- “…reducing the number of people born in the US would make a big difference in achieving reductions in CO2 levels.” Sounds like a threat to me!
- “…wealthy people can offset their own carbon emissions by funding contraceptive programmes in the developing world.” Again, the hypocrisy of “buying offsets”. If we have to pay others for the program we should have some oversight and decision-making role, otherwise the funds would be lost to greed and graft, never reaching the intended beneficiaries.
To be honest, I’m glad to see climate-change advocates talk openly about population control. It lays bare more of their intent to control us!
Fund family planning ‘to cut CO2′Meeting the demand for family planning in poor nations is a cheap and effective way to cut CO2 emissions, a new website initiative claims.
The UK-based Optimum Population Trust says human activity is exacerbating global warming and higher population levels mean higher emissions.
It asks people to fund contraception, saying it is better value than wind turbines, solar power or hybrid cars.
Critics would argue the analysis is too simplistic, a BBC correspondent says.
The BBC’s environment analyst Roger Harrabin says they could contend that reducing the number of people born in the US would make a big difference in achieving reductions in CO2 levels.
Our correspondent added that carbon emissions from people in most of sub-Saharan Africa are so low that they can barely be counted.
According to the OPT, every £4 spent on family planning saves one tonne of CO2.
It estimates that a similar reduction would require an £8 investment in tree planting, £15 in wind power, £31 in solar energy and £56 in hybrid vehicle technology.
It is promoting a scheme in which wealthy people can offset their own carbon emissions by funding contraceptive programmes in the developing world.
Story from BBC NEWS:
a UK-based organization, has a web site that promotes population control and even reduction to cut CO2 emissions and to reduce resource usage. A subject worthy of discussion but as you can see in the below BBC story they vomit that same talking points as the rest of the ”climate change” community.A couple of points in the article were slightly disturbing yet not surprising:“…reducing the number of people born in the US would make a big difference in achieving reductions in CO2 levels.”Sounds like a threat to me!“…wealthy people can offset their own carbon emissions by funding contraceptive programmes in the developing world.”Again, the hypocrisy of “buying offsets”. If we have to pay others for the program we should have some oversight and decision-making role.http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/science/nature/8392193.stm
