Salon: Childless Climate Faithful Upset By Celebrity Hypocrisy

Brad Pitt
Brad Pitt. Georges Biard [CC BY-SA 3.0], via Wikimedia Commons
Guest essay by Eric Worrall

According to Salon, women who have taken a personal decision to help save the planet, by not having children, are angry that celebrity hypocrites appear to be ignoring the climate issues which they claim to take so seriously.

Baby Doomers: As climate change threatens to strain resources, women are increasingly reevaluating reproductive decisions. Now, these women are angry

When Sara Kelly, the 30-year-old founder of SAK PR firm in Philadelphia, posted an article to her Facebook page in December — one describing the growing trend of women refusing to have children for environmental reasons — it received more than 60 impassioned comments, mostly from friends of childbearing age debating the merits of the movement. “The topic comes up at least once a week,” Kelly told Salon. “People on both sides are having to put a lot more thought into their reasons than ever before. We’re forced to weigh the impact of climate change more than any generation before us. At dinner, cocktail hours, birthday parties. . . it’s on everyone’s mind.”

So, in the great population debate of 2016, who came out on top: the pro-baby set, or population-control enthusiasts? It doesn’t really matter, some experts contend, because we’re having the wrong conversation.

“We have a generation of people whose decisions are deeply and painfully complicated by climate change,” Josephine Ferorelli, co-founder of the nonprofit Conceivable Future, which frames global warming as a reproductive justice issue, told Salon. “There isn’t a correct answer here — it’s an impossible choice. So we’re trying to refocus the conversation to something larger.”

Conceivable Future — a network that welcomes parents as well as non-parents — encourages women of every experience to share their struggles in an attempt to put political will behind emotion. So far, they have more than 70 testimonials and counting. While they’re often mistaken for a population control advocacy group, this isn’t the case, largely because discussions of population control, they believe, are often rooted in classist ideology. Because it’s women in developing countries who tend to have more children, it’s these women who are often targeted. In reality, the largest per capita carbon emissions come from America. According to Mother Jones, Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie’s daughter Zahara will likely produce 45,000 pounds of CO2 yearly, but that number would shrink to 221 pounds had Zahara stayed in Ethiopia.

It’s this discrepancy that’s increasingly shaping the plans of future mothers. Take Mary Sullivan, a 31-year-old school teacher from Newton, New Jersey, who has decided to foster children rather than have her own. “Climate change is already killing children in the developing world, and soon we will see the effects on the most vulnerable citizens of our country,” she told Salon. “Arguably, we are already. I don’t consider myself especially vulnerable, but I also don’t think I’ll ever be in a financial position to guarantee my child’s safety in the midst of a global crisis. With that in mind, yes, it does make me angry that there are people in the world who don’t even have to think about this — and these are often the very people making the decisions causing this disaster or refusing to address the problem.

Read more:

It is good that jet-setters who claim to be concerned about CO2 emissions are receiving more public criticism for their hypocrisy. But in my opinion, the real tragedy is women being terrorised out of child bearing by climate propaganda.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
January 30, 2017 7:23 pm

Don’t worry guys…..I’m working on this problem as hard as I can

Reply to  Jamie
January 30, 2017 7:39 pm

You are a martyr.

Reply to  Jamie
January 31, 2017 5:07 am

“I do a lot of work with unwed mothers…just helping them get their start.”
— Steve Martin (a wild and crazy guy)

Reply to  Jamie
January 31, 2017 7:10 am

Talk about “fake news!” I should imagine the “childless over fears of climate change” numbers to be right up there with one-legged, left-handed albino dwarfs. We can do without their DNA in the gene pool.

Bryan A
Reply to  Goldrider
January 31, 2017 7:53 am

Since Zahara’s carbon footprint will be 45,000 pounds annually in the USA but just 220 in Ethiopia, the solution is simple. Every woman that thinks childbearing is bad for climate change should simply move to Ethiopia.
And, lest you forget, electing to not have children brings about an unconcieveable future

Bryan A
Reply to  Goldrider
January 31, 2017 7:57 am

So long as they wear a specific pin identifying themselves as unconceptible, I have no problems with it. I simply won’t marry one

Reply to  Goldrider
January 31, 2017 7:04 pm

The fewer lefties there are raising future little lefties, the better off the gene pool.

Reply to  Goldrider
January 31, 2017 7:13 pm

Stupid noaaprogrammer, acquired characteristics are not passed on genetically.

Reply to  Goldrider
January 31, 2017 9:08 pm

I believe bleeding heart disease is 50/50.

Paul belanger
Reply to  Goldrider
February 4, 2017 10:26 am

” We can do without their DNA in the gene pool.”
As long as they remain childless your wish will be granted. Praise the Lord.

Jeff L
January 30, 2017 7:26 pm

The fact that people (both men & women ) would choose not to raise a family because of an unjustifiable fear of climate change / climate impact is immoral & a crime against humanity. It leaves me speechless. Perhaps alarmists should be re-labled “climate terrorists”

Reply to  Jeff L
January 30, 2017 7:55 pm

On the other hand, women that are gullible enough and stupid enough to believe the climate hype are perhaps unfit to raise children anyhow.

Reply to  karabar
January 30, 2017 8:05 pm

But it has to turn into self-flattery – “Look at me! I’m not having kids because I’m SavingThePlanet™!”

Walter Sobchak
Reply to  karabar
January 30, 2017 8:39 pm

I think we should thank them for cleansing the gene pool.

Reply to  karabar
January 30, 2017 8:45 pm

Two things strike me; one is that these organisations should be in line for a Darwin Award (no children division) and that these people have not studied history to wit “We’re forced to weigh the impact of climate change more than any generation before us”. I think the generations that suffered through the little ice age with mass starvation due to crop failures and increased conflict over resource had more to worry about!

Reply to  karabar
January 30, 2017 9:03 pm

PiperPaul, you are absolutely right. People who make these kinds of decisions ALWAYS have to “share” them, so that others may see their superiority. Unfortunately, I have had to listen to a few women virtue signal. Never looked at them the same way, especially since their comments revealed a strong contempt of humanity.

Reply to  karabar
January 30, 2017 9:21 pm

My wife and I used to march our 8 kids arranged by age single file down the grocery store aisle just to see how many climate feminists we could leave fainted on the floor.
It became such an exercise in verbal abuse that we had to suspend such forays into enemy territory.

Reply to  karabar
January 30, 2017 10:15 pm

Hear hear!

Alan Robertson
Reply to  karabar
January 30, 2017 11:29 pm

January 30, 2017 at 8:05 pm
“But it has to turn into self-flattery – “Look at me! I’m not having kids because I’m SavingThePlanet™!”
Q: How can you tell which person in the room owns the Tesla parked outside?
A: He’ll tell you.

M Seward
Reply to  karabar
January 31, 2017 3:44 am

Exactly Karabar, this is precisely how the species evolved its intelligence. The dumb ones didn’t breed enough.

Reply to  karabar
January 31, 2017 4:27 am

if like me those “gullible women” are targeted in their pre teens BY climate conmen allowed to come into schools and be unquestioned in what they told us?
I am one of those gullibles
and my school allowed these basta&rds IN and also the eugenics mobs
from 1970 to 73 we were getting the “new” teachers inspired by mongrels like Hansen ehrlich and strong in our schools.
our parents if they even had any idea? most didnt know, wouldnt have donne anything anyway
you didnt question authority from their perspective the teachers n govt must know more n be right.
thats how it was.
its why I am now so ragingly angry seeing this same sh!t being repeated all over again on a whole new generation.

