LOUNGE all new asksnapzu ideasforsnapzu newtribes interesting pics videos funny technology science technews gaming health history worldnews business web research entertainment food living internet socialmedia mobile space sports photography nature animals movies culture travel television finance music celebrities gadgets environment usa crime politics law money justice psychology security cars wtf art google books lifetips bigbrother women apple kids recipes whoa military privacy education facebook medicine computing wildlife design war drugs middleeast diet toplists economy fail violence humor africa microsoft parenting dogs canada neuroscience architecture religion advertising infographics sex journalism disaster software aviation relationships energy booze life japan ukraine newmovies nsa cannabis name Name of the tribe humanrights nasa cute weather gifs discoveries cops futurism football earth dataviz pets guns entrepreneurship fitness android extremeweather fashion insects india northamerica
  • NomadiChris

    Do you feel you still need data to accept that human beings are directly affecting the environment and predominantly in a negative way? Or are you the kind of person that would build a house near an active volcano and gasp when there's lava in the living room?

    • Boethius

      I didn't mention what I think, quite on purpose, because it's irrelevant to the map. All I will say is the map is awful, the article misrepresents what the map shows, and it doesn't prove anything on its own. I will also say they deliberately modified the map to mislead people by deliberately excluding the years the data was collected in. Do you disagree with this?