They Figured Out How To Slow Climate Change

[guohua]

Yes, They have finally declared Humans To be The Root Of All things Wrong With Mother Earth!
It's all of You Breeders Out there!  Yes you're Killing Our Climate and Making The Earth Hotter For Us and All Of Earths Little Creatures!
Stop Having Babies
Stop Believing That God Will Punish You For Using Any Form Of Birth Control!  
One Child and No More and then Get Yourself Neutered, Fixed or What Ever It Takes, WHY? Because You're the Problem!  
The Facts are in, a moral philosophy professor and bioethicist have Said as much. You can't argue with The Educated, Any Progressive well tell you that! 

Carbon dioxide doesn't kill climates; people do. And the world would be better off with fewer of them.

That's a glib summary of a serious and seriously provocative book by Travis Rieder, a moral philosophy professor and bioethicist at Johns Hopkins University.
When economists write about climate change, they'll often bring up something called the Kaya identity—basically a multiplication problem (not an espionage novel) that helps economists estimate how much carbon dioxide may be heading into the atmosphere. The Kaya identity says the pace of climate pollution is more or less the product four things:

• How carbon-heavy fuels are
  
• How much energy the economy needs to produce GDP
  
• GDP per capita
  
• Population
  

After years of policymakers' yammering about carbon-light or carbon-free this-or-that, Rieder basically zeroes in on the fact nobody wants to acknowledge: The number of people in the world—particularly in affluent countries—is literally a part of the equation.
Think of Rieder's as the argument waiting in the wings should the 195-nation Paris Agreement, which came within a shade of enactment this week, fail to address the problem.

Yes, Yes We Have A Grafted, All Good Climate Change Pusher's have a Chart!   

Yes Really!    Read Some More!

Q: So. What seems to be the problem?

A: There are 19 million adoptable orphans, and there's catastrophic climate change on the horizon. Contributing a child to the world both makes climate change worse and, if we don't get our act together, it might actually not be all that great for the child either.
You have two tracks. You could say climate change is a big structural problem, so it requires a structural solution; that's a policy question. Or you could say a problem like climate change requires that we change our culture of individual obligation, and everybody needs to think about having small families.

Q: That seems like a pretty heavy ask. People don't even want to think about having small bags of movie popcorn.
A: Well, the argument goes like this: Okay, humans have shown me that they're just not willing to give up their toys. And so we need another option on the table. You want to continue to live in your 10,000-square-foot house? You know, fly private jets around, and that kind of thing? Well, that would mean a lot fewer people on the Earth.


Q: At least in the carbon-heavy countries? Do you think that would actually ever happen? 
A: Mostly I want to put it on the table. Population is a central part of the equation for total emissions, but that gets kind of looked over because people don't like to talk about it. 
Total emissions is per-capita emissions times population, minus technological advances. We've been trying to get you to give up your toys—to change per-capita emissions. So if you're really going to continue to show reluctance, well, here's the other option: We'll start putting pressure on families. If that pressure's really, really, really undesirable, then, well, maybe people decide to start doing the other thing. 
If we could fix everything through decarbonizing our economy, then it's likely that the population variable wouldn't be a real concern. 

Q: It does have the distinct unpleasant feel of a moral gun to the head.
A: Here's my actual suspicion, though: Most people don't find it that undesirable. Demographic trends the world over show when you give women choice, you educate them, you give them power in the household, and you start to fight back against patriarchal society, then fertility rates go down. 

Q: People are helpful to have around, though, if you want to have an economy. China may learn that the hard way. 
A: This is the most infamous example, but it turns out there's been a lot of countries with pretty influential fertility-reducing policies and strategies. What we found is that some of them are really, really good. That's one of the reasons people balk at this sort of argument. They say, 'Look what happened in China.' None of those are arguments against any kind of strategies; those are arguments against the ways the Chinese government employed them.
We put policies on a kind of spectrum of invasiveness, what we call a coercion spectrum. There are things we obviously should never do. You should never violate basic human rights by forced sterilization or forced abortion. That's off the table. We're not going to talk about that. Nobody's going to talk about that.
But this is actually really good fertility policy: Provide family planning. Provide your people with health care. Educate women, and empower women within the home. 

Yes Look at China, More Men Than Women and More Women Opting For A Career Before Family, The average Chinese male has to look outside of China far a wife.
Now I'm going to skip to the Religion Part of the Article,,,, You Still With Me? 

Q: Pope Francis wants to fight climate change, but I'm not sure he'd be down with your full argument here. 
A: Religion—not only Catholicism but Mormonism, ultra-orthodox Judaism, that sort of thing—probably is a really good reason to think about using population as a way to raise the stakes. If you're Catholic, and you're really going to stare climate change in the face, refuse contraception, and continue to have sex anyway, there's the foreseeable outcome that you will have more children than average. Well, then you really better be doing your darnedest in all sorts of other ways. When you make that choice, there's a cost. You have to pay for it in some way.

