by Sallust
The Mail has published an article by a businesswoman in her 30s who has vowed not to start a family. She has even persuaded her husband to have a vasectomy after doctors refused to sterilise her. Such decisions are anyone’s free choice, and for any reason they wish, but in this case the claimed reason turns out to be climate change:
For how can I bring an innocent warm bundle into the world when none of us can say that the world will even be habitable for them? In the past few weeks, two new sets of statistics have emerged – the first to widespread hand-wringing; the second to barely a whimper.
The first showed that the U.K. birth rate has fallen to its lowest level since records began. Between 2022 and 2023, the fertility rate for England and Wales decreased from an average of 1.49 children per woman to 1.44 –the lowest rate on record and far fewer than are needed to sustain an ageing population.
And the second set of stats? Those were the ones telling us that 2024 is “virtually certain” to be the hottest year on record, according to the European Climate Service.
A year punctuated by deadly heatwaves and catastrophic storms will end up 1.5°C hotter than pre-industrial levels, and for the first time breach the symbolic point beyond which we stop being able to avoid the most disastrous consequences of climate change – a series of knock-on effects which could see the widespread extinction of animal species and even wipe us out.
For me these two statistics are not unrelated. Raising a human being in today’s world is hard. As reasons not to do it, women cite childcare costs, the hit they’ll take to their career and the difficulty in finding a decent man to have a baby with. As a happily married businesswoman with her own sales company, those reasons don’t apply to me.
She doesn’t pull her punches:
I won’t have a child because of the threat posed by climate change.
Those world leaders who gathered in Azerbaijan for the COP29 climate conference last week should know that women like me aren’t having babies because we are too worried that adding to the global population will simply hasten its demise.
Whenever anyone asks me about my childlessness, I tell them the truth and make no apologies for sounding curt. “Why bring children into a world when we don’t know if it’s going to exist in 100 years?”
The most common answer to this always astounds me: “Oh well, it doesn’t matter to me because I won’t be here then!” It’s such a selfish attitude.
Why have children to fulfil a biological need then not care that the world they will inhabit looks increasingly likely to resemble some post-apocalyptic wasteland? The seas barren, the skies raging, the deserts spreading and no way to turn back this ecological disaster.
I have long been terrified of what the future holds. From the age of six I had recurring nightmares in which I’d find myself being pulled through a hole in the sky, my little body shooting up into space.
It seems she’s not alone:
I am just one woman but my decision is not an especially rare one. One U.S. poll found a quarter of adults without children say climate change is part of the reason – while, in 2021, analysis by a global bank found the decision “to not have children owing to fears over climate change is growing and impacting fertility rates quicker than any preceding trend in the field of fertility decline”.
The U.K.-based BirthStrike Movement comprises women who refuse to procreate “to spare [their] child from a dystopian existence”.
Dismissing any arguments for having children as “selfish” (presumably having children in the pre-modern era when they faced the prospect of high infant mortality, disease, disaster and revolution was unconscionably selfish too, and perhaps more so), she takes care to let the Mail’s readers know how she’s doing her bit to stop Britain turning into a boiling and barren desert:
I’m careful to buy my godchildren sustainable gifts, from local businesses in North Yorkshire where I live. I try to do things with my godchildren that teach them to value the beauty in nature, like long walks and collecting shells at the beach. I grow my own veg and I support local producers whenever I can.
Every day I try to do something to help. I use a lower temperature on my washing machine, drive an electric car and scrupulously recycle. I use Vinted instead of buying new clothes and I have a rescue dog. My entire business is digital: we avoid printing anything and send all documents and contracts digitally. I use public transport to travel to business events.
In a curious twist, she’s worried about the impact of making a decision like hers on her own old-age care:
In fact, who will look after my generation as a whole if there aren’t enough young people to pay for pensions and the NHS?
Economists say the plummeting birth rate spells serious trouble for supposedly selfish women like me, whose fault it is.
But if falling birth rates are worrying political leaders, perhaps they should do something to address it by ramping up our response to climate change.
It’s not the job of younger people solely to fund the elderly (I’ve worked from the age of 16 and take full responsibility for my retirement income) but in any case, whether the state pension keeps pace with inflation may well be the least of our concerns when Norfolk and the Thames estuary are under water and wildfires are raging across our national parks.
The argument seems to be that if governments fall over themselves to devote their every waking minute to preventing climate change, then women like her might have children after all. Perhaps. Or perhaps there’s a subtext. Who knows?
The article is a fascinating insight into the psychological effects of state-sponsored fearmongering, resulting in potentially the greatest catastrophe of all: a culture of total negativity. One wonders why she bothers to go to work, which incidentally appears to be about helping other companies sell more stuff.
