John Seager: Fight warming through birth control

The Providence Journal ^ | 08:13 AM EST on Wednesday, February 21, 2007 | John Seager

[Brian Mosely]

WASHINGTON -- GLOBAL WARMING is “unequivocal,” according to the just-released report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The most likely culprits are people — all of us. Yet, apart from insightful comments by former Vice President Al Gore, there has never been much public discussion about the role of human population growth in global warming.

Prof. Tim Dyson, of the London School of Economics indicates that a 40 percent cut by 2050 in per-capita carbon emissions in the developed world could be completely cancelled by population growth.

It’s time to open a “second front” in the battle against global warming by stressing the need for population stabilization, sooner rather than later. Scientists warn that temperatures will continue to rise unless we stabilize greenhouse-gas levels. Global warming will be accompanied by increased sea levels, resulting in massive flooding of homes and destruction of fragile wetland habitats.

To slow down this process, experts estimate that global CO2 emissions must be slashed. Yet the United Nations projects that world population will rise 40 percent — reaching 9.1 billion — by 2050. And even if we change our ways, the environmental footprint of each human being will never reach zero.

As population increases, the challenge of slowing climate change becomes ever more difficult. After all, it is people, not birds or bears, who drive Hummers and hybrids and who heat and cool homes and offices. Although the vast majority of population growth occurs in the least-developed nations, the people there, too, are using more fossil fuels every day as they seek better lives.

What can we do? We know that family planning works everywhere. When women and couples are free to make their own informed choices and have access to family planning resources, they choose to have smaller families. Thirty years ago, for example, Mexican women had almost seven children each. Today, thanks to education and the availability of family planning, they have an average of 2.4 children.

Globally, at least 350 million couples lack family planning services. Here in the United States, one-third of all births are unplanned. And the Bush administration’s family-planning failures, from its global gag rule against abortion to ideologically driven abstinence-only programs, contribute directly to millions of unwanted and unplanned births. If we could cut in half the number of unwanted births in the U.S. alone, we’d have about 5 million fewer births over 20 years.

Family planning makes sense for people – and for our fragile planet. It’s vital to focus on thorny technical issues such as tax credits, energy alternatives and emissions trading programs. These efforts are especially important here in the United States, where less than 5 percent of the world’s population produces about 25 percent of the world’s carbon-dioxide emissions. But cutting energy consumption must be coupled with stabilizing population.

More people use more energy. If we had zero population growth, part of the global warming problem would, well, melt away. Global warming is too big a problem to be solved by energy experts alone. It’s about people. It’s about how many of us there are and how we choose to live our modern lives. It’s about the very personal decisions we make about whether, when, and how many children we choose to have. We can start by supporting the notion that every woman and every couple should have the resources and power to control their own reproductive lives.

If every child is planned, we’ll go a long way toward solving global warming and making a less-crowded and healthier world.

John Seager is the national president of Population Connection, formerly Zero Population Growth.

[Brian Mosely]

Globally, at least 350 million couples lack family planning services. Here in the United States, one-third of all births are unplanned. And the Bush administration’s family-planning failures, from its global gag rule against abortion to ideologically driven abstinence-only programs, contribute directly to millions of unwanted and unplanned births. If we could cut in half the number of unwanted births in the U.S. alone, we’d have about 5 million fewer births over 20 years.

Perhaps Seager should have titled this: "Fight Global Warming through More Abortions"

[big'ol_freeper]

Eliminate all the liberals. Problem solved.

[Wally_Kalbacken]

If we could just kill the 300 million inhabitants of the United States we could save 25% of global energy consumption.

[gotribe]

And why can't Mr. Seager and others do the brave thing and take their own lives to spare us global warming? We could plant trees in their memory.

[D.P.Roberts]

It must be terrible to have every little kooky idea you ever heard of tying in with every other one in your head like that.

[Doogle]

[JoanneSD]

And the Bush administration’s family-planning failures

Wondered how long this would take...to blame the President

[Sherman Logan]

This is so 1970s. Every single industrial country is near or below replacement birth rates, many far below.

