I knew that it was only a matter of time before those in the global warming crowd clamored for the elimination of people from the planet, because we are destroying it. But it didn't surprise me that one of the proponents of this is an obsterician. It is exactly like the push for abortion rights from the National Education Association, there is a mental inbalance present of wanting to kill your patients or students.
First there has been the gradual acceptance of artificial birth control and abortion, now some professors are calling for fining parents who have more than the acceptable 2 children. What next? Making those 3rd and 4th children illegal, like in the children's novel Among the Hidden?
"Professor Walters, clinical associate professor of obstetric medicine at the University of Western Australia and the King Edward Memorial Hospital in Perth, called for condoms and "greenhouse-friendly" services such as sterilisation procedures to earn carbon credits.
And he implied the Federal Government should ditch the $4133 baby bonus and consider population controls like those in China and India.
"Every newborn baby in Australia represents a potent source of greenhouse gas emissions for an average of 80 years, not simply by breathing but by the profligate consumption of resources typical of our society," he wrote.
I do like the response of this sensible lady:
Australian Family Association spokeswoman Angela Conway said it was ridiculous to blame babies for global warming.
"I think self-important professors with silly ideas should have to pay carbon tax for all the hot air they create," she said. "There's masses of evidence to say that child-rich families have much lower resource consumption per head than other styles of households."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
I think that OB must be a man who hates his job. I hope he loses all his patients (of course he's an assoc. prof. so he probably doesn't actually PRACTICE is profession!) and finds a new job -- maybe as a garbage collector or something more satisfying for him! Urg.
Hmm. Well, being that I spent years working as a scientist on paleoclimate, you might consider me part of the "global warming crowd' although I would be much more confortable talking about it as climate change. In any case, I wonder about the scientific reasoning behind crazy ideas like the one the obstetrician put forth or the silly 'don't light Hannukah candles campaign' from last week.
And there was also the football games by candlelight. Nuts!
This is all hype, not science. And hype like this always brings the crazies to the fore--they get world press by vying to put forward the most ridiculous ideas.
It reminds me of a bad science fiction movie--like The Day After Tomorrow.. I keep wondering if these people are actually serious. And if they are, I wonder what's in the water where they live! ;)
Hmm, most of the larger families I know live a simpler lifestyle than the typical dual income 0 or 1 child family in our area. We live in a moderate-sized townhome rather than a huge McMansion, share an economy car rather than own 2 gas-guzzling SUV's, vacation close by rather than jetting off around the world, buy used at consignment shops and Craig's list rather than purchasing new, and so on.
It's not about family size- it's about lifestyle choices!
Thanks for this post! I linked to it on my blog.
Just to point out the obvious: A misanthropic obstetrics professor in Australia does not speak for "the global warming crowd." I do not dispute that Professor Walter's statements are morally ridiculous. But he is not a climate scientist, nor from what I can gauge from the article, a representative of any global climate change advocacy group. The absurd view he espouses does not represent any official or unofficial goal related to addressing the problem of global climate change.
So, if you are looking for reasons to ignore or marginalize those who are trying to get humanity to take the problem of global climate change seriously, you will have to do better than this. By all means, condemn Mr. Walters' comments. But as a straw man, he is just too flimsy to do the work of dismissing global climate change.
You might begin by explaining why the Vatican's calls to address the problem of global climate change should be dismissed:
http://www.catholic.org/international/international_story.php?id=19830
Yes, the climate is changing. But are humans causing it? Can we change it back? What reduction in our lifestyle would be necessary if it was possible?
I think that the science will prove that the sun, not people are causing the Earth to warm, we can't change it back to cooler, and this is another method of controling people by a certain group of people. "The end is coming!" crowd who tell us not to turn on our lights, eat meat, have children... are the same folks who hop around the globe (to Bali, perhaps?) on their private jets, have mansions, drive Hummers, and spend, spend, spend.
After seeing the pictures of snow accumulation up in Maine I think a little global warming would be a good idea! ;)
Post a Comment