Shaker art - Hannah Cohoon, Tree of Life or Blazing Tree, 1845

ABC: More Climate Alarmists Denying Themselves Children

Essay by Eric Worrall

Are climate alarmists modern day Shakers, doomed to die out because of their religious rejection of having children?

How climate change is impacting people’s decision to have kids in different ways

ABC Everyday / By Kellie Scott

Australia’s fertility rate is falling.

One of the many reasons people are choosing to have fewer children — or none at all — is concern for climate change.

Experts say fewer babies being born can have a positive impact on the environment, although there are negative implications associated with a rapidly ageing population.

While some people are steadfast in living child free to reduce their carbon footprint, there are those who say having children is a statement of hope.

We spoke to two people whose concerns about the planet’s future influenced their decision about whether or not to have children.

Jonathan: Child free by choice

While Jonathan (who asked we withhold his surname for privacy) has never felt the “strong biological urge” to have children, it was environmental concerns that really cemented his decision to remain child free.

“Environmentally, I am very aware of the devastating trajectory that we are already on due to climate change and global warming and, even in my late 20s and early 30s, had decided that the single most impactful decision I could make in relation to reducing my own carbon footprint was not to have children,” the 39-year-old from Brisbane says.

Read more:

Shakers didn’t have kids, but they offered sanctuary to orphans, who were free to leave when they reached majority if they didn’t want to stay. But the modern movement is only a shadow of its former self.

My original draft was going to be a joke about climate alarmists removing their mental illness genes from future generations, but people denying themselves the joy of child rearing for something as pointless as unfounded climate fears just seems too sad to laugh about.

There were an old couple who used to live next door to my grandparents. They didn’t have kids. Very friendly, but I only saw them occasionally. Very lonely, there was never anybody visiting at Christmas time. Then one day they weren’t there.

Maybe they couldn’t have kids and just told everyone they didn’t want kids. But the look in the husband’s eyes, one time I was leaving after paying a quick visit for some cookies, he just looked incredibly sad. Maybe they realised too late they had made a mistake.

Not every climate alarmist stays the distance. Guardian author David Bry featured a few times in WUWT, for his strident opposition to having kids, before finally caving in to demands from his wife. But sometimes nature takes the decision away from you, if you hesitate too long.

I sometimes worry about alarmists who are ideologically opposed to having kids, who cave into their desire for kids. I have horrifying visions of some alarmist who caved into their desire to reproduce, screaming at their defenceless little kids, telling the kids they are “planet wreckers” by virtue of their very existence.

Nevertheless I hope climate alarmists who are denying themselves the fulfilment of having kids come to their senses. The world has enough unhappiness and despair, without people surrendering to unfounded climate fears, and condemning themselves to a life of misery and lost opportunity.

4.7 22 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
December 12, 2022 10:09 pm

I admire them. They are making sure there will be no more brainwashed groupthink children wringing their hands in despair while they freeze to death and go hungry.

Reply to  universalaccessnz
December 12, 2022 10:20 pm

You are underestimating teachers’ role in moulding the minds of children. Unless you home school or are in a position to select and train your child’s teachers, the children will reflect the mental disabilities and impaired outlook of their various teachers.

Bill Powers
Reply to  universalaccessnz
December 13, 2022 6:14 am

I can’t say I admire them, but the next best thing for the world after taking back education for the purpose of educating, as opposed to indoctrinating, is for socialists to stop procreating.

Reply to  universalaccessnz
December 13, 2022 10:11 am

It’s a big freakin tragedy nothing to admire about it. Eugenics is evil and self-imposed eugenics, which has at it’s core philosophically is anti-human. Being anti-human is insanely evil. When brainwashed ideology impacts a population to the point they do not get married nor have children it’s a disaster regardless of your political convictions. They make themselves victims and will victimize the future of America. Already, our birth rate is well below replacement level. We depend on immigration to prevent depopulation which is good but when immigrants come to America their birth rates years drop to below replacement level. The insanity is contagious. Depopulation is dystopic to the core. US Birth rate 2022: 1.782, replacement rate is: 2.1. The birthrate only recovered by 0.06% since the Fauci years of 2020 and 2021 It is a disaster in the making. Seems WUWT has become a political post for twits and lost itself as a science blog.