Worth reading in full if only to see just how nihilistic the culture of climate change has become.
The odd thing about this bit of Net Zero Darwinism is that she can still change her mind, he can’t.
I think he should change his mind … and marry a lovely woman that is actually sane. He can then get a reversal of his vasectomy.
The global warming alarmism has been amazingly effective.
“Why bring children into a world when we don’t know if it’s going to exist in 100 years?”
A tiny increase in temperature and some additional beneficial CO2 is not going to cause the world to cease to exist. The Earth has survived much more consequential events over its very long history.
This is of course very sad and there were very many people with the same attitude in WW2 too – viz don’t bring children into a war torn country, etc, etc. We saw it again when those who camped out at Greenham Common took a similar view – though at least in their case they lived to see that their actions had actually delayed peace and not helped it. In every case of this sort it is always wrong to mess up your own life, your future and your offspring’s futures on a mistaken interpretation of what might happen..
In WW2 I thought it was the opposite, take your pleasures now as the future is so uncertain. And they did , down dark alleys or after a chance meeting at a dancehall
She wears the trousers, he is henpecked.
How could anyone consider continuing to live when an asteroid could fall from the sky at a moments notice and cause a mass extinction? Now THAT has happened before and could happen again.
Denying yourself the experience of raising and nurturing a “Warm Bundle” from birth to adulthood means you might be denying humankind of the potential scientist that… discovers the cure for cancer… or the common cold… or scalable Fusion Energy… or…
And the rest of the world will continue to suffer from your selfish short sightedness
“Climate…” is not the reason she convinced her spouse to get the snip. She is a little bit short-sighted. Now, he can fool around without leaving a trail, whilst she must be careful to not forget whatever control she uses. Think about it. Punctum.
Perhaps she doesn’t like the idea of a pole tax.
Job done
She’s bonkers – just the way they like it.
At least she won’t directly propagate her skewed viewpoint to another generation…unless she’s a teacher.
For once we agree.
Does that mean you agree there is no climate crisis? If you’re not going to answer directly, then don’t bother replying at all.
There is a ‘climate crisis’ to the extent that we are faced with massive disruption and cost due to the ongoing emissions of greenhouse gases from continuing and indeed increased combustion of fossil fuels.
This will lead to increased atmospheric warming and its associated hazards. That’s not even in question these days, apart from a few outlying contrarians. Even this site is waking up to this reality.
Everything that you just said is a load of scientifically unsupportable GARBAGE. !
1… Please provide empirical scientific evidence of warming by atmospheric CO2.
2… Please show the evidence of CO2 warming in the UAH atmospheric data.
3… Please state the exact amount of CO2 warming in the last 45 year, giving measured scientific evidence for your answer.
PS, your FAILURE to answer each of these questions will mark you as a “climate contrarian”
Doctor….!
You need a psychiatrist, not a doctor.
Your mental health has deteriorated to that of a 5-year-old with ADHD. !
Noted: your failure, yet again, to produce anything to support your gibberish.
Dr Van Pelt will see you now
PS. The “Massive Disruption” is coming from the totally idiotic “Net Zero” agenda… not from any minor natural changes in the climate.
I same natural, because you continue to be unable to provide any scientific proof to the contrary.
Maybe you would like to try again ???? and FAIL again.
1… Please provide empirical scientific evidence of warming by atmospheric CO2.
2… Please show the evidence of CO2 warming in the UAH atmospheric data.
3… Please state the exact amount of CO2 warming in the last 45 year, giving measured scientific evidence for your answer.
“There is a ‘climate crisis’ to the extent that we are faced with massive disruption and cost due to the ongoing emissions of greenhouse gases from continuing and indeed increased combustion of fossil fuels.”
The massive costs we are facing are from totalitarian agendas, not from CO2.
Has there been warming? I’d say we really don’t know, since all we’re given are utterly meaningless global averages. And even if there is, there’s no conceivable way to attribute any warming, or cooling, to minor changes in atmospheric gas content.
Meant to add… So this woman is “bonkers” because of unfounded alarmism that people like you have fostered and promoted.
What horses will win the 5th, 6th and 7th races at Alameda on June 17, 2030? I want to win the trifecta that day.
Since you are already predicting the future in your last post, I’m sure your psychic powers extend to more than just the weather.
Anyone who believes the Global Warming dogma probably shouldn’t have children.
Anyone who believes that anyone else can predict the future shouldn’t have children. Why pass along bad genetic code?
It’s good when fanatics don’t have children.
Any child they might have had would have been miserable in the extreme. Never mind the genetic component.
Yep, someone else who won’t be having a Greta.
She’s also likely a Democrat and so won’t be raising a replacement Democrat.