Mark L Gilbert
Reply to  karabar
January 31, 2017 4:57 am

self correcting problem I think

Reply to  karabar
January 31, 2017 7:28 am

They’re just signalling their virtue.

Reply to  karabar
January 31, 2017 9:22 am

+10, unfit for a myriad of reasons

Reply to  karabar
January 31, 2017 10:43 am


Reply to  karabar
January 31, 2017 11:08 am

Good point. I sometimes think that many of these women use climate change as an excuse to avoid something they don’t want to do anyway.

Reply to  Jeff L
January 30, 2017 9:00 pm

Several years ago, there was a couple in Brazil (IIRC) who killed their children and then committed suicide, leaving a note stating that they were too distraught over AGW to continue living and/or to allow their children to experience the negative effects.
I wish I was making that up, even though that would make me a truly despicable person.

Reply to  AllyKat
January 31, 2017 7:10 am

Shouldn’t these people be dumping on the Sister Wives guy, Cody, whose really cranking out carbon emitters out by the busload? I mean, talk about exponential growth! And what about Nineteen and Counting? Don’t Michelle and Bob Duggar know when to stop? Haven’t they tuned in to the fact that the planet needs to be saved? I haven’t heard a single mention of the AGW crisis on either show. These families are living in a fantasy world, pouring out CO2 by the megaton while the rest of us have stopped having children. The shame of it all! Oh wait! I forgot. It’s a money-making operation in both cases. Where do I sign up?

Boulder Skeptic
Reply to  Jeff L
January 30, 2017 10:48 pm

I’m very much heartened by two things…
1. The population of those reaching into my wallet to solve a non problem appears to be poised to dwindle in the future. Now there’s a trend I can get behind.
2. “Zahara will likely produce 45,000 pounds of CO2 yearly”. I owe Zahara a debt of gratitude for all that plant food. Thanks for doing your part to feed the world, kid!

David Chappell
Reply to  Boulder Skeptic
January 31, 2017 6:05 am

She certainly doing more for the people of Somalia rather than staying behind – not that she had much say in the matter I guess

Reply to  Boulder Skeptic
January 31, 2017 9:24 am

How does Zahara’s anticipated 45k lbs of annual CO2 production compare to our hero AlGore’s? Should I revise upward my “bar” for Personal CO2 production?

Reply to  Jeff L
January 30, 2017 11:17 pm

The fact that they choose anything around this issue, for any reason, is outrageous. Civilization has become maladaptive. Where has the attraction gone? In the wild-type human, it results in babies, unfailingly. A wild man doesn’t choose anything, he simply can’t resist being chosen. Resistance is painful and futile. The cultured ones feel nothing of the kind. They do everything they can to appear repulsive to the opposite sex (what with tattoos and other kinds of self-mutilation), and then if any natural impulses are not completely inhibited by this poisonous lifestyle, they are killed off with “family planning”. We all know how that is going to end, and yet it gets worse from one generation to the next.

Reply to  Jeff L
January 31, 2017 5:20 am

It’s the problem that (eventually) fixes itself.

Reply to  Jeff L
January 31, 2017 9:44 am

Such is the insanity of the far-left. What it means is the rest of us need to have significantly more kids to offset the drop-dead stupidity of the leftists.

January 30, 2017 7:29 pm

If the enviro-weenies, who refuse to learn and understand real science, want to remove themselves from the gene pool, that’s just fine. We win; they lose. We win anyhow as the real world and real science are on our side, but removing themselves is poetic.

Reply to  higley7
January 30, 2017 8:04 pm

If only we could as easily convince women in the Islamic world to stop having children!

Reply to  BoyfromTottenham
January 30, 2017 8:34 pm

I don’t think that Islamic women (under Sharia) really have much choice.

Reply to  BoyfromTottenham
January 30, 2017 9:22 pm

“If only we could as easily convince women in the Islamic world to stop having children!”
Nope. Women in Islam cannot refuse their men. The relevant Islamic scripture is:

“Your wives are as a tilth unto you; so approach your tilth when or how ye will; but do some good act for your souls beforehand; and fear Allah. And know that ye are to meet Him (in the Hereafter), and give (these) good tidings to those who believe.”

(Al-Quran 2:223)
Of course, Islam is a fiction created to advance the interests of Iron Age desert barbarians, so why would it surprise anyone that Islam treats women as slaves to be taken whenever their master feels like it.

Cheryl Davies
Reply to  BoyfromTottenham
January 30, 2017 11:59 pm

It takes a little help from males for any female, of any religion, to have babies.

Ben of Houston
Reply to  BoyfromTottenham
January 31, 2017 5:00 am

Moa, there is a similar command in the Jewish Bible about how a man may not deprive his wife or a wife deprive her husband. Official punishment was public shaming.
You are reading too much into one statement

Reply to  BoyfromTottenham
January 31, 2017 5:53 am

Moa, there is a similar command in the Jewish Bible about how a man may not deprive his wife or a wife deprive her husband. Official punishment was public shaming.
You are reading too much into one statement

It is not in the Jewish part of the Bible (the Old Testament), it is in the Christian part of the Bible (the New Testament). And there was no punishment for not giving the spouse their sexual needs because if both partners had mutual consent they could abstain. The point of the counsel, if you read it, is to provide no excuse for either partner in a marriage to commit adultery. The set of scriptures is clear that it is a recommendation and not a law. To verify for yourself, read 1 Corinthians chapter 7.
It is also important to know ancient culture. In Bible times, there was no Hebrew word for bachelor. Especially before Christ, people married young and had plenty of children. This was a necessity of life. It isn’t like today where you have machines to save labor and doctors. Life was hard work for both husband and wife, and families needed all the help they could muster. Not to mention mortality was high and the Middle East was a hotbed of violence even back then. It is for these reasons that having children became an important part of ancient culture. It was a source of great reproach for a woman to be childless. They needed bodies for the hard labor, for the constant wars, and to replace the lives of those who died young. And civilizations went to war for slave labor.
That is still a little bit true today. In parts of the world they don’t have machines enabled by cheap energy or good doctors. So what do you see? Families with a lot of children and slave labor. Give the people cheap energy and those problems will be solved.

Gard R. Rise
Reply to  BoyfromTottenham
January 31, 2017 6:22 am

Well, that is not just a little bit arrogant, is it? Scoffing off some 1400 years of history, tradition and culture by saying it is “a fiction created to advance the interests of Iron Age desert barbarians”. Yeah, right. It has only been extremely important to hundreds of millions of people throughout the ages and it still is.
Seriously, are we okay with this. now? Full frontal Islambashing, I mean? Why on earth would one want Islamic women not to have any children, by the way? (Unless buying into the Club of Rome narrative?)
Isn’t it at all possible to criticize religions and religious customs (if that is what one wants, for any reason) without being outright offensive?

