A modestly proposed culling for the sake of the children

Despite the virus scare (or perhaps because of it?), global warming activists still worry about and grieve over their pet cause.  I've given the matter some serious thought and conclude that the only possible solution is population culling.

We need to cull 6.9B of the Earth's 7B people and spread them out over the several habitable land masses.  That would be 100M people spread out over the vast plains of the U.S. and Canada and Mexico, the huge Brazilian and Argentine llanos, the gargantuan Asian steppes, the endless African savannas, the entire continent of Australia, and the flatlands of Europe.  Those 100M would live maybe one person per 100 square miles.

That should take care of social distancing.

We would have to diversify the cull to ensure equitable death quotas per race, self-identified gender, birth sex, religion, national origin, ethnicity, language group, height, weight, eye color, hair color, body mass type, number of fingers and toes, expected longevity, fingerprint type, etc.  Also a fair spread of mechanics, welders, professors, farmers, talk show hosts, hairdressers, soldier types, stockbrokers, particle physicists, accountants, thieves, murderers, con men, politicians, and the like.

Yes, I repeat myself, but we can't discriminate.

If that didn't cut the CO2 threat enough, we could cull all the cattle-type animals (cattle, deer, bison, etc.) whose whole purpose for living is to be dinner for other species.  Those cutbacks alone would reduce the number of predators breathing and farting and belching and in other ways emitting the dreaded CO2 — cutting it off at the source, so to speak.

As a result of such culling, the few people left would have an idyllic existence.  Clean air.  Clean water.  Of course, neither you nor any of yours would be around to enjoy it, but neither would your mother-in-law.  So there's that.

Despite the virus scare (or perhaps because of it?), global warming activists still worry about and grieve over their pet cause.  I've given the matter some serious thought and conclude that the only possible solution is population culling.

We need to cull 6.9B of the Earth's 7B people and spread them out over the several habitable land masses.  That would be 100M people spread out over the vast plains of the U.S. and Canada and Mexico, the huge Brazilian and Argentine llanos, the gargantuan Asian steppes, the endless African savannas, the entire continent of Australia, and the flatlands of Europe.  Those 100M would live maybe one person per 100 square miles.

That should take care of social distancing.

We would have to diversify the cull to ensure equitable death quotas per race, self-identified gender, birth sex, religion, national origin, ethnicity, language group, height, weight, eye color, hair color, body mass type, number of fingers and toes, expected longevity, fingerprint type, etc.  Also a fair spread of mechanics, welders, professors, farmers, talk show hosts, hairdressers, soldier types, stockbrokers, particle physicists, accountants, thieves, murderers, con men, politicians, and the like.

Yes, I repeat myself, but we can't discriminate.

If that didn't cut the CO2 threat enough, we could cull all the cattle-type animals (cattle, deer, bison, etc.) whose whole purpose for living is to be dinner for other species.  Those cutbacks alone would reduce the number of predators breathing and farting and belching and in other ways emitting the dreaded CO2 — cutting it off at the source, so to speak.

As a result of such culling, the few people left would have an idyllic existence.  Clean air.  Clean water.  Of course, neither you nor any of yours would be around to enjoy it, but neither would your mother-in-law.  So there's that.