Families should have no more than two children - thinktank

[Shinobi]

NIALL FIRTH
Daily Mail
Wednesday, July 11, 2007

Comment: This is just modern-day eugenics wrapped up in phony environmentalism and it's aimed at middle class white people, whose population in most industrial areas of Britain is rapidly declining anyway. What would be the deterrant for people having more than two children? Would government agents abduct women off the streets, drug them and perform forced abortions as happens in China? Is the threat of global warming, like terrorism, severe enough to sacrifice all our freedoms and live in a society where the state regulates every single aspect of your personal life?

Families should have no more than two children if they want to help combat climate change, according to new research by a thinktank.

According to the report, published by the Optimum Population Trust, Britain's high birth rate is a major factor in the current level of climate change, which can only be combatted if families voluntarily limit the number of children they have.

The report calls for a 'two-child' policy in the UK that would reduce the nation's population from 60 million, as it currently stands, to no more than 55 milllion by 2050.

With the UK having the highest rate of teenage pregnancies in western Europe the thinktank is also calling for the Government to increase investment in family planning clinics and to look at ways of discouraging teenage girls from becoming pregnant.

At its current rate the report estimates that the UK's mid-century population is projected to be 68-69 million with the planet having the largest generation of young people in history - what it terms a 'youthquake'.

High population and accelerating consumption means that humans are outstripping the planet's biological capcity, says the report. By 2050, with the global population rising to 9.2 billion, humans will be using twice the Earth's natural capacity.

Figures released in the report highlight the links between human population and climate.

It claims that every additional Briton will 'burn' during their lifetime roughly the same amount of carbon as is found in a hectare of old-growth oak woodland - an area about three quarters the size of a Premiership football pitch or 50 average-sized UK gardens. Commenting on the figures, Prof John Guillebaud, the report's author, said: "Climate change is now widely regarded as the biggest problem facing the planet but most of the solutions seem to involve national or international agreements that look as far away as ever.

"We're nearing the point of no return and people are feeling increasingly desperate and helpless.

"The answer lies in our own hands. We're simply failing to acknowledge the link between human numbers and global warming.

"We have to recognise that the biggest cause of climate change is climate changers – in other words, human beings, in the UK as well as abroad - so deciding to stop at two, or at least to have one child less, is probably the simplest, quickest and most significant thing any of us could do to leave a sustainable and habitable planet for our children and grandchildren."

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/july2..._b_children.htm

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pagesve/arti...in_page_id=1770

[Guest]

Environmentalism? Depopultion IMHO. If it takes 2 to make 1, and they make only one, how many generations b4 the population is halved? 1.

[groggin]

having grown up in a small suburban town and watched it go from (as i saw it then) an untouched paradise to a paved parking lot, I entered my young manhood hating the masses of fat-happy campers that were putting up their NO TRESSPASSING signs up around my favorite swimming hole, hunting grounds, etc, etc.
in those days i'd swallowed that overpopulation shite hook, line and sinker.
no more tho, have a look:

Question: if u gave everyone on Earth one half of a sheet of plywood (4'x4' or 16 sq.f.) to stand on and call their own, and then put them all (yeah all 6+billion of us standing on 3+billion sheets of plywood) in the same place, how much of the surface of the Earth would be covered?

put ur calculator away please and answer from the gut

A. an area the size of africa + the continental U.S.
B. an area the size of texas
C. an area the size of the continental U.S.
D. an area the size of the U.S. state of Rhode Island + Delaware (two smallest states)

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
ok so now to the calc

6,000,000,000 X 16 = 96,000,000,000 square feet of area covered
a sq. mile = 5,280 X 5280 = 27,878,400 sq ft
96,000,000,000 divided by 27,878,400 = <span style="color:#33FF33">3,443.5 sq. miles covered ...

according to wikipedia,
Rhode Island covers an area of approximately 1,214 square miles (3,144 km²) and
Delaware = 2,491 sq mi (6,452 km²)
sooo
1214 + 2491 = <span style="color:#66FF99">3,705 square miles :biggrin:

please everyone take a look at a globe and give this some thought

Mother Earth has plenty of room for all of us,
tis only the hearts (do they have hearts?) of the corrupt global elite that are lacking free space :-)

[psilocybin]

The one thing I notice is that sheep reproduce like rabbits.

[groggin]

Quote:The one thing I notice is that sheep reproduce like rabbits.

we do ... and the cottontail is now on the endangered species list

[metal-gear-solid]

The problem with this "thinktank" is that they are not getting their message across to where it is needed. Africa and Asia. Those two continents; the people need to stop breeding.

[Dunamis]

(01-19-2011 10:49 PM)metal-gear-solid Wrote:  The problem with this "thinktank" is that they are not getting their message across to where it is needed. Africa and Asia. Those two continents; the people need to stop breeding.

Says "metal-gear-solid"! Total BS. What needs to happen there is Western governments need to get out, stop supporting dictators time and time again, and wipe third world debt out. Of course it wouldn't be a simple task, as we have helped arm the oppressors, so something would need to be done to even the playing field for all Africans. Maybe a program like the one in Switzerland initiated after WWII, rifles and training for all, which invariably leads to zero gun crime.

To suggest that Africa is actually overpopulated neglects reason, but then, you didn't try to provide an adequate reason.


Back to the article, clearly this is just population control at work. I love how they cleverly cover how this is depopulation by avoiding the fact that life kills. What about all those who will die before their 5th birthday? And of course those that die before parenthood in accidents, war, and as a result of illness?

Getting the message over that our planet, without Western Capitalism, can clearly support a much greater world population, is an important mission,and all of us should take part, even if only in simple conversations with friends and relatives. The science and maths is all quite simple. It's just the spin-doctors and political mouthpieces that confuse things.

http://overpopulationisamyth.com/




Click here to see the science behind this video.