Reply to  JC
December 13, 2022 2:38 pm

How is it possible to leave politics out of science when all that is promoted on the world stage is ‘the science’, by politicians, and of course MSM?

The general public have the right to know that they are being fed a false narrative. I am not a scientist so am I to assume I’m one of the twits? There are millions of us out here that have no voice, but worse than that most have no factual knowledge of the discussions that are had here on this site.

I come here learn about ‘real’ science. The long threads on science posts tell me that the science most definitely is not settled. I have gained in confidence when having discussions about the absolute rubbish that is being fed to us by politicians and the media. I have the knowledge and resources to call them out when writing submissions against policies that are being put forward based on ‘the science’.

I also enjoy the humour here, in a world that is so lacking in laughter. This site has given me a voice, for which I am most grateful. But more than that it has given me the knowledge and the confidence to fight against the senseless injustices that are being heaped on society today.

There are those people who complain about what is happening in the world today, and there are those who are fighting for change. Which one are you?

Reply to  megs
December 16, 2022 1:35 pm


My comparison is WUWT 2008-2016 to now. In 2009 WUWT won the Top Science Blog award. Now, there is far less science and far more politics since 2009

My commitment is to objective truthful analysis and clear thinking.. I am just learning so much less than I once did. What I get is more narrative boundary enforcement of a party line that doesn’t always get the whole picture because they believe their narrative enforcing comments will right the wrong in the world politically.

I have appreciated every WUWT post I ever read if they are now more politically bent. My issue is there are too many commenters enforcing the narrative and too little scientific debate.

Of course, I agree in general with the narrative on WUWT. As you noted the world changed since 2016 and much injustice has happened since then. I could write forever about my thoughts on the crapola that was unleased on the world since 2016 but this isn’t the place for it.

WUWT has been a wonderful window into the world via the scientific debates around climate/weather variables that I would not have happened anywhere else.
See here. This is not a science debate unfortunately.

Reply to  JC
December 16, 2022 5:43 pm

JC why isn’t this the place for political discussions? If not here then where? Vapid social media sites where your comments are censored to the point of non existence? People are desperate for a platform where their voice is heard. They also want a site that they feel that they can trust to give them factual scientific information, or even a starting point for further investigation.

Politics is now unfortunately completely entwined with science. Policies are formed on the manipulation of science. The biggest issue on the face of the planet revolves around the premise that anthropogenic C02 emissions are going to ultimately destroy the planet as we know it unless we replace our energy systems with renewable energy.

The general public deserve to know that the destruction of the planet from anthropogenic C02 is simply not true. They also deserve to know the cradle to grave story of wind and solar and that there is nothing clean or green about them. They deserve to know about the human degradation, environmental damage and destruction of economies that result from the existence of this infrastructure.

JC this is politically driven to destroy global economies. ‘The science’ is being used as a marketing tool. I say ‘the science’ to differentiate from actual science. You know that science is never settled. Without question, science is simply dogma. That is what is driving the political scene today, scientific dogma. If you work for the government in any scientific field associated with weather/climate and you don’t toe the line then you are cancelled.

You are mourning the loss of science on the WUWT platform, and I have seen comments like this occasionally. Surely by today’s standards and in regards to the insanity that is happening around the globe, this loss is inconsequential. Nonetheless, it’s a loss of something that was important to you and I’m sorry for your loss. Though, has it not occurred to you that science has been manipulated to the point that if a scientist is actually still employed in their field, he or she might be reluctant to speak openly on this site regarding their stance toward particular subject matter? At least under their real name.

There is still scientific debate on this site. I would think it a tragedy for real scientists to leave the site because there were too many laymen or even just people wanting to see others point of view. The input from scientists is why we come here. How else can we get a scientific point of view that differs from the dogma we are fed by the government? Why shouldn’t we seek information that leads us to ask questions?

