3 ms·

the Wiki citation doesn't even have a source, nor is calling that indigenous people made it your last link is about Llanos de Moxos, which isn't in Amazon. you

by luqtas 1y ago

the Wiki citation doesn't even have a source, nor is calling that indigenous people made it your last link is about Llanos de Moxos, which isn't in Amazon. you don't seen to understand even basic geography... even if Llanos was 100% man-made (and isn't) and it was part of the Amazon (and not a region that borders it) it would be the equivalent of 2.6% of the whole Amazon area. concluding such a thing because 3% of an area that benefited (soil quality wise) from billions of years of geologic events and was partly modified by humans is ignorant but again, Llanos isn't even Amazon it was common knowledge among middle age that Earth was flat. doesn't seem an argument to me

Jensson 1y ago
There were elephants there that humans hunted to extinction, elephants typically keep forests down and create grasslands. So it seems likely it happened, and that humans was the cause (by killing the elephants). Edit: So it is likely that the change happened and had nothing to do with the soil change.
- zeristor 1y ago
  Depends, there’s elephants in the Congo forest, they’re just not too easy to see. The trees grow faster than the elephants can wreck them. But in areas with less rain fall elephants keep the grasslands more open. As did Mammoths in the northern forests.
culi 1y ago
I never said Amazonian grasslands was manmade. Reread your own comment to understand the context The Wikipedia source was to back up the claim that Amazonia was largely grasslands about 10-20k years ago. That is what is common knowledge.
southernplaces7 1y ago
>it was common knowledge among middle age that Earth was flat. doesn't seem an argument to me And you don't seem to know basic history, casting doubt on other things you say. Nobody serious in the middle ages (or since much further back than that either) thought seriously that the Earth was flat.
- luqtas 1y ago
  actually i meant "geocentrism" but it was too late to edit but you are right, middle age didn't thought Earth was flat now if you are defending this absurd commentary that Amazonia was a grassland 10,000 years ago and turned out to be what's because humans, i think you both are on the level of flat earth 21° century people
  - southernplaces7 1y ago
    No, not defending that, since evidence points to it having been a forest, but that a place like the Amazon could form from grassland in the span of a few thousand years is absolutely possible.
    - luqtas 1y ago
      the western part once turned into a huge wetland, after the Andes emerged from the ocean. that was more than 10 Ma ago although. that was also what made the western Amazonia part differ on its biodivesity humans may altered the biodiversity of Amazonia by breeding only wanted species. but we don't have too much evidence of that (yet). but if it was, the biodiversity of pre-humans was probably richer, as indigenous apparently managed the forests with fire and farmed hyperdominant cultures [0] [0] https://portal.amelica.org/ameli/journal/181/1813954027/html/ https://portal.amelica.org/ameli/journal/181/1813954027/html...

by luqtas 1y ago

Jensson 1y ago

There were elephants there that humans hunted to extinction, elephants typically keep forests down and create grasslands. So it seems likely it happened, and that humans was the cause (by killing the elephants). Edit: So it is likely that the change happened and had nothing to do with the soil change.

zeristor 1y ago
Depends, there’s elephants in the Congo forest, they’re just not too easy to see. The trees grow faster than the elephants can wreck them. But in areas with less rain fall elephants keep the grasslands more open. As did Mammoths in the northern forests.

culi 1y ago

I never said Amazonian grasslands was manmade. Reread your own comment to understand the context The Wikipedia source was to back up the claim that Amazonia was largely grasslands about 10-20k years ago. That is what is common knowledge.

southernplaces7 1y ago

>it was common knowledge among middle age that Earth was flat. doesn't seem an argument to me And you don't seem to know basic history, casting doubt on other things you say. Nobody serious in the middle ages (or since much further back than that either) thought seriously that the Earth was flat.

luqtas 1y ago
actually i meant "geocentrism" but it was too late to edit but you are right, middle age didn't thought Earth was flat now if you are defending this absurd commentary that Amazonia was a grassland 10,000 years ago and turned out to be what's because humans, i think you both are on the level of flat earth 21° century people
- southernplaces7 1y ago
  No, not defending that, since evidence points to it having been a forest, but that a place like the Amazon could form from grassland in the span of a few thousand years is absolutely possible.
  - luqtas 1y ago
    the western part once turned into a huge wetland, after the Andes emerged from the ocean. that was more than 10 Ma ago although. that was also what made the western Amazonia part differ on its biodivesity humans may altered the biodiversity of Amazonia by breeding only wanted species. but we don't have too much evidence of that (yet). but if it was, the biodiversity of pre-humans was probably richer, as indigenous apparently managed the forests with fire and farmed hyperdominant cultures [0] [0] https://portal.amelica.org/ameli/journal/181/1813954027/html/ https://portal.amelica.org/ameli/journal/181/1813954027/html...