A Group of Scientists Believe That the Green New Deal Falls Short

In the spirit of those people who think that the Green New Deal, first proposed by Rep Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-New York and taken up by Democratic presidential candidates such as Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, is too moderate, Bloomberg is reporting on a report signed by 11,000 scientists. The report demands, along with taking away meat, milk, air travel, and private automobiles, that severe restrictions be imposed on reproductive rights. By “reproductive rights” the report does not mean the right to an abortion, but the right to have children.

The document, published in the journal BioScience, proposes draconian measures to cut economic growth, the gold metric that economists use to map the increase in human prosperity and happiness.

“Excessive extraction of materials and overexploitation of ecosystems, driven by economic growth, must be quickly curtailed to maintain the long-term sustainability of the biosphere. We need a carbon-free economy that explicitly addresses human dependence on the biosphere and policies that guide economic decisions accordingly. Our goals need to shift from GDP growth and the pursuit of affluence toward sustaining ecosystems and improving human well-being by prioritizing basic needs and reducing inequality”

The plan for population control is a little more benign, involving giving access to birth control services to underserved populations and increasing access to education, especially girls and women. The latter is an inherently beneficial goal, which has the side effect, data has shown, of curtailing childbirth. However, Hot Air sounds the alarm.

“What’s worrisome about this is that once lowering the population becomes the goal, it’s only a matter of time before government mandates are called for. China has done pioneering work-limiting its population through the one-child policy. There are plenty of progressive technocrats who admire China’s work.”

The Chinese one-child policy should give population controllers some pause. The New York Times noted that the policy not only failed but created some serious unintentional side effects. Because of the Chinese preference for boy babies, the policy created a severe imbalance for adult males and females. Tens of millions of young Chinese men do not have access to women with whom to start families. The dearth of children also took a wrecking ball to the traditional Chinese system of caring for the elderly, based on families of younger people. The stark possibility of social unrest has ensued in a society that prizes order above all.

The idea that we must control our population was once all the rage, thanks to the publication of a book entitled “The Population Bomb” by Paul Ehrlich in 1968. The book’s thesis was that the world needed to curtail population growth drastically least humanity outstrip the Earth’s capacity to sustain it. The book led to a scientific report called “Limits to Growth” that demanded that economic growth and technology creation be curtailed.

However, as a recent article in Wired notes, the confident predictions of Ehrlich and his supporters of world-wide calamity failed to come to pass. The reason, according to the piece, is that we used technology to make everything from agriculture to manufacturing, to energy production, to resource production more efficient. In effect, we have learned to do more with less.

The Population Bomb and The Limits to Growth were so far off because they failed to fully understand both the fire of genius and the fuel of interest. By and large, they didn’t take into account that as soon as shortages of food, metals, or other resources appeared, an intense global search for more would ensue, along with an equally ardent hunt for substitutes. As one or both of these quests succeeded, the shortage would ease and prices would plummet.”

The same article expresses confidence that the world will continue to use ingenuity to continue economic growth, spread its effects to more people, and to lessen the impact on the Earth’s environment.

Even that optimistic scenario fails to take into account the vision by Jeff Bezos, the CEO of Amazon and Blue Origin, as described in Ars Technica. Bezos imagines a human civilization that has spread off-planet, living in space colonies and using the resources of the moon and asteroids to create goods and services. The Earth would be rezoned for residential areas and what Bezos calls “light industry.”

The question arises, which future is to be preferred, the one envisioned by Jeff Bezos or the one by the scientists who want us to have fewer babies and fewer goods and services? The answer is best left as an exercise for the reader.

Comments (50)

  1. I have been browsing online more than three hours today, yet
    I by no means found any attention-grabbing article like yours.
    It is beautiful worth sufficient for me. In my opinion, if all website owners and bloggers made excellent content material as you did, the internet
    can be much more useful than ever before.

  2. I every time spent my half an hour to read this web site’s
    content daily along with a cup of coffee.

  3. Touche. Solid arguments. Keep up the great spirit.

  4. I every time spent my half an hour to read this webpage’s posts all the time along with
    a cup of coffee.

  5. PhD of ignorance. Go fuck yourself

  6. And directly comes out of your mouth

  7. How’s the Trump university working out for you dumb ass.

  8. You’re an idiot. Let me guess…you voted for the orange shitbag

  9. You would know you dumb bitch

  10. These so called scientists must have escaped from an insane asylum. Sadly people are foolish enough to believe this stupidity of fear, doom and gloom, while scientists are making millions from it. This is what happens when people people put their faith in science and man instead of truth. The end of this planet will come when it’s creator says enough is enough and that time is getting closer. The whole world can deny God but every human will one day die and will receive the choice the made.