Reply to  BoyfromTottenham
January 31, 2017 9:00 am

“Why on earth would one want Islamic women not to have any children, by the way?”
Well, it is pretty simple. The current ratio of martyrs to virgins is now greater than the prescribed reward. They are, or soon will be, running out of appropriate reward in the afterlife. As such, it would be prudent to have less children until societal pressures push the virgin side of the ratio significantly higher.
Can you imagine the resentment if a martyr showed up in heaven and was told he could only have nine virgins…?
(And then for the martyrs that are already there…. “Hey guys, things are changing. But don’t worry, if you like your Virgins you can keep your Virgins; if you like having 72 virgins you can keep 72 virgins.”)
Now think of the angry resentment when the long term, existing, residents of heaven start having their virgins taken away so the newcomers can have an adequate supply.
Silly question Gard.

Gard R. Rise
Reply to  BoyfromTottenham
January 31, 2017 11:08 am

Scholarly answer, Don.

Reply to  BoyfromTottenham
January 31, 2017 3:51 pm

Well thank you,
There are Islamic cleric scholars that spend their whole lives interpreting and reinterpreting the Koran to provide for for past, present, and even future direction of the Islamic followers.
My interpretation of the Koran may be just as logical as theirs, but to call it scholarly kind of takes away from the lifelong pursuit those Islamic clerics. To avoid insult to the clerics and their scholarly status (which may lead to attempted murder), maybe we should just call my response an interesting study.
(As a side note, there are those that say that a simple phrase mis-interpretation led people to think “virgins” rather than the intended “grapes”. So Islams’ true promise and reward to suicide martyrs is that, in return for killing themselves for the cause they get 72 grapes. A true scholarly change of interpretation for the Islamic community …. Grapes or raisin as reward. With such changes, I feel I could really warm up to Islam.)

Gard R. Rise
Reply to  BoyfromTottenham
January 31, 2017 4:45 pm

Right, religious bigotry is a whole lot of fun, isn’t it. Also, it is in fashion these days. Count me thoroughly out of it.

Reply to  BoyfromTottenham
January 31, 2017 4:56 pm

“Isn’t it at all possible to criticize religions and religious customs (if that is what one wants, for any reason) without being outright offensive?”
Were you ACTUALLY offended? If so, I guess the answer to your question is no.

Gard R. Rise
Reply to  BoyfromTottenham
January 31, 2017 5:52 pm

Oh, come on. Where is your sense of moral decency? I haven’t got the slightest connection to any Moslems whatever, other than that they are my fellow citizens whom I meet on my way to work, at work, at my local grocery store. You know, the majority of them tax-paying, ordinary, good-natured, decent folk. None of them overly obsessed by the thought of virgins in paradise, as far as I know.
Now there is this guy openly wishing that Moslem women would have no children in a public forum and you think that is perfectly all right, don’t you? You obviously do, since you instead choose to ramble on with stories about virgins and grapes that amuse you.

Reply to  BoyfromTottenham
February 1, 2017 10:26 am

“If only we could as easily convince women in the Islamic world to stop having children!”
I don’t read that comment as a “guy openly wishing that Moslem women would have no children in a public forum”.
Children are enjoyable … and they should be allowed in public areas regardless of their religious upbringing. (If you meant delivering babies … that’s whole ‘nuther story. Personally, I don’t think Moslem women, or women of any religion, should give birth in a public forum).
When I read the guys post, I just assumed “Islamic world” meant areas of the world that are predominantly Moslem, ruled and controlled by church based on Sharia. I do believe that the world would be a better place if women in those areas would have less children and I don’t see any reason not to say that out loud.
I did not read his post as meaning that he thought ALL women in the world, that profess that they are Moslem, should stop having children. Maybe he is saying that, but I don’t begin and end my day looking for reasons to be indignant, so I didn’t see it.

Gard R. Rise
Reply to  BoyfromTottenham
February 1, 2017 11:26 am

Sure, make fun of my English all you like. If religious bigotry is a fountain of mirth to you, so should foreigners trying to write in your language be. Good luck with your respecting your fellow man; you seem to be doing great with that.

January 30, 2017 7:32 pm

Leo sells his services to the Global Warming crowd, same as paid to advertise watches to him. Allows him to have his private jet and his 482 foot yacht. 482 foot, the way a boat burns fuel its way worst than his jet flying 10 hours to pick up an award….

Reply to  scottmc37
January 30, 2017 7:42 pm

He could never afford to buy a 482 foot yacht–he just rented it. –AGF

Caligula Jones
Reply to  agfosterjr
January 31, 2017 9:24 am

…and rented it from an oil sheikh…

January 30, 2017 7:33 pm

The forces that create these useful idiots are complex, scary, and overwhelming to a large and vulnerable subset of our citizenry that, unfortunately, are so scientifically inept that they cannot string together the simplest logical arguments. Makes one wonder if we shouldn’t encourage them to remain childless and celebrate their selfless contribution toward elevating Earth’s IQ.

John V. Wrighy
Reply to  BobM
January 30, 2017 8:49 pm

“Two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I am not yet completely sure about the universe.” – A. Einstein

Reply to  BobM
January 31, 2017 7:16 am

You have only to listen to the ridiculous ads on radio for dietary supplements, slimming programs and exotic medical treatments with ZERO biological plausibility to know that the bulk of our population now don’t even have the basic “user’s manual” understanding of Life Itself. I’d bet that unless one is on a med or vet track they aren’t even required to take basic biology in high school. The evidence speaks for itself.

Tom Schaefer
January 30, 2017 7:48 pm

I do hope these climate fools commit demographic suicide. I think they as a group deserve a Darwin Award.

Reply to  Tom Schaefer
January 30, 2017 8:11 pm

I agree, I’m all in favor of progressive fools refusing to breed.
The sad part, in California as well as Germany, is that the lack of young people able to do non-professional jobs leads them to favor the importation of huge numbers of foreign nationals to do this work for them.

January 30, 2017 7:52 pm

western civilization is hell bent on committing suicide for reasons not known to me.
as evidence i present the zero population growth movement (ZPG) of the 1970s and the current movement to save the planet from fossil fuels that threatens to finish the job that the ZPG started.
the migration crisis in europe has both a supply side and a demand side. the demand side arises fertility rate lost because of the dumb europeans’ wholehearted embrace of paul ehrlich’s population bomb and the ZPG that it engendered.

Reply to  chaamjamal
January 30, 2017 7:54 pm

“the demand side arises from the fertility rate lost ….

Mike barminski
January 30, 2017 7:54 pm

Anyone who believes they should not have a child in order to save the earth has proven they are not mature enough for parenthood, and therefore should not have children. Anyone who thinks others should not have children for earths sake is either a racist or a misanthrope.

Jim Gorman
Reply to  Mike barminski
January 31, 2017 9:55 am

Or a liberal. Liberal progressives “feel” everyone should believe and act as they do and are willing to use force if necessary to make sure that happens. I’m not a theologian but that sounds a lot like Islam to me.

January 30, 2017 8:10 pm

I’d like to tread carefully here. People who want to “save the planet” are certainly well-meaning and quite honestly, why wouldn’t one want to save the planet?
However, it saddens me that so many have their “save the planet” endeavors miss-directed. A little extra atmospheric CO2 isn’t harming the planet.

Reply to  JohnWho
January 31, 2017 5:55 am

Working towards saving the planet is like putting effort into the sun rising in the east every morning. I could spend billions working on it or spend absolutely nothing. The result will be identical.

Reply to  jclarke341
January 31, 2017 11:22 am

Nice!! I’m saving that one.

