When climate scientists/believers in 97% Doomsday Global Warming claim they are are “saving the planet” for “the children’s children”, who’s children’s children are they talking about?
You’ve changed your lightbulbs, you recycle, you’ve retrofitted your house, cycle when you can, and drive an electric car when you can’t.
You’re doing your bit to reduce your carbon emissions and prevent dangerous climate change.
But if you have two children, your legacy of carbon emissions could be 40-times higher than those you saved through lifestyle changes.
In fact, under dangerous climate change scenarios in 2050, nearly a third of carbon emissions can be avoided by slowing population growth.
Tens of millions of pounds of UK aid money have been spent on a programme that has forcibly sterilised Indian women and men, the Observer has learned.
Many have died as a result of botched operations, while others have been left bleeding and in agony.
A number of pregnant women selected for sterilisation suffered miscarriages and lost their babies.
With officials and doctors paid a bonus for every operation, poor and little-educated men and women in rural areas are routinely rounded up and sterilised without having a chance to object.
Activists say some are told they are going to health camps for operations that will improve their general wellbeing and only discover the truth after going under the knife.
Yet a working paper published by the UK’s Department for International Development in 2010 cited the need to fight climate change as one of the key reasons for pressing ahead with such programmes.
The document argued that reducing population numbers would cut greenhouse gases, although it warned that there were “complex human rights and ethical issues” involved in forced population control.
“0.00 seconds: In reality, the most profound impacts of climate change [Global Warming], are going to be felt by later generations, by my daughter and her children.”