  11. they are both subhuman

  12. their not confused they are nuts

  13. Climate change is a total hoax. The left just wants to turn our country into a communist one with all this bull crap they like spreading around.

  14. You are another nut case if you believe all this nonsense.

  15. It’s not fake news. These nutcases honestly believe this.

  16. According to them we won’t have any children or grandchildren.

  17. Okay then. Let’s start with killing off those 11,000 ‘scientists’ and their families and see how it goes from there.

  18. Just how much were these 11,000 “scientists” paid for this tripe.

  19. They believe it “falls short”…short of what—reality? intelligence? common sense? you could say that–but it’s putting it mildly. asinine is a little closer.

  20. I don’t see where anyone has asked Greeta Thurnberg (or whatever her name is) what we should do. After all, she is an authority on the subject!

  21. Michael Bloomberg and George Soros, money that comes from the ass
    all the way up to the mouth, regergetation of foolishness.

  22. have americans tone down having children BUT with Beries new program bring in more immigrants for what. climate change, he calls them CLIMATE IMMIGRANTS

  23. look at AOC when she is with Bernie its like a school child looking at that new young good looking gym teacher . why not just jump him AOC and guess who would be his most likely vice president ( REMEMBER VICE ) vice being what is or was used for the BAD guys Aoc and Bernie are way out in left field and way out of their minds

  24. It’s called “Payola” Being bought off by big business. 38,000 real scientists have said “Climate Change ” is a Big Hoax to make money. Without “Climate Change” there would be Thousands out of jobs.

  25. How any these scentists ever read Adam Smith The Market well the fact the matter is The Market Works and Ssocialists eventually must deal with that reality and The Market will solve our problems.

  26. These were not ‘11,000’ climate scientists,, but leftists pretending to be. This letter to the UN from real climatologists, including most of the leading climate researchers in the world, tells the truth. Of course, this letter is never mentioned in MSM, anywhere:
    António Guterres, Secretary-General. Photo: UN.
    More than 500 prominent scientists from all over the world, among them distinguished MIT climate scientist Prof. Richard Lindzen, are urging the Secretary-General of the United Nations for a further, de-politicised discussion of the climate issue, in which alternative scientific views are also given a voice.
    A UN climate meeting will be held in New York on 23 September. To this end, CLINTEL has sent two registered letters, one to the UN Secretary-General, António Guterres, and one to the Executive Secretary of the UNFCCC, Patricia Espinosa Cantellano, together with the text of the European Climate Declaration (see below).
    This also includes the explicit request to organise a joint meeting with world-class scientists. The letter follows:
    Your Excellencies,
    There is no climate emergency.
A global network of more than 500 knowledgeable and experienced scientists and professionals in climate and related fields have the honor to address to Your Excellencies the attached European Climate Declaration, for which the signatories to this letter are the national ambassadors.
The general-circulation models of climate on which international policy is at present founded are unfit for their purpose. Therefore, it is cruel as well as imprudent to advocate the squandering of trillions on the basis of results from such immature models. Current climate policies pointlessly, grievously undermine the economic system, putting lives at risk in countries denied access to affordable, continuous electrical power.
We urge you to follow a climate policy based on sound science, realistic economics and genuine concern for those harmed by costly but unnecessary attempts at mitigation.
We ask you to place the Declaration on the agenda of your imminent New York session.
We also invite you to organize with us a constructive high-level meeting between world-class scientists on both sides of the climate debate early in 2020. The meeting will give effect to the sound and ancient principle no less of sound science than of natural justice that both sides should be fully and fairly heard. Audiatur et altera pars!
Please let us know your thoughts about such a joint meeting.
    There is no climate emergency
    A global network of 500 scientists and professionals has prepared this urgent message. Climate science should be less political, while climate polities should be more scientific. Scientists should openly address the uncertainties and exaggerations in their predictions of global warming, while politicians should dispassionately count the real benefits as well as the imagined costs of adaptation to global warming, and the real costs as well as the imagined benefits of mitigation.
    Natural as well as anthropogenic factors cause warming
    The geological archive reveals that Earth’s climate has varied as long as the planet has existed, with natural cold and warm phases. The Little Ice Age ended as recently as 1850. Therefore, it is no surprise that we now are experiencing a period of warming. Only very few peer-reviewed papers even go so far as to say that recent warming is chiefly anthropogenic.
    Warming is far slower than predicted
    The world has warmed at less than half the originally-predicted rate, and at less than half the rate to be expected on the basis of net anthropogenic forcing and radiative imbalance. It tells us that we are far from understanding climate change.
    Climate policy relies on inadequate models
    Climate models have many shortcomings and are not remotely plausible as policy tools. Moreover, they most likely exaggerate the effect of greenhouse gases such as CO2. In addition, they ignore the fact that enriching the atmosphere with CO2 is beneficial.
    CO2 is plant food, the basis of all life on Earth
    CO2 is not a pollutant. It is essential to all life on Earth. Photosynthesis is a blessing. More CO2 is beneficial for nature, greening the Earth: additional CO2 in the air has promoted growth in global plant biomass. It is also good for agriculture, increasing the yields of crop worldwide.
    Global warming has not increased natural disasters
    There is no statistical evidence that global warming is intensifying hurricanes, floods, droughts and suchlike natural disasters, or making them more frequent. However, CO2-mitigation measures are as damaging as they are costly. For instance, wind turbines kill birds and bats, and palm-oil plantations destroy the biodiversity of the rainforests.
    Policy must respect scientific and economic realities
    There is no climate emergency. Therefore, there is no cause for panic and alarm. We strongly oppose the harmful and unrealistic net-zero CO2 policy proposed for 2050. If better approaches emerge, we will have ample time to reflect and adapt. The aim of international policy should be to provide reliable and affordable energy at all times, and throughout the world.
    Our advice to political leaders is that science should strive for a significantly better understanding of the climate system, while politics should focus on minimizing potential climate damage by prioritizing adaptation strategies based on proven and affordable technologies.
The undersigned ECD Ambassadors:
    Professor Guus Berkhout, The Netherlands
Professor Reynald Du Berger French, Canada
Terry Dunleavy, New Zealand
Viv Forbes, Australia
Professor Jeffrey Foss English, Canada
Morten Jødal, Norway
Rob Lemeire, Belgium
Professor Richard Lindzen, USA
Professor Ingemar Nordin, Sweden
Jim O’Brien, Republic of Ireland
Professor Alberto Prestininzi, Italy
Associate Professor Benoît Rittaud, France
Professor Fritz Vahrenholt, Germany
The Viscount Monckton of Brenchley, United Kingdom

  27. The communist party want’s to take all the money for themselves. None for r and d to fix problems just create more. Then when money starts to get short, they will bring out their Gestapo and starve the people.

  28. These Climate REPROBATES have no business telling US what we need to do, since “climate change” is a NATURAL PHENOMENON and “climate change crisis” is a LIE and a HOAX set up by GLOBAL ELITE LIARS. This is all based on Socialism/Communism JUNK SCIENCE manufactured to take away a country’s SOVEREIGN rights to further their FALSE agenda. These people only want to CONTROL and ENSLAVE you for THEIR benefit ONLY. DON’T let them do it! Team Trump and his allies 2020 – KAGA (Keep America Great Again).

  29. They can’t be very good scientist if they don’t know about photo synthesis. The plants need basically water, sun and CO2 to make oxygen for us and all living things. The earth has been greening more in the last 10 years, because CO2 is slightly higher. If you check out real scientists, the ones that don’t get paid and depend on money from Soros etc. they will tell you our climate depends on the sun, not what people do. They tell us to use solar and at the same time they use cem trails to stop the sun from warming up the earth, what gives?????

  30. Those 11,000 included Professor Mickey Mouse of Namibia (really) and many others non-existent names plus many who have no expertise at all about the factors that affect the earth’s extremely complex climate system.

