I have a lot of things to point out about the original post:
1) "Humans play a role in this warming, most dont deny, nor care. Just exactly what humans do to heat-up the planet is not clear."
That statement is not true. There is a lot of scientific research on how humans impact the environment.
2) "reducing consumption by killing unborn people"
Unborn people are not consuming anything. If you mean to control population growth in order to reduce consumption, this is where the argument fails. Consumption and population ratio are not directly correlated. China posseses the largest population, but the U.S. actually pollutes and consumes much more per capita.
2. "constraining the desires of those managing to be born. This involves eliminating the automible as we know it."
Are you perhaps promoting the idea of communism or authoritarianism? This is direct violation of human rights. Instead of "constraining desires" we shoud promote green consumerism and emphasize on environmental awareness.
3. "changing earth's weather so that cities remain unaffected by earth's warming; consider ex-ruban areas as dispensible."
This is not plausible at all. Instead, cities should invest in urban resilience through land-use planning in order to prioritize where to investment urban infrastructure projects in order to minimize costs and hazards. In addition, full understanding of local urban ecosystems is important. Incorporation of green and blue infrastructure act like natural ecosystems. For example, urban parks are proven to reduce in-land heat and absorb rainwater.
