Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Thursday November 07 2019, @08:11PM   Printer-friendly
from the Neo-Malthusian dept.

From Bloomberg:

Forty years ago, scientists from 50 nations converged on Geneva to discuss what was then called the "CO2-climate problem." At the time, with reliance on fossil fuels having helped trigger the 1979 oil crisis, they predicted global warming would eventually become a major environmental challenge.

Now, four decades later, a larger group of scientists is sounding another, much more urgent alarm. More than 11,000 experts from around the world are calling for a critical addition to the main strategy of dumping fossil fuels for renewable energy: there needs to be far fewer humans on the planet.

[...] The scientists make specific calls for policymakers to quickly implement systemic change to energy, food, and economic policies. But they go one step further, into the politically fraught territory of population control. It "must be stabilized—and, ideally, gradually reduced—within a framework that ensures social integrity," they write.

Others disagree, stating

Fewer people producing less in greenhouse-gas emissions could make some difference in the danger that climate change poses over time. But whether we end up with 9, 10, or 11 billion people in the coming decades, the world will still be pumping out increasingly risky amounts of climate pollution if we don't fundamentally fix the underlying energy, transportation, and food systems.

Critics blast a proposal to curb climate change by halting population growth

Journal Reference:
William J Ripple, Christopher Wolf, Thomas M Newsome, Phoebe Barnard, William R Moomaw. World Scientists' Warning of a Climate Emergency[$]. BioScience. doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biz088


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 07 2019, @09:14PM (3 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 07 2019, @09:14PM (#917530)

    Peer pressure
    Once everyone knows 2 kids is the sustainable number to have, you get this in Ender’s game
    https://www.enotes.com/homework-help/how-being-called-third-by-stilson-both-good-bad-74861 [enotes.com]

    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   +1  
       Interesting=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   1  
  • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 07 2019, @09:19PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 07 2019, @09:19PM (#917533)

    No need for fictional references, China is a perfectly good example.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 08 2019, @09:44AM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 08 2019, @09:44AM (#917821)

    Yeah! Who needs Edison, Tesla, the Wright brothers, etc

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 08 2019, @04:37PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 08 2019, @04:37PM (#917928)

      But funny how they all emerged from a much smaller population pool, if your logic was right, we’d have multiple ‘Einsteins’ solving our every problem now (with most of those problems being exacerbated by too many people)