On 30/07/2019 14:45, JGD wrote:
On 30/07/2019 13:11, Andrew wrote: On 30/07/2019 11:56, JGD wrote:
The urgency is about stopping what is happening in the next 100-200
years, not in 50,000 or one million or 50 million years. Think human
timescales!

In that case you should ignore all the 'climate crisis'
screachers and start shouting 'POPULATION crisis', until
people start to listen.

Every female who has had, or intends to have more than 2 surviving
kids is guaranteeing the demise of the human race.



Actually, population growth is no longer that acute a problem - we've
largely missed the boat on that one. See eg:

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tan...f-the-century/


or https://pewrsr.ch/2N7MIUb (the same URL shortened).

Certainly an extra 20-30% added to the world population between now and
2100 is not going to help things and if it could be limited that's all
to the good, but it's not the killer factor that climate change itself is.

Looks like Africa is main continent where efforts should be focused to
encourage smaller family sizes. If that were successful then we might
significantly undershoot the 10.9B that's currently projected for 2100
(up from nearly 8B now).
If the worlds population had levelled off at about 3 billion then we
wouldn't have the current media-inspired fantasy called 'climate
extinction'.

The worlds population is still going UP and will continue to do so
for some time. UP means MORE people, not fewer, even if the rate is
slowing.