If you thought that the human engineering pseudo-science died out with its Nazi practitioners, think again. The concept is alive and well and being touted as a means to the creation of a human race more in sync with Big Brother’s ideal of a carbon-friendly humanity.
Prof. Matthew Liao of New York University’s Center for Bioethics touts “human engineering” as offering possible solutions to the politically correct green thesis that human beings are becoming a pest threatening the survival of planet Earth. In academic terms his thesis is that “the biomedical modification of humans makes them better at mitigating climate change” (Ethics, Policy and Environment, February 9).
In other words, if we can genetically engineer a species of much smaller human beings, it follows that our environmental footprint on planet Earth will be much smaller and hence the damage we are told we do to planet Earth will be reduced.
Is this guy really serious?
Sadly, it appears he is. He puts his argument this way: “We shall argue that human engineering potentially offers an effective means of tackling climate change …. [A] striking example of human engineering is the possibility of making humans smaller. Human ecological footprints are partly correlated with our size. … [A] more speculative and controversial way of reducing adult height is to reduce birth weight. … [P]harmacologically induced altruism and empathy could increase the likelihood that we adopt the necessary behavioral and market solutions for curbing climate change” (ibid).
Having apparently bought the whole politically correct argument that human beings are planet Earth’s principal pest, heating up the planet at an unacceptably accelerating rate by their general habits of living, Liao posits: “Anthropogenic climate change is arguably one of the biggest problems that confront us today. There is ample evidence that climate change is likely to affect adversely many aspects of life for all people around the world, and that existing solutions such as geoengineering might be too risky and ordinary behavioural and market solutions might not be sufficient to mitigate climate change. Read More