  31. So how about those 11,000 scientists live with no electricity eat plants and while their at it do away with plumbing as that requires too much energy I’m a bit concerned about all the fires that will be necessary to heat and cook as that will add to the carbon foot print and Hollywood will be done as there will be no ability to make a movie .I can’t hardly wait to see how they will dispose of all the batteries and I still can’t figure out how they will manufacture them but these are just trivial details as within a year of implementing these drastic changes and the average american trying to live like the early settlers of the 1800’s we will be right back to being the wasteful people that make progress and provide for the future

  32. The scientists are right, anybody who don’t see it are like a horse with blinders on, what’s creating are worldly problems, people

  33. Satan stays busy with his minions!

  34. Absolutely! Time to clean house! Politicians should be limited to two terms in office. One in office and one in prison!!


  36. Since America has already put in place ridiculous “green” laws, maybe these “Green New Steals” enthusiasts should lecture the gross polluters of India, China,……………………………………………

  37. I have a PhD and do not support this nonsense. My opinion is that these morons promoting population control, etc. are only giving this Country to China and Russia where civil rights are non existent and the only new progress is stolen from the USA. When the AOC-type morons turn the USA into a cesspool like them, who are they going to steal from? The second dark age is looming on the horizon It’s time for term limits.

  38. Liberals are nuts! Doesn’t mean we can’t rationally address issues such as population control, work on new, more environmentally friendly energy sources as they become economically feasible, and work on cleaner air and water. But you don’t destroy the economy but do it using common sense. Can you imagine what $10.00 a gallon gas would do to the working man. Liberal politicians don’t care!

  39. It sounds like a very political paper not unlike what you would expect from the 3rd Reich or Stalinist Russia or China. I believe it’s more Fake News.

  40. They did not say competent scientist. I am willing to bet they ate all BS prepared and maybe a handful have PhD. This will not fly. The Hispanic population try and succeed in having 4 to 6 children. No they will also say kill everyone over 60.

  41. Japan went with the one child. And it has BACKFIRED BIG TIME. Not enough people to do work. Towns are closing because not enough people to keep them going. Schools only have a small handful of students. They had to use robots to do basic jobs. The country is trying to correct this but it is not working. Because by tradition the woman can be a mom or in the labor force but not both. Most are going for carriers instead of family. The population has dropped hard. Where most of the population are seniors. And not enough support people to support them. China is starting to see this too. And China has the worst pollution in the world.

  42. It’s all about politics and which party supports what. I believe if Republicans started it, then Democrats would apposed it. Strength is in unity but since 2016, strength is in party sadly.

  43. The next ice age will come first and there are also scientists that agree that is the case.

  44. God controls the earth with mother nature and man has no idea of nature as God designed it. All these looney scientist and demorats need to stick their heads up their butts and smell the stink that comes out of their mouth’s and what little brains they have.

  45. When political correctness supersedes even plain ordinary common sense, then even so called scientists go completely crazy. Why have these “scientists” proposed such draconian measures, supposedly, to “save the planet”. Their motives are less than pure! I generally boils down to money –academic grants–and power. Imagine if they got their way, how much power they would exercise of the lives of ordinary people. The above ideas would bring the world into a worldwide depression! Totalitarians always have a “fix” for societies problems, that is far worse than the problem. Fortunately we now have a President and a Senate who does not listen to these prognosticators of doom, but God Help Us if the loony left ever gets into power–they will kill this economy, and our children and grandchildren will wind up in poverty!

  46. Again people , time to clean house and start over and do it the right way this time. there are ways to solve these problems, and they are simple . Govt , for the people , by the people , and OF the people , get these nut jobs out of office now

  47. Agenda 21 now renamed Agenda 2030 here we go. People better wake the hell up.

  48. If Michael Bloomberg is involved in any way it is a scam! Anything he does is suspect. He wants to be a God of the world. Him and George Soros are like Frick & Frack. Two peas in a pod. He can take is 11K nuts and cramp them up his anus. In a hour or so I can produce 12K scientists that will dispute the 11K’s claims.

  49. What The Hell college if any did they go to? 11,000 Scientists , Say that the Green new deal doesn’t go far enough?
    They demand taking away MEAT, MILK, AIR TRAVEL, and PRIVATE AUTOMOBILES? Note only are the Democrats
    Nuts, now we have 11,000 More Nuts added to the list!!!! GOD HELP US ALL!!!! AMERICA WAKE UP!!!!!!

  50. Dems are not going nowhere with New Green Deal They want to play the confusion game

Comments are closed.