Environmentalists push Population Control via Carbon Credits

[rambone]

Those kooky Environmentalists... they have such an interest in controlling us for some reason...

Environmentalist Reporter: Give Carbon Credits to One-Child Couples



Andrew Revkin, who reports on environmental issues for The New York Times, floated an idea last week for combating global warming: Give carbon credits to couples that limit themselves to having one child.

Revkin later told CNSNews.com that he was not endorsing the idea, just trying to provoke some thinking on the topic.

Revkin participated via Web camera in an Oct. 14 panel discussion on “Covering Climate: What’s Population Got to Do With It” that was held at the Woodrow Wilson Center in Washington, D.C. The other participants on the panel were Dennis Dimick, executive editor of National Geographic, and Emily Douglas, web editor for The Nation magazine.

At the event, Revkin said: “Well, some of the people have recently proposed: Well, should there be carbon credits for a family planning program in Africa let's say? Should that be monetized as a part of something that, you know, if you, if you can measurably somehow divert fertility rate, say toward an accelerating decline in a place with a high fertility rate, shouldn't there be a carbon value to that?

“And I have even proposed recently, I can't remember if it's in the blog, but just think about this: Should--probably the single-most concrete and substantive thing an American, young American, could do to lower our carbon footprint is not turning off the lights or driving a Prius, it's having fewer kids, having fewer children," said Revkin.

“So should there be, eventually you get, should you get credit--If we're going to become carbon-centric--for having a one-child family when you could have had two or three," said Revkin. "And obviously it's just a thought experiment, but it raises some interesting questions about all this.”

When CNSNews.com later followed up with questions about his comments, Revkin responded in an e-mail.

“I wasn't endorsing any of this, simply laying out the math and noting the reality that if one were serious about the population-climate intersection, it'd be hard to avoid asking hard questions about USA population growth,” wrote Revkin...

In a Sept. 19, 2009 blog entry, “Are Condoms the Ultimate Green-Technology?” Revkin cited an August 2009 study by the London School of Economics that highlighted having fewer children as a solution to diminishing our carbon footprint.

The study was sponsored by the British activist group Optimum Population Trust, which advocates reduced population growth.

Naturally the NYT reporter "doesn't endorse the idea" but still feels compelled to write about Government-mandated population control, just to get people thinking. Last I checked we are not having a shortage of news. Every day there is some dramatic turn of events in politics and world events. We don't need some cretin from the New York Times provoking our thoughts about how humans are warming the planet by their mere existence.

And how about this "Optimum Population Trust" group? Makes me feel all warm and fuzzy. Do we really have groups sitting around plotting how to wipe out humans, or control their breeding? Talk about social-experimentation gone awry.

 

[5.56'aholic]

I, for one, vote that all of these enviro-douchebags off themselves first if they are so concerned about the environment. I might then take them seriously.

 

[rich8483]

I, for one, vote that all of these enviro-douchebags off themselves first if they are so concerned about the environment. I might then take them seriously.

yeah! right! if they honestly believe the world is over populated then let them prove their sincerity by being the first to lead by offing themselves, for the sake of the enviroment of course.

like when michael moore says we dont pay enough taxes. fine, then you can start by donating all of your money to the IRS.

and al gore has his panties in a bunch over the enviroment and says we need to drive smaller cars and less often. fine, then sell your SUV, take a bus instead of your private jet, and stop eating meat, b/c cattle are a much larger cause of CO2 actually than transportation.

when they talk out of two sides of the ugly face, its awful hard to take them seriously!

 

[Panama]

I, for one, vote that all of these enviro-douchebags off themselves first if they are so concerned about the environment. I might then take them seriously.

Amen!
Something like this would work.

 

[4sarge]

Those kooky Environmentalists... they have such an interest in controlling us for some reason...

Naturally the NYT reporter "doesn't endorse the idea" but still feels compelled to write about Government-mandated population control, just to get people thinking. Last I checked we are not having a shortage of news. Every day there is some dramatic turn of events in politics and world events. We don't need some cretin from the New York Times provoking our thoughts about how humans are warming the planet by their mere existence.

And how about this "Optimum Population Trust" group? Makes me feel all warm and fuzzy. Do we really have groups sitting around plotting how to wipe out humans, or control their breeding? Talk about social-experimentation gone awry.

Population Control is one of the planks in the Progressive Agenda. Several of Obama's Tzar's have written and expressed the desire for population control and genetically ridding ourselves of undesirables. One of the major hybrid seed companies has a strain of corn that contains birth control additives. I think that even Henry Kissinger expressed the desire to control various populaces thru the food supply. The media doesn't report or investigate and or we have been oblivious to the activities of many who are definitely NOT our friends.

 

[IUGradStudent]

Take a look at the chapter on Eugenics in Jonah Goldberg's book Liberal Fascism. He outlines there how throughout the 20th century Progressives/Liberals have used the state to try to exterminate people groups who they thought were sub-optimal. It started with races and immigrants, moved to abortion and euthanasia, and the next step could easily be pure number of people. The "population bomb" inanity has been around since the 19th century and it shows no signs of stopping.

Pretty incredible to have advocates for less children at a time when Europe is self-destructing because they're not having enough children. The future belongs to those who bother to show up for it, as Mark Steyn says.

 

[Pami]

*cheeky grin* I think every politician and people like Mr. Revkin need to be given a copy of the movie Idiocracy and forced to watch it at least twice, just to make sure it sinks in.

Idiocracy (2006)
Idiocracy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[rich8483]

Brawndo - its got electrolytes. what plants need!