The only way to stop Global warming is population control?

Question

With fewer people then the human race would have a smaller carbon footprint - instead of trying to breed so many people and worrying about how to control Carbon release - the only sensible and realistic solution is to make fewer people population control - Nobody talks about population control in the context of Global Warming - its simpl the first thing we should be doing - stop making babies - tax baby makers and lock up your daughters. What do you think?

Answer 1

Global warming is a reality - the current debate is over whether human activity can have impact on our climate. Personally (from IPCC climate model evidence) i think yes - we do have significant impact. But either way - surely it is better to err on the side of caution and curb our emissions regardless.





Anyway - as for population control, I agree that this is an important factor in the future of the human race - Sir David Attenborough agrees with you too:



http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article6087833.ece



And in my opinion he is a leading authority when it comes to our planets delicate eco-systems, and the role we play within them.







Population control is a very difficult topic of debate at this time - i think the fear surrounding the debate is mainly stemming from religious trends, or simply because this is a relatively new idea to be brought to the forefront - and new ideas are often considered scary!!



Also: i call Godwins law!

Answer 2

Well, population control is always going to be a controversial topic and unless you're talking about it strictly in the sense of improving standards of living (reducing the need for large families) and/or increasing levels of education (letting people make their own choices), you are going to start sounding a little Hitleresque.



Overpopulation is at least as big a problem if not a bigger problem than Global warming in the context of survival of the human race (There are twice as many people on the planet now as there were when JFK was president). The Earth has a finite amount of resources and can only support a certain amount of life.



If you are interested in population problems or social evolution and you haven't already you should read; Garrett Hardin's The Tragedy of the Commons. Its an interesting read but a little extreme!



Link: http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/162/3859/1243

Answer 3

If by "nobody" you mean nobody you know, fine. But don't think that a lot of people who study sustainability haven't posed this as potentially *the* biggest factor in the whole equation. Because they have. So it's a great thought! But it sounds like you need to do a little research to find like-minded folks. Not that this will change the state of affairs in parts of the world where birthrates are 8 children (surviving past age 5) per woman. But maybe if you and those like-minded folks chose to adopt children and then focused your efforts on promoting family planning in the third world, you could help. But right now, you'd be wasting precious effort at stopping overpopulation by encouraging fewer children in developed countries where birth rates are lowest.



That being said, developed countries consume the most. So we would be best-served to strive for zero population growth in these parts of the world. But unless you're suggesting extinction of all humans, then you can't possibly think that *everyone* should stop having babies. How to get this under control? No one knows any truly ethical answers to this question. You can't just let diseases cause endless suffering, and you can't punish anyone for being born.



But hopefully lots of people raising this question over and over again will lead to progress on that front. My personal belief is that when people lead busy and interesting lives, with access to birth control and information, they just choose fewer children. Cultural norms that may have dictated large families in the past are sometimes rather slowly phased out, but so far it seems a universal side effect of development and stability in a culture. There are probably as many reasons for this as there are couples deciding whether to conceive. But you'd be well to learn about these factors if you hope to effect change.

Answer 4

Good idea.



Forget about human rights. women and men should be sterilised after the first child is born.

What about natures rights?



We are completely overpopulated, with most people in the West being gross fat useless lumps and the rest of the world are following us, argh!



There is no room left for the rest of the diverse animals and nature on our precious planet. We are ruining it.



Ban meat, fish poultry, eggs, and dairy foods.

Everyone should become vegetarian. It takes less space to produce crops, approximately one eighth of the equivalent to meat

I am 62 and have been a vegetarian now fo 43 years and I am very healthy, slim and young looking.

I have a very varied diet and it is not at All boring.

My meat eating friends are never disappointed when they come for dinner.



We should make methane gas from our human waste to power our electricity generators and use the remaining solids for fertiliser, instead of chemicals. Also develop alternative power sources urgently. But not nuclear.

Ban imports of food. Only eat what you grow in the country that you live in. Organic vegetable growing takes more labour, so people can work out side in a healthy way instead of factories and offices.

This is how it was before we discovered oil, and everything was organic because we did not discover chemicals and we did not have ships.

It is possible now to have a more diverse modern vegetarian diet now, because we have developed agriculturally.

Think of all the new vegetables that we now have and can grow in our own country, that were not known by our grandparents.



Instigate one child per one family only. Then our numbers in time, would reduce.

If we don't do something soon, there is likely to be a global catastrophe.

There will be mass migration from people whose lands have become deserts, there will be wars over water rights and there will be wars over oil and gas distribution etc etc.

Answer 5

You might reject my answer if you look at it only superficially.

But global warming, and in fact any of the crisis situations facing humanity all come from the same root.

And it is not our carbon footprint.It is our selfish egoism.