I have been fighting against wind and solar for more than three and a half years. WUWT set me on a path of research and investigation and I compiled hundreds of articles that gave me a totally different narrative to what I was being fed by government, MSM and renewables developers. We started a local group with a view to educating people and sharing information. We were doxed by the Guardian, and by the local rag who also banned us from writing for them. Still, we have grown considerably and now have member groups across three states. We have written a paper which we have updated as new information becomes available. We included the paper in a submission against a climate bill in late 2019 and were invited to speak at a parliamentary hearing based on that paper. We have written scores of submissions since that time and we have have a few small successes.

No JC we are not scientists. But we have learned a great deal from many of the scientists that contribute and comment here on this site and from links and other investigations. We have been working pretty much full time on this venture, all on a volunteer basis. No money has exchanged hands, nor are we seeking any compensation. Our goal is to educate as many of the general public as we can and hope that they share the information. The paper we wrote is called “Wind and Solar Electricity Generation are the Answer. Seriously?” if you add Oct 2021 to that you should get the latest version online. It’s not a science paper. The intention is to inform people with information that they will hopefully understand.

Incidentally, Australia’s contribution to anthropogenic C02 emissions is 1.16% of the global total anthropogenic contribution of 3%.

Total global C02 in the atmosphere is 418 ppm
Anthropogenic C02 is 3% of that at 12.54 ppm
Australia contributes 1.16% of that at 0.145ppm

Australia’s C02 contribution to the global
total of 418 ppm as a percentage is less than .035%

Australia’s land area is 7.688 million square kilometres and only a total of 6% of that is arable land. That is where they are installing wind, solar, backup batteries, substations and transmission lines. Rural communities are being ripped apart and the environment along with thousands of native wildlife and birds are being destroyed. For what?

Yes JC science has become political.

Bryan A
December 12, 2022 10:17 pm

Fret not Eric. They aren’t doomed to extinction that quickly. They’ll just become a slow smoldering infected festering pustule on the backside of modern society that spreads through the schools and infects further generations of impressionable youth. What will be needed is a new brand of antinecrotic to treat the insanity infection before it turns cancerous or spreads to another generation

Reply to  Bryan A
December 13, 2022 11:21 am


Are you married with children? .

My kids are Freshmen and Sophomore’s in college. Both are in relationships that appear to be headed towards marriage and children…..soon, I am very grateful for this. We home schooled the kids and were careful to teach them about the prevailing philosophies and narratives that would ruin their lives.

Yet kids being kids do their own thing and become their own people. If they had become radical environmentalists devoting their lives to the cause under the conviction that having children is counter productive…… I doubt I would take the ad hominem approach and refer to them as “smoldering infected festering pustules on the back side of modern society”.

Frankly, they would tell me my argument was a crude fallacious ad hominem and challenge me to a more valid argument and they probably would think twice about spending the Christmas Holiday with me.

Reply to  JC
December 13, 2022 12:10 pm

The argument was crude for the sake of exaggeration; but on average, if people don’t contribute to productive re-populaton, they will indeed be a net drain on society.

(unless of course they live in Canada, or any other equally progressive managed society, that is moving toward euthanasia of those individuals that don’t have a viable support (non-govt) system).

A crude exaggeration, yes. But not fallacious unless they are willing to cut MY losses as they age out and move to Toronto.

Reply to  DonM
December 16, 2022 1:56 pm


I agree with your concern whole heartedly I am equally appalled but we need to take heart and be compassionate for people setting themselves up for a huge loss in life. There may be readers who have 35 year old kids who are not getting married or having kids.

The Spector Depopulation-current birth rate 1.76 with replacement at 2.2

Micro-impact: Most people go through life feeling they have missed something or have missed out. This is because people expect more out of life than life can give them because life is short. Compound this with the psychological disaster that will unfold through out the life of the person who makes the unwise false-ethical choice to remain single without children. There will be no Paul McCartney in 2063 asking the question about where all the lonely people come from because everyone will already know the answer. This will be especially acute when it’s clear the climate change disaster never happened. (War, Famine, Pestilence are more likely)

Macro-impact– lower productivity, higher health care costs, accelerating dependence on immigration that will destabilize many communities, and our political system. I am not against legal immigration. The doors will have to remain wide open to avoid depopulation.

