago

      In terms of particulates? China’s really cleaned that up in recent years.

      But, well, China doesn’t have massive piles of natural gas it can burn instead of coal. Coal is notoriously dirty.

      • zerfuffle@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        Also the country that dominates green energy manufacturing… Which is what everyone else is using to reduce their emissions.

    • jol@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yes. And the same country that produces all the shit we order from them. So is it their pollution or ours?

  • Randomunemployment@lemmings.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    1 year ago

    I would be hesitant in claiming this as a win. I know that Japan has one of the highest number of trees per capita in the g7 but that was a hold over from post WW2. Where they planted a shit ton of a singular tree type. The monoculture wrecks havoc in their ecosystem. All this to say it’s good that they are planting trees I’m just hoping they are doing it planning it out carefully.

    • zerfuffle@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      A monoculture only wrecks havoc on an ecosystem if a flourishing ecosystem existed there already…

      In China, trees are mostly used to block desertification.

  • Ironfist@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    according to (checks notes) … “visualcapitalist”. Yeah that sounds like a totally unbiased and reliable source.

    • Vode An@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      How is that relevant? Serious question, I don’t see a link between forests and per capita that actually matters. If we were talking about economic comparisons, sure. If anything, adjusting it as “per sq mile of forestable land” would make more sense.