Babies are bad for the environment?

According to the Club of Rome, the Bilderberg Group, and other think tanks and institutions, we in first-world countries are "useless eaters" and need to have only ONE or TWO children or the "planet will die"....................


Ok, come on. Seriously? This isn't about global warming, it's about CONTROL. It's about government being able to involve itself in every facet of your life, including matters of reproduction.

For more info, go to:
wearechange.org
infowars.com
jonesreport.com
prisonplanet.com
prisonplanet.tv

Category:

Nonprofits & Activism

Tags:

• China
• NATO
• UN
• Olympics
• one
• child
• policy
• population
• control
• global
• warming
• sterilization
• australia
• baby
• levy
• polluter
• pays
• principle
• medical
• journal
• carbon
• tax
• poverty
• bertrand
• russell
• terrorism
• mind
• mass
• media
• nickelodeon
• education
• environment
• treaty
• behaviorism
• psychology
• profit
• government
• club
• of
• rome
• first
• revolution
• pollutants
• new
• world
• order
• climate
• change
• obesity
• family
• size
• Jason
• Bermas
• Alex
• Jones
• Alan
• Watt

[edAVP1138]

Next they'll have a baby tax before an out right one-child policy.

[WEARECHANGEIL]

you sir or ma'am are an idiot please drink some fluoride and take your shots, the government loves you.twat

[danze78]

The best and only way to reduce environmental problem such as pollutions, littering, overfishing, devastation of forest areas etc. is to apply the one-child-policy

se my article on the matter at

wwwenvironmentinfocuscom

[danze78]

The best and only way to reduce environmental problem such as pollutions, littering, overfishing, devastation of forest areas etc. is to apply the one-child-policy

se my article oon the matter at

wwwenvironmentinfocuscom

[mandokamine]

Your emotive responses to simple mathematical questions get you NO WHERE

[mandokamine]

I thought i'd mix it up a little and actually put in some evidence.

current world population growth is 1.1711% per year [world bank]

current population is 6,697,254,041 [world bank]

land surface of earth [including ALL land, ie. desert, mountains] = 148,939,100,000 square meters [wiki answers],

so with current growth, you can expect there to be only 1 square meter of land for every human within 20 years.

log to base 1.1711 of [land space/population] = 19.638923606

full argument: F-QA2rkpBSY

[uncaljeff]

WHAT THE FUCK the nwo can shove that up its ass. no one is going to tell me now meny kids to have. bull shit.

[blt40]

the global elite are bad for the environment.

[luckyvet]

you sir are well informed. 

*nods in agreement.*

[Vlaxitov]

It would be common sense to consider anyone who claims they are in any position to decide how many humans should be on the planet to be a narcissistic marxist.

[Vlaxitov]

"the obvious fact that the best way to reduce our collective eco-footprint is to lower our population."

No, the best way to reduce our "collective" (lol's @ collective) eco-footprint is to change our behavior.

To lower the population would only slightly prolong the eco destruction you're not worried about enough to change your personal behavior to avoid.

[samchilat]

and then, some rich and priveleged people will be allowed to have MORE babies, just like that in china,which grants the minority people could be above one-child policy