Reply to  JohnWho
January 31, 2017 9:45 am

The CAGW farce has shown me what many of you have probably already deduced: many if not most people are incapable of reason, and rather than think they react emotionally to issues, clininging to their first emotional response until the next sound bite comes along to distract them.

Reply to  Cube
January 31, 2017 11:05 am

hey … it is not possible that my first emotional response to a situation or concept could be wrong. My emotions are valid & therefore must be correct. My logic, and the people I call friends, have always proved my emotions to be correct. 🙂

January 30, 2017 8:11 pm

This is like not having kids because you’re worried about the Earth being hit by an asteroid or the eruption of the Yellowstone Supervolcano. If you replace global warming with either of the former, you’d be branded as nuts, but global warming–an event much less likely to wipe out humankind–is somehow exempt from this perception.

Steve Case
January 30, 2017 8:11 pm
Reply to  Steve Case
January 31, 2017 12:31 am

Without a label, people don’t know what to think.

So the person telling the VHEMT followers what to think is telling them to help make humans go extinct. Didn’t we try that in the 1920s and 1930s? Eugenics and the “isms?”

Reply to  Steve Case
January 31, 2017 12:28 pm

I’ve always wondered why these people don’t volunteer to go first?

Steve Case
January 30, 2017 8:14 pm

Hmmm, three strikes and I’m out, just Google “The Human Extinction Movement”

January 30, 2017 8:15 pm

Climate Change Jonestown.

January 30, 2017 8:20 pm

If one really cared about the environment, you would raise your children in Ethiopia, where each of them would produce only 221 pounds of CO2 emissions???
This number does not appear to include the CO2 emissions each of those children would emit in the process of metabolizing their food intake.
If one was really serious about saving the planet, not only they could choose not to produce these carbon hungry little creatures around them, they could actually stop breathing themselves. We could then put up a plaque somewhere recognizing those who have made this supreme sacrifice.

Reply to  Asp
January 30, 2017 8:47 pm

In poorer countries with less stable governments, once the Muslim population hits 30 to 50% they start knocking each other off (just supply lots of ammo). Remains to be seen if this will occur in Europe.

Reply to  Asp
January 30, 2017 9:19 pm

When I read that, I thought, yeah, she’d be producing way less of everything. Because she would likely be half-starved, completely malnourished, and living in squalor.
I guess everyone who made the “mistake” of having children should raise them as if they were living in a Third World hellhole. Just think, if parents doubled down and made their boys be child soldiers, the kids might all get rid of each other!
Ever notice that whenever “justice” is used in conjunction with an adjective, the people advocating [blank] justice demand that everyone else sacrifice and change? There is also usually something about destroying those who do not agree – personally, professionally, economically, and sometimes even physically. I now have a Pavlovian response: someone uses the phrase [blank] justice and I stop taking anything they say seriously.

January 30, 2017 8:40 pm

In Australia, we have a saying for times like these, “you poor diddums”.
It says it all, really.

January 30, 2017 8:41 pm

Somebody forward these women the study showing cold weather kills 8 times more people than warm weather. But then they might have kids and raise them to be stupid like they are, so scratch that.

January 30, 2017 8:44 pm

“Climate change is already killing children in the developing world”. So is abortion. Working to reduce abortions would be far more fruitful.

January 30, 2017 8:58 pm

Inverse Darwin Award winners?

Patrick MJD
January 30, 2017 9:32 pm

“According to Mother Jones, Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie’s daughter Zahara will likely produce 45,000 pounds of CO2 yearly, but that number would shrink to 221 pounds had Zahara stayed in Ethiopia.”
What a disgusting thing to say! Clearly not been to Ethiopia (Or any other similarly developing country). Live Aid should not have happened “Mother Jones”?
Disgusting and vile!

Caligula Jones
Reply to  Patrick MJD
January 31, 2017 9:32 am

The hypocrisy of progressives is being produced at such a rate that it will probably exist past the heat death of the universe.
They rather like the idea of “primitive culture” and not allowing our modern age to “poison” the purity of it, while never (and I mean ever) volunteering to live in it. Sure, they’ll go for a photo op or two, or a safari (complete with photos in “Hello” or other trash).
They somehow want to condemn the west for not doing enough to help the Third World while pointing out that we all should be living in Third World conditions. Or something, we aren’t talking of the most logical of people.
And that 221 pounds would also be “better” as it would obviously not be for as many years…

January 30, 2017 9:38 pm

Baybe Cum Back … You K blambs it alls on meze … I was strong but I juz cant lib …

She’s Gonn … She gonn … Oooo wha … I pay the deba to repla c er …. She Goonnnn … oOOOoo,

Evabody high on … Con sol ape … chum …. Hahahhahahahhah

January 30, 2017 9:57 pm

This is all just political hair shirt wearing except in public. You don’t want children that is up to you. Sure it’s for the best. That you need to turn it into a virtue says something not very pleasant about you.

January 30, 2017 10:02 pm

Imagine how silly all the environmentalists will feel after they realize that under no circumstances is warming and co2 bad for life on earth and that even if their ridiculous predictions are true their policy is an attempt to pick current property values in coastal cities over the environment?

Old Woman of the North
Reply to  Joe
January 30, 2017 10:47 pm

Most people who practice a religion only become more attached under apparent attack. so I don’t really expect any realisation from environmentalists.

Mark - Helsinki
January 30, 2017 10:31 pm

Expect to see more astroturfed “grass roots” movements relating to not reproducing. Soros loves those kinds of things

January 30, 2017 10:31 pm

Oh my God, theire all gone crazy! Both sides!

January 30, 2017 10:35 pm

“All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others”

January 30, 2017 10:40 pm

Yes but if they stop having kids, hopefully the stupid breeds itself out of the gene pool. The foster kids of these people are a worry.

Eric Harpham
January 30, 2017 10:41 pm

My wife’s cousin decided not to have children in the (19) seventies because of fears about their being a third world war (her father’s brain washing having fought in the second world war). Now we are all in our 60/70s and all her cousins have children and grand children and she doesn’t. Regrets? I don’t know. It is too delicate a subject to bring up in casual conversation. When AGW is shown to be false and the majority agree I fear a lot of women will have regrets and a lot of anger against those who perpetrated the fraud.

Reply to  Eric Harpham
January 31, 2017 4:37 am

and yes many of us were just trusting kids when we got brainwashed BY approved teachers promulgating this crud.
blaming us for being scared n mislead n bullied into decisions that made our lives a damn sight less fulfilling isnt helpful

January 30, 2017 10:42 pm

If these women are that stupid, let them self select out of the gene pool.

Ore-gonE Left
January 30, 2017 11:05 pm

My oh my. I hope these people don’t vote. They obviously don’t have the requisite gray matter!

January 30, 2017 11:08 pm

I went through this process in the 70’s reading ‘Limits to Growth’ by the Meadows and The Club of Rome.
Since the Earth , according to the Meadows, could not possible support the predicted population I developed an indifference to fathering a child that would have a very tough life in the noughties or so I was told.
The Club of Rome and the Meadows science was rubbish as it has transpired, much like CAGW.
Fortunately a large family has adopted us so we haven’t missed totally the experience of bringing up children but I regret believing a apocalyptic science paper that forecast the end of civilization

Reply to  Allan
January 31, 2017 4:39 am

bless you, glad it wans just us females fell for it too.
yes friends kids are a semi family
but its never the same is it?