One less Democrat for voting
One less Nosy Karen to pry…
Not in North Yorkshire. Unless her vote is an absentee ballot counted late to try an make the numbers work out.
Greta may firmly believe what she preached but it is extremely probably that she was programmed to those beliefs and might well have been a good scientist or followed some other useful calling had she grown up in a better environment.
Nah. Her highly educated parents already knew she was merely an achiever rather than a very high achiever. So climate activist was it.
Micheal Mann faced the same situation at graduate school . His study area was solid state physics but soon found others were so much better and his academic career would only be at the lowest level.
So a switch to dendrochronology with only mediocre competing students meant he could shine amoungst the ….dare I say it …..deadwood?
You mean that his degree isn’t in Climate Science (TM)? Then we can’t believe anything he says about Climate Change (TM).
It seems to me, as it has to many others through out recorded history, that the majority of children end up with viewpoints opposed to their parents, especially parents with extreme views. There seems to be little evidence to support eugenics in the sphere of intellect and emotions.
Michael Mann and Phil Jones must be real proud of themselves.
Lying about the Earth’s climate has serious repurcussions. I guess this woman is just collateral damage to Mann and Jones. “The Cause” is more important than the Truth.
Collateral dumb@ss more like it…
Good point, but it’s not just Mann and Jones . . . every single AGW/CAGW alarmist has the impact of instilling unwarranted fear and worry onto millions of people “on their hands”, as it were.
I hope they can live with that.
It is quite clear that the Scientific Method and our current scientific knowledge base does NOT support AGW/CAGW alarmists claims of climate change™ being an existential threat to mankind.
“I hope they can live with that.”
It’s pretty obvious that none of them give a rodent’s backside.
Don’t know about Jones, but Mann has been a strong advocate for emphasising corporate rather than personal responsibility for climate change.
He’s a very good communicator on the subject (which is why this site hates him).
TFN, your remote armchair psychoanalysis of “this site” is worth exactly what WUWT paid to get it.
By the way, you obviously cannot distinguish a website from the commenters who post to it . . . why am I not surprised by this?
What does this mean?
This site promotes climate change denial. Perhaps it has moved more towards obfuscation than denial in recent years, given the obvious idiocy of denying what people can see and feel with their own eyes and senses.
But the fact is clear; this site promotes fossil fuel interests at every turn.
It may be an “armchair analysis”, but it is none the less true.
This site promotes Scientific Rationality and Reality
Something you are incapable of understanding.
You can’t even defend the most basic memes of your AGW-cultism with anything remotely representing science.
You are a massive supporter of the fossil fuel industry.
Everything in your pitiful existence is based on what that industry supplies.
You could not exist without it.
—-
Let’s see your “science”.. three simple questions..
1… Please provide empirical scientific evidence of warming by atmospheric CO2.
2… Please show the evidence of CO2 warming in the UAH atmospheric data.
3… Please state the exact amount of CO2 warming in the last 45 year, giving measured scientific evidence for your answer.
Failure to produce, will imply that you agree that there is no warming by CO2, and that there is no current or future “climate crisis” due to fossil fuels.
BTW. Mann is a moron who can only communicate LIES and MISINFORMATION to gullible twits through the FAKE media.
This is true. For once you have made sense.
I massively use and have used fossil fuels. My career was based on a fossil fuel reliant industry and I get the pension benefits from that to this day.
I’m a frequent flyer. I have a petrol car. My house is heated with oil. I use plastics. I eat meat (and have shot and processed some of the meat I have eaten).
I have never once admonished anyone for doing any of these things that I have frequently done myself.
But this is not the point.
It doesn’t change the fact that we are heading towards dangerous global warming due to combustion of fossil fuels.
The solution to this is not by individual action; it’s by regulation of industry.
Regulation is what industry hates the most.
So we’re stuck….
“It doesn’t change the fact that we are heading towards dangerous global warming due to combustion of fossil fuels.”
You mean the MANTRA BS based on ZERO science.
You still haven’t presented any science to back up the CO2 fallacy.
There is absolutely ZERO NEED to regulate industrial CO2… period. !
Want to try… just once.. or remain a total FAILURE.
1… Please provide empirical scientific evidence of warming by atmospheric CO2.
2… Please show the evidence of CO2 warming in the UAH atmospheric data.
3… Please state the exact amount of CO2 warming in the last 45 year, giving measured scientific evidence for your answer.
“It doesn’t change the fact that we are heading towards dangerous global warming due to combustion of fossil fuels.”
That is not a fact. It is a conjecture that has not yet even been elevated to hypothesis.
The point is, you and everyone else is headed toward the grave and will reach it eventually.
In the meantime, fossil fuel use has relieved incessant misery for ALL who use it. It has increased the standard of living and the length of living for everyone lucky enough to live in societies that do use it.
