The Hot Weather Madness

Randy said:
I don't propose to "reduce" population. Somebody tried that in the 40's, he wasn't a particularly nice man.

Have you had your kids Corcaigh?
Click to expand...
Population needs to decrease and it's going to happen one way or another, I think it would best be done in a more civilised way than barbarism, which is the way we're heading now and which you feel quite comfortable about.

Nobody is stopping people having children but maybe you should start having a read into what's been going on with respect to the relationship between wealth, mortality rates and birth rates without resorting to the dramatic. You're mimicking The Sun, Daily Mail etc and it's not going to get much support.
 
Funky_Chicken said:
You’re beginning to sound like a politician - no amount of whataboutery can alter the fact you’ve chosen to make multiple fights in your life and will continue to do so. It doesn’t matter if you’re prepared to pay more to offset it (you haven’t and probably never will) . One of your trips abroad has probably thrown out more carbon than the average person does in a year. So whilst my trip to Scotland or Cornwall in the 80’s and 90’s in my old petrol car will have thrown out some carbon it will be minuscule in comparison to your long haul flight to wherever. I could do my journey multiple times and still get no where near your one journey carbon emissions aboard your jet, so yes I’m pretty sure my carbon footprint is lower than yours. You made that choice to get on that plane, and by your own admission will continue to do so. You knew what effects that plane’s emissions had and you still were happy to board and travel to wherever. That’s your choice and you’ve committed no crime but to come on here preaching how we have to all change our ways just smacks of hypocrisy when your actions in the past, and your continuing actions in the future, exacerbate the very situation your talking about.
www.theguardian.com

How your flight emits as much CO2 as many people do in a year

Even short-haul flights produce huge amounts of CO2, figures show
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com
Click to expand...
It's not whataboutery, it's what I actually do. Maybe try and counter my points, instead of trolling?

If you're willing to drive to Cornwall in the 80's, you've probably spent 40 years driving 10-15k miles a year (in a petrol/ diesel car), which is ~160 tonnes of emissions. I'd have to go on 320 return flights to southern Europe to match that :LOL: For reference, my total lifetime car emissions will probably end up a 20th of that, and the flights for my holidays maybe a 10th, up to now.

Your life will be responsible for a lot more emissions than me, and I'll bet my hat you don't have the same influence/ contribution to green infrastructure schemes as I do/ have/ will. I suppose I think I've earned the right to go on a couple of flights a year (especially having the EV early, solar, WFH etc). What have you done to earn your 160 tonnes of carbon from your vehicle alone, or what are you going to do to make up for that?

You seem to be against most green schemes, and you'd have been kicking out 12 tonnes per year for your adult life, if you had your way or if everyone thought like you. That's probably 720 tonnes or so, I won't even make a third of that, and will do plenty to stop others doing the same, and people thinking like that is why that line is trending down.

1658405374517.png
 
Corcaigh_the_Cat said:
Population needs to decrease and it's going to happen one way or another, I think it would best be done in a more civilised way than barbarism, which is the way we're heading now and which you feel quite comfortable about.

Nobody is stopping people having children but maybe you should start having a read into what's been going on with respect to the relationship between wealth, mortality rates and birth rates without resorting to the dramatic. You're mimicking The Sun, Daily Mail etc and it's not going to get much support.
Click to expand...
Dramatic?

I'm not one of the ones openly calling for a reduction in the population of the world.

One does wonder if the people who support this idea supported it before they had kids or after?
 
