Home | About | Donate

"Trump Forest" Blooms to Counter "Trump's Monumental Stupidity" and Attack on Earth

"Trump Forest" Blooms to Counter "Trump's Monumental Stupidity" and Attack on Earth

Andrea Germanos, staff writer

Want to help counter President Donald Trump's war on climate action and combat climate change? Help plant Trump Forest.

The brainchaid of climate scientist Dan Price and sustainable cap company founder Adrien Taylor, the Trump Forest initiatve launched last month with a batch of 1,000 trees planted in Christchurch, New Zealand.

The new website lays out the initiative's impetus like this:


Trumps towering ignorance and pathology is a clear danger to the entire earth and Her ecosystems! His regime of service to exploitation, usury and demolition of much (or most) of what responsible, educated people of both parties built over decades - facing destruction by a person lacking any sence of moral compass, is an anachronism of last century - extreme corporatism and rule by the 1%, profits uber alles as goal, denial of science and man-made global warming, zero respect of understanding of the natural world, war and deathslavery brutality as mechanism of policy - regardless the BS “emotion” re the gassed men, women and children in Syria!

This pathetic excuse for a human being has already brought massive destruction to much. If trump and his regime is not taken-down toot-sweet we ALL will pay the highest price for his gross ignorance/stupidity, lack of moral compass, arrogance, and pathological “malignant” narcissism!


Forrest growth has increased enormously over the past century. From 30-50% more trees in many areas of the world today

There is some evidence to suggest the increased Forrest coverage contributes to global warming due to trees lower albedo reflecting less sunlight and absorbing more heat during the day and they limit IR cooling from the ground at night

Ugh. Like the idea. Hate the name. Why name anything after the child king.

Thank you for your informative post. I also wonder about the mix of old growth with replacement trees that might be of a different type. Thinking about over logging also. This Trump monster wants everything named after him as was stated. That is not normal.

Let’s hope every single state sues this bum personally.

How can one “man” have the power to make the earth unlivable? I am surprised that the real countries haven’t applied sanctions upon the USA until we ditch NONpresident Trump. It’s three months after the election (where he failed to win even a plurality of the votes) and, as far as I know, he STILL has not divested of those businesses, as the Constitution requires. WTF USA? Is everybody here willing to die for that country-wrecking misfit? Is no one willing to hold John Roberts accountable for his crime of “Letting an incompetent drive”?

1 Like

I hear you- These are strange and trying times that we are living in…
No one seems to have the WILL…

Trump troll!

You make up some ridiculous alternative fact and catch some gullible or ill informed souls but you betray and weaken us…all of us. Your own fellow citizens by dumbing down thy neighbor. Well you tried to anyway. Tsk tsk.

Trees were they to grow on perpetually snow covered land or if dirt were white or even desert sand then the albedo effect might come into play. However greenery is far more reflective than brown soil. Just a point but nice try anyway. Also trees shade the ground leaving it cooler during the day and of course at night as well.

Do you have a point?

I ask that in general terms… lol

I would characterize your post rather as mis-informative or mis-leading. Though it is true that forest loss has slowed in some regions the overall global trend of loss of forest cover continues. There is an unfortunate tendency here to not carefully read what someone has written so I did carefully read (several times) exactly what you posted. Yes, there is ongoing investigation between forests, albedo, and nighttime radiatonal cooling.

But consider these factors: while we continue to map and try to interpret or detect loss or gain there is no doubt that the human population continues to grow exponentially, and where this is happening most rapidly also is in regions where poverty reigns and forests are depleted for the basic needs of heating and cooking; to take what you may possibly be implying to the absurd why, when the human population was much less and the forest cover much greater did the earth not have a much higher global average temperature?

You did very judiciously qualify your comment. The fact remains though that global warming is no mystery and is due to the concentration of heat-trapping gasses in the atmosphere, and it is a fact that the as-yet most effective instrument for removing and sequestering the most predominant gas - co2 - are trees.

Anyone wishing to verify the truth of your assertion can do their own internet search. The information is technical and you’ll have to wade through many analyses that merely attempt to determine the accuracy of the analysis. As for mealouts earlier response, I read an article in National Geographic about ten years ago that suggested that young, vigorously growing forest stands were much more efficient at removing and sequestering co2 than old-growth forests. That doesn’t mean we should cut down all the old-growth and plant new, as old-growth forest preserve much of what is left of this planet’s biological diversity.

Won’t go so far as wereflea just did, but I do wonder if there is a motivation beyond being informative behind your post.

Name desperately needs to be changed to Trump Stupidity Forest. Like Obamacare, hang it on his sorry ass for time immemorial. So fitting.

There is even more evidence that the demise of the Amazonian civilization in the 1500s allowed the jungle to greatly expand and overtake the cities and farmlands enough to cause the “litte ice age” of the late 1500s due to increased oxygen levels worldwide.

While there is some evidence that there had been a (agricultural based) village network civilization in certain areas of the Amazon that was wiped out by introduced disease (presumably), there was little tree loss at its height since the population numbers were still relatively low by comparison to the vast areas of the present Amazon that have become denuded of jungle as trees are cut down and cattle grazing and farming accompany modern colonists. Scientists fear that so many trees have been cut that it is changing the weather in portions of the Amazon resulting in dry areas rather in rain forest.

