![]() ![]() It’s hard to tell how many people have died of climate-change-related causes. This has already been pretty bad, with unusually many hurricanes, wildfires, and droughts. One way to think of this is to notice that we’ve already gotten about 25-30% of the global warming we’re likely to see by 2100. The people who say otherwise are going against the majority of climatologists, climate models, and international bodies. Life in the First World will continue, with worse weather and maybe a weaker economy, but more or less the same as always. But it won’t cause the collapse of civilization. It will hit subsistence farmers in poor agricultural countries very hard, and some of them will starve or become refugees. It will lead to increased spread of invasive species and diseases. ![]() The current scientific consensus, as per leading scientific organizations like the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, is that climate change will be very bad, but not world-endingly bad.Ĭlimate change will cause worse hurricanes, fires, and other disasters. Second, the more people there are, the more carbon they produce, so having more children will make climate change worse. First, climate change will be so destructive that it would be wrong to bring children into such a bad world. The people profiled in these articles make two arguments. See also Guardian, BBC, NYT, etc, etc, etc. Or, from CNBC, Climate Change Is Making People Think Twice About Having Children:Īnalysts at Morgan Stanley said in a note to investors last month that the “movement to not have children owing to fears over climate change is growing and impacting fertility rates quicker than any preceding trend in the field of fertility decline.” Some people are choosing not to have children because they fear that that doing so will amplify global warming while others are concerned about extreme weather events their children may have to endure and the knock-on effects. For years, people have lamented how bad things might get "for our grandchildren," but Rieder tells the students that future isn't so far off anymore. Why question such assumptions? The prospect of climate catastrophe. He's at James Madison University in southwest Virginia to talk about a "small-family ethic" - to question the assumptions of a society that sees having children as good, throws parties for expecting parents, and in which parents then pressure their kids to "give them grandchildren." Standing before several dozen students in a college classroom, Travis Rieder tries to convince them not to have children. For example, from NPR: Should We Be Having Kids In The Age Of Climate Change? ![]() And sure, people say a lot of things on polls, but people seem to be talking about this more and more. A recent poll finds that 39% of young people “feel uncertain” about having children because of climate change. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |