Support NeoGAF

[Pomerlaw]

It's not really pessimism. The fact is we're already fucked, we needed to be making changes years ago but aren't even at a point where climate change is seen as a legitimate issue, let alone a serious one. The questions now are, how fucked are we, and how much can we mitigate the damage?

And it doesn't really matter if smart people or liberals or whoever have kids at this point. Once food production begins to stall and people's lives are directly impacted by the increasing cost of living, even the idiots are going to (finally) start buying in.

We are NOT already fucked. Stop with the depressive thoughts which is exactly what will doom us.

We needed to make changes years ago... Right... Changes are already being made! Maybe not fast enough to prevent a lot of crap from happening, but if you think the migration to clean energy is not started then you ignore a lot of facts. The market is switching and there is no going back. Do your part!

I don't see food production stalling anything soon. There are a lot of things we are doing that can boost food production especially in Africa.

It's amazing how many people on gaf are depressive... This attitude isn't helping at all.

Now visit my thread
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1319159&highlight=trumped

 

[uncelestial]

And where is the evidence to back all this up? We know Malthusian and Paul Ehrlich's population bomb are not a thing due to advances in science and agriculture.
Oh, please stop trying to be so edgy.

Nobody cares about Paul Ehrlich, and listening to projections that I literally posted in the OP of this thread doesn't make me "edgy." They're from NPR or fuck's sake, how un-edgy can you get?

 

[Keri]

There's always a chance that a child born in the next generation will invent technology we can't even imagine, which will reverse global warming, mediate its effects or allow humans to comfortably inhabit alternative shelters (Underground? Space?).

Hell, even if that's not true and we're already doomed, the end of the world is decades away and that's plenty of time to have happy experiences. I mean, it's already true that each of us is going to die. Our time is limited, regardless, yet we all still find living worthwhile. We all still find ways to enjoy the time that we have. Maybe the next generation only gets 50 or 60 good years. Maybe it's worse and they only get 30 or 40 good years. That's still worth it.

 

[A Fish Aficionado]

Nobody cares about Paul Ehrlich, and listening to projections that I literally posted in the OP of this thread doesn't make me "edgy." They're from NPR or fuck's sake, how un-edgy can you get?

There doesn't seem to be much data in that article, mostly opinions. Second, you're the one saying that the apocalypse will come in the next generation and that overpopulation is a problem.

No, I don't believe the demographics agree with the dude's assessment of combating climate change by going childless, especially when populations in developing countries is already dwindling and are so adverse towards immigration as a positive. By his logic, why not start now by euthanasia?

 

[Cuburt]

I've certainly started considering it for the first time in my life.

Longer life-spans and rapid industrialization of developing countries seem like dangerous combination. We are doing things to counter-act the impact we have on the world, but change may be too slow and the most pressing issue of the human population creating more issues, it's hard not to think of a bleak future in our lifetimes, especially if climate change does reach a tipping point.

Add to the fact that there are people actively working against that change for short-term personal gain, and it really makes me reconsider bringing kids into this world if this is the world I would be leaving for them, especially since their very existence would be adding to the problem and not helping it.

At the very least, I'm putting off having kids until I can feel more confident that we're not heading for a future with the harshest inhospitable climate and resources like water and food are a commodity that we aren't guaranteed. I think it's the most responsible thing I can do rather than this whole "eh, things with work themselves out. You can't tell me I can't have kids" sort of mindset.

 

[Alcotholic]

Ive thought a lot about this recently and I've come to the conclusion that the world isnt in the right place right now for me to want to raise a child. And I really want to raise a kid...

 

[NYCmetsfan]

Wait the Professor in the original piece is a Bioethicist and philosopher? Not a climate scientist?

Dude talk to climate scientists before you proclaim its going to be post apocalyptic in a kids life time.

Why do these people who don't study climate science get these stupid stories written about them?

Same with that 10 years we'll be extinct guy

 

[A Fish Aficionado]

Wait the Professor in the original piece is a Bioethicist and philosopher? Not a climate scientist?

Dude talk to climate scientists before you proclaim its going to be post apocalyptic in a kids life time.

Why do these people who don't study climate science get these stupid stories written about them?

Same with that 10 years we'll be extinct guy

The clicks!

 

[Kinsei]

Wait the Professor in the original piece is a Bioethicist and philosopher? Not a climate scientist?