We are not stuck in our lifetimes except by Malthusian Luddites who just don’t get the big picture. Instead, they would rather self flagellate for their imagined sins, which is silly.
“This site promotes climate change denial.”
No, this website promotes examining the science of climate change.
Questioning scientific claims is the central part of any science, including climate science.
If an unsupported climate change claim is made, people are going to question it. No denial involved.
If you have an unsupported climate change claim, you probably shouldn’t bring it up here at WUWT. Otherwise, you will be asked to prove your claim, which 99 out of 100 times goes badly for climate alarmists.
” . . . given the obvious idiocy of denying what people can see and feel with their own eyes and senses.”
That statement provides all the proof anyone needs that you are totally ignorant of the Scientific Method and science in general. You won’t find any mention of “seeing and feeling” with one’s “eyes and senses” in any description of the Scientific Method.
If mankind relied on such child-like reasoning, humanity would still believe the Earth was a flat plate and the Sun, planets and stars revolved around the Earth.
ROTFLMAO!
“This site promotes climate change denial.”
Not at all.
A pragmatic and scientific approach to climate change is what is promoted.
Not catastrophic. Not anthropogenic as defined as CO2 being the control knob.
And certainly countering to false alarmism.
“This site promotes climate change denial”
Tell us what is “denied” that you can produce actual verified scientific evidence for.
You have FAILED COMPLETELY ever other time you have been asked.
Yet he couldn’t communicate anything useful about his research and data.
Mann has dozens of publications and has many academic wards and qualifications.
How about you, Jeff?
That hasn’t been my path in life.
So mutual backslapping means you’re an amazing person?
D.C. Comics has thousands of publications and many awards, too.
Hard pressed to see the difference.
Oh, heavens, we don’t hat University Distinguished Professor Dr Michal E Mann. We love to laugh at him.
O/T but not a million miles away…
The British Board of Film Classification has helpfully issued a trigger warning for Wicked, citing “discrimination” against a “green-skinned woman” and the persecution of “talking animals.” Grounds for moral panic…
https://order-order.com/
I liked the green woman in Kirk’s Star Trek, she was hot.
Guardians of the galaxy also had a green skinned woman
and the Wizard of Oz
Uhhhh . . . Wicked (both the play and the movie) are based on the Wizard of Oz story.
I’ve only seen a little of the content but the book Wicked, a very engaging part of a 4 book series by Gregory Maguire, is only peripheral relate to the Wizard of Oz or any of Lyman Frank Baum’s Oz.What I saw of bits of the movie and play tell me they are also probably a completely new and mostly different writing from the book Wicked.
Not so hot!
But by all accounts, the actress, Margaret Hamilton, was a very nice lady.
So was the character in the book Wicked although that was not often apparent to most other characters.
How about Gamora, the green-skinned beauty in the Marvel/Guardians of the Galaxy universe?
Where’s the “moral panic” when Gamora is a featured star hero, helping to save the universe from Thanos and his Infinity Sones???
Let’s also consider similar pleadings for Rocky, a talking raccoon, also featured alongside Gamora.
“Technically he’s not a raccoon” – Hawkeye.
That’s not going to please these Daily Mail readers who, on the whole, don’t like immigration. But it’s certainly going to go up.
What about readers of The Spectator or Spiked?
The article referred to was published in the Mail.
I don’t know much about The Spectator or Spiked.
Maybe their readers love immigration?
Let’s hope so, because they are about to see plenty more of it.
So, you do want Sharia Law, and Islamic gangs.
Remember, they don’t treat gays very kindly.
As a Methodist/Baptist married to a Catholic I don’t want Sharia law very much.
And you need psychiatric help.
I say this as a friend.
And carbon dioxide is The Devil.
This site offers you evidence to calm your irrational beliefs and fears.
You poor muppet.
Then why do you support continued Islamic immigration, idiot !!
I’m not the one with the psychiatric disorder. !
Sharia law is already happening…
Sharia Law in London & UK ! Residents are very worried !
“when none of us can say that the world will even be habitable for them? ”
I’m curious TFN, as one of the more likely candidates on this site – do you fall into the category of “us” ?
More like they/them….
Zhe/Zher
Not sure what makes me a likely candidate, but my view is that the world will still be habitable for humans, no matter how bad warming gets.
Just a bit less easy.
Warming and extra CO2 has been absolutely BENEFICIAL for the whole planet.
It is easier to live in warmer places than cold places.
Your views is, as always, twisted and deluded.. and based on innate ignorance.
So, “a bit less easy” is grounds for destroying the most advanced civilization in existence??
Who’s talking about destroying civilization?
You support the net zero anti-CO2 nonsense…
…. and support Islamic immigration.
So YOU are the one seeking to destroy civilisation.
