This story is archived
Science chief: cut birthrate to save Earth »
Posted by: capn_caveman 2 years, 5 months agoNew museum head says lower population would cut CO2 at a fraction of renewable energy cost
Read Full Story at observer.guardian.co.uk »
Submitted By:
I'm a community leader for propeller. Feel free to send me a message with any questions you may have on propeller.
I'm also ...
This Story is Archived and Commenting is Closed
Comments: 19
-


TechnologyExpert
July 22, 2007, 5:41 p.m.It's not just CO2 ... it's everything. The world cannot sustain the population predicted for 2050. Besides global warming, we need to worry about sufficient food, water, and energy, especially as we start to run out of oil.
-


agentX
July 22, 2007, 9:55 p.m.Some countries already have a shrinking birthrate. Now if we can only adjust the birthrate in other areas.
One good step would be to end abstinence only education. Yeah, like that crap ever really worked.
-
-


Jayson
July 23, 2007, 3:05 a.m.The problem I find with his argument is that, as far as I can see, developed nations, which are the most polluting, already have a really low birth rate.
-


drunkenhunter
July 23, 2007, 7:05 a.m.And then a miracle occurs...the miracle is convincing third world men to father just one baby in their entire lives...yes the whole world would be rich and happy in one generation if they did that but their machismo would suffer. If you are poor-- machismo, some kids--well what else DO you have?
-


UBCONFUSE
July 23, 2007, 10:30 a.m.This is an excellent story, and I agree with many of the above comments. The problem with controlling population growth is the interruption of cultural sexual practices cannot be changed without the use of force. Poor people use their genitals as their primary source of recreation. Unprotected sex is the norm for 75% of the world's people.
The Chinese have been successful in limiting births to one child, but years of killing female children in favor of a male is now a major social issue.
For the planet Earth, we, the West, have to practice some tough love with the third world.
1) Stop all food aid in the third world.
2) Stop all medical intervention in the third world.
3) Erect heavy barriers to immigration to all but the brightest minds and allow them in as a gene pool for the displaced.
4) Stay out of the internal affairs of the Third world, aka, ignore genocide as tribal warfare was historically responsible for stable populations.
I did not say I like this. It would be effective.
-


simonsez
July 23, 2007, 10:30 a.m.You could put ALL the people in the WORLD in Texas and have less than half the density of New York, Hong Kong or Tokyo.
In a year or two, it will become clear that CO2 was bad science.
The biggest problem we have at the moment is what to do with all these water bottles. Maybe the best thing we can do for the planet is drink tap water
-


KMFDM
July 23, 2007, 10:53 a.m.that is why I am not agaisnt people being homosexuals. we have enough breeders on this planet. though hetrosexual myself, I have choosen to be satified by corrupting the youth by being a bad influence, and not knocking anyone up.
-


Tigra
July 23, 2007, 1:25 p.m.this isnt rocket science. Most of the developed world live longer than our predecessors, and the overpopulous will take its toll on the earth's climate overall. It's nice in theory to say "cut the birthrate", but how does one enforce that? doing what China does?! I dont think so!!
-


4mogger
July 23, 2007, 1:32 p.m.Fortunately, global warming will dramatically increase the production of food crops throughout most of the world--particularly in northern regions with traditionally short growing seasons.
AIDS will also become a major population limiter in the decades to come.
On the upside, Muslim Extremists are outpopulating every segment 10 to 1. This should also dramatically reduce the global population through massive death tolls from terrorist attacks.
All 19 comments are shown.
Submit a Story
Advertisement