Oh, thank God; I was soooo worried about this: Having kids probably won't destroy the planet.
Several friends and academic colleagues vocally opt not to have kids in order to “save the planet.” To them, population numbers are a simple input and output equation in which more people create more problems. Thankfully, it takes more than math to understand the mechanisms that shift the balance of life on Earth.
Here’s the part that’s not up for debate: Some of the greatest challenges we face globally stem from our current predicament. Too many people are squandering ever more limited resources including food, water, energy, and more. Climate change exacerbates these problems.
[. . .]
Still, Ehrlich and his predecessors were not entirely wrong. We do face many real challenges, but not every person has the same impact on Earth. The real danger isn’t in sheer number of humans, but how specific individuals and societies use resources.
I don't know why anybody pays any attention to the doomsayers when they are wrong time after time. What they always leave out of the equation is that humans are adaptable and meet each new problem with a solution. We haven't had a food crisis because we keep finding better ways to increase yields. We haven't faced an energy crisis because we keep finding new resources. What the frack!
Ah, climate change. Is there nothing it can't do?