Dude talk to climate scientists before you proclaim its going to be post apocalyptic in a kids life time.

Why do these people who don't study climate science get these stupid stories written about them?

Same with that 10 years we'll be extinct guy

Someone saying that humanity will be extinct in 10 years brings in more readers than actual science does.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

It's literally the first sentence in the OP.

He's not a climate scientist.

And cataclysmic consequences and catastrophic /= apocalypse

The clicks!

Someone saying that humanity will be extinct in 10 years brings in more readers than actual science does.

Like I agree its gonna be bad, There are horrible things coming, I'm not sure if current human civilization can survive
I fear these things will cause wars, holocausts and possibly nuclear war. But get people who know what they're talking about.

 

[SafeinSound]

Because it costs a fortune to adopt.

To answer you question: Sure have as many kids as you want. I personally think this whole climate change and global warming is much to do about nothing.

Jesus h Christ.

1) I don't even have a kid, but everyone knows kids in general "cost a fortune."

2) Jesus h Christ

 

[SMattera]

If you follow this logic to it's conclusion, then no one should have kids, and in fact, committing mass suicide would be a rational act.

 

[Branduil]

If only people who don't care about climate change have kids, that will just make the future worse.

 

[Comfort Jones]

If only people who don't care about climate change have kids, that will just make the future worse.

While I do agree, honestly if you're the type thinking you shouldn't have kids now I think it's best that you don't. We don't need more people prone to panic and giving into fear, especially in this coming apocalypse some of you apparently want to just ragequit the species out of.

 

[manueldelalas]

Some random thoughts:

1-. You will die, your kids will die, your kids kids will die and so on. No matter how good or bad the climate is or advanced is the medicine, they will eventually die.

2-. You will struggle in life, your kids will struggle in life, your kids kids will struggle in life, no matter how good social security, free education or free medicine, all will struggle, and it was the same for all of your ancestors. They may have different struggles than you, the same as you have different struggles than your ancestors, but they will struggle, and life will be hard. There is no period in the history of human kind were people did not struggle to live. There have been more peaceful moments, like right now, when hunger is at the lowest ever worldwide, but it's never been easy.

3-. If we reduce the problem to a basic Darwinian premise; the survival of the fittest, the fittest are the people having kids, as basic as that is. Those are the people ensuring their genes pass to the next generation; people in underdeveloped countries are more fit than people in developed countries, and they are slowly, but surely, invading those countries. Latin americans are more fit than whites in the USA, eastern europeans are more fit than western europeans, and people from muslim countries are more fit than both. Those populations are not only growing because of mass immigration, they are growing because they are having more kids.

4-. I don't believe for a second any of you saying you are not having kids because of climate change. You have your own reasons for not having kids, and I fully respect them, and maybe climate change is a factor, but it's a factor way, WAY down the list of reasons for not having kids. You may disagree with me, and it's fine, just wanted to tell you I just don't believe it, and I'm calling bullshit.

5-. A scary thought for some:
I'm a conservative and catholic and pro-life, I am expecting my 5th child and am 31, so I have room for a couple more kids. My friends that are conservative, catholic and pro-life have much more kids than those who aren't. Those who aren't, have less kids, if any at all.

I've read statistic that 7 out of 10 kids hold about the same political views as their parents. Think about it, why is it that so many of you, on this heavily liberal leaning forum (sorry for generalizing), have conservative parents? Judging by some threads, especially the thanksgiving ones, it's a lot. And those who have, how many have conservative brothers or sisters as well? Again, a lot. Do those conservative brothers or sisters have more kids than you?

This is the reason religions and conservatism will never cease to exist. If liberals aren't having kids, then they have a HUGE job to do if you want to convince the next generations, kids raised in conservative families, of their values and ideas.

 

[freenudemacusers]

While I do agree, honestly if you're the type thinking you shouldn't have kids now I think it's best that you don't. We don't need more people prone to panic and giving into fear, especially in this coming apocalypse some of you apparently want to just ragequit the species out of.

yeah, we need less reactive-emotion-over-reason parenting out here. that's how we got antivaxxing.

 

[7DollarHagane]

This is ridiculous. Of course you should have kids, if you want to have kids.

