King of the Americas
Banned
- Joined
- Nov 15, 2001
- Messages
- 6,513
15m = 49 feet.
Do you really think there's some discrepancy here?
There are NO triangles here...it's all perfectly square rows of trees 45 feet apart.
YES. THAT's a HUGE discrepancy!
15m = 49 feet.
Do you really think there's some discrepancy here?
Not necessarily, no. It also depends on the size of the project.
10 = 30 feet. These were planted 45 feet apart. Those two numbers are NOT equal. The GRAPH I posted, and HERE again, shows 13, 10, 7, and 6 "meter" separations. 13 m = 39 feet...again that's NOT 45 feet. The trees bordering each square are planted 15 feet apart.
You are utterly and completely failing to grasp the enormity of this project...
Why are CONAF and international organisations lying about planting these trees?
That's what you have failed to answer.
That's what you are failing to grasp has to be the case for your fantasy to be true.
None of that is a cost estimate. Please feel free to continue following that logic with some numbers and get a cost estimate.MILLIONS of trees, in the desert, requiring 11 daily waterings...then watering ever 20 days...
Digging holes, plowing rows...
You went a little further with that line of thought but you didn't actually finish that either.*I've posted the math behind operating a 1965 Case tractor- one square = 30 days, and all of these trees are the same age, across the planting!
None of that is a cost estimate. Please feel free to continue following that logic with some numbers and get a cost estimate.
You went a little further with that line of thought but you didn't actually finish that either.
And I don't HAVE to estimate the cost to be substantial enough to appear in an annual budget!
I'm not your monkey, do your own work.
And I don't HAVE to estimate the cost to be substantial enough to appear in an annual budget!
I'm not your monkey, do your own work.
Yes you do.
There's nothing that suggests the cost was high enough that it couldn't have been paid for by the usual budget.
If you are asserting otherwise, feel free to give the actual argument rather than just incredulous rantings.
Feel free not to as well, but until you do you won't have actually made an argument.
I am trying to grasp the enormity of modern inventing of a non existent project and fooling the world for half a century, with no conceivable motive.MILLIONS of trees, in the desert, requiring 11 daily waterings...then watering ever 20 days...
Digging holes, plowing rows...
*I've posted the math behind operating a 1965 Case tractor- one square = 30 days, and all of these trees are the same age, across the planting!
You are utterly and completely failing to grasp the enormity of this project...
Your claims, your burden of proof. Anything less is crackpottery.
Please remember the history of the Tarapacá Department. There was a boom in nitrate mining there in the nineteenth century. The area was disputed by Peru and Chile, and finally a very bloody and destructive war erupted in 1879, and lasted for several years. Many battles were fought, and cities were bombarded by warships. The capital of Peru was occupied by Chile, and suffered significant damage.Ruins from one of the farms...Yup, that's 1960's design alright...pfft.
On Google Earth, turn on the Photos option.
So the fact you haven't been able to find evidence for your statements is evidence for your statements? How dishonest.
I say- "There's no proof that the Chilean government paid for or built this project. No increase occurs in any of the years it is claimed to have been created."
You say- "Tell me how much it cost to fund the project!" I say- "I don't know when it truly was created or by who."
You say- "Okay then you're a crackpot."
---
O M G
I am done with you!
Yes!
Thank you so much for your insight and participation!
Can you date any of these sections of common planting?
Especially the lines of trees in the far right image...