Reply to  JC
December 16, 2022 2:15 pm

I have counselled many on the calling of marriage. I have been a best man 9 times…. one divorce out of the 9. In my experience, the vast majority of people should get married and have children. There are only a few who make the right choice to remain single without children.

I was one who chose not to be married or have children due to a complex fight with cancer in my teens and 20’s. I was made infertile by the tumor and surgery and ended up physically handicapped in WC and crutches through my 20’s, 30’s and early 40’s. I was finally able to walk consistently without crutches in 1998. At 44 I met a woman who asked me “why are you not married?”. I told her my reasons. Then she said, “so that is the reason you have not asked me out”. So I asked her out and 8 months later we were married. I was 45. Five years and 1,500 injections later, we had a boy and a girl. It’s been spectacular having an 18 and 19 year old in my late 60’s . All the negative people we encountered during our dating, engagement… were dead wrong. It has been and still is the dream that came true. I feel very sad for anyone who makes a choice from false ethics not to marry or have children..

Alexy Scherbakoff
December 12, 2022 10:27 pm

They spoke to two people.

Reply to  Alexy Scherbakoff
December 13, 2022 6:04 am

But they both agreed and that is a 100% consensus, none of this 97% crap.

Perhaps the other bonus is that these types are likely to have fallen for the covid vax scam which is doing a great job of reducing fertility and causing a surge in miscarriages.

December 12, 2022 10:56 pm

For the true alarmists, their “mother”, that is Earth, literally speaks to them, and has whispered it so – “that yee shall not reproduce, for my sake…Oh best beloved”….

Dodgy Geezer
December 12, 2022 11:00 pm

There IS a major recent problem with fertility – birth rates over the last year have plummeted, particularly in Western nations.

It correlates closely with the distribution of the mRNA Covid vaccinations. But, as we all know, correlation is not causation. Even if the vaccine has an unexpected but well documented impact on reproductive systems. Because it is defined as ‘safe and effective’…..

Joe Gordon
Reply to  Dodgy Geezer
December 12, 2022 11:29 pm

Behavioral changes linked to isolation seem like a logical factor. And, well, if we’re no longer shaking hands, just think how date night has evolved.

Studies of couples trying to conceive have shown no link at all to fertility. The only correlation found of significance was if either partner had recently had COVID.

I’d file this one in the same place I file the climate models that show the world ending in nine years, four months, eleven days and twenty-two hours.

Reply to  Joe Gordon
December 12, 2022 11:44 pm

…15 seconds…and counting

Dodgy Geezer
Reply to  Joe Gordon
December 13, 2022 2:32 am

There are lots of papers documenting the impact the vaccine spike protein has on both male and female reproductive organs. Menstrual displacement is now an acknowledged side effect mentioned in the official vaccine documentation.

Where are the studies you claim show ‘no link at all to fertility’? Given the official acceptance of menstrual disfunction I would like to see their methodology…

Reply to  Dodgy Geezer
December 13, 2022 3:32 am

throw in a hell of a lot of miscarriages as well in first trimester especially in vaxxed mums. I know of 3

Reply to  ozspeaksup
December 13, 2022 8:58 am

According to U.S. military records, miscarriages are up 80% in military families. My hearts bleeds for the pain these demons have let loose upon the world.

Reply to  Joe Gordon
December 13, 2022 6:04 am

The recent hubub about fertility was actually about studies showing that sperm counts have been dropping.

Don’t know how they did their research – it’s not like anyone other than those going to fertility clinics because of inability to conceive would ever get tested. Not exactly a random sample.

Maybe it’s a trial balloon – they let the questionable research make the rounds of the press, and wait for it to spread or go viral – and then follow it up with articles that climate change is the culprit!!!

Reply to  Dodgy Geezer
December 13, 2022 3:31 am

same as 18kover average deaths in Aus alone this yr 5k+were covid related they say. leaves 13k to explain and golly…they seem to be baffled

December 12, 2022 11:01 pm

It all helps the gene pool.

