Comment on Trying to reverse climate change won’t save us, scientists warn

• ivanafterall@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  What about 2 billion people living pretty good lives or 9 billion people living less-miserably? That’s at least two more options right there.

  source

  • daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    There are infinite options we start doing fractions! (Please don’t)

    source

    • Honytawk@lemmy.zip ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      We can completely solve it with 10 billion 1/2 people

      source
• petersr@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  So who should go? You?

  source

  • carl_dungeon@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    I’m pretty sure he said have less children, not start death camps.

    source
  • daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    I literally said just having less children.

    And I’m totally ok to only having between one or zero children myself.

    source

    • 0x0@programming.dev ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      China tried it, didn’t go too well… good luck trying it on a global scale…

      source

      • MaggiWuerze@feddit.org ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        Chinas problem was also a still very uneducated and traditionalist populace, that insisted on having boys as heirs. Leading to abortions or straight up murder of female infants. That wouldn’t really be a global issue I beleive

        source
      • daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        Derived problems were product of a sexist society should be avoidable, you know, ending sexism…

        source

        • -> View More Comments