First  Prev  1  2  Next  Last
Post Reply Women choosing not to have kids because of climate change.
8921 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M / Ark-La-Tex
Offline
Posted 12/16/16
Posted 12/16/16
You're really into the planet being doomed thing, huh?
3704 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M
Offline
Posted 12/16/16
*drops them nukes*
5020 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / F / The Cat Empire
Offline
Posted 12/16/16 , edited 12/16/16
Well he is right. By the way things are going, its probably gonna happen sooner or later.

But same


If the population gets too high, resources will disappear.

"All of those people mean a lot of extra mouths to feed, more strain on water supplies, a lot more trash and human waste to put somewhere and an increased threat of a major deadly global pandemic, among other problems."

http://www.livescience.com/41316-11-billion-people-earth.html


Shouldn't you want your kids to be able to live in a good world?


http://www.childrensrights.org/newsroom/fact-sheets/foster-care/


"On any given day, there are approximately 415,000 children in foster care in the United States."


Adoption and fostering is a great idea!






27922 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M
Offline
Posted 12/16/16
So the only people who will be making babies are people who don't care about the climate? Brilliant idea.
Posted 12/16/16

MysticGon wrote:

So the only people who will be making babies are people who don't care about the climate? Brilliant idea.


Yeah, if people are that gullible.... well, they're doing us all a favor and breeding themselves out!
4390 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M
Offline
Posted 12/16/16
These people aren't very smart overall.

On the one hand there is merit to wanting to slow down the rate at which our population increases (Note we don't want to stop it or we'll have an aging population that will cause our country to collapse once the previous generation starts dying off).

But on the other hand there is the whole "The world is doomed" outlook that is just stupid.

But I guess that means it's good they aren't planning to pass their genes on.

Also the rather obvious "anti male" tones in the article especially near the end don't help add to it's legitimacy. Yes a lot of guys can be dicks but to act like all men reject the idea because all men are selfish and arrogant is just more feminist garbage. Again for me my only issue is the "World is doomed" mindset and the fact we can't allow the population to decrease too fast. I'm fine of a woman doesn't want to have kids and I'm not even sure if or when I'll be ready for some. So my problem with their movement isn't what they are doing but why.
3852 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 12/16/16 , edited 12/16/16


i also thought they said 2012 was the end of the world ?

it's ironic to be honest..

people are ranting on and on about saving the planet.. while they are consuming things like some zombies

wasting foods and resources..

so when you run out and get the latest electronics, clothes, etc... think about it..

those people ranting on and on about climate change are also contributing to the so call problem they made up ?

i'm already in the "saving the planet" mode before these people started their crusade..

but for me it's not about the planet but money that is what i'm trying to save..

i'll not buy new unless i can not fix it.. to help reduce waste



43263 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
37 / M / Houston, Texas
Offline
Posted 12/16/16
People in 1st world "western" countries not having kids is a drop in the bucket in total world population
growth. Even if you could make an impact in population numbers, material use per person is increasing
everyday. And as other countries become more "modern" that use is increasing ever more. Something
fundamental to world civilization is going to have to change before anything real get accomplished.
21555 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Hoosierville
Offline
Posted 12/16/16


Europa and the Americas are fine when it comes to population. Its the rest of the world that has more people than their land can support.
4662 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
16 / M / The Shire, England
Offline
Posted 12/16/16
4390 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M
Offline
Posted 12/16/16
Oh BTW about this part

"There's this number, 9,441. That's the amount of additional metric tons of carbon you add to the atmosphere for every child you have. You can never take it back. That stopped me in my tracks."

uhhhhhh...... what? This person is either a troll or is brain dead. Carbon isn't a pollutant! Hell plants need carbon dioxide for photo synthesis!

Human's exhalling carbon dioxide isn't hurting the planet and I find it doubtful that number is all that accurate.

Even if it is that's probably under the assumption said child breaths at a regular rate for 80+ years!

Numbers don't mean a damn thing without proper context on where it came from and how it was scaled.

And even if that number was accurate. Again carbon isn't a pollutant. It's what makes up most living organisms and countless plans and microbes feed on it. The reason carbon dioxide is treated as dangerous is if it's in such dense qualities in the air it crowds out other essential gasses.

But there is no way for humans to exhale so much of it that the planet can't make use of it! I hate idiots like this who make meaningless numbers look big to push an agenda. The sad part is how many people fall for it.
29091 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Bundaberg, Queens...
Online
Posted 12/16/16

Metazoxan wrote:

These people aren't very smart overall.

On the one hand there is merit to wanting to slow down the rate at which our population increases (Note we don't want to stop it or we'll have an aging population that will cause our country to collapse once the previous generation starts dying off).

But on the other hand there is the whole "The world is doomed" outlook that is just stupid.

But I guess that means it's good they aren't planning to pass their genes on.

Also the rather obvious "anti male" tones in the article especially near the end don't help add to it's legitimacy. Yes a lot of guys can be dicks but to act like all men reject the idea because all men are selfish and arrogant is just more feminist garbage. Again for me my only issue is the "World is doomed" mindset and the fact we can't allow the population to decrease too fast. I'm fine of a woman doesn't want to have kids and I'm not even sure if or when I'll be ready for some. So my problem with their movement isn't what they are doing but why.


well we need a lower total population since overpopulation will become a thing.

Human lifespans in the next 100 years might extend to 100-300+ with the looks of recent developments and alot of research going on.

People are using the argument any form of life extension / immortality should be banned because of overpopulation i would argue (someone who's life goal and dream is life extension) that we should be not overpopulating in the first place so when it eventually does happen we won't have a disaster.

but the world is doomed mindset is bad.
but i'll support this move to not have kids because it will stop idiots protesting against any form of immortality research (which can bring us alot of regenerative medicine and technology)
4390 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M
Offline
Posted 12/16/16

Ryulightorb wrote:


well we need a lower total population since overpopulation will become a thing.

Human lifespans in the next 100 years might extend to 100-300+ with the looks of recent developments and alot of research going on.

People are using the argument any form of life extension / immortality should be banned because of overpopulation i would argue (someone who's life goal and dream is life extension) that we should be not overpopulating in the first place so when it eventually does happen we won't have a disaster.

but the world is doomed mindset is bad.
but i'll support this move to not have kids because it will stop idiots protesting against any form of immortality research (which can bring us alot of regenerative medicine and technology)


Again not saying the idea we need to reduce population growth doesn't have merit. It's the why they are doing it not the what that I take issue with.
29091 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Bundaberg, Queens...
Online
Posted 12/16/16

Metazoxan wrote:


Ryulightorb wrote:


well we need a lower total population since overpopulation will become a thing.

Human lifespans in the next 100 years might extend to 100-300+ with the looks of recent developments and alot of research going on.

People are using the argument any form of life extension / immortality should be banned because of overpopulation i would argue (someone who's life goal and dream is life extension) that we should be not overpopulating in the first place so when it eventually does happen we won't have a disaster.

but the world is doomed mindset is bad.
but i'll support this move to not have kids because it will stop idiots protesting against any form of immortality research (which can bring us alot of regenerative medicine and technology)


Again not saying the idea we need to reduce population growth doesn't have merit. It's the why they are doing it not the what that I take issue with.


fair point but look at it this way just let them believe they are helping and lets reap the benefits of their ignorance eh?
First  Prev  1  2  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.