Earlier quoted context omitted.
Even NASA concedes that the last 20 years has seen the planet become greener. Humans planting trees for reforestation have almost nothing to do with that trend. People are trying to claim credit for things they have nothing to do with. The surface area of the earth is absolutely massive. Humans likely occupy less than 2% of it. Even if all humanity was mobilozed to planting trees 24/7 with the most advanced machines…
> Even NASA concedes that the last 20 years has seen the planet become greener. Humans planting trees for reforestation have almost nothing to do with that trend. Are you sure, from nasa.gov itself: > which is thought to be due to intensive agriculture to feed growing populations and ambitious tree-planting programs https://www.nasa.gov/feature/greening-of-the-earth-mitigates... > Birds do more for nature using only…
This article from NASA makes it absolutely clear that it's not human tree planting which has caused the greening:
>> From a quarter to half of Earth’s vegetated lands has shown significant greening over the last 35 years largely due to rising levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide
https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2016/carbon-dioxide-fer...
The second point is just as dishonest. The number of different species of birds does not affect forestation. It's mostly about the number of specimens. The variety of species doesn't matter much since many different bird species exhibit the same behaviors. Many different species of birds eat fruits and seeds. Many birds carry twigs and sprouts long distances to use to build their nests. Birds are like forest planting drones which work 24/7 and can replicate themselves.