What is your opinion on the events going on at Copenhagen?

Didn’t China start the one child policy? Is China really the best model for the rest of the world?

@colliedog yes they did. this is actually getting fairly serious since so many representatives are there and agreeing that this is a good idea. things are really getting sticky over there…

Give me a second to chew on it…

I have diagrams and stuff I made being shown there right now. Eeeeeeeeeeee.

Personally i’d rather the limit be set at two, but yes, I think that it’s extremely appropriate concerning the fact that people are stupidly having absurd numbers of children when we have a global food crisis and climate crisis going on.

I find it terrifying.

@J0E No problem!
@delirium Think of it this way: we already have a method of distributing the wealth! you have children. you buy diapers at walmart. the walmart workers are paid for helping you. they in turn go out and buy something at the mall. the mall worker is paid for helping you….get it? i personally am a child of 7, and find nothing absurd about it! and as for the climate, there is nothing wrong with CO2! it is a perfect circle! their method of thinking is ‘CO2 kills us. humans breath out CO2. therefore, we should kill all humans.’ this is the literal thinking going on right now, and people are AGREEING with it. isnt this scary to you??
@casheroo i completely agree, thanks

Wow, you’re…. a little uneducated about climate change, aren’t you.

@delirium well you seem to know so much! please, enlighten me! tell me what i obviously lack so that we can be on the same page!

You are too young to chew Wil. Dont start that habit:)

@Sir_Mikey what do you mean?? im not trying to chew her out, i just want to know her views! yeah i was a little sarcastic…but arent we all? sigh…so misunderstood.. =]

P.S. my comment on here was another attempted joke…I don’t think anyone got it.

I was joking about the fact that you are asking about cope! You should know me better by now, Im full of crap:) I know you dont chew tobacco:)

@Sir_Mikey hahaha i get it =] took me a sec, but im with you =]
@J0E no i got it, very funny =]

Have a great night Wil, Stop the dipping though:)

haha thanks, you too mikey =]

1. No one is thinking that the anthropogenic causes of climate change are due to exhalation of carbon dioxide. Not. One. Educated. Individual.
2. It has nothing to do with our biological effects on the levels of carbon in the atmosphere, but with the effect of our irresponsible use of technology and industry.
3. The birth rate should be curbed for other reasons. We’re overpopulated already and having that many children, at this point, qualifies as irresponsible and selfish behavior. Not to mention the fact that there are much data to support the fact that the fewer children = smarter children, with 1 child being the ideal number for intelligence, success, etc.
4. Limiting the number of children that people have is called “negative population growth” and is a replacement for the exponential population growth that we’re currently experiencing.

Not even beginning to mention the fact that we cannot (I repeat: CANNOT) support the growing population with the agricultural land and land management practices that we currently have. In over half of populous Africa, for example, the current population exceeds the agricultural capacity.

@WilAthart I don’t know where you are getting this crap from, but please (for your own sake and others) stop believing it and stop propagating it.

No mass of delegates at Copenhagen are considering a one child policy as part of any agreement on curbing global greenhouse emissions. I can only imagine that some chinese delegate made some comment about their draconian national policies and those with an alternative political agenda are milking it for all its worth.

The fact is that the world may well hit 9 billion sometime around 2050, whether anyone likes it or not.

But regardless, population control is not on the agenda of any global agreement at Copenhagen.

Please repeat the previous sentence a few times and take a deep breath while exhaling as much CO2 as you like. The issue in Copenhagen is industrial, agricultural, transport, and land-use change associated emissions of greenhouse gases and trying to get an interim agreement on how the world’s nations will share the responsibility of adequately and rapidly reduce such emissions.

This is simply yet another bizarre conspiratorial fantasy to pop out of the ass of the electronic media.

That said, I do think you might have something to worry about….If you keep producing copious amounts of bullshit, someone might try to cap and trade your methane emissions.

It’s been my observation that the climate change deniers are getting very desperate. Quoting people like Lord Monckton is one sign of sheer desperation. The Lord might be a smart individual. But he’s not among the world’s leading climatologists. He knows his stuff, yes. And his stuff is media and politics. People like him getting involved with science can lead to confusing people. The same can be said about some politicians on the other side. Many of our most excellent scientists are rather shy and many of them are not very good communicators. But the public climate change debate is about emotions, same as with evolution.

So all of us who are concerned about climate change and are in favor of applying the precautionary principle should ask the following questions:

1) Why do people reject the idea of evolution?
2) Why do people reject the notion of man-made climate change?

Fear of not being a special creature anymore? Uneasiness about the notion of a worm, fish or bird being a (remote) cousin of our ancestors? Fear of a multicolored world which is not a simple black and white, good and evil as it might appear at first in religious texts?

Fear of losing our life styles and the accomplishment of modern civilization? Uneasiness because green technology promoters might be part of a disguised communist movement wanting to raise taxes? Fear that the proven economic growth model might be in jeopardy?

I think many high-level scientific arguments have been exchanged, like natural cycles and man-made contribution are not mutually exclusive. The rate of change and so on. @Critter38 is very knowledgeable and he can offer many links where we find the stuff to better understand the issues.

To make some real progress in this debate we should focus on why people are worried. On both sides!