David S
January 30, 2017 11:17 pm

Agree entirely with the final paragraph. It’s not dissimilar to the women in Europe who had abortions after Chernobyl even though they were beyond the danger zone. Greens scaremongering has consequences.

Reply to  Alex
January 30, 2017 11:44 pm

Yeah, those lame scientists whose work is responsible for the quality of life we have today.

Tim Hammond
Reply to  Chris
January 31, 2017 1:07 am

I love science, but our quality of life owes little to it. All the great advancements were made with little or no understanding of why they worked, and theres very little that started as science and became something we use. Fire, steam power, the internal combustion engine, vaccines, antibiotics (mainly), sanitation, anaesthetics (which we still dont know how they work), flight…
Experimenters should be our heroes! They are the ones who made life better.

Reply to  Tim Hammond
January 31, 2017 9:26 am

Experimentation is science. As things stand today, experimental science is the best form of science. Regarding your statement about major achievements not being science-informed, I suspect it is not supported by evidence. I know of at least one case where the evidence is to the contrary. When you get a chance, visit the USAF museum in Dayton, OH. They have preserved parts of Wright brothers’ research lab that existed long before the first flight. Seeing it will be a shock to you if your priors are informed by the media incessantly referring to them as “tinkerers”.

David Walker
Reply to  Chris
January 31, 2017 3:09 pm

“Yeah, those lame scientists whose work is responsible for the quality of life we have today.”
You’re referring to engineers, Chris.
They’re the ones who convert theory into practice, just like the Wright brothers.

Reply to  Chris
January 31, 2017 3:10 pm

“Yeah, those lame scientists whose work is responsible for the quality of life we have today.”
You’re referring to engineers, Chris.
They’re the ones who convert theory into practice, just like the Wright brothers.

Reply to  Alex
January 31, 2017 12:20 am

Real science doesn’t try to disprove God, it tries the explain the world he/she create. Somehow we got to where we are, and somehow all this was created, and that explanation may never be known, but without being able to explain how things were created in the first place, it is kind of difficult to reject God as the creator. Then, of course, you have to ask who created God. Get my point? Some questions science will never answer.

January 30, 2017 11:30 pm

“. . . there is no cure for stupidity.”
If one doesn’t know the right questions to ask, then the answers don’t matter (timeless adage that, regardless of the generation).
So, “Childless Children Doomers” have gone all in for the blue marble and humanity? Hopefully, they won’t consider removing their breasts.
But, there’s really no need for such selfless sacrifice. See, a funny thing happened as the Rockefeller/Gates/et al crowd got their abortion/sterilization/save the earth’s resources (for themselves) programs funded and underway. Couple of early clues: China’s population won’t able to replace itself, thanks to their brilliant one child policy, and Japan’s population looks like a one-winged 747 headed off the bottom of the population charts. But what’s really interesting is this set of world charts comparing replacement workers. I know, I know, we’ve been told we can lab all of–and the type of–humans we want in going forward (can you imagine stepping on a football or rugby field with one of those things), but what if the labs get it wrong? What if the scientists don’t know what they claim to know? Are found to be fallible? Or liars? Psychopaths? I digress. Have a look at the charts.

January 31, 2017 12:15 am

the growing trend of women refusing to have children for environmental reasons

Can anyone name a woman that doesn’t think her Children are the greatest joys in her life? What a completely misguided group of people these leftists are, and it is truly unfortunate, let alone, self-limiting. After a few more generations the liberal nitwit gene will have been removed from the gene pool. Their self-hate robs them of life’s greatest joy. BTW, without haveing children you never truly reach adulthood, so it kind of explains why so many of these childless leftist seem to be so developmentally arrested in their teen years.

Jay Hope
Reply to  co2islife
January 31, 2017 1:32 am

Co2 is life, I have a lot of female friends who do not think that ‘having children is the greatest joys in their life’, and they regret having had them. Not everyone wants kids. I certainly do not. ‘Without having kids you never truly reach adulthood’. Really? Tell that to the people who end up conceiving a kid they don’t want. Usually because they were pissed at the time, and didn’t think to take precautions. If you think that’s an adult way of behaving, then you need to grow up.

Reply to  Jay Hope
January 31, 2017 6:02 am

When you are bitter at life, there is nothing outside of you that can change that.
First you need to fix yourself, then you can start enjoying all the pleasures of life.
Of course if you would rather continue to wallow in your bitterness towards others, nobody can stop you.

Reply to  Jay Hope
January 31, 2017 9:25 am

Wow, I thank God I had conservative parents and grew up in a conservative community. The hatred the Left has towards children is shocking. The more I learn about the left, the more morally bankrupt them become, the more black-hearted they become, and the uglier they become. Bottom line, I’m glad I was never part of that anti-children, anti-human, anti-Christian, anti-morality, anti-progress, anti-free-market, anti-America, entitlement minded, collectivist liberal crowd.

Reply to  Jay Hope
January 31, 2017 10:28 am

I have three kids. Before they had children, our Christmas Eve was boring. A bunch of adults sitting around giving books and shirts to each other.
With the grandkids at Christmas Eve, the party is on. Just no comparison.
Imagine the pity you would feel to people who never had sex for fear of committing a mortal sin. Not having children because of a fear of global warming/whatever is 100x worse.

Reply to  Jay Hope
January 31, 2017 12:32 pm

co2islife: Worse, they are going to expect our kids to work so that they can have a comfortable retirement.
joel: Sex is not a mortal sin for several reasons. First, the very idea of a mortal sin is a human invention. From God’s perspective as is made clear in the Bible, there is only sin. There are no gradations of sin.
Secondly, it’s only sex outside of marriage that is a sin. Sex within marriage is a gift from God.

George Lawson
Reply to  co2islife
January 31, 2017 1:50 am

Absolutely Those who say they are not having children because they have accepted the preaching of the GW terrorists are undoubtedly those who dislike children in the first place. They find the GW ‘scare’ presents them with a good excuse for justifying their ‘I hate children’ attitude when they would otherwise receive silent criticism from their friends at the dinner table.

Reply to  George Lawson
January 31, 2017 9:19 am

That is really tragic. The left convinces people to never experience the greatest joy most people ever have. The more I learn about the left, the darker and soulless they become.

Reply to  George Lawson
January 31, 2017 10:55 am

1) “They” are afraid of all sorts of things. Living in fear and not knowing it. The unknowns associated with having kids would just add to their fears (and they are aware of that). But rather than say THEY are afraid for themselves, they say they are afraid for the kids (and they don’t realize they are confused).
2) “They” are selfish and are using whatever is handy to stay away from kids, rather than saying “I am selfish”.
3) “They” are both knowledgeable, and fearful, that the kids that they would likely have would be substandard (in their eyes), so they don’t want kids and use the world problems as an excuse. [these are the ones that I have met in person].
4) There are a few that think non-existence is better than existence with the potential of problems.
5) There are those that think no one would want to have children with them, so world problems are a good excuse.
6) There are chris’ and griffs and similar … that will say anything at any time to get on the bandwagon to get attention.

Reply to  co2islife
January 31, 2017 5:20 am

It’s a standard distribution curve based on the child’s age. As infants and toddlers, they are the greatest gift. When their teenage (trust me), they are three standard deviations from the “greatest joy” tag. ;-)!!