Problem is, you are too dumb to realise it. !
“Who’s talking about destroying civilization?”
Everyone who wants to replace reliable energy generation with very unreliable, for starters.
“when none of us can say that the world will even be habitable for them? ”
Copy that, but it is also true that:
none of us can say that the world will NOT be habitable for them.
People like you are yearning for the UK to become an Islamist Sharia law country..
And Ireland soon after.
Doctor…!
I don’t think a doctor will help you once they find out you are a gender bender. 😉
Really, mods….?
You have often touted that you support “trans”.
And now attempting to play the “woke victim” card.
Pathetic.
If people like her didn’t have climate change to worry about, they would be worried about something else. Some people just have a deep seeded need to worry about something.
Such as “being pulled through a hole in the sky” 🙂
Yeah, I think her problems existed before CO2 became an issue.
Perhaps just a deep seated need to believe that something matters in the universe as a whole, even if it is a negative something. some “grurs” teach a very different and more pleasant viewpoint. Perhaps it all depends on what connections and what opportunities the woman has had.
Traditional western populations will collapse, due to too low birth rates.
They will be REPLACED BY PROLIFIC illegal aliens, if no drastic measures are taken, such as closing our borders, and ousting present illegals, by the millions each year
We have to preserve our western civilizations.
Italy is down to 1.24 birth rate – 2.1 needed to sustain population.
Too late. Museums will be the first to go….
Without the toxic influence of now too many of out ‘western civilization’ influencers, most immigrants, by the millions, came here to be a part of America, not to change or destroy it. I suspect very many still do.
I’m not worried about law-abiding immigrants. They end up being bigger defenders of the American dream than do some native-born Americans. Many of the immigrants know firsthand about dictatorships and authoritarian regimes, and they don’t want to see one happen here in the United States. That’s why many of them supported Trump. They saw the danger the Democrats posed to their freedoms.
We just need to get the immigrant criminal element out of our society and the law-abiding ones can stay and contribute to the society of the United States.
Not sure we HAVE to preserve our western civilizations.
I note western civilizations have evolve over the millennia and will continue to evolve.
Perhaps Darwin was right, but his theories need to be expanded to civilizations, social structures, governments, etc.?
Agreed. Traditional western populations will collapse, due to too low birth rates and be replaced by immigrant populations who don’t believe in the global warming religion. So her refusal to have children will eventually lead to increasing emissions and abandonment of net-zero.
Leftists not having children and
Elon Musk has 11 or 12 children
Both seem like good news to me
Elon failed badly with one. A claim I cannot make.
So you say.
It was a mistake he will not make again!
He’s successful, but a late developer nonetheless.
Yep . . . approaching a year late on the originally contracted date to develop (!) and perform an unmanned Starship HLS demo landing on the Moon.
And it’ll probably take another 2-3 years to “develop”.
Well, FWIW, here’s part of that “good news”:
“Originally named X Æ A-12, the child (whom they call X) had to have his name officially changed to X Æ A-Xii in order to align with California laws regarding birth certificates.
” ‘The child’s name is pronounced “X Ash A Twelve,” ‘ Musk explained on ‘The Joe Rogan Experience”’podcast shortly after his birth.
“ ‘First of all, my partner’s the one that mostly came up with the name,’ he said. ‘It’s just X, the letter X, and then the “Æ’” is pronounced, “Ash,” and then, “A-12’”is my contribution.’ ”.
and
“Elon Musk and singer Grimes welcomed their daughter, Exa Dark Sideræl, via surrogate in December 2021.
“Grimes told Vanity Fair in a March 2022 feature that the baby’s name is pronounced ‘sigh-deer-ee-el,’ but nicknamed ‘Y’.”
— source:https://www.today.com/parents/parents/elon-musk-kids-rcna19692
(my bold emphasis added)
Yikes! . . . Donald Trump imagines Elon Musk, with all that “baggage”, to be an ideal pick to co-lead the newly created “Department of Governmental Efficiency” (DOGE).
Heaven help us!
Names are what people call each other. They’ll manage.
Congratulations . . . that’s a highly efficient response, although it completely misses the main point of my post.
“the main point of my post.”
Your post was basically pointless.. is that the point you were trying to make ?
(Sigh) . . . OK, I’ll lay out the obvious for you: my point was that anybody so inefficient in naming their children and in creating many more children than he has time to devote to being a good father to is ill-qualified to lead any organization having the purpose of increasing efficiency.
As I posted elsewhere, please provide the average number of hours each week that you believe Elon Musk devotes to parenting each of his 11 children (that we know about).
I pity those kids for Elon Musk’s inefficiency as their “parent”.
YAWN. Another dose of speculative BS.
