In fact, perhaps Warmists should have no kids. Do they really want to have a little carbon footprint running around and killing Gaia?
Want to fight climate change? Have fewer children https://t.co/Iq2LUVRq75
— Tom Nelson (@TomANelson) July 12, 2017
From the article
The greatest impact individuals can have in fighting climate change is to have one fewer child, according to a new study that identifies the most effective ways people can cut their carbon emissions.
So, instead of 10, have 9? It’s rather like the old “turn your AC up a bit/heat down a bit” thing. They never really give us actual numbers.
The next best actions are selling your car, avoiding long flights, and eating a vegetarian diet. These reduce emissions many times more than common green activities, such as recycling, using low energy light bulbs or drying washing on a line. However, the high impact actions are rarely mentioned in government advice and school textbooks, researchers found.
Get too it, Warmists! Sell you car! No meat. No drying machines.
The reason they go with the “one fewer child” is that they figure a child is worth 58.6 tonnes of CO2 per year, which seems excessive.
The new study, published in Environmental Research Letters, sets out the impact of different actions on a comparable basis. By far the biggest ultimate impact is having one fewer child, which the researchers calculated equated to a reduction of 58 tonnes of CO2 for each year of a parent’s life.
The figure was calculated by totting up the emissions of the child and all their descendants, then dividing this total by the parent’s lifespan. Each parent was ascribed 50% of the child’s emissions, 25% of their grandchildren’s emissions and so on.
Wait, wait, it gets nuttier
“We recognise these are deeply personal choices. But we can’t ignore the climate effect our lifestyle actually has,†said Nicholas. “It is our job as scientists to honestly report the data. Like a doctor who sees the patient is in poor health and might not like the message ‘smoking is bad for you’, we are forced to confront the fact that current emission levels are really bad for the planet and human society.â€
That’s right, they just compared having a child to smoking.
This is actually a good idea. Those of the left should consider fewer children to reduce CO2 and reduce the potential for the continued expression of genes that result in stupidity. Those currently alive should consider some method of their curtailing the elimination of CO2 in their personal lives and metabolism. If the religion of climate would look around for other methods of reducing CO2 besides destruction of the economy, high taxes, and global communistic government, then they might get more attention from those that do the work.
FEWER kids, not LESS kids…
[…] lots of taxpayer funding), has finally chimed in on the “study” that says people should have one less child. (via […]