China's Suggestion to Tackle Climate Change...Can you Guess?



History's only Holy, One Child Policy. Holy Mother of God, pray for us.

Fancy Tackling Climate Change the Chinese way? Enforced contraception, sterilisation, abortion and post-birth infanticide. These are all deeply unpopular measures in the UN and all of these methods of fighting climate change repulse leaders of the 'West', as we know. There's no way any such policies will be adopted by our Governments because here in the UK, Europe and the US, we defend life from conception to natural death. Yep. We love babies...Obama loves babies too. His science czar, John Holdron, he loves babies too. Loves them! All of these countries love babies, they just think there should be fewer of them and in order for there to be fewer babies, well, to tackle climate change, China say the people of the World are just going to have to make some 'sacrifices'.

China Daily reports...

Population and climate change are intertwined but the population issue has remained a blind spot when countries discuss ways to mitigate climate change and slow down global warming, according to Zhao Baige, vice-minister of National Population and Family Planning Commission of China (NPFPC) .

"Dealing with climate change is not simply an issue of CO2 emission reduction but a comprehensive challenge involving political, economic, social, cultural and ecological issues, and the population concern fits right into the picture," said Zhao, who is a member of the Chinese government delegation. Many studies link population growth with emissions and the effect of climate change.

"Calculations of the contribution of population growth to emissions growth globally produce a consistent finding that most of past population growth has been responsible for between 40 per cent and 60 percent of emissions growth," so stated by the 2009 State of World Population, released earlier by the UN Population Fund.

Although China's family planning policy has received criticism over the past three decades, Zhao said that China's population program has made a great historic contribution to the well-being of society. As a result of the family planning policy, China has seen 400 million fewer births, which has resulted in 18 million fewer tons of CO2 emissions a year, Zhao said.

Of course, when the Chinese official got up and said that, all the other delegates will have behaved as if someone's just farted or commited a dreadful faux pas like accidently urinating on the podium, won't they? Won't they...? Nah, its a nonsense. Nobody buys this Chinese suggestion. Oh, hang on, Canada's National Newspaper, The Financial Post, just did.

In her editorial published on Tuesday, columnist Diane Francis wrote that, “A planetary law, such as China’s one-child policy, is the only way to reverse the disastrous global birthrate.”

Comments

Physiocrat said…
The Catholic Church has the exact answer to the problem but seems strangely shy of talking about it.

There probably are too many people, and it is putting a strain on resources. It is a sign that we are not getting enough religious vocations and need more. People who care about the planet should become priests, friars, monks and nuns. Carthusians, Benedictines, Carmelites, Cistercians, Franciscans, Dominicans, etc, etc. Overpopulation problem solved at a stroke. I blame Vatican II.

.
Anonymous said…
God helps those who help themselves........................................
Shepherd said…
Ironically, it is the one child policy that is leading China to self destruct. The population is aging and they will not have the younger members of the community in the numbers that they need in c. 20 years or less.
There are not too many people in the world Physiocrat...it is just that there are not enough people in the world who care about their fellow man.
In the 60s the Brandt Commission worked out that (at the rate in those days) just an extra 2.5 pence on the individual tax returns of folk in the western world would eradicate poverty.
We lack the Christian spirit and guts to do it. But then, our MPs do require their turrets and duck houses don't they?