No, RFK Jr. Is NOT a Climate Change Extremist

[mikegriffith1]

One of the biggest objections to RFK Jr. that I hear from my fellow conservatives is that he is a climate change extremist. Trump has started making this claim. But, actually, this is false. When you research Kennedy's environmental views, you discover that he holds a number of non-AOC/non-green-extreme positions on environmental policy. No, he is no Ted Cruz or Vivek Ramaswamy on the environment, but he is no AOC or Nancy Pelosi on the environment either.

Perhaps this is at least part of the reason that just last month a number of leading far-left green groups disavowed Kennedy and urged that environmentalists vote for Biden. The far-left green groups the Sierra Club and the Sunrise Movement actually argue that RFK Jr. is “rejecting science" and that "what he offers is no different than Donald Trump.” One far-left group has published an article titled "RFK Jr. Joins the War on Climate Scientists." The DNC recently claimed that “RFK Jr. has changed his tune from being an environmental lawyer to peddling conspiracy theories about the science of climate change." No, the problem is they just haven't been listening to everything he's been saying on the subject; they simply assumed that since he used to be an environmental lawyer, he agrees with every point of the leftist green agenda.

Why are green extremists unhappy with RFK Jr.? Because he:

-- Rejects the extreme call for an immediate end to oil and gas production and insists that this should only be done when suitable alternatives are available: "Existing productive oil and gas fields will only be phased out as suitable alternatives are available, so that people and the economy can transition smoothly to new technologies."

-- Rejects the extreme call for an immediate end to fracking. He recognizes that "an immediate and total ban on fracking would devastate the U.S. economy, and is therefore unrealistic."

-- Opposes Biden's huge subsidies for green energy.

-- Argues that Biden has given away "billions of dollars of taxpayer money for false environmental solutions."

-- Says Biden's carbon pipeline is a "boondoggle."

-- Has pledged to work to end Biden's carbon capture projects funded in the Inflation Reduction Act.

-- Wants to reduce federal subsidies for clean energy.

-- Has refused to commit to maintaining Biden's new regulations on cutting emissions from vehicles and power plants.

-- Opposed a Dutch effort to reduce the use of fertilizer because he thought it was unfair to small farmers.

-- Says he is open to supporting more nuclear power plants as long as they are safe (but he does not think their construction and disposal operations should be subsidized with taxpayer money). He has been willing to have extensive discussions with nuke power supporters. He forthrightly makes clear that he is skeptical of nuke power's safety but that he would support expanding nuclear power if he were convinced it was safe and economically competitive without subsidies. Even this guarded position is unacceptable to green extremists, as is his willingness to hold dialogues with pro-nuke advocates.

-- Hired as his Communications Director someone who has criticized the hysteria over global warming. (LINK, LINK, LINK, LINK, LINK, LINK, LINK)

Again, I am not saying that RFK Jr. is a Ted Cruz on climate change and the environment, but I am saying that he is no AOC or Sierra Clubber on the environment, that he's not going to do anything reckless on energy policy that will damage the economy or put thousands of people out of work. In point of fact, in most cases, he actually favors a free market approach to energy and energy production.

 

[JoeB131]

RFK Jr. has a brain worm.

 

[JackOfNoTrades]

Dammit...beaten to the brain worm joke again.

You know there's a reason just about his entire family has come out in support of other candidates...they think he's a whack-a-doodle.

And they'd be right. Only good thing right now is he seems to be more of a vote detriment to Trump than to Biden.

 

[candycorn]

RFK jr. is a kook.

 

[mikegriffith1]

RFK Jr. has a brain worm.

Why am I not surprised by your juvenile, uninformed reply?

I'm not a bit surprised that you've uncritically swallowed the distortions about RFK Jr.'s stand on vaccines and autism (ASD). RFK Jr. argued, and still argues, that abundant scientific evidence shows that intake of mercury increases the risk of autism (ASD), and most vaccines used to contain mercury. In response to the clear evidence that mercury can cause autism, and in response to lawsuits over the issue, drug companies stopped including mercury in vaccines.

Just FYI, here's what an NIH study found regarding mercury and autism (ASD):

This review found 91 studies that examine the potential relationship between mercury and ASD from 1999 to February 2016. Of these studies, the vast majority (74%) suggest that mercury is a risk factor for ASD, revealing both direct and indirect effects. The preponderance of the evidence indicates that mercury exposure is causal and/or contributory in ASD. (The relationship between mercury and autism: A comprehensive review and discussion - PubMed)

An NIH meta-study found similar results:

