We Can Totally Stop ‘Climate Change’ By Giving Girls Birth Control

Wired’s Robin George Andrews thinks she totally has the solution to fixing this whole (made up) issue

TO STOP CLIMATE CHANGE, EDUCATE GIRLS AND GIVE THEM BIRTH CONTROL

CLIMATE CHANGE IS a ubiquitous hydra, a many-headed beast that affects everyone and everything in some form. Solutions to climate change range from the effective and the practical to the potentially catastrophically dangerous—but, in this somewhat heated debate, a potent weapon in our arsenal is falling by the wayside: the empowerment of women.

Last year a coalition of scientists, economists, policymakers, researchers, and business people published Project Drawdown, a compendium of ways to prevent carbon dioxide from escaping skywards. Drawing from a plethora of peer-reviewed research, the document ranks 80 practical, mitigating measures—along with 20 near-future concepts—that could push back the oncoming storm. (snip)

But two lesser-known solutions also made this most practical of lists: the education of girls (number 6) and family planning (number 7). This is a stunning revelation, one that couldn’t be more pertinent, and yet, for the most part, discussions of mitigation and de-carbonization focus heavily on other matters, from the perceived perils and bona fide benefits of nuclear power, to just how quickly solar power is proliferating.

Got that? We have to educate girl because of Hotcoldwetdry. Not because they deserve education (most education systems in the 1st World are run by leftists: why are they not educating girls already?), but because of a manufactured issue based on junk science. Hey, I wonder if these same Warmists will finally take on Islam, and especially Islam, for their treatment of women?

Then there’s family planning, something that’s indivisible from the education of girls. The planet is overpopulated, and the demands of its citizens greatly exceed the natural resources provided by our environment.

Contraception and prenatal care is denied to women across the world, from those in the United States, to communities in low-income nations. It’s either not available, not affordable, or social and/or religious motives ensure that it’s banned or heavily restricted. As a consequence, the world’s population will rise rapidly, consume ever more resources, and power its ambitions using fossil fuels. Carbon dioxide will continue to accumulate in the atmosphere.

What they really mean is contraception to make sure “minorities”, ie, Africans and Asians, in 3rd world countries do not breed, via contraception and abortion.

It’s farcical that this isn’t forming a major part of the debate over climate change mitigation. It’s not entirely clear why this is the case, but I’d suspect that regressive societal attitudes, along with the tendency of commentators to focus on the battle between different energy sectors, play suppressive roles in this regard.

Or, it could be that some people, even in the high end Warmist community, think it’s a Bad Idea to make the racist notion of aborting, sterilizing, and reducing the population in 3rd world countries a top shelf talking point. Even though this type of eugenics idea has been part of Progressive dogma for over 100 years.