So God blessed Noah and his sons, and said to them:
Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth....
so are children of the youth.
Happy is the man that hath his quiver full of them:
Genesis 9:1/Psalm 127:4,5
--Vs.--
"The researchers claim in the journal Environmental Research Letters that having one fewer children will result in a carbon savings of 58.6 tons per year.
For those wondering how a single child could possibly emit 58.6 tons of carbon per year, the answer is that he can't. The researchers estimate that Americans and Australians contribute 16 tons of carbon per year (adults, we might assume) whereas the British kick in 7 tons each.
 |
| You can hear the Serpent rustling in the Leaves of the Tree again |
So how does shrinking the family by one child save 58.6 tons each? The climate researchers reached this figure by adding up the yearly projected emissions not only of the child but all of his or her descendants as well throughout their lives, then dividing that number by the parent's remaining lifespan.
With 50% of their children's lifetime emissions and 25% of their grandchildren, the figure quickly balloons up to nearly 60 tons. But why stop there? Why not carry the calculation out six or seven more generations?
With birthrates below replacement rate in many developed countries and governments scrambling to incentivize larger families, one would think that such a study wouldn't be worth mentioning
As climate alarmism overtakes Western governments and such "solutions" from scientists gain traction, can we expect to see carbon taxes applied to children? Might we also expect to see one-child policies being lifted directly from pre-2016 Communist China and applied in the West?
Ipso facto: abortion is the key to stopping climate change.
Ipso facto: abortion is the key to stopping climate change.
For those who missed it, here is an excerpt from a 2017 speech by Gloria Steinem when she was asked if climate change were a feminist issue:
"Are you kidding me? Listen, what causes climate deprivation is population. If we had not been systematically forcing women to have children they don't want or can't care for over the 500 years of patriarchy, we wouldn't have the climate problems that we have. That's the fundamental cause of climate change."
Another climate activist, Travis Rieder, who works as the assistant director for education initiatives at the Berman Institute of Bioethics at Johns Hopkins University, recently said in an interview with NPR that "bringing down the global fertility rate by half a child per woman could be the thing that saves us."
He went on to say that "maybe we should protect our kids by not having them."
Through a combination of handouts for the poor and taxes on the rich (the famous carbon tax on children again) he hopes to use economic pressure to curb population growth. He does "cut poor nations slack because they're still developing" but ignores the fact that the uncontrolled immigration espoused by those same liberal minds will mitigate any fertility rate decrease he might achieve.
Rieder and several scholars from Georgetown University did their part by publishing the paper "Population Engineering and the Fight Against Climate Change". PNW