You can bet these children have far more opportunities in life than a low-life complainer like you would ever be able to offer. !
bnice2000, thank you for proving the insightful wisdom of Socrates who said “When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser.”
BTW, since you don’t know, many aged adults will state that NOTHING—even later “opportunites in life”—ever compensated them for the absence of a father when they were growing up.
References:
— https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10666570/
— https://www.allforkids.org/news/blog/a-fathers-impact-on-child-development/
— https://www.mnpsych.org/index.php%3Foption%3Dcom_dailyplanetblog%26view%3Dentry%26category%3Dindustry%2520news%26id%3D54
— https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3904543/
— many, many more
YAWN !!
You have just proven you are a woke *anker. !
“slander becomes the tool of the loser”
Yep, you have been slandering Elon Musk at every opportunity.. LOSER !!
Easy to spout off . . . far less easy to prove with facts:
since you referenced “every opportunity”, please cite the percentage of my WUWT posts related to SpaceX, to Tesla, and Elon Musk specifically where I have slandered him.
Waiting . . . (but not too long, obviously)
My request: “please cite the percentage of my WUWT posts related to SpaceX, to Tesla, and Elon Musk specifically where I have slandered him.”
Ahhhh . . . a nothing-burger I see . . . why am I not surprised?
I dunno… to have a dozen or so children, sounds like something is working pretty darn efficiently to me. !!
Right genes to propagate. !
If Musk’s procreation is working “pretty darn efficiently”, please cite what his child support payments are to his two former wives, Justine Wilson and Grimes (aka Claire Elise Boucher), and his former “partner” Shivon Zilis.
I’d also like you to cite the number of hours he regularly devotes to being a father to each of his 11 kids . . . or maybe that is not as important to you as are his genes.
Well that was a load of gibberish..
You are starting to sound like Final Nail. !
Have you caught the “woke” virus?
Still waiting on the average number of hours each week that you assert that Elon Musk devotes to being a parent to each of his 11 children . . . but based on your response, I conclude that you consider such a metric as “gibberish”.
More’s the pity.
Still waiting on your to show that these children don’t have far more opportunity in life that you would ever be able to give one.
Based on your comment , I conclude you had a very sad upbringing.
He has been munching on a Harris world salad.
He’s good at many things TYS, even though he’s not so good at others. His charter, I think, under the Trump administration, is to fire people that are parasitizing the taxpayer. He’s definitely good at that, with a proven track record.
I don’t think Musk or Vivek can fire government employees on their own authority. Rather, they would make the suggestion, and Trump would fire/reassign the people and make the other changes Musk and Vivek suggest.
As Tom Abbott has already commented, Elon Musk hasn’t been given any authority to fire Federal government personnel in his upcoming role as co-leader of the ““Department of Governmental Efficiency”.
Even so, he and Trump will learn how very difficult it is to “fire” (terminate the employment of) Federal workers. The numerous appeals and various stages of hearings requiring documented justification for such will bog down the Federal legal system if the intended firings amount to more than, oh, about 10,000 persons . . . and there are currently about 3,000,000 (yes, 3 million!) Federal employees!
will learn how very difficult it is to “fire” (terminate the employment of) Federal workers
So it may be difficult, doesn’t mean it’s not worth doing.
Non-sequitur. Musk’s ideas about names for his children has zero relevance to his ability to prune bureaucracy for efficiency.
Ha-Hah! We’ll see about that since, as has been previously noted, his co-leadership position of the future DOGE does not give him any pruning authority.
You truly have a deep dose of EDS, don’t you.
Is it because he is a massive success , and you are a total failure ??
I follow the facts and have ZERO regard for social media “stardom”. You?
It’s better for society when these people remove themselves from the gene pool.
Only problem is that it’s HIM she’s removed, not herself.
That eugenics viewpoint is likely as unreasonable as the rest of eugenics. Raising racing gray hounds is not the same as raising people, unless one is just concerned with obvious physical properties.
It is amazing how deluded people are these days.
Today is Thanksgiving. It is 30 degrees where I live. I remember a Thanksgiving from 70 years ago. While my mother was cooking the Thanksgiving turkey, just to kill time my father took me to the museum. It was a cold morning, exactly like today. For no particular reason, I particularly remember the weather that day seventy years ago as we walked into the museum. In 70 years, there has been no change in the weather.
I don’t care what the official temperatures show, or what the climate models show, or what the academics theorize. I can see with my own eyes that the temperature this Thanksgiving is exactly the same as it was seventy years ago.
Is it warmer now than then? I don’t need a thermometer or some NOAA chart to know that winters here in Milwaukee are warmer than they were in the ’60s & ’70s. Starting my old 1956 Ford when it’s -20°F for several days in a row in those years is a pretty clear memory.