Joe Gordon
Reply to  lincsnick
December 12, 2022 11:37 pm

No, it doesn’t. The reason for this is that the schools and the government have been collectively scaring kids for a generation now. This is the religion of their time.

A lower birth rate, as Japan and China could tell you, leads down a path that ends with far too few working adults supporting an aging population.

We need education reform and some kind of reckoning for the political class, not lower birth rates.

Rich Davis
Reply to  Joe Gordon
December 13, 2022 1:32 am

If people susceptible to these delusions don’t breed then to the extent that the trait is genetically transmitted, it will lead to a healthier population.

AGW is Not Science
Reply to  Rich Davis
December 13, 2022 6:57 am

Yes. But the question becomes the extent to which the “trait” is genetically transmitted.

Rich Davis
Reply to  AGW is Not Science
December 13, 2022 1:57 pm

I agree and also suspect that the genetic aspect doesn’t predominate. Nevertheless unless the genetic aspect is zero, not having these loons breed is a net positive.

Eric Harpham
December 12, 2022 11:08 pm

In my younger days, born 1946, a minority of people talked about not having children because of the possibility of a third World War. Most of them went on to have children. But I do know one couple, who I see a couple of times a year and are now retired, who so believed that we are all DOOMED that they never did procreate. Their loss!

Alexy Scherbakoff
Reply to  Eric Harpham
December 13, 2022 1:19 am

Do they complain about not having children?

John Hultquist
Reply to  Alexy Scherbakoff
December 13, 2022 9:26 am

Only that there are no grandchildren around to shovel the snow from the path to the auto.

Reply to  Eric Harpham
December 13, 2022 7:27 am

Actually, they went on to have the “baby boom”….

Joe Gordon
December 12, 2022 11:33 pm

Just call it the Baby Gloom.

Genetic drives and traits are often triggered by environmental concerns. It’s only natural that young people feel less drive to procreate if they don’t feel their future allows for safe reproduction.

Middle school science teachers, having collectively joined the cult of climate doom, have been scaring the crap out of kids for nearly a generation now. It’s not surprising we’re seeing the results.

December 13, 2022 12:05 am

Help! I desperately need counselling to come to terms with the endless sleepless nights I have to endure trying to cope with my deep guilt of being the father of FOUR children. 😱😚.
Any suggestions on matters of atonement?

old cocky
Reply to  cognog2
December 13, 2022 12:56 am

There’s a reason for sleepless nights, at least when they’re little.

Writing Observer
Reply to  old cocky
December 13, 2022 5:02 am

Even when they’re bigger, old cocky.

old cocky
Reply to  Writing Observer
December 13, 2022 12:17 pm

There are different reasons at different ages 🙁

Peta of Newark
December 13, 2022 12:14 am

Why are we asking Jonathan if he wants kids – it never and never was hsi choice.
Girls decide about baby-making and always have done -All Through Human History

But in order to ‘give themselves the OK’, the girls need to be made to feel safe, secure and protected – and THAT is the job of the ‘Jonathans’ in this world. The boys.

That job has a name – it is called Romance but in the trainwreck of wrongness that the entire world has become. nobody even knows what Romance is, what it’s about and what it involves.

But no. The boys have gone all selfish and greedy – they don’t want to do Romance with anybody except themselves.
Worst of all, that notion has infected the girls – they want to do their own Romance and have given it a new name: Equality

iow: The girls want to be, or have been brainwashed into thinking they want to be, Just Like The Boys. And have all the fun

And therein lies The Wrong.
Life without Romance is not fun – it is purgatory.
Some use the term/phrase, especially legal types, they call it ‘Unreasonable Behaviour’

Here’s equality for you:Childcare fees mean mum makes £2 on overtime shifthere

Are you pleased with yourselves lads – are you happy with what you’ve done?
Instead of Romance, you’ve turned the girls into slaves – while you sit around in front of computers (super ones of course because they are surrogates for something else) and counting the dancing angels, admiring the Emporer and quibbling about the new phlogiston.
And myriad other nonsensical time, money and resource squandering garbage – while imagining you care and are ‘doing science’
Nothing could be further from the truth and any more wrong, you don’t care and are complete pathetic wimps – going continually AWOL on your Prime Directive, namely: Romance.