A meteor can hit the earth and wipe us out or nuclear war can break out and wipe us out. Cataclysmic events have always been a scientific possibility. This shouldn't stop anyone from having kids if they want to.

Do you think people stopped having kids during the cold war because a nuclear attack could literally have happened at any moment?

 

[Gaz_RB]

Best thing for the planet is for all of us to kill ourselves right now.

That's kind of the point of the show lol

 

[D1renegade]

Meh.. Climate change is not that big of a deal. Humans are destined for outer space. We'll never reach our potential as long as our souls are still shackled by Earth's gravity.

 

[ChrisSTARR]

I struggle with this sometimes too, with all the gloom and doom new reports, it's easy to fall into a sense of hopelessness. But I always come to the conclusion that if we're going to make it out, the answer is likely going to be more people, not less. Isn't extinction the threat were facing, after all?

But you're very right to be concerned about your future child's quality of life, but it's not like the world is already free of suffering. If we want a chance to survive the mass extinction we face, we need all the healthy, educated people we can get to tackle the issue and it starts with raising your kids.

But that's my take away, if anybody more educated would like to inform me, then please do.

 

[mrkgoo]

Some random thoughts:

1-. You will die, your kids will die, your kids kids will die and so on. No matter how good or bad the climate is or advanced is the medicine, they will eventually die.

2-. You will struggle in life, your kids will struggle in life, your kids kids will struggle in life, no matter how good social security, free education or free medicine, all will struggle, and it was the same for all of your ancestors. They may have different struggles than you, the same as you have different struggles than your ancestors, but they will struggle, and life will be hard. There is no period in the history of human kind were people did not struggle to live. There have been more peaceful moments, like right now, when hunger is at the lowest ever worldwide, but it's never been easy.

3-. If we reduce the problem to a basic Darwinian premise; the survival of the fittest, the fittest are the people having kids, as basic as that is. Those are the people ensuring their genes pass to the next generation; people in underdeveloped countries are more fit than people in developed countries, and they are slowly, but surely, invading those countries. Latin americans are more fit than whites in the USA, eastern europeans are more fit than western europeans, and people from muslim countries are more fit than both. Those populations are not only growing because of mass immigration, they are growing because they are having more kids.

4-. I don't believe for a second any of you saying you are not having kids because of climate change. You have your own reasons for not having kids, and I fully respect them, and maybe climate change is a factor, but it's a factor way, WAY down the list of reasons for not having kids. You may disagree with me, and it's fine, just wanted to tell you I just don't believe it, and I'm calling bullshit.

5-. A scary thought for some:
I'm a conservative and catholic and pro-life, I am expecting my 5th child and am 31, so I have room for a couple more kids. My friends that are conservative, catholic and pro-life have much more kids than those who aren't. Those who aren't, have less kids, if any at all.

I've read statistic that 7 out of 10 kids hold about the same political views as their parents. Think about it, why is it that so many of you, on this heavily liberal leaning forum (sorry for generalizing), have conservative parents? Judging by some threads, especially the thanksgiving ones, it's a lot. And those who have, how many have conservative brothers or sisters as well? Again, a lot. Do those conservative brothers or sisters have more kids than you?

This is the reason religions and conservatism will never cease to exist. If liberals aren't having kids, then they have a HUGE job to do if you want to convince the next generations, kids raised in conservative families, of their values and ideas.

I'm non-religious and not really that conservative (whatever that really means), and I agree with you totally.

I might add that there's a weird notion here that your kids will be like you. It's possible, but it's probably just as likely your kids won't be like you as well. I mean, sure you instill your values and beliefs into your children, but that on;y goes part way. How many people here are like younger versions of their parents?

 

[Madness]

We discussed this in an ethics class. The people who should be having kids aren't, while those who shouldn't are. Human population isn't skyrocketing because of developed countries but undeveloped ones. If your goal is ultimately a control of the human population, the question becomes do rich westerners stop having kids or do poor third world nations stop? Some countries in the world have birthrates over 8 and yet have to receive food aid to survive.

 

[Ashes]

This bullshit has been peddled in one form or another for decades.

 

[mAcOdIn]

Even with global warming in most parts of the world it's still a better time to have kids than a thousand years ago.

I mean, no one shat on the British for having kids under a shitty feudal Lord or laments people having kids while populating North America centuries ago after crossing some ice bridge or shit like that.