“In 70 years, there has been no change in the weather.”
You’re really making that claim from a vague memory 70 years prior??
“ It is 30 degrees where I live”
Same here.. but I suspect unit of measurement. 🙂
Youtube as a great number of videos on the demise of the UK economy. All self inflicted.
The Economy of the UK Is in Serious Trouble
“All self inflicted”
That is correct.
The wrong politicians have been put in charge.
They can’t tell the difference between speculation and evidence.
They are dangerously ignorant of the CO2 facts. Those who voted for them are also dangerously ignorant of the CO2 facts.
Self-inflicted.
She’s being passive aggressive, appears to be holding the dangerously low birth rate hostage (along with other dim-wits like herself), and all the while, flaunting her supposed moral superiority. Nice.
At least he won’t get lumbered with child maintenance when the divorce comes
…. and the winner is ^^^
I grow my own veg and I support local producers whenever I can.
Even if she grows her own veggies, I still wonder if this person realizes how much nearly everything she does in her daily life contributes to the demand for fossil fuel energy (and probably some nuclear energy as well there in Britain).
If she still buys food in food stores, is she aware that she is contributing to the demand for fossil fuel energy? When she uses anything made of plastic, wears anything made of polyester or nylon? The list goes on and on….
In my mind, she is not giving herself any reason to go on living. If fossil fuel energy were to be outlawed tomorrow, I suspect that we would all be dead within a month or two. She and her ilk are in a doomsday end-of-the-world cult. It is a horrible way to live one’s life, and it demonstrates what can happen when we do not learn to think for ourselves and critically analyze before accepting such narratives at face value.
As I have said before, on both a personal and national level, we pay a very dear price for our lack of scientific literacy.
A couple of weeks ago there was a report claiming that “growing your own veggies” caused more CO2 than buying from grocery stores that sourced from commercial growers. Fresh from your garden may taste better but not actually more nutritious, and usually inefficient. In the extreme – think of a pair of shoes, could you make a pair from scratch efficiently or buy a pair from a factory? {Tanning a hide is a chore.}
There have been various other attempts to suppress home gardening, as well as any food or other supplies storage, well before CAGW was dreamed up.
if “fossil fuel energy were to be outlawed tomorrow” there would be a huge black market withing a quite short time. Some large number of people, of course, would be unable to afford the offerings but “we would not all be dead within a month or two”
As a happily married businesswoman with her own sales company, those reasons don’t apply to me.
and here is Jessica Lorimer posing for the article-
Meet the Woman so Afraid of Climate Change She Made Her Husband Get the Snip and Refuses to Have Children – The Daily Sceptic
..that wouldn’t be Jess posing for shots with her sales company would it?
Selling To Corporates ® Official Website – Selling To Corporate ® – How to sell to corporates, B2B sales training, B2B sales, how to sell to companies, corporate sales training, corporate sales podcast, sales training podcast, how to write proposals for companies, how to pitch to companies
….if it is then our Jess has had somewhat of an epiphany-
(About Us)
Jessica:The Selling to Corporate ® founder Jess left her corporate sales career in 2014 after being diagnosed with a chronic illness. No longer cut out for 70+ hour work weeks and boozy client brunches, she swapped her stilettos for leggings (way before a certain world event made them cool!) and started dolling out sales advice to strangers on the internet.
A global top performer in her corporate career, Jess knew that entrepreneurs needed to know how to make sales simpler and quicker so that they could genuinely build businesses that benefited them; instead of creating new jobs that they hated. Her proven sales strategies and techniques have been taught around the globe to both professional salespeople and small business owners – and Jess has been personally responsible for training over 20,000 individuals and transforming their attitudes towards B2B sales, conversations and metrics management! Jess is responsible for training, development, speaking and the Selling to Corporate ® podcast.
Personally, Jess is a recovering perfectionist, accidental marathon runner (#London2021), unintentional comedienne and the (semi) proud owner of a rather savage chihuahua.
In any case you’d highly suspect that Jess with marriage rings is all too busy flogging lucrative flogging materials to strangers on the net for yukky childbirth and messy tackers.
Jessica looks normal but only has one oar in the water. Not into rowing? Her elevator doesn’t go to the top floor.
Top floors are racist.
“and started dolling out sales advice to strangers on the internet.”
I wonder if “dolling” was an intentional typo. Maybe she’s giving out more than advice.
The woman’s mental confusion is really sad, but there is something to be said about persons willingly removing themselves from the future gene pool.
Especially when such person offers logic such as this, quoted in the above article:
“But if falling birth rates are worrying political leaders, perhaps they should do something to address it by ramping up our response to climate change.”
Two simple questions for Ms. Businesswomen:
1) What’s your definition of “climate change”, since a universally-accepted definition does not exist?