There is instead the singular fact that tree growth in the USA (actually the eastern USA primarily) post the Civil War era has increased only because the old growth trees had been clear cut and have now re grown. Hikers and campers are often surprised to encounter the remains of dry stone fences that farmers had built in an earlier century amidst the second growth eastern forest that now occupies the recovered farms. So yes there actually are more trees in certain areas but of the USA and not the world in general. There is less than 5% of old growth forest left in the US outside of Alaska and parts of the NW and even the second and third growth suburban forests are being clear cut in turn. World wide the extent of forest cover has been drastically reduced not increased to feed the demands of 7+ Billion people for both space and lumber.

As far as whether trees contribute to the heat index globally… sigh… that is trolling misinformation not facts. But then like all good alternative facts science citing your sources that refute the peer reviewed research should be a snap!

1 Like

My source comes from the book “1491"by Charles Mann, who cites Jesuit priest Father Gaspar de Carvajal logbook of journey down the headwaters of the Amazon river with the Orellana expedition. Journal cites huge populations and large plazas and avenues leading miles back into the interior of the Amazon. At one point witnessing nearly 200 miles of shoreline completely built out with human occupation on both sides of river.
Upon his return to Spain, the recorded saga was thought unbelievable and stored away for over 400 years. Latent slash and burn techniques are revealing evidence of huge ancient infrastructure capable of supporting populations of 30 to 50 million people. By 1600 all had been swallowed by jungle, producing enormous amounts of oxygen.
Corroborating evidence comes from the book " The Biochar Solution " by Albert Bates citing large tracts of manmade artificial terra preta soils in aggregate the size of France, capable of supporting populations of that size.
Futher corroboration can be found in the book " The Biochar Debate” by James Bruges.

Yeah okay except that I agreed (I read 1491 among other reports based on satellite imaging showing the overgrown sites etc) .

However as I clearly stated, I asked for sources on the bogus alternative fact denial science concerning your support for the Trump troll’s nonsense claim about more trees increasing global warming. Do you want to pretend that I was asking about something else?

You felt the need to promote alternative fact denial science in support of Pman claiming that there is ‘evidence’ basing it on an archaeological/anthropological comment from a book which was not about climate. Moreover I read the book and I am wondering exactly where the author makes a claim such as you suggest. Btw the book was not rigorous in its many theoretical assertions but offered popular science more often than not. However I agreed with the theory but not in the exaggerated claims the author made since he was speculating rather than presenting peer reviewed evidence.

Nevertheless, you seem to treat the theory reflexively or do you now want to present scientific evidence showing the connection between this speculative Amazonian Jungle civilization ( I know of no cities in the jungle but only of a trade network of villages reaching across the jungle from the Andes to the Atlantic. It is a theory and most certainly did not speculate that large portions of the jungle had been cut down at the time but only that there was a network of villages.

Similarly you don’t even cite your reference to the little ice age of the 1500’s making the connection to tree growth. You obviously do not do your own research about the causes of these relatively minor blips in climate which occur periodically, most of which are misnamed little ice ages by a sensationalist press rather than by scientists. The one around the time of the Vikings excepted, most were of very minor effect on climate.

But cite your ‘science’ as I asked ( not some author’s speculation) concerning your assertion (implied or otherwise) that additional tree growth could increase global warning instead of the accepted science showing how added tree cover reduces global warming.

You say 30 to 50 million people in the jungle? Cite this evidence then. Try maybe a few million people spread out through numerous villages but not tens of millions. Satellite imaging do not corroborate such a sensationalist claim of cities etc.

Btw the coasts did have considerably larger population densities than did the less hospitable interior but you cite unsubstantiated speculation not hard science and it wasn’t the question I asked anyway!

The trees? Global warming? Hello?

Fact is I was not supporting the alt science but agreeing with you, only adding to your position. Don’t know why you chose to debate me.
But since you asked , do you disagree that more trees create more oxygen AND remove carbon from the atmosphere?
Further, if you read the Bates and the Bruges books, they make a great case for terra preta soils, that are still being discovered as slash and burn continues unabated, as the single most important support structure that allowed for the food production as the native Amazonion soil was nearly sterile.
What you may have failed to see is the impact of making biochar, which returns carbon to the soil, where it remains today. They are actully bagging and selling it today

On a grand scale , coupled with sustainability practices such as waste control , it’s not hard to draw a picture of, essentially, a garden of Eden. Stumbled upon and completely unrecognized by those claiming Christianity as superior to the pagan beliefs of the native populations. Father Carvajal’s journal was finally reopened in the 1970s and is still being translated today, iirc.
What a complete waste and an enormous loss to humanity.

I was trying to figure out myself why Wereflea seemed to be attacking you for agreeing with her/him and providing complimentary evidence against the trolls nutty assertion of there being more trees and that they were contributing to global warming. I think she/he must have just read/interpreted your comment incorrectly?

1 Like

You are correct. Looking back on the thread, I realize now that I originally had been responding to Pman’s nonsense assertion about increased forest growth helping to cause global warming and when earthling1 wrote his/her comment, I inadvertently attributed Pman’s comment to the discussion.

I got your comment confused with Pman’s. Scusa!

1 Like

Did not take offense, Wereflea. It’s ok.
Incidentally, wikipedia Percival Fawcett or the lost city of Z for a fascinating glimpse into Amazonian civilizations pre columbian.