Just how much are you willing to sacrifice to stop global warming, assuming of course that you're drinking Al Gore's Kool-Aid?
Well, in England, a woman has actually sterilized herself.
And, in France, they're talking about replacing municipal cars and trucks with horse-drawn carriages.
I kid you not.
As sterilization seems the more extreme measure, let's begin there as reported by England's Daily Mail Wednesday (emphasis added, h/t NBer lunaticcringeradio):
Had Toni Vernelli gone ahead with her pregnancy ten years ago, she would know at first hand what it is like to cradle her own baby, to have a pair of innocent eyes gazing up at her with unconditional love, to feel a little hand slipping into hers - and a voice calling her Mummy.
But the very thought makes her shudder with horror.
Because when Toni terminated her pregnancy, she did so in the firm belief she was helping to save the planet.
Incredibly, so determined was she that the terrible "mistake" of pregnancy should never happen again, that she begged the doctor who performed the abortion to sterilise her at the same time.
[...]
"Having children is selfish. It's all about maintaining your genetic line at the expense of the planet," says Toni, 35.
"Every person who is born uses more food, more water, more land, more fossil fuels, more trees and produces more rubbish, more pollution, more greenhouse gases, and adds to the problem of over-population."
While most parents view their children as the ultimate miracle of nature, Toni seems to see them as a sinister threat to the future.
Fortunately, the Mail included a picture of this woman so that folks around the world can see what environmentalist cadre look like :
Scary, don't think?
I don't know about you, but I never felt having children was a selfish act. Quite the contrary, I believe successful members of a species that decline to replicate their genes are being selfish as most of them do it for their own personal interests and not those of the species.
After all, if a majority of any species opted out of the procreation process, said species would cease to exist.
I'm no expert, but on the surface, that doesn't appear beneficial for that species.
I'm just saying.
Heading across the Channel, the French are considering moving back to the Dark Ages in order to solve global warming as reported by Reuters Wednesday (emphasis added):
Horses are a possible alternative for vehicles such as school buses and refuse trucks, say groups eager to pick up on global concerns about eco-friendly transport.
"It's all about sustainable development and bringing some humanity back to today's monotonous, machine-driven jobs," Stephane de Veyrac, from the French National Stud Organization, said at this week's annual conference of French mayors.
De Veyrac's group says it is the first in France to offer consulting on a wide range of horse-powered vehicles that could also haul bottles and aid street sweeping.
[...]
Studies about cost and overall carbon footprint are still underway but supporters say the animals beat cars and trucks on a number of criteria, especially for transport work requiring frequent stops over short distances, like emptying trash bins.
Do you think such studies will factor in the methane released by these horses, which, for those drinking the Kool-Aid, is a much stronger greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide? And what about the other environmental disadvantages reported by NewsBusters in February:
In his piece published Tuesday in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Dwight R. Lee wrote (h/t JunkScience.com, emphasis mine throughout): "The motto of all environmentalists should be 'Thank goodness for the internal combustion engine.'"
[...]
The emissions that came out of the tailpipes of horses were much more lethal pollutants that those now coming out of the tailpipes of cars. Horse emissions did more than make our town and cities stink; they spread fly-borne diseases and polluted water supplies that killed people at a far greater rate than the pollution from cars and trucks ever have.
Lee deliciously continued:
Photochemical smog is clearly a health risk, but not nearly the health risk of cholera, diphtheria and tetanus that have been largely eliminated with the help of gasoline powered transportation.
Honestly, how much of Gore's toxic tonic must be consumed for one to believe regression is progress?