2) Can you present any facts—other than your own elective case—that “falling birth rates” are the result of “climate change”, however you choose to define it?
In the very same article, they have, as a side-bar, an example of “ramping up our response”, aka stealing money from taxpayers, and lots of it:
“Can you present any facts—other than your own elective case—that “falling birth rates” are the result of “climate change”, however you choose to define it?”
In her case it’s not climate change that’s causing falling birth rates, but anxiety about it, regardless of reality.
If there wasn’t climate change™, she wouldn’t have any anxiety about it, would she?
It’s called “getting to the root of the problem”.
There’s always climate change. What she has anxiety about is Climate Change, which doesn’t exist.
How do you know such to be the case?
Are you her psychotherapist?
You seem like real simpleton, not to catch the capital letters in Jeff’s comment.
Oh, I see . . .it is YOU who is her psychotherapist.
Assuming such, you’re not doing a good job.
FAIL ! You still haven’t reach the comprehension stage. !
So since she was anxious about being pulled through a hole in the sky, that means there really was one?
People are often anxious about fantasies.
. . . as they also are about reality, duh! Climate change is a reality, not a fantasy. Even Jeff Alberts said so!
I notice you didn’t address the other part of my comment.
According to your reasoning “If there wasn’t climate change™, she wouldn’t have any anxiety about it” then it holds equally true that “if there wasn’t a hole in the sky she wouldn’t have any anxiety about it”.
I think you need a critical thinking refresher.
Thank you for your thought. I will give it all the attention that it deserves.
Your comment deserves a “fart in your direction”.
That is the only attention needed.
Nice. That’s exactly on the remark-level-of-intelligence scale that I’ve come to expect from you.
Carry on.
More intelligent than any of your comments.
Tony_G, you know, you’re absolutely right! I intentionally did not address that last phrase about a “hole in the sky’ because the women herself refers to it as a nightmare, not a belief, to wit:
“From the age of six I had recurring nightmares in which I’d find myself being pulled through a hole in the sky, my little body shooting up into space.”
Reading comprehension 101.
Climate Change (initial caps) something also including a trade-mark sign…
… is an unproven fantasy conjecture.
Showing yet again you lack comprehension…not unexpected.
Very appropriately addressed.
Birth rates were falling in the US long before CAGW came along.
Birth rates are falling all over the world.
Can you fathom the misery when this woman finally discovers that she has been lied to and that there is no climate crisis in any sense at all and that therefore her rejection of motherhood was based on a malicious lie?
Good question Ed. I wonder about this sort of thing and have after learning there is more than one religion on Earth. Can they all be correct?
Many ClimateCult™ activists are under 30 so have 45 years to think about it.
Ask a Hindu and probably get an expansive answer that there is truth is all religions. Ask a few that I’ve had contact with and find out that almost all others are going to Hell.
I think the major religions all say there is only one, all-powerful God. So they apparently worship the same God. They are describing the same, all-powerful God. There can be only one All-Powerful God.
I think the Hindus would say we are currently living in Hell because of our past actions, and must find our way out of it by realizing our true circumstances.
There will never be such a revelation.
Plenty of other guys around that only need a few beers !
Her writing is just a little to trite with all the hackneyed climate doom phrases. Maybe this woman is real, maybe not. Maybe her story is real, maybe not. Her article is definitely media propaganda.
Yah, just went and read the source article. Stock photo of an unnamed woman. I call BS,
I wonder how long they will stay married. Years ago I met a guy whose wife had demanded the snip for “over population” reasons. Then she moved on.
Isn’t this exactly the result desired by the global elite through creating climate hysteria? They were in a panic over overpopulation, and that the resulting depletion of the world’s resources would negatively impact their profligate lifestyles and security. They searched for a way to take control to stop the overpopulation, and found it in “global warming” — persuade stupid political leaders that the planet was dying because of CO2 emissions (read: use of fossil fuels), stop the CO2 emissions to “save the planet” (read: stop the great unwashed from using energy), resulting in global famine and reduction of the population. Widespread easy availability of abortion is part of the same strategy; people voluntarily choosing to stop reproducing is so much the better. It’s all about the greedy elite wanting the resources for themselves rather than having more mouths to feed.
“Isn’t this exactly the result desired by the global elite through creating climate hysteria?”
Indeed it is.
The Population Bomb, published in the (I think) 1960s.
I have long been terrified of what the future holds. From the age of six…
It’s not climate that’s the problem.
BirthStrike Movement, aka “Hags Who Hate Kids”. But this way, they get to virtue-signal about it the their heart’s content. Win-win!
What are you worried about you daft moo? If Norfolk and the Thames estuary are under water there’ll be plenty of water to put the forest fires out with..!