Seems incredibly conceited to me to believe anything not "this" is some unbearable hellhole not worth living.

 

[Wowfunhappy]

I thought science predicts massive sea level rise and irreversible climate change even if every nation implements the Paris Accords immediately and perfectly.

Yes, because the Paris Accords are the literal definition of too little too late.

I would love for those technicalogical solutions to come true, but it seems unlikely they will actually do enough.

Simply not having children actually seems like a decent strategy, except that it's never going to happen.

 

[SatoAilDarko]

I definitely want kids and would ideally like 4. If catastrophe hits in a couple decades then it hits. Anyone can die at any time.

I love the idea of adoption but any wife I have will almost certainly be of a different race and my culture is important to me and my family. I highly doubt there is a single kid in my state that would match my and my wife's race.

 

[Steejee]

Wifey and I have already agreed to no biological kids - adoption/fostering if we really want them, just the cat otherwise.

Climate is the biggest reason for me. The carbon impact of a single american child is pretty staggering, and the planet as a whole is way beyond its carrying capacity already. I don't want to both add to the problem and bring a new life into a world that's going to face a lot of devastating changes over the next 100 years.

The human race will survive, I just don't want to contribute to its problems.

As for the 'concern' about the dumb/mean/etc outbreeding the rest - plenty of kids rebel against their religious parents, against their not-religious parents, against their ignorant parents, their smart parents, etc. The world has plenty of smart people, it needs more *good* people, which is more about the world around you than the genes that made you.

 

[Brawly Likes to Brawl]

Yeah, cutting off reproduction is going to solve the problem instead of just fucking demanding better education for future generations.

 

[ginger ninja]

I wanna thank all those people in here who are not having kids. More resources for me and my brats. Gonna have at least 3-4.

 

[Sweeney Tom]

Me?

Save us, friend

 

[leakey]

Having 1 and adopting 1 for this reason. Hopefully they will come up with answers for the coming crises.

 

[Banglish]

http://www.sciencealert.com/humanit...-years-left-on-earth-stephen-hawking-predicts

Stephan Hawkings hypothesizes we have about 1000 years left on this planet.
So we will basically become nomads again. With that in mind, it might be ignorant to some to want children but I would like to continue my family tree. Hopefully have a family of progressive thinkers.. who knows who they could become, maybe help make humanity better, maybe not. But won't know if we don't try, right?
I'll probably have 1-2 biological kids and maybe adopt a child if (future) wife is okay with it.

I was discussing this with my father earlier.
I think in the long run it's not the number of people on this planet that will make the biggest impact.
What is important is that we focus on transitioning from non-renewable to renewable sources of energy. In order to do that we need educated, progressive thinkers and like someone said earlier if we stop having kids based of off fear - we will become a minority and we won't have the numbers of educated minds needed for this change for the future.

 

[HarryKS]

Who cares anymore? We gonna die. We dead.

 

[FireVoa]

My wife and I are still planning on having at least 3 or 4 so this doesn't affect our decision/plans at all. Now whether those kids want to have them is another story.

 

[Frostburn]

Relevant?

Our first child is 4 months 2 weeks old right now, For me personally I've always wanted to have a child or two once I was in a loving, stable relationship and had the means to support a child and give them a good life.

 

[7Th]

The fact that humanity as a whole isn't pooling their efforts into reaching the singularity is really depressing; everything else might as well be irrelevant.

 

[davepoobond]

less people means less pollution

 

[Opto]

One child policies will likely take hold as things grow worse.

I don't plan on any to prevent further pollution and to not saddle a kid with riding out the rest of the ice melt

 

[Monocle]

Ive thought a lot about this recently and I've come to the conclusion that the world isnt in the right place right now for me to want to raise a child. And I really want to raise a kid...

For fuck's sake, just do it. Be the best parent you can be and make sure you raise a kid who will be a good addition to society. We need more good people in the next generation, not fewer.

 

[curiouscharles]

westerners don't necessarily need to stop having kids.

all population projections are showing an explosion of global population over the next 50 years - that is true.

BUT, they're showing a strong overall DECLINE in population in western nations.

the fact is we're all so fucking smart and emo over here in the western world that we're all too depressed / smart / pretentious / whatever [no judgement, i'm scared of having them too] to have kids anymore.

it will create some rather huge crises over here, you know... systems wise?

maybe not, but it's really not "us" per se [i'm presuming most of us on GAF are part of the non-second-or-third-world democratic countries out there?] that need to curb our baby-making - it's the countries [we need not name] that all currently have that issue already.