At the moment humanity, each and every one of us only cares about him/herself, using exploiting the others for self benefit, more pleasures and more profits.

We managed to get away with this attitude up until now, but something has changed.

The world has become global.

From now on we live in a closed integral system, and that means we have to change our relations to each other, otherwise we simply destroy the whole system.

Believe it or not, this planet could sustain much bigger populations, than 7 billion, provided that population behaves as one united, loving family.

We have to understand we are chained to each other whether we like it or not, and there is no escaping this station.

So we have to move in one direction, working for the benefit of the whole.

If we managed to correct our connections in between ourselves, and we can settle into the system of Nature in Harmony, all our problems, including the climate, would solve themselves almost automatically.

I hope it helps with your dilemma, all the best.

Answer 6

I agree with you. I think making efforts at population control is the only realistic way we can possibly manage our planets resources properly and prevent us heading towards rapid extinction.



The Earth's population 1000 years ago was only around 300,000. It is now 6.7 BILLION and expected to get to over 9 BILLION by 2050. This rate of growth is mathematically unsustainable and we are destined for a very unpleasant Malthusian correction in population size if we don't seize the opportunity now to do something about it.



Fortunately, this could be done by simply investing in raising education and living standards in poor countries and enabling easy access to freely available contraception to all. There is a pretty good correlation between falling birth-rates and declining population in those countries that have very good living standards and levels of education.



With fewer people on the planet there is less competition for resources, less energy consumption, less pollution and less excuse for conflicts and warfare.

Answer 7

Contrary to the other answers, you are quite right that population growth makes all of our environmental problems worse, not just global warming.

The answer is as simple as 1 + 1 = 2. One woman, one child for two generations, all done voluntarily. Provide women incentives such as education to have at most one child, and give bonuses to women who have none. The more economically independent women are, the fewer children they have.



Nevertheless, this does not mean that depopulation will solve all of the problems. Other environmental steps must also be taken. It does mean that no matter what other steps we take to reduce our per person pollution, if we have a growing population we will never get ahead of our problem.

Answer 8

Global warming is a fact. Just what is causing it is somewhat debatable. But your premise is basically right. To many people consuming too much is starting to strain the environment. But reducing births is not the only solution.



Universal poverty would answer just as well.



But you do not see people jumping up for that either.



Obviously unpopular solutions are not going to work but some restraint on child bearing and some restraint on consumption will help.

Answer 9

No that would not remedy the subject, because of the fact worldwide warming never stops. The IPCC released an editorial a pair of weeks in the past asserting that worldwide warming is irreversible, so no forcing human beings to renounce having greater desirable than one infant won't remedy the subject. we are able to easily decrease worldwide warming. it is impossible to completely eliminate it. it may be like removing all climate and climate in the worldwide. impossible.

Answer 10

It has been known for a long time that our main problem on nearly every front is over-population.



The solution, however, cannot be found. No one can suggest an effective method that would be accepted by every nation and religious group on Earth.



Nature has its own method that works every time. Nearly every species will reproduce until its population grows beyond its food supply. Famine trims the population.

.

Answer 11

The planet can feed this many people, that's not the problem. The main problem stems from having economies that rely on continuous overproduction and destruction of badly made goods. It's not so much the number of people but the ridiculous amount of waste and energy use that happens just to keep the wheels of the economies turning. All people really need is food, medicine, homes and warmth. They don't need a new car every year to impress their stupid friends.



Will you be volunteering for suicide to help save the planet? It'll reduce your carbon footprint, you know.

Answer 12

There's not even hard evidence to support the theory of Global Warming. In the 1970's the big issue was Global Cooling. Perhaps you should spend more time studying these subjects before theorizing about population control.

Answer 13

Thats what ive always said, but not the population control part. I dont know what the fuss is with global warming, it will sort itself out - it will kill a chunk of human population from drought and crazy weather, then it will just go back to normal. We cant control the temperature of the planet even if we wanted to, we're too dependant on fuel and shizz

Answer 14

Amen! Tax the people who think it's OK to add to the problem! Neuter criminals!

Answer 15

You can't stop global warming.

Answer 16

global wamring is a lie yes the worlds temprutre is rising and ther is more drought and forest fires and etc but this impact of the cause of global waming that the sinetist say would only effect the world like 1%,it alie sintiest know this and thye ont want to admit ti because they will be ridiculed by everyone, and also they are getting billions and billios of money for research into global wamring so why would they admit that they are wrong

Answer 17

Oh, it's ok to stop others now that you are here, is it?

Answer 18

You are so fricken stupid. There is NO global warming or "climate change" NASA has proved that global warming is FAKE!!! Get a life.

Answer 19

You sound like Hitler.

Answer 20

i think you listen to too much crap.......its all a con