In whole blood, plasma, and RBCs, Hg [mercury] levels were significantly higher in ASD cases compared to their neurotypical counterparts. This indicates that ASD children could exhibit reduced detoxification capacity for Hg and impaired mechanisms for Hg excretion from their bodies. This underscores the detrimental role of Hg in ASD and underscores the critical importance of monitoring Hg levels in ASD children, particularly in early childhood. These findings emphasize the pressing need for global initiatives aimed at minimizing Hg exposure, thus highlighting the critical intersection of human–environment interaction and neurodevelopment health. (Mercury and Autism Spectrum Disorder: Exploring the Link through Comprehensive Review and Meta-Analysis)

Even if Kennedy were completely wrong about mercury in vaccines as a contributor to autism, this would not be as bad of an error as the belief that lockdowns were the correct response to COVID, or that third-trimester preborn babies do not feel pain when they're aborted, or that there's no danger in giving puberty blockers to young children, or that there's nothing wrong with allowing young teens to get transgender surgery, or that a person can "change" their gender, etc., etc.

 

[JoeB131]

Why am I not surprised by your juvenile, uninformed reply?

I'm not a bit surprised that you've uncritically swallowed the distortions about RFK Jr.'s stand on vaccines and autism (ASD). RFK Jr. argued, and still argues, that abundant scientific evidence shows that intake of mercury increases the risk of autism (ASD), and most vaccines used to contain mercury. In response to the clear evidence that mercury can cause autism, and in response to lawsuits over the issue, drug companies stopped including mercury in vaccines.

So then there's no reason why anyone should be anti-Vax now, but Brain-worm still is.

It isn't that there was an increase in autism, it's just that people are getting better of identifying kids (and maybe overdiagnosing) who have it.

Even if Kennedy were completely wrong about mercury in vaccines as a contributor to autism, this would not be as bad of an error as the belief that lockdowns were the correct response to COVID, or that third-trimester preborn babies do not feel pain when they're aborted, or that there's no danger in giving puberty blockers to young children, or that there's nothing wrong with allowing young teens to get transgender surgery, or that a person can "change" their gender, etc., etc.

Lockdowns were the best response. Countries that were serious about lockdowns, such as Germany and Japan, had much lower death rates due to Covid than we have. Countries led by science deniers like Trump, Johnson, Modi, had much higher death rates.

Fetuses aren't people and any fetus being terminated in the third trimester had serious medical issues.

Your Transphobia is not a basis for policy.

 

[JoeB131]

And it was only fantasy...
The Wall was too high, as you can see
Try as he might, he could not break free
And the worms ate into his brain....

 

[Oddball]

No, RFK Jr. Is NOT a Climate Change Extremist​

Yes, he's a total Goebbels warming moonbat.

I'm ratepayer surprised that the OP is falling for this "RFK jr is a centrist" bullshit.

 

[JoeB131]

No, RFK Jr. Is NOT a Climate Change Extremist​

Yes, he's a total Goebbels warming moonbat.

I'm ratepayer surprised that the OP is falling for this "RFK jr is a centrist" bullshit.

Well, he is a Mormon, he's particularly gullible.

Seriously, check out his "Real Issues" homepage. Big doses of crazy there.

 

[mikegriffith1]

So then there's no reason why anyone should be anti-Vax now, but Brain-worm still is.

If you weren't such a brainwashed Marxist loon, and if you bothered to do any serious research, you would find that he's not anti-vax. His kids are all fully vaxed. He's fully vaxed, with the sole exception of the COVID vax. His main point on vaccines is that he thinks they should have to undergo the same testing standards that other drugs have to undergo.

It isn't that there was an increase in autism, it's just that people are getting better of identifying kids (and maybe overdiagnosing) who have it.

LOL! No increase in autism?! Even NIH admits there has been an explosion in autism over the last several decades. This ranks right up there with the other loony comments you have made. And Mao and Stalin were great leaders. And Red China was freer than Free China. And Mao was better than Chiang Kai-shek. And the Chinese army had no idea that breaching the Yellow River Dam in several points would cause massive flooding, and, gee, we can't blame them for not warning the million-plus people who lived in the potential flood area. And the government should give you a tax credit for your credit card interest. And on and on we could go.

Lockdowns were the best response. Countries that were serious about lockdowns, such as Germany and Japan, had much lower death rates due to Covid than we have. Countries led by science deniers like Trump, Johnson, Modi, had much higher death rates.

You're the "science denier." I know you didn't read any of the articles linked in the OP regarding the numerous studies that have been done that utterly, totally debunk the pro-lockdown myths.

Fetuses aren't people and any fetus being terminated in the third trimester had serious medical issues.

Nah, they're just beings with a heartbeat, brain waves, their own blood supply, arms, legs, feet, nose, ears, mouths, and the ability to learn before they're born. But, nah, they're not people. And slaves weren't really people either, right?

Your Transphobia is not a basis for policy.

Oh, so not allowing minors to get their sexual organs permanently altered or take puberty blockers, and not allowing biological males to compete in female sports, is "transphobia." You are not a serious person.