The only way to stop the growth of population in the next 40 years or so in these countries is to kill a bunch of people.

[gobus1]

Gotribe, you are the man! I'll support your campaign...I'll buy the trees.

[edpc]

Family planning makes sense for people – and for our fragile planet.

I'm sure he's doing his part. I seriously doubt this dude is getting laid.

[claptrap]

More unassailable factoids from some Infertility Cult?

[Always Right]

I wish liberals would take their own advice and stop reproducing. They should just neuter themselves as soon as they discover they are liberals. I mean if they were really serious about these problems.

[Brian Mosely]

Yeah, I found the above article at this blog, and the blogger makes this point:

"Mr. Seager is so seventies in combining his blame-America-first ideology with warnings of looming environmental disaster. The United States is 130th on the world fertility ranking list, already at a rate of 2.09 children-per-woman, meaning that our population has already stabilized (when every couple produces two kids, total population doesn’t grow)."

"The most fertile European country is Albania at 132 (2.03 children-per-woman). The first West European country in fertility ranking is Iceland at 141 (1.92 children-per-woman). And to find a continental West European country on the fertility list, we have to drop down to France at 154 (1.84 children-per-woman, already helping advance Mr. Seager’s goals, by beginning to depopulate itself). Given these numbers, if Mr. Seager is serious about what he says, he needs to focus his efforts on the Third World and tell them they can’t be having so many kids, because they are causing global warming. "

"(Related question: Anyone care to speculate on whether it’s a positive sign, or a sign of the apocalypse that Afghanistan is now 5th in fertility, at 6.69 children-per-woman?)"

[LibKill]

Isn't this the complete butthead who said something to the effect that it was better to kill a human (baby?) than an animal?

About ten years ago or so.

[Ron/GA]

The author is obviously unaware that the developed world as a whole is already at zero growth and sliding into negative numbers. If if weren't for the bleed-off of folks from the undeveloped world into the developed world, those numbers would be ringing alarm bells.

When you factor in the dramatic increases in efficiency that we are already seeing, efficiencies that will only accelerate in the near future, the developed world is not the problem. He needs to be addressing his concerns to China, India, Pakistan, Indonesia, etc., etc.

While not politically correct and certainly not easier in terms of getting the mainstream media to hang on to every word, it would be less of a waste of his time ... and ours.

[zarf]

What an absolute load of rubbish.

I more convinced than ever that the entire Global Warming BS was authored by a panel of socialist elders in a hermetically sealed room beneath the UN.

[The_Reader_David]

Actually, fertility rates below 2.11 children per woman result in shrinking population due to deaths before puberty, and yes, that's with modern health-care.

[Son House]

Gore could cut his carbon emission down by having
his children deemed 'wards of the state'.
Than the state could raise taxes to puchase more
carbon offsets for the wards.

[Quick or Dead]

It’s time to open a “second front” in the battle against global warming by stressing the need for population stabilization, sooner rather than later.

Replace "global warming" with "dwindling food supply and you have a Neo-Malthusian (too many people, not enough food, something's got to give).

These efforts are especially important here in the United States, where less than 5 percent of the world’s population produces about 25 percent of the world’s carbon-dioxide emissions. But cutting energy consumption must be coupled with stabilizing population.

Sell China and India on cutting energy consumption first. Oh right, they don't have to, seeing as how they were tyrannized by the EVIL imperialist powers. *gag*

More people use more energy. If we had zero population growth, part of the global warming problem would, well, melt away.

That is an excellent point Mr.Seager. I suggest that you volunteer to have your energy consumption cut down to zero immediately. That means caves and sharpened rocks for you.

[xcamel]

FReepmail me to get on or off

Click graphic for full GW rundown

Ping me if you find one I've missed.

---

"eugenics is ugly"

[LoneRangerMassachusetts]

If we could just kill the 300 million inhabitants of the United States we could save 25% of global energy consumption.

