5 ms·

Most things make the environment worse. Kids are the worst. Even the environment seems to have a negative effect on itself once the ball starts rolling.

by sshine 3y ago

FiniteField 3y ago
To add onto this comment, saying "having children is the worst thing for the climate" is a totally defeatist attitude towards the issue. What people are saying is "human life is incompatible with the Earth so we should stop perpetuating it". We might as well count our living selves alongside hypothetical future children and all kill ourselves now if that's the case. Of course, the people espousing this message are pretty much exclusively talking to western/European people, who are in almost all cases already giving birth at far below-replacement levels.
- convolvatron 3y ago
  none of these arguments are useful if they are all phrased in terms of two absolutes. we could clearly chart a middle course between breeding as much as possible and lying down and dying. ignoring our apparent inability to do anything at all about anything of course
  - antisthenes 3y ago
    > none of these arguments are useful if they are all phrased in terms of two absolutes. we could clearly chart a middle course between breeding as much as possible and lying down and dying. That's also primarily an American issue. They tend to view everything through the lens of 2 political camps and "whose side are you on?". That kind of view is completely antithetical to actually solving problems.
    - ilyt 3y ago
      And makes any discussion absolutely obnoxious with the usual "if you don't agree you must be on the other side and be the enemy"
    - cmrdporcupine 3y ago
      I always wonder if it's related somehow to the deep imprint that organized professional team sports, especially football, seems to have on the US psyche. Yeah, hockey is popular here in Canada, but it's not nearly on the same level as the NFL in the US. And "college sports" etc. is not even a thing. I feel like the American mindset is ever more leaning towards framing everything in a "my team vs your team" dynamic.
- thefz 3y ago
  > saying "having children is the worst thing for the climate" is a totally defeatist attitude towards the issue But, spreadsheet at hand, it is. It's always the parents that get offended by this. We are not judging anyone's lifestyle. Relax.
  - olddustytrail 3y ago
    It really isn't though. Spreadsheet at hand, having American children is. It's always the Americans that get offended by this. Relax. It just happens to be your fault.
    - thefz 3y ago
      Not American, sorry.
      - olddustytrail 3y ago
        No worries. You're probably only 40% responsible baby.
  - truculent 3y ago
    If we're attributing the carbon emissions of children to their parents, then we can pass the buck all the way back up to a handful of apes that decided to descend from the trees.
  - ilyt 3y ago
    Right. But to many "saving the future" is to have good future for their children. Saying that basically sounds like saying "don't have children peasants, so our the world is better for our overlord's children"
someone321 3y ago
[dead]
- _Algernon_ 3y ago
  Not having kids is doing something. It removes a lifetime of future carbon emissions, and that is ignoring any further ancestors. You may disagree that that is the right path to take for personal reasons and that's fine, but an average middle class person who doesn't have kids has likely saved more carbon emissions than any other realistic action (eg. not flying, vegetarian/vegan diet, using paper straws). Don't discredit that.
  - goatlover 3y ago
    I discredit all such talk as unrealistic and meaningless. People will have kids if they want kids, and if they don't want kids, they'll use that to say they're saving the environment. Same with eating meat, going on vacations, etc. None of that is going to solve the problem anyway.
  - ChatGTP 3y ago
    Not having kids and not using all the excess money to fly around the globe, drive cars, consume hardcore isn’t an improvement. I’d say most childless adults I know are way more carbon intensive the me simply because they can do more. Kids are actually economical. They’re light, don’t eat much, can be entertained by pretty simple means and because they constantly grow and everything needs to be changed over, second hand goods are so accessible, nearly everything we buy for them is secondhand, bikes, skateboards, clothes. I honestly ride my bike with my kids everywhere and we have not used the aircon once this summer. I’d say my kid uses 1/20th the emissions of an average adult with no children.
  - truculent 3y ago
    If I’m responsible for my kids’ emissions, then my parents are responsible for mine. Emissions are no longer my problem!
  - someone321 3y ago
dweekly 3y ago
While I'm not skeptical about the reality of anthropogenic climate change, I _am_ skeptical of viewing the climate like a fundamentally unstable / delicate system, like that all life on Earth will perish and the planet will become like Venus on a runaway path if we hit +2C. Earth _has_ had periods both much warmer than that and with more CO2! There are checks and balances to any system - like Life - that has been around a billion years. So Life will go on. And so I'm skeptical of a claim that "the environment seems to have a negative effect on itself" generally given its longevity. Life will go on -- though...that might be with or without Sapiens.
- esalman 3y ago
  So you think if a bunch of people is Palau go under water because of sea level increase, they are not worth saving?
  - goatlover 3y ago
    Are they just going to sit there for decades as the water rises and drown very, very slowly? Might there be some other way of "saving" them?
    - esalman 3y ago
      This is another piece of the puzzle climate change deniers don't understand (I am not calling you one btw). Of course these people are not going to stay there. We will see mass migration. It is easy to dismiss climate change by saying that life will go on. But we all know how the western societies view and treat migrants these days.
      - ilyt 3y ago
        > But we all know how the western societies view and treat migrants these days. Migrants from incompatible bring crime and strife. Countries don't want to have more crime and strife.
        3y ago

Most things make the environment worse. Kids are the worst. Even the environment seems to have a negative effect on itself once the ball starts rolling.

by sshine 3y ago

Most things make the environment worse. Kids are the worst. Even the environment seems to have a negative effect on itself once the ball starts rolling.

