slug.com slug.com

1 1

Social Darwinism would do more to slow climate change than any liberal or progressive policy would. Change my mind.

Brockalizer 5 Apr 19
Share

Be part of the movement!

Welcome to the community for those who value free speech, evidence and civil discourse.

Create your free account

1 comment

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

0

Well, I'll have a bit of trouble changing your mind since I agree with you.

All of the proposed measures to combat climate change are only a reduction in the percentage of carbon emissions. As the world population increases the net carbon footprint remains the same... and since India and China are exempt from the carbon accords... the net emissions increase.

The only thing to have any discernible effect would be a significant reduction in the world's population... and the only one I've seen in favor of that is AOC.

Too many humans. I disagree with her on just about everything, but she's not wrong about significant population reduction. Man is the biggest factor in man made climate change. Reducing man is the most efficient means of combating it. How you go about doing it is another ball of wax altogether.

@JayKane I've long thought that many if not most of the world's problems could be attributed to overpopulation.

No good solutions for that problem... What I'm hoping for is that technology comes up with 100% effective painless convenient birth control.

@An_Ominous, switch out the flouride in the supply with depo provera.

@JayKane so who do you propose killing first? People that don’t share your opinions?

@Bonez I agree that reduction of world population is the only thing that would reduce carbon emissions.
I don't think we should do that or even consider it. I also don't agree that we're facing Carbon-mageddon πŸ™‚
Gradually when the technology is viable (it isn't yet) we'll move to renewable "greener" energy sources... if for no other reason than fossil fuels are not an infinite resource.

I'm just pointing out that most of the solutions proposed by people who think Climate Change is a vital issue won't work. (I don't think their solutions will work... and I don't think their solutions are immediately necessary.)

In likewise... overpopulation is a problem... but there aren't any non-ridiculous solutions..
Pragmatism... most of my training as an engineer taught me to see when something won't work. It didn't do a lot to help determine what will actually work πŸ™‚

@Bonez I am not picking winners and losers like that. In fact I think if the US government got out of the business of doing just that, this problem would be off to a pretty good start in fixing itself. I'd propose a fairer solution. How about just cutting off foreign aid and let natural selection play it's course? That tact would have the added benefit of freeing up some fairly substantial amounts of cash that could be better spent at home solving domestic problems. If that doesn't get us the desired results maybe we can revisit the issue and perhaps consider your suggestion of figuring out which people to kill.

You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:32305
Slug does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.