Dog piling? I've made one comment on the matter. I know that old growth is not the same as a freshly planted pine farm. But that's not my point, my point is th

Dog piling? I've made one comment on the matter. I know that old growth is not the same as a freshly planted pine farm. But that's not my point, my point is the author talks about reduced forest cover in aggregate across the land surface of the earth, which is not true, then admits to limiting it to old growth only and hilariously claims that it strengthens his point. It doesn't. When you basically say "forest cover older than 100 years is all that counts" of course the numbers look bad, you're preventing the measure of any repair to the forest cover by definition.