Posted on 09/11/2016 8:27:30 PM PDT by BenLurkin
NPR correspondent Jennifer Ludden profiled some of my work in procreative ethics with an article entitled, Should we be having kids in the age of climate change?, which summarized my published views that we ought to consider adopting a small family ethic and even pursuing fertility reduction efforts in response to the threat from climate change.
...
Perhaps many of us in rich countries (the us who might be reading this) will be largely protected from these early harms; but that doesnt make them less real to the vulnerable citizens of, say, Bangladesh, Kiribati or the Maldives. In fact, it escalates the injustice, as the global wealthy have benefited from and contributed to climate change the most, while the global poor will be hurt first and worst.
...
The problem here is that we have a finite resource the ability of the Earths atmosphere to absorb greenhouse gases without violently disrupting the climate and each additional person contributes to the total amount of greenhouse gas in the atmosphere. So although humans will hopefully save us (we do, in fact, desperately need brilliant people to develop scaleable technology to remove carbon from the air, for instance), the solution to this cannot be to have as many babies as possible, with the hope that this raises our probability of solving the problem. Because each baby is also an emitter, whether a genius or not.
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
Hillary was doing her part to save the planet today by exposing that little girl to pneumonia.
Hmm. Maybe that’s why Hillary hugged a small child despite being infected with pneumonia. Just trying to get a head-start on the whole Agenda 21 thing I guess.
And that extra carbon dioixide.
"Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature" - the Georgia Guidestones
That’s been their same solution at least since 1968 when Paul R. Ehrlich’s “Population Bomb” came out.
The only “climate crisis” is an epidemic of idiocy in the heads of gorebull wahrumists...
Tell it to China, India, and Africa...
Now we are getting down to brass tacks. Killing people is what those who worry about such things as global warming, peak oil, and “alternative energy” obsessively do.
Speaking of which, is that Emanuel guy, not the mayor but his brother, who said 75 should be the age of death, over 75 yet?
go tell that to the muzzies....
I hope liberals globally will take this advice. The problem is still decent people who allow liberals access to their children, but keeping socialists from breeding would be a nice start.
Maybe if the dinosaurs had had fewer babies, they’d still be here today, too.
Kiribati and Maldives have a combined population less than the City of Denver, CO. Obama is importing more Syrian refugees than the number of people who live in those islands.
Bangladesh doesn’t need climate change to drown. Every typhoon that blows in floods half the country now.
The author is a Malthusian nut job looking for his Final Solution to the human question.
This geek should lead by example.
Scratch any global warming true believer and you’ll find a Malthusian monster every time.
If there WAS a climate crisis, that might be true. There ain’t, and it’s not.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.