China says population control key to Copenhagen deal

[Sol Invictus]

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2...nt_9151129.htm

Article Published on December 10 2009

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.

[SwordoftheVistula]

Well, they're right. It's also the only way to improve the environment without decreasing the quality of life in other areas.

They should combine this policy with the 'cap&trade' concept, each woman gets one or two 'child licenses' which may be sold on the open market.

[Sol Invictus]

Well, they're right. It's also the only way to improve the environment without decreasing the quality of life in other areas.

They should combine this policy with the 'cap&trade' concept, each woman gets one or two 'child licenses' which may be sold on the open market.

Suprising statement coming from a 'supposedly' Libertarian-American.

As a libertarian you should be defending my right (AND YOUR RACE!) to have as many children as I damn well please.. Not supporting enforcement of oppressive laws against it.

Umm.. Hello?!

Population control, like gun control, would only keep children out of the hands of law-abiding citizens.. You think your Mexican neighbors down the street will be obliged to follow such laws? Blacks? Arabs? And as a Libertarian, you should be concerned about what would happen to those children and/or the parents should they break that law - because I sure as hell am.

Get real.

[Equinox]

Suprising statement coming from a 'supposedly' Libertarian-American.

As a libertarian you should be defending my right (AND YOUR RACE!) to have as many children as I damn well please.. Not supporting enforcement of oppressive laws against it.

Umm.. Hello?!

Population control, like gun control, would only keep children out of the hands of law-abiding citizens.. You think your Mexican neighbors down the street will be obliged to follow such laws? Blacks? Arabs? And as a Libertarian, you should be concerned about what would happen to those children and/or the parents should they break that law - because I sure as hell am.

Get real.

1) You have, whether intentionally or otherwise, encountered but one of the problems that Libertarianism faces.

2) By the look of things, China is taking a holistic approach to global CO2 emissions. This would require all people to step in line and might very well make it easier to police illegal immigrants.

3) Telling someone what they ought or ought not do as a Libertarian is fruitless - the most basic principle in Libertarian ideology is that it is up to the individual to determine what The Good Life is and how they go about achieving it.

4) Please read this, Aldo Leopold's The Land Ethic.

[Sol Invictus]

2) By the look of things, China is taking a holistic approach to global CO2 emissions. This would require all people to step in line and might very well make it easier to police illegal immigrants.

There still is no conclusive evidence that CO2 emissions is what is causing 'global warming', because if that were the case, there would be no debating it - which is exactly what many nations around the world are doing supported by actual science without hidden agendas.

3) Telling someone what they ought or ought not do as a Libertarian is fruitless - the most basic principle in Libertarian ideology is that it is up to the individual to determine what The Good Life is and how they go about achieving it.

A basic tenant of Libertarianism that all adhere to, is that as long as it doesn't infringe on the right of someone else to go about their lives in a peaceful and independent fashion, leaving that person to persue whatever it is he desires in life free of tyrannical interference - something you support - which Libertarians staunchly oppose.

I won't read any link anyone posts whom supports the argument that a person's breath and passing gas is destroying the earth, which is an absurd concept to me and anyone else with half a brain.

[The Black Prince]

[url]
“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,”

hmm.. for an original approach to this problem think about this:

The republic of China has, according to the 2009 estimate, circa 1.3 billion inhabitants and according to the big climatologists the emmision of methane (CH4) is one of the strongest agents causing the global warming threat. Reckon that the people in China fart 14 times a day (human average), this means around the 18.2 billion farts. On a yearly basis this accumulates to 6643 billion farts.. the days amount is about half a litre of flatulent gas and a fart roughly consist of 10% methane.

Using these variables, the methane production of the Chinese in the rep. of China accumulates to 332.5 billion litres of methane a year.

Based upon this it seems a wise idea that the population of China is one of the major causes of the global warming and should be persuaded to do something about this fact!.....

[Sol Invictus]

Using these variables, the methane production of the Chinese in the rep. of China accumulates to 332.5 billion litres of methane a year.

Based upon this it seems a wise idea that the population of China is one of the major causes of the global warming and should be persuaded to do something about this fact!.....

If that were the case, volcanic eruptions and normal human biological activity on the earth would have destroyed it thousands, if not millions of years ago.

Mars, Pluto, and other planets are also proven with science to be heating up also, so since human activity isn't possible on those planets, how do we explain this phoenominon occuring other than blaming on the only source of heat, that being the sun.

[Cato]

Population control is key says the nation that consists of about 1/5 of the entire world in terms of bodies.

[Equinox]

There still is no conclusive evidence that CO2 emissions is what is causing 'global warming', because if that were the case, there would be no debating it - which is exactly what many nations around the world are doing supported by actual science without hidden agendas.

It's funny you should claim that, when you also used this thread to back up your agenda. Both the skeptic and the scientist agree that CO2 emissions is what is responsible for climate change. According to your logic above, the poll on Close-Up would show that 100% of NZers disagree with you.

Make up your mind.

I won't read any link anyone posts whom supports the argument that a person's breath and passing gas is destroying the earth, which is an absurd concept to me and anyone else with half a brain.

Ignorance is bliss.

Population control is key says the nation that consists of about 1/5 of the entire world in terms of bodies.

If anyone was to know about dealing with internal problems it would be the Chinese or Indonesians - both of which are some of the most populous countries on Earth. For a (at least nominally) Communist state, I think you would find that internal stability is key. Taking this into account it is no wonder that China wishes to impose population controls.

[Sol Invictus]

Both the skeptic and the scientist agree that CO2 emissions is what is responsible for climate change.

31,486 scientists world-wide beg to differ, vs the IPCC who has 2,500 'experts' on global warming, most of which are beurecrats and less than 1% are climatologists.

Make up your mind.

I have, and it certainly isn't to agree that farts are killing the planet.

Unless you have an asshole twice the size of Mt. St. Helens.

Ignorance is bliss.

Indeed.

If anyone was to know about dealing with internal problems it would be the Chinese or Indonesians

Oh yes, let's take China as the standard bearer on how to deal with internal problems; like executing Tibetan patriots who want liberty and self-rule, keeps dossiers on every working citizen to see who is the biggest threat to their tyrannical regime, where dissenters are locked away in mental institutions, a country that has threatened nuclear holocaust on America, a country that uses executed prisoners' skins as beauty products, a dehumanist society that is documented to routinely torture it's citizens?

Is this really the model you look upon as ideal for maintaining internal stability?



I think maybe you should spend a couple years in China and see how much your views change about things.

Only tyrants need worry about maintaining stability in their own country, for if they are unable to do so without forcing such horrific things on their citizens, than that government no longer has any right to be in power.