Reply to  FTOP_T
January 31, 2017 6:02 am

However when they start having kids, they quickly return to the greatest joy category.

Reply to  FTOP_T
January 31, 2017 9:55 am

@FTOP_T: I don’tknow, the problems get bigger and they certainly get nasty when the hormones kick in, but at the same time there are moments when you can sit together, and talk, and wonder about the universe that even make those difficult years a joy. And, you can’t get them back, once they’re gone…

Reply to  FTOP_T
January 31, 2017 7:00 pm

Agreed @Cube,
There was both truth and a bit of tongue in cheek in my bell curve analogy. With two daughters (15 & 16) that are both straight A students, our problems are all 1st world ones. It is difficult to combat the indoctrination they receive from the schools and media. Reading about folks on here whose lives were altered by the Malthusian warnings from their youth is disturbing.
It is all angels on a pin. The sun represents essentially all the mass in our solar system and all of its energy. The ocean absorbs and retains (as latent heat) the gift of life from the sun. It is folly to think man can change the direction dictated by these two forces (sun + ocean).
The green movement seems very dark in its view of the world. Why not enjoy the bounties afforded by how fortuitous we are that the earth formed in such a way as to sustain life. I think I’ll golf in the sun on Saturday.

Jim Gorman
Reply to  co2islife
January 31, 2017 10:38 am

Jay: ‘Without having kids you never truly reach adulthood’ is very true but also has one caveat. Being a parent can make you focus on someone other than yourself, but you have to be willing to also sacrifice for someone other than yourself to achieve the best result. Some people simply never learn to be willing to give up their lives for their children or to love a child more than yourself.

Reply to  Jim Gorman
January 31, 2017 1:41 pm

So sad, but true. The unselfish aspect is the part the left seems to have a problem with. Tragic.

Jay Hope
Reply to  Jim Gorman
January 31, 2017 2:27 pm

Jim, I don’t know who you’re trying to kid – yourself, me, or others? During the Maunder Minimum, people abandoned or ate their children in order to survice, and they will do so again if and when things get bad enough.

Jim Gorman
Reply to  Jim Gorman
February 1, 2017 9:09 am

Jay: What you have said here doesn’t disprove anything. You left out the fact that some people also died trying to protect their children. You simply confirm the fact that some people never learned to be willing to give up their lives for their children or to love a child more than themselves.

James Bull
January 31, 2017 12:18 am

I think there’s a chance they are after getting a Darwin Award.
James Bull

Jay Hope
Reply to  James Bull
January 31, 2017 6:52 am

‘They quickly return to the greatest joy category’. They have to. So that they can justify their mistake when they accidently pump out a unit and will now have to live with it for the rest of their silly lives.

Jim Gorman
Reply to  Jay Hope
January 31, 2017 10:42 am

You just proved to me that you are a liberal narcissist who puts yourself above everyone else!

Reply to  Jay Hope
January 31, 2017 12:35 pm

I hope and pray that someone as selfish and self-centered as you, never has children.

Reply to  MarkW
January 31, 2017 2:17 pm

Nature seems to sense that, and those who should not have children, usually do not. But as in all things, nothing is perfect, so we hear the horror stories of the few that do have children that should not.

Reply to  Jay Hope
January 31, 2017 7:06 pm

I’m guessing your middle name is either “no” or “without”

January 31, 2017 12:25 am

Children are a serious drain, financially and time-wise, on devoting yourself to the seeking of personal pleasure.
That is the real reason these self-centered creatures are not having children – but they have to turn it into a virtue signal.
Now, the one that is fostering isn’t doing that – but no sane foster agency should even consider her as a foster parent; all too likely the kids will end up dead in a murder-suicide like the poor Brazilian children mentioned in another comment.

January 31, 2017 12:26 am

According to Mother Jones, Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie’s daughter Zahara will likely produce 45,000 pounds of CO2 yearly, but that number would shrink to 221 pounds had Zahara stayed in Ethiopia.

How truly sick and hypocritical is that? Maybe all those elitist journalists at Mother Jones should move to Ethiopia and live in a hut. Last I looked publishing takes a lot of trees, paper, and energy. And I doubt the quality of life in San Francisco is anywhere near that in Ethiopia.comment image

January 31, 2017 12:51 am

the real tragedy is women being terrorised out of child bearing by climate propaganda.

No tragedy, as that has always been a personal choice issue. We all descend from people that chose to have children in the face of adversity. For every westerner woman that decides not to have children there are a million Chinese women that are just too happy to have a second child.

January 31, 2017 12:53 am

America’s birth rate is a disaster. The number of young, healthy, productive people is declining. The number of pensioners, me included, is increasing. It doesn’t take a genius to know that it is a recipe for economic disaster.
The idiots, who refrain from breeding so they can save the planet, are just making an excuse for what they would do anyway. People always make up logical virtuous sounding excuses for what they are going to do. The reasons they actually aren’t breeding are deeper and, IMHO, are rooted in their own selfishness and shortsightedness.

Reply to  commieBob
January 31, 2017 1:51 am

All my life, I have been told of, and seen, the bad results of population increases. Increased urbanization, suburban sprawl, and encroachment into rural areas. This, of course, has led to near universal zoning laws on the US East and West coasts, pushing housing costs to truly unaffordable levels. We also have population pressures on everything from water resources to fisheries to open spaces and National Parks. On the economic front, when unemployment is calculated the same as when Carter was president, the rate is a staggering 23%. To put this number in perspective, unemployment hit 23% only briefly at the height of the Great Depression, currently this rate has been dragging on for 8 long years. Our Labor Force Participation Rate is back down to where it was in the early 1970s. But in the early 1970s, the one income family with a stay-at-home mom, was still the norm. (Although that would change fast) This Labor Force Participation Rate, when a two income family is needed to pay the bills, is a disaster for the middle class.
Yet everywhere we look, we are told that increasing computerization, the next wave of automation, and robotics will combine to make the employment situation a whole lot worse.
Yet somehow, through it all, we are now told that not enough babies is the problem. The truth is that our economic base is declining faster than our population base. Or, put another way, our economic base is not expanding as fast as our population base. (on a per-capita base, same thing)
The thing really threatened here is the government’s ability to tax, borrow, and spend beyond all reason. Ironically, it is the government’s own social and economic policies pursued since the 1960s which have wrecked the financial foundations of the middle class and turned the govt social programs into giant Ponzi schemes.
And all this is because women are not having enough babies? Really?

Reply to  TonyL
January 31, 2017 5:54 am

You got it TonyL. “The thing really “is caused by” the government’s ability to tax, borrow, and spend beyond all reason. Ironically, it is the government’s own social and economic policies pursued since the 1960s which have wrecked the financial foundations of the middle class and turned the govt social programs into giant Ponzi schemes.” I made one little change. The problem is not that the gov’s tax ability is threatened, the gov’s tax ability has caused the problems. Take a look at Wrusssr’s January 30, 2017 at 11:30 pm link.
It has a logical explanation for what is happening to the world’s economy. It is out of control because there is no restraint on the ability of government banks and Central Banks to print money.
Coincidenatly, The WSJ had an article on almost exactly the same thing.`Since the Britain, the US, and the world went off the gold standard the US dollar, as the strongest, most stable economy became the default world currency. Any dollars in other countries were essentially a deficit of dollars in the US. IF currencies are backed by something physical, such as gold, when there are price pressures the price of gold rises. When there is less demand is falls, automatically balancing things out. The ever so smart global banking system seems to have found a way to hide the problem by playing ring-around-the-rosy, passing growing deficits back forth behind the scenes through taxes and exchange limits.

