The RFK Jr Thread

GoodShepherd said:
So far I really like Robert Kenedy, Trump is doing the right thing having him on board to run the health of USA, the downside of him I heard he is into climate change so Trump must keep him away from any climate change stuff but so far so good Im so glad to hear these topics discussed from politicians.
Click to expand...

RE: The climate change stuff, its not a black and white issue, imo. There is no doubt man's capacity to convert nascent elements locked in the earth into new forms and substances non-replicatable by natural means has an effect on the environment. To think otherwise is ignorant.

Likewise, to believe that a 'carbon tax' on first-world nations combined with premature electrification utilizing immature energy capture and storage techniques will solve global climate issues is also ignorant.

I feel the term 'environmentalist' has come to carry with it too many negative connotations - the image of a Prius*-driving Birkenstock-wearing unshorn/unshowered granola-eating hippie. I prefer 'conservationist,' as in someone who aims to conserve, preserve, and protect the natural, God-given beauty of this incredible world as a whole and this nation in particular. Those of us on the right as progenitors of families and legacies and believers in Christ and God have more of a duty to look after this promised land and ensure it is not wasted in the name of wanton, destructive, pointless consumption.

American Conservation is a movement a wholeheartedly support and can get behind - using American ingenuity, capital, and resources to maximize the potential of our land without destroying its natural beauty or ability to provide for us (i.e. corporate farming, strip mining, overfishing, toxic dumping, etc.).


(*Legit a damn fine car, tbh)
 
dicknixon72 said:
RE: The climate change stuff, its not a black and white issue, imo. There is no doubt man's capacity to convert nascent elements locked in the earth into new forms and substances non-replicatable by natural means has an effect on the environment. To think otherwise is ignorant.

Likewise, to believe that a 'carbon tax' on first-world nations combined with premature electrification utilizing immature energy capture and storage techniques will solve global climate issues is also ignorant.

I feel the term 'environmentalist' has come to carry with it too many negative connotations - the image of a Prius*-driving Birkenstock-wearing unshorn/unshowered granola-eating hippie. I prefer 'conservationist,' as in someone who aims to conserve, preserve, and protect the natural, God-given beauty of this incredible world as a whole and this nation in particular. Those of us on the right as progenitors of families and legacies and believers in Christ and God have more of a duty to look after this promised land and ensure it is not wasted in the name of wanton, destructive, pointless consumption.

American Conservation is a movement a wholeheartedly support and can get behind - using American ingenuity, capital, and resources to maximize the potential of our land without destroying its natural beauty or ability to provide for us (i.e. corporate farming, strip mining, overfishing, toxic dumping, etc.).


(*Legit a damn fine car, tbh)
Click to expand...
I love nature and want the enviroment to remain pure, I like that RFK is against GMO's and to remove pesticides from crops and flouride from the water etc, Im all for that, I like organic food and healthy living, but to be against mining oil in your own country and rather have your country go to war against another country and travel all the way there and back to get their oil is ridiculous and all this carbon tax stuff, putting the earth and nature above mankind.
 
I always say the Billionaire Trillionaire Families that made their Dirty Fortunes want to play Holier than Though at Davos flying in on a Oh, oh big ol' jet airliner, are the ones that need their credit lines cut to stiffle another "Boom/Bust Cycle".

They lecture after they get to have the fun.
Reeling Central Banks in would be the cure for a lot of the Environmental Degredation Real or Perceived. Much of it is Local Geographical issues not a World Ending Phenomenon as they sell it. Moreso it would curtail the over use of resources. Only a real store of Healthy Profit and Capital would be the main Growth Instrument.

I don't argue the "suspect things" that are deemed unhealthy like GMO's and other chemical ingredients, but sometimes I see the problems of Health are over consumption and sedentary lifestyle that contributes to obesity thus disease.

Basically an Unsustainable scheme to pay for Bad Choices regarding the Industrial Health Complex.

Basically this takes..."Poisoning the Well" to a whole new level of Lucrative plunder and silent Genocide of sorts.
 
dicknixon72 said:
RE: The climate change stuff, its not a black and white issue, imo. There is no doubt man's capacity to convert nascent elements locked in the earth into new forms and substances non-replicatable by natural means has an effect on the environment. To think otherwise is ignorant.
Click to expand...

The effect of increased CO2 on the weather is marginal at best, but its effects on agriculture is huge, and very positive. Without the increase in CO2 hundred of millions would be starving today.

CO2 is highly beneficial to humanity, the policies to try to curb it are incredibly stupid and driven by bankster/globalist agendas.
 
Cooper said:
The effect of increased CO2 on the weather is marginal at best, but its effects on agriculture is huge, and very positive. Without the increase in CO2 hundred of millions would be starving today.

CO2 is highly beneficial to humanity, the policies to try to curb it are incredibly stupid and driven by bankster/globalist agendas.
Click to expand...
Yes, the war on CO2 is part of the global depopulation agenda. They assume that the majority of normies don't know basic science (and they are probably right). They just throw out some chemical compound and say it's evil, and sheeple will just follow the herd. If you started a petition to ban Dihydrogen monoxide (H2O), a lot people would get on board and sign it.
 
Let God Arise said:
Yes, the war on CO2 is part of the global depopulation agenda. They assume that the majority of normies don't know basic science (and they are probably right). They just throw out some chemical compound and say it's evil, and sheeple will just follow the herd. If you started a petition to ban Dihydrogen monoxide (H2O), a lot people would get on board and sign it.
Click to expand...

I found that the best way to limit your exposure to dihydrogen monoxide is to drink more beer.
 
GoodShepherd said:
I love nature and want the enviroment to remain pure, I like that RFK is against GMO's and to remove pesticides from crops and flouride from the water etc, Im all for that, I like organic food and healthy living, but to be against mining oil in your own country and rather have your country go to war against another country and travel all the way there and back to get their oil is ridiculous and all this carbon tax stuff, putting the earth and nature above mankind.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Certain elements if we do not have, we do not have and it is what it is. But shipping goods and products from halfway around the world simply because "its cheaper" is what lead us to today's poor quality Wal-Mart level of consumer consumption. I would rather pay more for something durable because it costs less in the end. I'm all for responsible, clean mineral extraction from US soil (and working with our hemispheric neighbors and allies). In fact, the more we Monroe Doctrine ourselves, the safer, more prosperous, and more wealthy we all become. Imagine an economy where the majority of our trade was longitudinal.


Cooper said:
The effect of increased CO2 on the weather is marginal at best, but its effects on agriculture is huge, and very positive. Without the increase in CO2 hundred of millions would be starving today.

CO2 is highly beneficial to humanity, the policies to try to curb it are incredibly stupid and driven by bankster/globalist agendas.
Click to expand...

Agreed as well. The US learned a lot during the 50s-80s and actually have some of the tightest restrictions on actual harmful particulate emissions like sulfur dioxide, etc.
 
Cooper said:
The effect of increased CO2 on the weather is marginal at best, but its effects on agriculture is huge, and very positive. Without the increase in CO2 hundred of millions would be starving today.

CO2 is highly beneficial to humanity, the policies to try to curb it are incredibly stupid and driven by bankster/globalist agendas.
Click to expand...

Trees and plants breath CO2. They want to ban CO2. That's all you need to know.

Btw RFK jr saved my kids from vaxx injuries by reading his book, great man.

* And for all the "aren't you for less pollution" bullocks. Yes I am and these days they can put incredibly effective filters on power plants and cars bikes etc, but it's CO2 emissions so you can never win.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top