OK now for the Proof when I stated this was a Progressive Push To make YOU Feel Guilty and The Core Of The Climate Change Problem As The See It!

Q: How's the reception to this work been?

A: The far-right hate machine is in full swing, and I'm getting hate mail. All that good stuff.

Source


Just another step in their plan for Population Control, it's easier to maintain control of a smaller population!

[BIAD]

So... basically speaking, Muslim extremists are eco-warriors then?
I had no idea that humans were such a bad influence on the world.

I can only think that the way forward is to create a system where companies
and countries can buy and sell their imaginary carbon emission quotas in the
unintentional way of creating a wealth-generating market.

Obviously, this kind of racket can't be used by the general public as it would
then be open to abuse. Chairmen of Corporations don't do that sort of thing
because they're better than the farmyard animals common folk.

If there  ever comes a time when to ease this planet of it's pollution burdens and
it's decided that the ivory trade isn't doing enough in killing those large, grey,
long-nosed farting machines called elephants, then I would suggest culling
the human race.

Of course, we'd start at the bottom of the wealth pile as those who have money
are better than most of their fellow species.

Does anyone have George Orwell's telephone number?

[guohua]

So... basically speaking, Muslim extremists are eco-warriors then?
I had no idea that humans were such a bad influence on the world.

I can only think that the way forward is to create a system where companies
and countries can buy and sell their imaginary carbon emission quotas in the
unintentional way of creating a wealth-generating market.

Obviously, this kind of racket can't be used by the general public as it would
then be open to abuse. Chairmen of Corporations don't do that sort of thing
because they're better than the farmyard animals common folk.

If there  ever comes a time when to ease this planet of it's pollution burdens and
it's decided that the ivory trade isn't doing enough in killing those large, grey,
long-nosed farting machines called elephants, then I would suggest culling
the human race.

Of course, we'd start at the bottom of the wealth pile as those who have money
are better than most of their fellow species.

Does anyone have George Orwell's telephone number?

Yes, 1-000- 666-1984

[Sol]

Yep. Stop reproducing like rabbits.

You can always have sex like rabbits though. Condoms, pills...extraordinary state of the art technologies that solve the problem...

Even the Vatican has shares in pills factories...

Oh until they get caught that is..


Catholic bank owned pill shares








He agrees...but won't say it publicly...

[senona]

Yunno, after wading thru all the bullshit that goes along with the climate change/global warming fear mongering debates....

The elephant in the room that no one talks about, although there is enough finger pointing going on already--

Is the Elite have been calling for decades about...hold on.....DEPOPULATION!


Yes folks, depopulation, there it is.


There are more roads, highways, buildings, homes, retail stores that all hold in heat and increase temperatures during summertime than there was 30 years ago.
In turn, we are destroying forests, swamp-lands, woods, deserts etc etc  to make room for such things, which in turn effect nature in a negative way.

Homes are being built in areas NOT designed for living, yet we are to accommodate housing due to increase in population.




My point is.....

IF we are really and truly 200% dead serious about doing something to help this planet, we would come up with a way to eliminate families from having 5-7 kids just to get welfare checks for each kid.

Limit the number of kids per family.
Limit the number of pets per family.
Limit the hours the one can run the air conditioner.
Limit the hours one can run a heater in the winter.

Or face the consequences......i.e. a fine.
Which is what they are working towards, after reading several articles on them blaming A/C use and heaters for putting off CO2.


'Depopulation' always gives people the heebie jeebies when it is mentioned.
But how else is the planet really and truly going to 'heal' with all of us bleeding it to death.

Carbon taxes ain't gonna do a damn thing towards the climate except make the government richer.
And the hard working guy poorer, cause we are going to pay for this scam eventually.
Yes, scam!!



So why not really get down to the nitty gritty.
Controlling the population...that is pretty much what is needed, yes???


Yet no one wants to talks about it.
 Maybe that is the whole point of the NWO, to take charge of what many Nations cannot/will not do on their own.



But then again, I may be just rambling.
Forgive me, but this shit gives me a headache.

Here we have the U.N. pretty much thinking they can control a planet from doing what it has done for billions of years...EVOLVE.
And I just do not see how unless they take some drastic, and I mean drastic measures....and passing bullshit carbon taxes is not what I'm referring to either.

I just don't see the point of all this fear mongering if they are not going to address the increasing population, assuming humans are 100% to blame.

Hope I did not make this too confusing....sometimes on more complex things like this, it is hard to type on keyboard what is running in my head and make it truly coherent for others to understand.


But this whole climate change issue goes so much deeper than just passing regulations and taxes IMO.




Anyhoo, off I go.....

[BIAD]

He agrees...but won't say it publicly...

Of course he won't. Depopulating the world by sodomising choir-boys would certainly be debated with
a more-positive tone now in the Vatican when looking at halting pregnancies.