Reply to  TonyL
January 31, 2017 12:37 pm

Governments pay people to not work, and punish people who do work.
Is it any wonder that more people choose not to work and that those who do work are less enthusiastic about it?

Ed Zuiderwijk
January 31, 2017 1:00 am

An aptly named website. There is a German word, ‘salonfahig’, which means socially acceptable with the conotation: good for the kudos.

January 31, 2017 1:05 am

If this is the reason these stupid people aren’t having babies then I’m 100% behind them. It may improve the gene pool a bit.

Tim Hammond
January 31, 2017 1:10 am

So why are these women not moving to Ethiopia? Why are they using the CO2 producing Internet to complain about CO2?
The whole thing is so illogical and so emotion-driven its embarrassing.

January 31, 2017 1:16 am

“Climate change is already killing children in the developing world”.
Err, where exactly?

Paul Penrose
Reply to  lawrence
January 31, 2017 7:22 am

Nowhere. It’s poverty that is killing people, especially children, in the developing world. And the only way out of poverty is to improve the local economy. That can’t be done without reliable, affordable energy.

Dodgy Geezer
January 31, 2017 1:38 am

I always believed that the Earth had self-correcting feedback mechanisms.
I’m glad to see that this applies to the humans as well…

Schrodinger's Cat
January 31, 2017 3:29 am

The other day I was amused to read comments in the Guardian from people genuinely in a panic about climate change. Then I got to thinking about how they arrived at that state of mind. Every day, the Guardian is full of alarmist scare stories and pseudo science articles promising doom.
People are attracted to internet blogs and social media discussions that reinforce their own beliefs. In the absence of counter arguments they end up with a high degree of certainty in what they are told.
However, even provable facts seem to be controversial in climate change. The excellent essay on How Climate Works part 2 had in the comments a strongly contested debate about how the models are tuned. Surely that is known or discoverable? It seems that Climate Science, rather being a search for truth, really is a religious belief system with the threat of fire and brimstone for the sinners.

January 31, 2017 4:00 am

There was a religious sect that forbade sex. Their last 2 followers were 2 brothers that lived in Ridgefield CT. and died (I think) in the 1970’s. They were well into their 80’s.
So it does work, that sect no longer exists and they no longer produce CO2.
They are probably producing methane at this very moment, however.

Reply to  lonetown
January 31, 2017 4:47 am

My great-great aunties did that! My grandmother’s parents committed suicide so she was raised by these aunties on their farm commune in upstate NY. She was the only child there and had adventures and then got married and had children. Yes, there were cults that did this.

Reply to  lonetown
January 31, 2017 8:35 am

The Shakers were a Protestant Christian group that had a vocation (calling) to the monastic life, but no idea how to go about it. For many years, they increased because some portion of the many orphans they took in joined them. (The reason they had no idea how to do monastic life and had to reinvent it on their own was because in the Protestant social environment of that time and place, nobody even considered asking Catholics about such a thing.)
thus endeth the pedantic historical note.

Reply to  lonetown
January 31, 2017 12:40 pm

Sounds like the Quakers.
While they didn’t have their own children, they were quick to adopt any children that others did not want or have room for.
Nor did they pressure these children to become Quakers, as many left the sect when they came of age.

January 31, 2017 4:29 am

Another example of the crazy misanthropy that CO2 obsession can lead to.

January 31, 2017 4:56 am

Apparently God has instilled in the SJWs the ability to accomplish their goals, and leave the rest of us in peace. They will non-breed themselves out of existence.

Bruce Cobb
January 31, 2017 5:38 am

The Climate Cult is essentially a death cult. They personify evil.

January 31, 2017 6:23 am

So, let me get this straight: First contrive CO2 as a demon to motivate humans via fear to improve their technology. Now further contrive CO2 as a demon to motivate humans via fear to control population growth, hence infrastructural density (crowding, etc.)
Humans seem to have a genetic need to scare themselves s***less in order to act for the common good.
I can’t say conclusively that the end results of such a process might be bad, … just the way of going about it is f’d up.

Darrell Demick
January 31, 2017 6:47 am

The truth to the matter is that the Fight Against Climate Change is taking trillions of dollars and pi$$ing it down the toilet, instead these funds could be saving lives in undeveloped countries. I believe Mr. MacRae has previously quantified the lives that could have been saved if this money was used instead to provide clean drinking water to those in need. 50 million comes to mind.
Truly amazing. Utterly ridiculous! Completely unnecessary.

January 31, 2017 6:52 am

Let’s hope these fools breed themselves out of existence. Perhaps they should start by giving up cocktail parties.

Roger Graves
January 31, 2017 6:53 am

Women refusing to have children is an old, old phenomenon. It was common two thousand years ago in the Roman Empire. Actually going through childbirth was a nuisance and spoilt the figure, so upper-class women often adopted children rather than have their own.
I suspect that a lot of the women who proudly announce they are foregoing procreation in order to save the planet are merely using this as an excuse. What they are really saying is that childbirth is too much of a nuisance and gets in the way of their hedonistic lifestyles, but prefer to virtue-signal rather than admit the true reasons.
It appears to be a more-or-less universal phenomenon that when the wealth of a given society increases beyond a certain level, the birth rate declines quite dramatically. Why this should be so I am not sure, but the reasons given by individuals in these societies for not having children are just just froth on the top of a large wave.

Reply to  Roger Graves
January 31, 2017 7:26 am

I completely agree. If “saving the planet” was the only reason they were not having children, most of these women would be adopting or fostering children. You hear similar things from celebs: “oh, I would love to have kids at some point…” Then they hit mid-forties and are still childless, even if they have been in a stable relationship for years. If you really want kids, you either have them yourself or you adopt/foster.*** Own it. You simply are not willing to change your lifestyle to accommodate children. If that is what you want, fine. But don’t act like you are doing the world a favor.
***Caveat: some women do not have children because they are not married or in a relationship, and they believe that children need/deserve two parents. However, such women tend not to go about crowing about their non-reproduction.

January 31, 2017 7:09 am

Little Zahara, being a child of the jet-setting celebrity elite, will certainly be responsible for the production of far more than the US average of 45,000 pounds of CO2 annually, probably as much as ten times. How much power is needed just to air condition their mansion in Southern California?
The anti-human environmentalists are having a heyday with this — and have been since the days of Zero Population growth and the Club of Rome nonsense.
George Will recently wrote: “Tom Nichols relates this to myriad intellectual viruses thriving in academia [and among the Hollywood entertainment elite]. Carried by undereducated graduates, these viruses infect the nation’s civic culture.”
I like this idea of intellectual viruses being passed around by the infected — WUWT is one of the vaccines against them.

January 31, 2017 7:24 am

“Conceivable Future — a network that welcomes parents as well as non-parents — encourages women of every experience to share their struggles in an attempt to put political will behind emotion.”
Says it all about science and CAGW really. Never let the facts get in the way of a ripping good emote eh warmies? With brain dead leftys it’s always all about the struggle which is why they’re such an unhappy, restless lot disturbing the peace.

Reply to  observa
January 31, 2017 7:29 am

They call for using “political will”, and in the next breath claim to not be advocating population control. So how exactly ARE they going to use that political will…and for what?