And how did you get away with such a monstrous crime? Come on lads, time to fess-up, how did you do it?

Simple, you drugged the girls. You poisoned them. (Stepford Wives anyone – who wouldn’t like one of those?)
How were thy poisoned?
With sugar.
Coz for female mammalian critters, all female mammalian critters, that is the easiest thing to do- as critters who lactate, do so by turning sugar into fat.

An especially good poison is Fructose Sugar, far and away one of the most addictive and habit forming substances in the world/galaxy/universe
And toxic in equal measure to minds and body
And girls in the US, all the girls, are eating over 100grams of that shyte Every Single Day

And just like how in the UK the old coal power stations have been destroyed, so as to make sure they’re never used again, the global food machine is now configured that there’s nothing else to eat except sugar.

Over to you, how will this end?
(It’ll be hard, but at least try not to have too many nightmares)

Reply to  Peta of Newark
December 13, 2022 1:01 am


Rich Davis
Reply to  strativarius
December 13, 2022 1:50 am

Not so much. Most of what Peta calls “sugar” is actually starch.

S/he would have you wash down your lard with water. Doesn’t that sound positively appealing?

Reply to  Peta of Newark
December 13, 2022 3:40 am

and birthcontrol pills did give girls a chance to NOT be forced to pop out a baby every yr or two
far greater i suspect was male desire to not be responsible for the accidents they kept having, back when guys were expected to fess up and BE responsible for them.
its only in recent years the runaway males are forced to at least contribute financially if not in any other way, when i grew up it was always the woman paying in social disapproval and struggle to get by, the govt didnt step in in Aus till the mid 70s to support single mums. Single parented myself, social pariah me n mum had to live in as househelp or live in slums and take lousypaid foul jobs to survive, and keep us fed n clothed

December 13, 2022 12:29 am

I suppose these sad – and easily spooked – people are doing us all a favour by signalling their virtue….

Peta of Newark
December 13, 2022 12:39 am

They are denying a whole lot more than children

This is the first of two posts, I need you to see two pictures.
(I tried crunching them into one inside Word then screen-shotting but the resolution died)
One is a screenshot from UK Met Office showing temps in SE England at 06:00 today – in this post.
The second is from Wunderground, same time same place showing the temps they are recording.
Spot the difference…..

Met Office Temps 131222.PNG
Peta of Newark
December 13, 2022 12:40 am

The second one, this time what the Wunderground sees in SE England right now…

Wunderground temps 131222.PNG
Bill Toland
December 13, 2022 1:02 am

After talking to climate alarmists, I agree that they should not reproduce.

December 13, 2022 1:42 am

I hope so – those particular genes are very flawed

December 13, 2022 3:24 am

the have no kids crap started in aus in the 70s IN schools along with the new iceage and other bullshit thanks to usa led hysteria by ehrlich holdren and strong
so 50 yrs of brainwashing is showing results
why is anyone surprised

AGW is Not Science
December 13, 2022 4:18 am

I think their commitment to not procreate is insufficient. If they are truly sincere about reducing alleged “harm” to the climate, then they need to end their own existence immediately. Especially those in academia.

Especially since THERE IS NO HARM, but their worse-than-stupid ideas are going to be a very REAL, as opposed to imaginary, catastrophe.

December 13, 2022 5:59 am

One could only hope.For those already born, hold your breath.

December 13, 2022 6:14 am

Who? Who will replace Greta? At least they are not giving up their private jets.

December 13, 2022 7:44 am

We are in our 70s and have 2 boys in their 40’s. One has 3 sons and lives overseas and one lives with his significant other in a nearby town. The single one and his significant other have both committed to not have children. Both sons have good jobs but work 50 – 60 hrs/week. Once a year we see our sons and grandsons. And that is it. We just finished paying off our parent loans and feel financially strapped. We have no other family and few “friends”. By most accounts we are “healthy”. I have doubts about the wisdom of having kids. I feel like I am just sitting here waiting to die. I am a Christian and volunteer but I still have constant doubts about the benefits of having children.

John Hultquist
Reply to  Retiredinky
December 13, 2022 9:42 am

Perhaps you should talk to your minister/priest or other councilor.
Further, if you are “financially strapped” find the support services to alleviate the burden.
May the road rise to meet you
May the wind be at your back
May the sun shine warm upon your face;
The rains fall soft upon your fields

Pat Frank
Reply to  Retiredinky
December 13, 2022 1:41 pm

The benefit of children is always paid forward, Rd.

You collected the benefit of the trouble paid by your own parents. Your children collected from your trouble. Your trouble paid the debt of your parents’.

You are justified to feel proud.

Health, a roof over your head, and food on the table is a map to happiness. You just need to find the route. 🙂

Best wishes.

December 13, 2022 8:35 am

Civilizations come and go. And they get replaced and forgotten by others.

December 13, 2022 8:36 am

The Atlantic told them so.

Gary Pearse
December 13, 2022 10:45 am

I’ve offered the Le Châtelier Principle of chemistry as the reason for warming being only ⅓ of what climateering models calculate (any induced change in one component of an interacting system, causes changes in the other components in such a way as to resist the perturbing change- i.e. induced warming is resisted by accommodations naturally built into the system).

Rising climate neurosis induces sufferers to remove themselves from the gene pool, thereby resisting increases in alarmism and calming the population down.

Reply to  Gary Pearse
December 14, 2022 7:50 am

Le Chatelier’s Principle also states that increasing the concentration of a reactant tends to increase the rate of reaction. So, for the photosynthesis reaction

6 CO2 + 6 H2O –> C6H12O6 (glucose) + 6O2

increasing the CO2 concentration should increase the rate of photosynthesis (and the growth rate of plants) as long as there is enough sunlight to power the reaction.

So, as the CO2 concentration in the air increases, plant growth rates should increase, which has been actually observed with increasing forestation and crop yields over the past 40 years.

As for those who avoid having children because of climate change alarmism, we will all die eventually, so the question is, who will replace us? If those spooked by climate change don’t have children, we will be replaced by the children of those who do not fear climate change, who will teach their children not to fear climate change and view themselves as the hope for the future and stewards of the earth’s resources, not a burden on them.

Pat Frank
December 13, 2022 11:43 am

The grim backstory irony is that between being eco-alarmists denying themselves children and being over-represented among the CDC-compliant accepting the covid mRNA injection, any population decline resulting will be concentrated among progressvies.

Reply to  Pat Frank
December 13, 2022 12:26 pm

It is amazing to me that only about 20% of the population (USA) abstained from getting a shot.

I can’t imagine the clutter in the mind of the parent of an 8 year old, that would allow them to get their kid a COVID shot.

Pat Frank
Reply to  DonM
December 13, 2022 1:18 pm

It’s a complete mystery to me, too, Don. But I’ve run into many with adamant mind-sets, who just won’t consider disconfirming data. The tragedy of the children, should it truly occur, will be heart-breaking.

December 13, 2022 1:39 pm

Yeah, y’all better not take this too lightly. The bottom quintile of intellect in the world is not bothered by this AGW rubbish in the slightest.

December 13, 2022 9:40 pm

ABC Everyday / By Kellie Scott

Australia’s fertility rate is falling.

One of the many reasons people are choosing to have fewer children — or none at all — is concern for climate change.”

Whenever people are asked to rank climate change as a problem, they rank it in the bottom three of a long list.

Yet, ABC treats it as the main reason or at least in the top three causes.

That is publishing malfeasance where information becomes disinformation. Or do they print a tiny disclaimer later in the week?

Tom in Florida
December 14, 2022 4:49 am

Nobody really cares if they have kids or not.

Allan MacRae
December 14, 2022 5:55 am

Darwin Awards by Proxy.

December 14, 2022 6:09 am

“Rapidly ageing population”? I’m pretty sure the population is ageing at the same rate it always has… one year older every year 🙂

Reply to  stevekj
December 14, 2022 7:03 am

There you go. I was sure I was 10 years younger just yesterday. Now I hurt a bit.

%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights