A fifth of female climate scientists who responded to Guardian survey said they had opted to have no or fewer children

A fifth of female climate scientists who responded to Guardian survey said they had opted to have no or fewer children

Ihad the hormonal urges,” said Prof Camille Parmesan, a leading climate scientist based in France. “Oh my gosh, it was very strong. But it was: ‘Do I really want to bring a child into this world that we’re creating?’ Even 30 years ago, it was very clear the world was going to hell in a handbasket. I’m 62 now and I’m actually really glad I did not have children.”

Parmesan is not alone. An exclusive Guardian survey has found that almost a fifth of the female climate experts who responded have chosen to have no children, or fewer children, due to the environmental crises afflicting the world.

…

An Indian scientist who chose to be anonymous decided to adopt rather than have children of her own. “There are too many children in India who do not get a fair chance and we can offer that to someone who is already born,” she said. “We are not so special that our genes need to be transmitted: values matter more.”

    • troed@fedia.io
      224·
      6 months ago

      You might want to read the article. Doomism isn’t climate science.

      • dot0@lemmy.worldEnglish
        20·
        6 months ago

        you might wanna read the article.

        We can avoid catastrophic climate impacts if we take meaningful actions to address the climate crisis. Yes, that’s an important “if.”

        this asshole buried the actual crux of the issue way deep in the fluff. these two sentences contradict the headline.

        which part of what is currently happening in the world is making you pretend that the “if” qualification is being even remotely met?

        • troed@fedia.io
          12·
          6 months ago

          The whole point of the article (written by Mann) is that the policies already in place keeps us below 3 degrees.

          Regarding your “currently happening”, this quote seems fitting:

          “I often encounter, especially on social media, individuals who are convinced that the latest extreme weather event is confirmation that the climate crisis is far worse than we thought, and scientists and climate communicators are intentionally “hiding” the scary truth from the public. It is the sort of conspiratorial thinking that we used to find among climate change deniers, but increasingly today we see it with climate doomists.”

          Do you consider yourself better educated on climate science than Mann?

          • dot0@lemmy.worldEnglish
            6·
            6 months ago

            point of order, madam speaker: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority

            I do appear to have better reading comprehension than Mann expected from his audience. otherwise he wouldn’t have have tried something underhanded like that.

            tell me, do you place value in peer review and consensus when it comes to science? you know Mann is out of step with scientific consensus in his view, yeah? I am inclined to believe you’ve cherry picked the one opinion piece which affirms a pre-existing perspective on your part.

            also I adore that you completely failed to acknowledge a direct question I posed to you: which part of what is happening in the world right now is causing you to behave like Mann’s “if” condition is fulfilled in any way whatsoever? I want an answer from you in your own words. don’t quote an appeal to authority again.