An even less popular opinion: if you care enough about climate change to not have children you should have children. The alternative is that only people who don’t care about climate change will have children.
Anyways, the fertility rate has dropped very quickly all over the developed world and the world is turning developed quickly. I’m not saying that will solve climate change but it looks like overpopulation is at least going to be solved.
if you care enough about climate change to not have children you shouldhaveadopt children.
This will reduce the population increase, while at the same time help children already in the world and being dealt a shit hand. It’s not an easy role to take, but if it makes one child happier then it’s worth it.
It’s a product of the environment, which the parents set. So children of people who care about the environment is probably going to also care because that’s what their parents teach them.
If you want to seriously do something about climate change, stop driving cars all the time.remake your cities to be bike and walk friendly, all of it.
Stop unbridled captialism. Buying shit you don’t need fucks this planet.
Make EVERYTHING electric
Also, if you really care about climate change them you’re screwed because humanity is fucked. We’re not going to win this one. IF, and that is a huge if, we can win this one, the people seeing it will be the ones living in the year 3000, give or take…
And note I said step 1. Surely there are other actions, but not having kids is by far the largest impact.
The big problem is everyone wants people to take the actions that they are ok with. Vegans think the best way to stop climate change is ending animal agriculture. Transit and bike advocates tell us it’s ending cars. Those same people will happily have multiple kids and fly around the globe without a second thought.
you’re fighting a losing battle. ‘having kids is a good thing’ is the only piece of propaganda that is distributed to probably every human. and probably the oldest one, too. it’s also a base instinct, sort of hard to override by reasoning, as anyone who’s ever been horny or hungry can probably attest. this is probably the best example on here related to the posted question.
If you actually want to do some about climate change, step 1 is to stop having kids.
An even less popular opinion: if you care enough about climate change to not have children you should have children. The alternative is that only people who don’t care about climate change will have children.
Anyways, the fertility rate has dropped very quickly all over the developed world and the world is turning developed quickly. I’m not saying that will solve climate change but it looks like overpopulation is at least going to be solved.
This will reduce the population increase, while at the same time help children already in the world and being dealt a shit hand. It’s not an easy role to take, but if it makes one child happier then it’s worth it.
Every child will consume resources and be responsible for producing greenhouse gases.
My parents didn’t care about climate change. People can learn on their own.
I don’t think not caring about climate change is a hereditary condition.
It’s a product of the environment, which the parents set. So children of people who care about the environment is probably going to also care because that’s what their parents teach them.
Step 2 is to start hunting kids
“Honey, stop the presses.”
Yes the climate will be much better without pesky humans around!
Any other species have an extinction event named after them 😎
If you want to seriously do something about climate change, stop driving cars all the time.remake your cities to be bike and walk friendly, all of it.
Stop unbridled captialism. Buying shit you don’t need fucks this planet.
Make EVERYTHING electric
Also, if you really care about climate change them you’re screwed because humanity is fucked. We’re not going to win this one. IF, and that is a huge if, we can win this one, the people seeing it will be the ones living in the year 3000, give or take…
One kid will contribute far more greenhouse gasses than a car will. One fewer child saves 58.6 tonnes CO2-equivalent per year, whereas going car free is only 2.4 tonnes. One less kid is better than 24 people ditching their car.
And note I said step 1. Surely there are other actions, but not having kids is by far the largest impact.
The big problem is everyone wants people to take the actions that they are ok with. Vegans think the best way to stop climate change is ending animal agriculture. Transit and bike advocates tell us it’s ending cars. Those same people will happily have multiple kids and fly around the globe without a second thought.
Oh I’ll agree there. Soon we’ll be 8 billion while we should have tried to level off at the 2-3 billion mark
you’re fighting a losing battle. ‘having kids is a good thing’ is the only piece of propaganda that is distributed to probably every human. and probably the oldest one, too. it’s also a base instinct, sort of hard to override by reasoning, as anyone who’s ever been horny or hungry can probably attest. this is probably the best example on here related to the posted question.
for what it’s worth, I do think you are correct
Well, that’s why I thought it fits in this thread.