China and libs: Population control best way to stop global warming
The above photo and caption come from a December 8 Financial Post op ed by pro-abort Diane Francis, editor at large of the National Post, who wrote…
The “inconvenient truth” overhanging the UN’s Copenhagen conference is not that the climate is warming or cooling, but that humans are overpopulating the world.
A planetary law, such as China’s 1-child policy, is the only way to reverse the disastrous global birthrate currently, which is 1 million births every 4 days.
The world’s other species, vegetation, resources, oceans, arable land, water supplies and atmosphere are being destroyed and pushed out of existence as a result of humanity’s soaring reproduction rate.
Ironically, China, despite its dirty coal plants, is the world’s leader in terms of fashioning policy to combat environmental degradation, thanks to its 1-child-only edict….
As commenter Michelle pointed out last week, the global warming, environmental, green, and population control movements are all linked by the common thought that people are bad.
China, which refuses to agree to lowering its pollution rates, now says it is helping stave the supposed global warming plight a better way. After years of being pummeled for its forced abortion and sterilization policy, with the nagging problem of female infanticide, China has now found a gateway to regain moral standing with world liberals, and as the above piece shows, it’s working.
China is relishing this opportunity to bask. According to China Daily, yesterday:
Copenhagen: Population and climate change are intertwined but the population issue has remained a blind spot when countries discuss ways to mitigate climate change and slow down global warming, according to Zhao Baige, vice-minister of National Population and Family Planning Commission of China.
“Dealing with climate change is not simply an issue of CO2 emission reduction but a comprehensive challenge involving political, economic, social, cultural and ecological issues, and the population concern fits right into the picture,” said Zhao, who is a member of the Chinese government delegation….
Many studies link population growth with emissions and the effect of climate change.
“Calculations of the contribution of population growth to emissions growth globally produce a consistent finding that most of past population growth has been responsible for between 40% and 60% of emissions growth,” so stated by the 2009 State of World Population, released earlier by the UN Population Fund.
Although China’s family planning policy has received criticism over the past 3 decades, Zhao said that China’s population program has made a great historic contribution to the well-being of society.
As a result of the family planning policy, China has seen 400 million fewer births, which has resulted in 18 million fewer tons of CO2 emissions a year, Zhao said.
The UN report projected that if the global population would remain 8 billion by the year 2050 instead of a little more than 9 billion according to medium-growth scenario, “it might result in 1 billion to 2 billion fewer tons of carbon emissions”.
Meanwhile, she said studies have also shown that family planning programs are more efficient in helping cut emissions, citing research by Thomas Wire of London School of Economics that states: “Each $7 spent on basic family planning would reduce CO2 emissions by more than one ton” whereas it would cost $13 for reduced deforestation, $24 to use wind technology, $51 for solar power, $93 for introducing hybrid cars and $131 electric vehicles.
She admitted that China’s population program is not without consequences, as the country is entering the aging society fast and facing the problem of gender imbalance.
“I’m not saying that what we have done is 100% right, but I’m sure we are going in the right direction and now 1.3 billion people have benefited,” she said.
She said some 85% of the Chinese women in reproductive age use contraceptives, the highest rate in the world. This has been achieved largely through education and improvement of people’s lives, she said.
This holistic approach that integrates policy on population and development, a strategy promoting sustainable development of population, resources and environment should serve as a model for integrating population programs into the framework of climate change adaptation, she said.
[HT: administrative assistant Kelli, readers Angel, Suzie A. and Ken B.; photos via Financial Times]
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
Fantastic! Are they going to take a bullet for their own cause?
No, I don’t think you understand Rosie. It’s not the superior intellects who need to go- it’s the worthless poor, the children, and the unborn children who need to go. They aren’t contributing ANYTHING to the vast knowledge wealth that these intellectuals have contributed. An unborn child has never nor will ever publish a peer reviewed paper, and hence is worthless to society. The goal of humanity, it’s ends, it’s raison d’être is to amass as much knowledge as possible and publish as many articles as possible in scientific, peer reviewed journals. If you aren’t doing that or if you are not worshiping someone who is, you suck and need to die.
Up next from ecofascists: 11 Million Dead Jews During WWII: How Hitler’s Policies Will Reduce Europe’s Carbon Footprint Into the 21st Century.
In the meantime, population alarmists scramble to explain the oddity that is this:
Simple, Cranky. That photo was taken 500 years ago BEFORE- people used up all the earth. Duh.
Geez, not to mention, this is exactly why liberals should be against universal health care. It costs a lot of energy to power hospitals and all those X-ray, EKGs, monitors, etc. Not to mention that it can prolong the carbon spewing lifetimes of millions of the earth’s population. The only good people are dead people, don’tcha know? Now excuse me while I fly my personal jet halfway across the world to attend a feelgood climate summit.
oh, by the way, Bobby, you’re on a rare roll today.
Reading this makes me sick to my stomach. Chinese women don’t just have one child. Many have several children and are FORCED to abort them, abandon them to die of exposure, and/or secretly dump them in orphanages. If you refuse to abort a second child in China, you will be forced to abort or you *will* go to prison. Is that what we want in America and Europe? Seriously? A world-wide bloodbath? Sick, sick, sick!
900 million people in 1750. An estimated 9.5 Billion people in 2150. Pictures of empty places are cute. But facts are facts. If we aren’t careful, overpopulation will trigger widespread disease and small collapses in eco systems. Species that overpopulate go through a major correction down the road. What is the tipping point for our species? No one knows. But if there is one, we’re 10 times closer to it than we were in the 18th century.
But a lot of crises are coming home to roost now.
LA and Vegas are running out of water. Australia is literally on fire. And the word’s first war over fresh water in Africa is on the horizon.
Acknowledging scientific facts does not make us environmentalists demons. We’re not evil. We’re only the people noticing the trouble headed our way if we are not careful.
The hell?
Abort a child, save the Earth? God, will some people do anything to get out of accepting that lack of abortion doesn’t cause overpopulation- extreme poverty and lack of access to education do. Fix those and the population will decline without killing anyone.
The whole, “It’s too hard to care for everyone” line is bull. Abortion will not save the planet. Only helping people will.
LA and Vegas are running out of water NOT Because there are too many people on the planet but because they have built unsustainable communities in the middle of an arid desert.
Australia is on fire, not because of too many people – in fact most of Australia is devoid of people.
Non-native species introduced to the continent have had disastrous effects on the ecology of the continent.
Africa is a continent rich in minerals and resources, including groundwater. The exploitation of this continents people and resources by the West needs to stop. They have also suffered greatly from terrible wars.
Africa needs more people, not less. And it’s people need to be educated and taught how to care for themselves. Lower infant mortality and proper medical care for women and children will help.
Forcing these people to have one child goes deeply against the African nations love of children and family.
The London School of Economics put out a paper this year suggesting that birth control is the answer to greenhouse gases. Read about it in the Washington Post.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/09/14/AR2009091403308.html
Dhalgren – people might die of disease one day. So, let’s kill them now?
Also: Here is another story from Diana…does she want people to die or not? It seems like war would be a built-in answer for her. I guess she wants the chance to decide who lives and who dies. Diana, are you a first-born?
The human cost of war
Diana Francis, 10 December 2009
http://www.opendemocracy.com/5050/diana-francis/human-cost-of-war
Thank you, Angel! As a woman of color, I get nervous when I hear talk about population control, as most of the population growth is occuring in the developing world. In fact, the U.S. is the only developed nation where population growth is at replacement level.
I believe that we should be good stewards of the planet, but the best way to “control” population is to increase the social status of women. When women have better educational and job opportunities, the birth rate almost always falls, even in countries where large families are valued, such as Iran.
I love yours posts, Phillymiss. Thank you so much for saying that the answer is helping women and raising women’s status. :)
Dahlgren dear,
Do the planet a favor and lead by example.
Let’s all “reduce” ourselves.
You go first.
The goal of humanity, it’s ends, it’s raison d’être is to amass as much knowledge as possible and publish as many articles as possible in scientific, peer reviewed journals. If you aren’t doing that or if you are not worshiping someone who is, you suck and need to die.
Posted by: Bobby Bambino Author Profile Page at December 11, 2009 9:00 AM
sounds like someone we know is spending too much time in academia.
Hope you have a a chance to take some time off soon.
As I was exercising this morning and thinking about this article…I wondered if there would be a carbon offset for each abortion…..like a voucher or something given out at the clinic.
She admitted that China’s population program is not without consequences, as the country is entering the aging society fast and facing the problem of gender imbalance.
Well, DUH. These Godless doofuses don’t realize that people are the world’s best resource. Until we become a God-fearing world, this will continue, so I don’t see this craziness ending. God-fearing people will just have to stand up for what is right.
Wasn’t it settled once and for all that China’s one child policy was a total disaster, that men would be fighting over the few remaining women, or leaving the country all together? Perhaps these crazy progressive liberals will start regulating whether families can have boys or girls. Family names starting with A-L can have girls, and M-Z can have boys. Or maybe genetic testing will be done to produce the best “specimens”…
“Now excuse me while I fly my personal jet halfway across the world to attend a feelgood climate summit.”