If we killed 25 million Saudis, we could eliminate that much in production thereby the same amount in consumption. Just think, we could eliminate Jihad funding, state department corruption, and much of the clash of barbarism clashing with civilization with their elimination.

[Ramius]

Having read Steyn's book... this guy has no idea what he's talking about. Really clueless.

[Rudder]

We in the USA our doing our part. We have a very high infant mortality rate, ranking in there with some of the third world countries. I know this fact defies conventional wisdom, but it is a fact. The theory for this is that many parents are too ignorant to avail themselves of pre-natal health care.

[Rytwyng]

If we could just kill the 300 million inhabitants of the United States we could save 25% of global energy consumption.

But global food production would also be cut 25%. Ooops.

[Rudder]

Isn't this the complete butthead who said something to the effect that it was better to kill a human (baby?) than an animal?

I believe that was Princeton Prof. Singer.

[AmericaUnited]

Perhaps Seager could lead his follows to 'Seagertown' and start chugging down the Koolaid to do their part in lightening the load...

[Nitro]

Even if this could work.........

it might be a better idea to kill the parents...

why waste a kid who might have the right idea?

[goldstategop]

At heart, libs are misanthropes. They hate humanity, they hate the unborn and they hate free individuals. "Global Warming" here is simply political cover designed to justify that most repulsive of liberal creeds: abortion on demand. I know they are eager to abort themselves out of existence. I wouldn't mind seeing the liberals become extinct but not if they destroyed our civilization in the bargain.

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus

[AmericaUnited]

Where's the quote from that 'famous' evironalmentalist that said 1 billion people needed to be 'eliminated' to stabilize the planet? These people and their earth worship religion always see man as some form of blight, rather than the crowning achievement of creation.

[Nitro]

At heart, libs are misanthropes. They hate humanity, they hate the unborn and they hate free individuals.

I agree.

What are we going to do about it?

[Rembrandt_fan]

I've been trying to get my head around this whole global warming thing; more specifically, I've trying to figure out how and when weather was politicized, and why. The population explosion is, of course, a lie: soylent green hasn't become people just yet. The fact that climate is cyclical, changing over time, is true--we are, after all, inhabiting a ball of matter coursing through a hostile universe. Nothing remains the same for long, especially the weather. It remains to be seen, though, to what extent humankind is effecting this cycle. While no scientist, I'm betting humankind isn't having much effect, if any.

The point, I think, is to manufacture a global threat requiring a global response. If it wasn't global warming, or overpopulation, or a hole in the ozone layer, or a scarcity of some vital resource, something would come along to suit the needs of those promoting global catastrophe. The nature of this highly unlikely apocalypse doesn't really matter. It's the reaction to the threat that counts, since a response to a global threat would, of course, require global administration, coordination, and a measure of authority. From the perspective of those creating this perception of imminent danger, a series of treaties encroaching on the national sovereignty of the participating nation-states would do nicely...as a start.

It sounds like tinfoil hat stuff, I know, but it strikes me as the most plausible explanation. Besides, someone has to explain the prominence and popularity of Al Gore. Global conspiracy seems the only explanation for that, too.

[rusureitflies?]

Latest Weather Channel Headline:
CURE GORE'S GLOBAL FLATULENCE! ABORT YOUR BABIES NOW!

[cardinal4]

It must suck to be a liberal..

[USArmySpouse]

I agree with him. I definitely believe he (and smart, thoughtful people like him) should go ahead and practice Zero population growth.

I'm just a stupid conservative, so I'll just continue pumping kids out.

That should work out just fine for everyone.

[A Balrog of Morgoth]

I know this fact defies conventional wisdom, but it is a fact. The theory for this is that many parents are too ignorant to avail themselves of pre-natal health care.

IIRC, we count prematurely born infants as babies while some other nations do not.

[USFRIENDINVICTORIA]

Save millions tomorrow -- kill billions today.