FiniteField 3y ago

To add onto this comment, saying "having children is the worst thing for the climate" is a totally defeatist attitude towards the issue. What people are saying is "human life is incompatible with the Earth so we should stop perpetuating it". We might as well count our living selves alongside hypothetical future children and all kill ourselves now if that's the case. Of course, the people espousing this message are pretty much exclusively talking to western/European people, who are in almost all cases already giving birth at far below-replacement levels.

convolvatron 3y ago
none of these arguments are useful if they are all phrased in terms of two absolutes. we could clearly chart a middle course between breeding as much as possible and lying down and dying. ignoring our apparent inability to do anything at all about anything of course
- antisthenes 3y ago
  > none of these arguments are useful if they are all phrased in terms of two absolutes. we could clearly chart a middle course between breeding as much as possible and lying down and dying. That's also primarily an American issue. They tend to view everything through the lens of 2 political camps and "whose side are you on?". That kind of view is completely antithetical to actually solving problems.
  - ilyt 3y ago
    And makes any discussion absolutely obnoxious with the usual "if you don't agree you must be on the other side and be the enemy"
  - cmrdporcupine 3y ago
    I always wonder if it's related somehow to the deep imprint that organized professional team sports, especially football, seems to have on the US psyche. Yeah, hockey is popular here in Canada, but it's not nearly on the same level as the NFL in the US. And "college sports" etc. is not even a thing. I feel like the American mindset is ever more leaning towards framing everything in a "my team vs your team" dynamic.
thefz 3y ago
> saying "having children is the worst thing for the climate" is a totally defeatist attitude towards the issue But, spreadsheet at hand, it is. It's always the parents that get offended by this. We are not judging anyone's lifestyle. Relax.
- olddustytrail 3y ago
  It really isn't though. Spreadsheet at hand, having American children is. It's always the Americans that get offended by this. Relax. It just happens to be your fault.
  - thefz 3y ago
    Not American, sorry.
    - olddustytrail 3y ago
      No worries. You're probably only 40% responsible baby.
- truculent 3y ago
  If we're attributing the carbon emissions of children to their parents, then we can pass the buck all the way back up to a handful of apes that decided to descend from the trees.
- ilyt 3y ago
  Right. But to many "saving the future" is to have good future for their children. Saying that basically sounds like saying "don't have children peasants, so our the world is better for our overlord's children"

someone321 3y ago

[dead]

_Algernon_ 3y ago
Not having kids is doing something. It removes a lifetime of future carbon emissions, and that is ignoring any further ancestors. You may disagree that that is the right path to take for personal reasons and that's fine, but an average middle class person who doesn't have kids has likely saved more carbon emissions than any other realistic action (eg. not flying, vegetarian/vegan diet, using paper straws). Don't discredit that.
- goatlover 3y ago
  I discredit all such talk as unrealistic and meaningless. People will have kids if they want kids, and if they don't want kids, they'll use that to say they're saving the environment. Same with eating meat, going on vacations, etc. None of that is going to solve the problem anyway.
- ChatGTP 3y ago
  Not having kids and not using all the excess money to fly around the globe, drive cars, consume hardcore isn’t an improvement. I’d say most childless adults I know are way more carbon intensive the me simply because they can do more. Kids are actually economical. They’re light, don’t eat much, can be entertained by pretty simple means and because they constantly grow and everything needs to be changed over, second hand goods are so accessible, nearly everything we buy for them is secondhand, bikes, skateboards, clothes. I honestly ride my bike with my kids everywhere and we have not used the aircon once this summer. I’d say my kid uses 1/20th the emissions of an average adult with no children.
- truculent 3y ago
  If I’m responsible for my kids’ emissions, then my parents are responsible for mine. Emissions are no longer my problem!
- someone321 3y ago

dweekly 3y ago

While I'm not skeptical about the reality of anthropogenic climate change, I _am_ skeptical of viewing the climate like a fundamentally unstable / delicate system, like that all life on Earth will perish and the planet will become like Venus on a runaway path if we hit +2C. Earth _has_ had periods both much warmer than that and with more CO2! There are checks and balances to any system - like Life - that has been around a billion years. So Life will go on. And so I'm skeptical of a claim that "the environment seems to have a negative effect on itself" generally given its longevity. Life will go on -- though...that might be with or without Sapiens.

esalman 3y ago
So you think if a bunch of people is Palau go under water because of sea level increase, they are not worth saving?
- goatlover 3y ago
  Are they just going to sit there for decades as the water rises and drown very, very slowly? Might there be some other way of "saving" them?
  - esalman 3y ago
    This is another piece of the puzzle climate change deniers don't understand (I am not calling you one btw). Of course these people are not going to stay there. We will see mass migration. It is easy to dismiss climate change by saying that life will go on. But we all know how the western societies view and treat migrants these days.
    - ilyt 3y ago
      > But we all know how the western societies view and treat migrants these days. Migrants from incompatible bring crime and strife. Countries don't want to have more crime and strife.
      - 3y ago