Posted by: Michael at December 11, 2009 9:24 AM
I heard that Nancy Pelosi might be taking a flight over to Copenhagen next week. Maybe we could convince them to keep her there, or lose her luggage at least.
* * *
you are quite welcome Phillymiss! It just really bothers me that the West goes over to places like Uganda and Nigeria and tells these people that the only way to solve their problems is to stop having children. And aid is tied to sex ed and birth control.
The problem is that these nations need help getting on their feet. They need their young people to be educated (and not condom education – real true education that allows them to make use of their talents and gifts) and their countries rebuilt.
“Do the planet a favor and lead by example.
Let’s all “reduce” ourselves.
You go first.
Posted by: carder at December 11, 2009 11:46 AM”
==============================================
I would agree..for those who say there are too many living people in the world…lead by example please and remove yourselves from the land of the living.
Those who say people are emitting to much Carbon Dioxide/ carbon foot print… Lead the way,pls stop exhaling…
Why is it that these pro-death people whose only solution to all of the world problems is to (always) kill other people (born or unborn)? Why don’t you take the lead and start with yourselves first?
What? You don’t want to die???
This was yesterday’s news.
Today’s news is HERE and HERE
And this is also TODAY’S news.
Right to Life in Spain rejects ‘radicalization’ of new abortion law
The goal of humanity, it’s ends, it’s raison d’être is to amass as much knowledge as possible and publish as many articles as possible in scientific, peer reviewed journals. If you aren’t doing that or if you are not worshiping someone who is, you suck and need to die.
Posted by: Bobby Bambino at December 11, 2009 9:00 AM
Hey Bobby! Kind of gives a new meaning to the popular saying in the circles of academia “publish or die”, doesn’t it?
Hey! Let the rest of the world worry about the environment!
Chinese car market overtakes that of United States (AP) 21 hrs ago.
SHANGHAI — China has overtaken the U.S. as the world’s biggest market for automobiles, the first time any other country has bought more vehicles than the nation that produced Henry Ford, the Cadillac and the minivan.
Now that the Chinese buy more cars and trucks than Americans, the shift could produce ripples for the environment, gas prices and even the kinds of cars automakers design.
More than 12.7 million cars and trucks will be sold in China this year, up 44 percent from the previous year and surpassing the 10.3 million forecast in the U.S., according to J.D. Power and Associates.
China has long been expected to overtake the U.S. since its population of 1.3 billion is more than quadruple that of the United States. But the increase in sales happened much faster than anyone expected because of China’s tax cuts, its stimulus program and a depressed American market.
Two years ago, J.D. Power predicted China would pass the U.S. in 2025. Earlier this year, it forecast 2009 sales of just 9 million vehicles for China.
After a sharp slowdown in auto sales late last year, the Chinese government cut taxes on small cars and spent $730 million on subsidies to encourage sales of SUVs, pickups and minivans. A big stimulus program also boosted truck sales by pumping money into construction.
It just really bothers me that the West goes over to places like Uganda and Nigeria and tells these people that the only way to solve their problems is to stop having children. And aid is tied to sex ed and birth control.
It bothers me too! Many of these countries have tremendous natural resources (such as Nigeria), but there is so much corruption there only the wealthy benefit from it and 99 percent of the people are poor.
Now that China’s carbon footprint will worsen with all the cars around….will they be implementing a Zero-child policy next???
Let’s see here. If China’s one child policy is supposed to be the answer in combating world pollution, (which is exactly what we are being told) then why are they one of the most polluted countries in the world? Not exactly exhibit “A” on why population control succeeds in reducing pollution.
Hi Jerry,
There’s a consensus on this already. A C-O-N-S-E-N-S-U-S. That’s all we need to know.
Jerry,
Did I tell you there’s a consensus?
:)
A consensus? Garbage in, garbage out.
Posted by: RSD at December 11, 2009 4:46 PM
“Now that China’s carbon footprint will worsen with all the cars around….will they be implementing a Zero-child policy next???”
——————————————————
No!
Humanist China will start at the other end of the life spectrum and beging elimnating peope who have lived beyond their ‘productive years’ and have become ‘useless’ eaters and China will iniate wars of conquest with neighboring countries to acquire resources, both human and non-human, to satifsfy their graying societies need for cheaper labor.
It will me another great leap backward.
Revolution is not a tea party.
yor bro ken