4 ms·
My favorite line was this: > It’s true that the most effective single action that most human beings can take, not only to combat climate change but to preserve
by jcoffland 10y ago
My favorite line was this:
> It’s true that the most effective single action that most human beings can take, not only to combat climate change but to preserve a world of biodiversity, is to not have children.
However, I'm not sure I understand how not having children preserves a world of biodiversity.
- nitrogen 10y agoHowever, I'm not sure I understand how not having children preserves a world of biodiversity. Increasing human activity depletes biodiversity by converting land into monocultured farmland, and by polluting the environment. Having children increases human activity. Therefore, having children reduces biodiversity. QED
- Ygg2 10y agoErgo wars are good? Especially nuclear wars? I find the whole "there are too many of us" argument tedious. It's probably easier for whole world to switch to renewables than to increase birthrates. More people don't mean necessary more polluters, but also potentially more ideas how to stop polluting, or go to space.
- adrianN 10y agoNuclear wars are probably pretty bad for the biosphere. Biological weapons are best if you want to kill humans with minimal environmental impact, I think. But jokes aside, don't you see an ethical difference between killing people and not having children?
- Ygg2 10y agoBiosphere will recover without all the pesky humans in the way. That's kinda the point - if reducing human population is the goal, then wars are way more efficient means. I think ultimately both those path lead to same road. The same road China is on.
- jcoffland 10y agoThat argument assumes humans will always behave badly.
- marssaxman 10y agoJudging by history, that seems a safe assumption.