Last edited:
Muttley said:
We know from experience that as child mortality drops then so does the birth rate. In most developed countries the birth rate is below 2. I am hopeful that this will continue without the need for any interference from Governments or anyone else. The other method of population control is to have periodic wars to slaughter a good chunk of the population and that will become more likely unless we address the demand on resources for "stuff". It might be that the current Ukraine war is more about resources than political influence and security with Russia wanting to secure the agricultural resources of Ukraine.
Click to expand...
Birth rate has dropped massively in other countries too outside of the traditional "developed" world. The popluation boom has already happened as child mortality improved but birthrate was slow to respond. Ultimately it's predicted there'll be something not far off a 1 in 1 out in the not so distant future, but the kids from a generation or two ago will now average a much higher life expectancy and fill up the world with adults. Most studies suggest that population growth will curve off and the damage has already been done. As you suggest actively wiping out chunks of the adult population would be the only thing that would stiop it (which i'm not suggesting as an option)
 
Randy said:
Dramatic?

I'm not one of the ones openly calling for a reduction in the population of the world.

One does wonder the people who support this idea supported it before they had kids or after?
Click to expand...
Im a father of 2 young children.

I believe population growth has to stop worldwide, otherwise we won’t be able to feed the population the world demands
 
GazC_MFC said:
Im a father of 2 young children.

I believe population growth has to stop worldwide, otherwise we won’t be able to feed the population the world demands
Click to expand...
There we go. You've had your kids and now you sound like you don't want others to have the amount of children they want.

I've still yet to hear any solution to stopping people having kids. Restricting financial assistance won't stop population growth.
 
Randy said:
There we go. You've had your kids and now you sound like you don't want others to have the amount of children they want.

I've still yet to hear any solution to stopping people having kids. Restricting financial assistance won't stop population growth.
Click to expand...
Sorry I’m not advocating no children. I’m advocating population growth control, to which I don’t have the answer for. People who a cleverer than me should come up with that

Actually the evidence is out there that if people are more financial secure they are more likely to have less kids. Socialist programmes would help with that
 
Randy said:
I don't propose to "reduce" population. Somebody tried that in the 40's, he wasn't a particularly nice man.
Click to expand...

Huh? Why the constant references to death camps? Do you honestly think anybody on the thread is suggesting anyhing like that?
 
Randy said:
I've still yet to hear any solution to stopping people having kids. Restricting financial assistance won't stop population growth
Click to expand...

Any government policies that reduce disposable income will effect population growth. They already are.

www.businessinsider.com

How the 21st century economy convinced millennial women that having kids isn't worth it

As the US birth rate declines, millennial women are realizing having kids comes at a cost. There's also a lot more to life in the post-2008 economy.
www.businessinsider.com www.businessinsider.com
 
Randy said:
Dramatic?

I'm not one of the ones openly calling for a reduction in the population of the world.

One does wonder if the people who support this idea supported it before they had kids or after?
Click to expand...
I think the point people are trying to make is that having children is the single most damaging thing a couple of people can do to the environment. I know it sounds horrific but sadly it's demonstrably true
 
SmallTown said:
I think the point people are trying to make is that having children is the single most damaging thing a couple of people can do to the environment. I know it sounds horrific but sadly it's demonstrably true
Click to expand...
I suppose another way to look at it is people having so many kids has enabled us to have enough clever people to come up with and invent ways out of it. It also produces voters who are more up for voting for green policies, to counter those who otherwise wouldn't want to do a thing?
 
Andy_W said:
I suppose another way to look at it is people having so many kids has enabled us to have enough clever people to come up with and invent ways out of it. It also produces voters who are more up for voting for green policies, to counter those who otherwise wouldn't want to do a thing?
Click to expand...
That's a fair point. I was just thinking from a consumption point of view, humans are incredibly destructive
 
I suppose a 2 kid limit wouldn't be that bad for those who want kids, and I have zero problem with those who have 2,3,4 kids etc saying that those coming after should be possibly limited to two. It's not really necessary in the developed world mind, with a low birth rate, so probably won't even need any control.

In the developing world like Africa etc, people are having many kids (lots of countries have a Fertility rate of over 5) , but they're not dishing out anywhere near as much emissions as those in the developed world. It would take 50 kids from Niger or Somalia, to emit the same CO2 as 1 person from the UK, or 150 to be the same as USA.

These people may also end up working on solar farms and the like, for export cables etc. I read something before about having massive solar farms and in Morocoo, to power Europe, via export cables.
 
SmallTown said:
That's a fair point. I was just thinking from a consumption point of view, humans are incredibly destructive
Click to expand...
Aye, but they're also incredibly good at fixing stuff too. We started digging the hole very early though, and we didn't start building the ladder at the same pace. Got a hell of a lot of catching up to do, even just to limit the problems coming our way.

There's no way to avoid some of what's coming, but we can certainly buy time, and this is a key point in history where we've got the tech to do it, we just need more of a will to do it. We could end up having to move a hell of a lot of people, and buying 10 or 100 years or whatever will really help that.
 
Randy said:
There we go. You've had your kids and now you sound like you don't want others to have the amount of children they want.

I've still yet to hear any solution to stopping people having kids. Restricting financial assistance won't stop population growth.
Click to expand...
There's the drama again. You can have as many kids as you want, that's not a problem, just keep knocking them out, you're living in a country that can handle it for the next few decades at least

The world population is going to fall, and it will fall faster in the places where there are more births first. This is the reality. You may not recognise global warming and the effect it's going to have on the world economy, it's a reality though.

You can scoff as much as you like about weather warnings, as you did when you kicked off this thread, we've seen the damage just two days of hot weather has done in the meantime. Homes lost, agricultural land burnt out, infrastructure struggling.
 
Funky_Chicken said:
You’re beginning to sound like a politician - no amount of whataboutery can alter the fact you’ve chosen to make multiple fights in your life and will continue to do so. It doesn’t matter if you’re prepared to pay more to offset it (you haven’t and probably never will) . One of your trips abroad has probably thrown out more carbon than the average person does in a year. So whilst my trip to Scotland or Cornwall in the 80’s and 90’s in my old petrol car will have thrown out some carbon it will be minuscule in comparison to your long haul flight to wherever. I could do my journey multiple times and still get no where near your one journey carbon emissions aboard your jet, so yes I’m pretty sure my carbon footprint is lower than yours. You made that choice to get on that plane, and by your own admission will continue to do so. You knew what effects that plane’s emissions had and you still were happy to board and travel to wherever. That’s your choice and you’ve committed no crime but to come on here preaching how we have to all change our ways just smacks of hypocrisy when your actions in the past, and your continuing actions in the future, exacerbate the very situation your talking about.
www.theguardian.com

How your flight emits as much CO2 as many people do in a year

Even short-haul flights produce huge amounts of CO2, figures show
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com
Click to expand...
Randy said:
There we go. You've had your kids and now you sound like you don't want others to have the amount of children they want.

I've still yet to hear any solution to stopping people having kids. Restricting financial assistance won't stop population growth.
Click to expand...
I believe China stopped people having children by increasing tax for people having more than 1 child.

I’m not advocating it, just highlighting how it can be done.
 
Heam44 said:
I believe China stopped people having children by increasing tax for people having more than 1 child.

I’m not advocating it, just highlighting how it can be done.
Click to expand...
With a population of 1.4 billion it's not worked has it? India also has a population of over a billion people too.
 
Randy said:
With a population of 1.4 billion it's not worked has it? India also has a population of over a billion people too.
Click to expand...
I think you'll end up arguing with yourself Randy as I'm at a loss as to what answer you are hoping to hear.
People have pointed out why population growth will impact the pace of climate change, how some countries have tried to limit population growth and how nature or wars will ultimately reduce numbers if we don't do anything.
I'll guarantee that nobody here will suggest anything along the lines of what you have been intimating at times.
You were one of the ones moaning about lockdowns saddling future generations with the bill and as far as I can see, you're not overly concerned about population growth making that future even worse.
Once again, as in the pandemic, you seem to have a bigger issue with the older generation than you do with the issues being discussed at times.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top