How is that relevant? Serious question, I don’t see a link between forests and per capita that actually matters. If we were talking about economic comparisons, sure. If anything, adjusting it as “per sq mile of forestable land” would make more sense.

[–] Cockmaster6000@sh.itjust.works -3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

It's relevant because, as demonstrated multiple times in this thread, when the topic of pollution and emissions from China comes up everyone rushes to defend them with "but muh per capita". As if the environment cares.

[–] Vode_An@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

So you said something irrelevant as a jumping off point for an axe you wanted to grind? Good job

[–] Cockmaster6000@sh.itjust.works -2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Alexa, what is rhetoric?

[–] Vode_An@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 years ago

Link your Twitter. I bet you have a statue pfp