Reply to  AllyKat
February 1, 2017 12:50 am

..for emotion apparently. Do try and keep up and to be fair they do mention something about a struggle.

Jim G1
January 31, 2017 7:41 am

Stupidity has always, eventually, been self regulating, like many believe is the climate.

January 31, 2017 8:00 am

Poor misguided fools.
Maybe we will have to revisit the saying “One’s born every minute”.

Reasonable Skeptic
January 31, 2017 8:51 am

If one were to be politically consistent, warmists should be anti-immigration and would support a ban on immigration. As the person noted Zahara will have a carbon footprint of 45,000 lbs, but if she had remained in Ethiopia it would have been only 221 lbs.
….but they are not politically consistent…. they just virtue signal their way out of any inconsistency

January 31, 2017 8:52 am

We should encourage this kind of nonsense so that the lunacy espoused by snowflakes, social justice warriors, eco Nazis and left wing nutbars will eventually dissipate when they all die out. Let them create their own demographic death spiral so that the rest of us can come up with real solutions for actual problems facing the world.

Mark Lee
January 31, 2017 9:01 am

I think this is a win-win situation. Considering the nonsense that these women would teach their children, we all win when they don’t reproduce. Problem solved.

Power Grab
Reply to  Mark Lee
February 2, 2017 12:21 pm

Yeah…but I just had a thought: What if they had kids? Mightn’t many of them be spending their time preaching the CAGW myth to them (instead of treating the rest of the population as their private class of malleable know-nothings)…then what percentage of those kids would then rebel against the myth???
I say it would serve them right!

Michael Jankowski
January 31, 2017 9:13 am

“…We’re forced to weigh the impact of climate change more than any generation before us. At dinner, cocktail hours, birthday parties. . . it’s on everyone’s mind…”
Who are these nitwits who are so ridiculously obsessed? And why are they celebrating another year of CO2-emitting life? Why is their life important while other lives should never happen?

Caligula Jones
January 31, 2017 9:40 am

Malthus for thee, but not for me (sayeth the glitterati).
Actors aren’t necessarily dumb, but being smart isn’t exactly a pre-requisite. Win the genetic lottery, get noticed at a cattle-call audition, and you can be famous forever. And these days, you don’t even need to audition, because you can be famous without talent.
I saw an actor (who plays a brilliant scientist on TV) on one of the 500 talk shows. Once they talked about he new project and his dog, it was evident the writers of his TV show were actually brilliant ones…

January 31, 2017 10:06 am

My baby sister is a lesbian (I love her dearly — her sexual orientation is a non-issue to me) and describes women with children as “breeders”. This seems to be the mindset discussed here.
My question to these women (I won’t ask it of my sister — keeping comity et al) is: What do you think you’re saving the planet for — or from? You seem to imagine a future without people — and that it would be morally superior to humanity and culture.
Just a few years ago the rallying cry for population control was the threat of a “nuclear winter”, i.e. “How can you bring a child into this terrifying world?”
I think the root of this is the progressive dogma of Margeret Sanger — let’s sterilize the inferior races so they can’t breed — and murder their unborn.

Caligula Jones
Reply to  therealnormanrogers
January 31, 2017 11:10 am

Well, my wife is not a lesbian (and I also love her dearly), and she also refers to women with children as “breeders” (I have a son from a previous marriage).
Hey, at least Japan is trying to fix their low birthrate (and very, very low immigration) with robots.

Reply to  Caligula Jones
January 31, 2017 12:44 pm

I’ve read that the birth rate in China went up a bit after they drastically cut back their one child policies.

Reply to  therealnormanrogers
January 31, 2017 1:22 pm

When I have heard people use the “breeders” term, it is usually deriding women who choose to make their children and home their priority. I suspect it is in part because becoming a mom (and *gasp* enjoying it) is seen by some as a betrayal of the “feminist” movement. “Breeders” is a favorite insult in the mommy wars. Because having children is so unfeminine. Oh wait. Femininity is bad. Having kids is so unfeminist. One should not be a mother because the role was created by the patriarchy or something. Women only have children because men force them to do so. Maternal instinct is a myth perpetuated by the patriarchy…blah blah blah.
I am only slightly exaggerating. There really seem to be people who think this way. It is always about the superiority.

J Mac
Reply to  AllyKat
January 31, 2017 2:15 pm

Well said, AllyKat.
I have seen and heard similar. Suggest, when confronted with those derogatorily labeling mothers and fathers as ‘breeders’, that you use the antonym label ‘barrens’ to describe those that deign their personal choice to not have children as a sign of ethical or moral ‘superiority’. Reserve such usage only for those derisive few…..

Joel Snider
January 31, 2017 12:30 pm

I got a kick out of this one – Russell Brand as Aldous Snow … although to be fair, HE was only pretending to be this stupid.

James Fosser
January 31, 2017 12:50 pm

Absolutely nothing that Humans do or say surprises me ever since I realised that 50% of the population are below average intelligence.

James Fosser
January 31, 2017 12:51 pm

On reflection,perhaps that should be because 50% of the population are above average intelligence!

January 31, 2017 12:58 pm

The best news I’ve heard in years! ; ) With luck in another generation the left wing climate nuts will be extinct! : D

January 31, 2017 1:02 pm

“We’re forced to weigh the impact of climate change more than any generation before us. At dinner, cocktail hours, birthday parties. . . it’s on everyone’s mind.” For those women who forego having a child thinking they are saving the planet, they are going to be really angry when it is finally accepted that the whole climate change/global warming was based on political needs and the science was heavily manipulated. Sadly, revelations like this will greatly impact the integrity of scientific endeavors. How do you gain the public trust when intelligent people were willing to push this hoax. It may have started out as a genuine concern but then it took on a life of its own.

Reply to  JohninRedding
January 31, 2017 2:21 pm

Think of the dinner conversation.

January 31, 2017 1:43 pm

Think of the children!

Gunga Din
January 31, 2017 2:35 pm

I haven’t read all the comments but a lot were in reference to it being a good thing that such don’t reproduce, along the lines of the “The Darwin Awards”.
But don’t forget that the last one mentioned is a school teacher. They don’t need to reproduce. They just need to “educate”. They want to raise your kids for you.
Pay attention to what your kids are being taught, their teachers and your local school board.
They are your kids to raise. Don’t delegate that responsibility to people you don’t know.

Reply to  Gunga Din
February 1, 2017 1:22 pm

Gunga Din: “But don’t forget that the last one mentioned is a school teacher. They don’t need to reproduce. They just need to “educate”. They want to raise your kids for you.”
Bingo!!! Just what I was thinking.

February 1, 2017 10:49 am

The sheer number of comments is amazing.. that plus the content of most comments is an indicator that population control is indeed the number one problem we need to face, and it has nothing to do with CO2 or Global Warming.

Mike Nystrom
February 2, 2017 2:10 am

This sounds like a problem that will solve itself 🙂

February 2, 2017 10:40 am

If Zahara had stayed in Ethiopia she would most likely have birthed a lot more children into the world than she will in the US.
I wonder, now that these eco-zealots have noticed the hypocrisy of the Hollywood elite in having lots of children, how long will it be until they notice the hypocrisy of those same Hollywood elites and eco-doomsayers for their massive carbon footprints?

%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights