https://www.biologicaldiversity.org/programs/population_and_sustainability/climate/
This is just one of numerous articles on this subject.
So if you accept that AGW is real, that is, that mankind has a direct impact on global warming, then you must accept that increase in our population should be kept to a minimum and that any policy to increase the population acts counter to our policy to reduce carbon emissions and therefore reduce global warming.
This is the start of the article:
"Human Population Growthand Climate Change
The largest single threat to the ecologyand biodiversity of the planet in the decades to come will be global climatedisruption due to the buildup of human-generated greenhouse gases in theatmosphere. People around the world are beginning to address the problem byreducing their carbon footprint through less consumption and better technology.But unsustainable human population growth can overwhelm those efforts, leadingus to conclude that we not only need smaller footprints, but fewer feet."
So accepting the premise of these articles and they are indeed numerous and easily researched, one has to ask the question "why are Lib/Lab in this great country of ours espousing low carbon emissions policy and Labor actually talking about zero emissions by 2050, but continue to have a policy of a "Big Australia"?
And what of the Greens? They would have zero emissions right now! So why are the Greens not beating the drums loudly to stop all migration of any sort right now?
It is my opinion that a Big Australia is madness and leads to a great lowering in our standard of living. But, it also has a demonstrable negative impact on climate change. So should we now put our pollies on notice that we demand a change in this policy and will be looking at making this a key policy area for the next elections?
And should our climate scientists take up the cudgels for a SMALL Australia?
