Posted on 05/23/2007 1:52:01 PM PDT by Constitutionalist Conservative
A new study by a renowned physicist ties the immigration-reform bill in Congress to global warming, warning that the consequent increase in U.S. population poses an even greater threat to the planet's survival.
Albert A. Bartlett, a Harvard Ph.D. and professor emeritus of physics at the University of Colorado, explains each person in the U.S. is responsible, directly or indirectly, for emission of 23.8 tons of greenhouse gases annually.
"So if we are serious about reduction of U.S. emission of greenhouse gases in the hope of slowing or stopping global warming, then it is imperative that the first thing we do is to stop the U.S. population growth," Bartlett declared.
Bartlett emphasized that since immigration – most of it legal – is estimated to account for about three quarters of the present annual increase in the U.S. population, it is essential "we do everything possible to halt U.S. population growth quickly."
Bartlett, a member of the board of advisers of a non-profit group called Population-Environment BALANCE, claims U.S. population growth "violates the laws of sustainability," which include:
Bartlett further argues mass immigration also increases the nation's birth rate. According to the Center for Immigration Studies, immigration's annual contribution to population growth reaches nearly 90 percent if children born to recent immigrants are counted.
Bartlett emphasized efforts at improving efficiency in energy use cannot compensate for continued population growth.
"If there is no end to population growth in the U.S., it is unlikely that there will ever be a decrease in the annual emissions of global warming greenhouse gases by the United States."
A think tank in another of the leading developed nations, the UK, expressed a similar view in a report it issued this month urging Britons to have fewer children in order to help save the world from global warming.
"The greatest thing anyone in Britain could do to help the future of the planet," said John Guillebaud, co-chairman of Optimum Population Trust, "would be to have one less child."
Global warming PING
This is one of those things where you are not sure if it reinforces your position or should be causing you to rethink it.
Gas prices is another.
So there are 300 million Americans compared to 1 Billion Chinese or, 6 Billion others on the planet and all of this is our fault?
GBW is a political ideology, nothing else.
bump
Good, a double bogie!!!
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 Paleologus
You see, its scientific fact that your contribution to global warming is significantly greater if you live in Brownsville, for example, than it is if you walk a hundred yards south to the other side of the bridge.
Its scientific fact.
For the sake of the planet, our government should offer tax incentives to encourage people to spend as much of the year as possible in Cancun, and as little of the year as possible toiling away at your desk in River City.
If it keeps illegals out I’ll sign onto the global warming nonsense
I posted something along these lines the other day. If you believe that we should import tens of millions of workers, and that we should cut USA greenhouse gas emissions, you believe that existing citizens should take a double cut, sharing their limited energy ration with the newly legalized aliens.
The Global WarmingTM faithful never like to put numbers like these into context, since it's a minuscule, insignificant amount when you're talking globally.
How many tons of water vapor are in the atmosphere there, Doc? How many tons of CO2 are produced by plants each year, Doc? How many tons from volcanoes, Doc?
Thumbing through dictionary . . . searching for “hoist by own petard” . . .
If we want to tie immigration to something that affects everyone, we should tie it to gas prices. The laws of supply and demand will back it up.
I'll go for that. While relaxing, you likely breathe more easily, exhale less CO2, especially if you're half conscious from the tequila shooters. And everyone knows that Mexican electricity is produced by some Mayan pyramid that doesn't burn any fuel.
Yeah, but what about all the gas emissions from eating those beans?
Some folks have called for a belt of landmines along our southern border. It's not clear to me that Bartlett is explicitly endorsing such a proposal, but it would cut down on our population growth.
Speaking from experience, the beans absorb a lot of the alcohol and they tend to cancel each other out, but not totally. ;o)
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.