 

[MogCakes]

I shouldn't be surprised that a climate change denier is on GAF, but...Wow.

 

[RMI]

For fuck's sake, just do it. Be the best parent you can be and make sure you raise a kid who will be a good addition to society. We need more good people in the next generation, not fewer.

This.

Jeez sometimes anti-kid gaf is infuriating.

 

[Captain Pants]

Isn't this an Idiocracy type situation. A kid I went to high school with just got arrested for robbing a bank this week. He's got seven kids. Doesn't it make sense for smart and conscientious people to breed? Aren't we left with Trumpian goons if we just let climate change deniers have all the kids?

 

[Muppet of a Man]

I waffle on this a lot. But I think I have to. If we're going to have any chance of surviving possible extinction, we're going to need as many scientists and engineers as possible and I think I'm uniquely situated to pass on the appropriate genetic advantages and raise some of those.

I know that sounds like bragging and I suppose it is, but I don't see any future saviors coming from a climate-denying family that has twelve kids. We're only hurting humanity's future chances by not reproducing.

From that particular perspective, we definitely don't want to make Idiocracy a self fulfilling prophecy.

 

[Warm Machine]

The first world isn't having children already. It is stalled at 1.8ish across all first world countries. The 2nd and 3rd world are coming back down to earth as QOL improves.

Green tech is accelerating daily and whether Trump likes it or not in a few short years it'll be cheaper and smarter to buy an EV than it will a gas powered car.

Beef consumption is going to drop by virtue of our decline in population.

It'll work out, if you follow the money, it'll work out.

westerners don't necessarily need to stop having kids.

all population projections are showing an explosion of global population over the next 50 years - that is true.

BUT, they're showing a strong overall DECLINE in population in western nations.

the fact is we're all so fucking smart and emo over here in the western world that we're all too depressed / smart / pretentious / whatever [no judgement, i'm scared of having them too] to have kids anymore.

it will create some rather huge crises over here, you know... systems wise?

maybe not, but it's really not "us" per se [i'm presuming most of us on GAF are part of the non-second-or-third-world democratic countries out there?] that need to curb our baby-making - it's the countries [we need not name] that all currently have that issue already.

Yes it is primarily true. The only exception is that we use most of the resources but have a way smaller population footprint. However because we are a huge buying market and tech feeds us first, if we change our ways and continue on our tech vector the rest of the world gets it by default due to economies of scale.

 

[Sky Chief]

This.

Jeez sometimes anti-kid gaf is infuriating.

Depressed pessimist GAF is infuriating, every thread is just so negative especially since the election. Why let things that you can't change or control make you miserable? There's still a ton of wonderful things about being alive.

 

[Mawnster]

Wait, you mean people still want to have kids? Willingly?!

 

[chaosblade]

Isn't this an Idiocracy type situation. A kid I went to high school with just got arrested for robbing a bank this week. He's got seven kids. Doesn't it make sense for smart and conscientious people to breed? Aren't we left with Trumpian goons if we just let climate change deniers have all the kids?

It doesn't really matter at this point, for climate change. By the time kids being conceived now are able vote or run for office or do anything to help, it will be too late to avoid things getting nasty (it basically already is, at this point we are determining how bad it will get). If climate change is still "politicized science" 20+ years from now it will be too late for anything but the most extreme of solutions.

And I'm not one of the people saying the sky is falling and in a few decades things will be apocalyptic, but the fact is we are projecting to not meet our already optimistic climate change goals, and a Trump presidency doesn't help things. Saying things are going to work out fine and will be great is as bad as saying the world will look like a Fallout game.

 

[Neo C.]

Isn't this an Idiocracy type situation. A kid I went to high school with just got arrested for robbing a bank this week. He's got seven kids. Doesn't it make sense for smart and conscientious people to breed? Aren't we left with Trumpian goons if we just let climate change deniers have all the kids?

Smart and conscientious people don't necessarily bring smart and conscientious kids to the world.

 

[ZackieChan]

I find it a little disturbing that people here seem to be the arbiters of who "should" and who "shouldn't" have kids, even if it's in the abstract.