[Rudder]

we count prematurely born infants as babies while some other nations do not.

Good point. I hadn't considered that.

[DaveLoneRanger]

I have a few other suggestions to solve global warming.

• Cut down plants, because plants cause global warming
• Cut down trees, because forests cause global warming
  
• Pollute the atmosphere more, because less pollution boosts global warming
• Burn more fossil fuel, because burning fossil fuel cools the climate

[Redbob]

The ultimate goal of the tree-huggers finally is expressed:

nothing less than the disappearance of the human race from this planet will make them happy.

[burnitup]

Mr. Seager would probably be too much of a pu$$y, like all of the folks who push for assisted suicide laws, to take his own life. Cuz how could you kill yourself properly without a law on the books?

[DaveTesla]

"We have a very high infant mortality rate, ranking in there with some of the third world countries."

Not So.
The USA ranks in the top 87% of live births for the world.

http://www.umsl.edu/services/govdocs/wofact2002/fields/2091.html

We would rank in the top 97% but minority genetics drive that
number down.

From the CDC's web site:
Examples of Important Disparities
Infant mortality among African Americans in 2000 occurred at a rate of 14.1 deaths per 1,000 live births.2 This is more than twice the national average of 6.9 deaths per 1,000 live births. The leading causes of infant death include congenital abnormalities, pre-term/low birth weight, Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS), problems related to complications of pregnancy, and respiratory distress syndrome.3 SIDS deaths among American Indian and Alaska Natives is 2.3 times the rate for non-Hispanic white mothers.

I have seen skewed figures like this from leftist media
such as the Cuba loving commies.

THIS IS THE FAMOUS 'GREAT AND FREE HEALTHCARE' THAT REGULAR CUBANS RECEIVE
http://www.therealcuba.com/Page10.htm

More America Bashing.
If they hate this country so much why don't they go live
in their above (Cuba) paradise?

[Rudder]

I got the data I cited from a recent textbook on developmental biology. It could very well be disputed, and I'm not an authority on this topic---just citing a university text.

[lonestar67]

I love how you argue.

Keep it up.

[DaveTesla]

"I got the data I cited from a recent textbook on developmental biology."

I don't doubt it.
They have an agenda,

Did you take a look at the link?

http://www.therealcuba.com/Page10.htm

That is what the socialist / communist refer to as good health care.

[exit82]

Mr. Seager should help stop the carbon dioxide madness. He should stop exhaling.

I guess that 55 million aborted children in 34 years just isn't enough. As the Dems say " We must do more".

[DaveTesla]

Democrat bumper sticker:

Save The Planet
Kill Yourself !

[Rudder]

Okay, I went to your link and found this:

A Cuban Hospital in what is obvious shambles.

Cuba didn't maintain this hospital.

Do you suggest this practice has spread to the USA?

[doc30]

Sounds like they want China's One Child policy mandated across the world. I hate these wackos.

[CheyennePress]

This man simply wants to deny healthcare to the world's populace. His little hatched scheme would do that, of course. Just bring about the death rattle of all socialized medicine and all insurance plans.

We'd have to go for a pay-for-service scheme where only the rick could afford the more complicated procedures.

Throw the liberal wash back in his face, say I.

[WFTR]

Yet, apart from insightful comments by former Vice President Al Gore ...

This guy has clearly been out in the sun too long.

If these people are so worried about overpopulation, why don't they picket the U.N. to stop trying to control AIDS in underdeveloped countries. The article admits that the biggest population growth comes from these countries. If we let AIDS and other diseases kill these people, then the population would be lower. While they're at it, why advocate peace of any kind? If people are killing one another in wars, the population will decrease. These people also believe that more guns means more people murdered. They believe that my having a gun in my home makes me more likely to be shot. I'm sure that they wouldn't miss me. If they believe that my owning guns makes my death more likely, why don't they buy me a gun or two. By their calculations, the gun would lead to my death, and the world would be a little less populous.

You know, you really should have put the "barf alert" on this commentary.

Bill