 

[JoeB131]

If you weren't such a brainwashed Marxist loon, and if you bothered to do any serious research, you would find that he's not anti-vax. His kids are all fully vaxed. He's fully vaxed, with the sole exception of the COVID vax. His main point on vaccines is that he thinks they should have to undergo the same testing standards that other drugs have to undergo.

I honestly don't care what this dangerous loon has to say.

LOL! No increase in autism?! Even NIH admits there has been an explosion in autism over the last several decades.

Autism rates have tripled. Is it more common or are we just better at diagnosis?

New research suggests doctors have improved at identifying autism, especially among children with average or above-average IQs. But that doesn't fully explain the trend.

www.nbcnews.com

Nationally, the rise in autism rates has been similar to the trend in New York and New Jersey, according to a 2021 CDC report. One in 54 children had been diagnosed with autism by age 8 in 2016, compared to 1 in 150 in 2000.

Advances in diagnostic capabilities and greater understanding and awareness of autism spectrum disorder seem to be largely driving the increase, the Rutgers researchers said.

Precisely what those other factors are is still unknown, but researchers are at least clear on one fact: Autism has nothing to do with vaccines.

"We know for sure, for so many years now, that vaccines don’t cause autism," said Santhosh Girirajan, an associate professor at Pennsylvania State University who studies the genetic underpinnings of neurodevelopmental disorders and wasn't involved in the new study.

This ranks right up there with the other loony comments you have made. And Mao and Stalin were great leaders. And Red China was freer than Free China. And Mao was better than Chiang Kai-shek. And the Chinese army had no idea that breaching the Yellow River Dam in several points would cause massive flooding, and, gee, we can't blame them for not warning the million-plus people who lived in the potential flood area. And the government should give you a tax credit for your credit card interest. And on and on we could go.

Nazi China wasn't freer than Communist China. That's who the Guomadang were... They were Chinese Nazis. Except Peanut was so fucking incompetent that the Axis wanted nothing to do with him.

Didn't you argue in another thread that Japan should get a pass for the Rape Inappropriate Touching of Nanking because the Yellow River Dam killed more people? Oh, wait, you claim that it wasn't that bad, that it wasn't possible for 300K people to have died because there weren't that many people there (even though the population was many times that before the war)

You're the "science denier." I know you didn't read any of the articles linked in the OP regarding the numerous studies that have been done that utterly, totally debunk the pro-lockdown myths.

Yes, because the are all crank science, Mormon Brain Worm (which is now your new nickname!!!)

Nah, they're just beings with a heartbeat, brain waves, their own blood supply, arms, legs, feet, nose, ears, mouths, and the ability to learn before they're born. But, nah, they're not people. And slaves weren't really people either, right?

Are they counted in the Census?
Are they deductible for tax purposes?
Do we do an investigation whenever there's a miscarriage?
Of course, we don't.
Why?
FETUSES AREN'T PEOPLE!

Oh, so not allowing minors to get their sexual organs permanently altered or take puberty blockers, and not allowing biological males to compete in female sports, is "transphobia." You are not a serious person.

I'm a very serious person. Transphobic idiots should not be making policy.

Now, if you want to have sensible guidelines as to when gender confirmation surgery SHOULD be performed, I'm good with having that discussion with scientists and doctors, not religious loons.

As for Girl's sports. Title IX is a scam, so I can't get upset when scammers get beaten at their own scam.

 

[mikegriffith1]

My bottom line on RFK Jr. and climate change is that I trust him not to do anything reckless or destructive.

We should keep in mind that there are plenty of mainstream conservatives, such as Marco Rubio and Jeb Bush, who likewise accept the orthodox scientific view on climate change but who do not support drastic measures like the Green New Deal.

Conversely, there are quite a few ardent climate change activists who strongly support nuclear power, including Stewart Brand, Gwyneth Cravens, Mark Lynas, Richard Rhodes, Michael Shellenberger, Richard Branson, and, believe it or not, Oliver Stone.

 

[JoeB131]

My bottom line on RFK Jr. and climate change is that I trust him not to do anything reckless or destructive.

We should keep in mind that there are plenty of mainstream conservatives, such as Marco Rubio and Jeb Bush, who likewise accept the orthodox scientific view on climate change but who do not support drastic measures like the Green New Deal.

Conversely, there are quite a few ardent climate change activists who strongly support nuclear power, including Stewart Brand, Gwyneth Cravens, Mark Lynas, Richard Rhodes, Michael Shellenberger, Richard Branson, and, believe it or not, Oliver Stone.

Reckless and destructive would be pretending Climate Change isn't a thing and keep doing what we are doing.

 

[mikegriffith1]

Reckless and destructive would be pretending Climate Change isn't a thing and keep doing what we are doing.

Hey, why don't you go troll threads where Mao Tse Tung is being discussed so you can once again deny that he murdered tens of millions of people and sent millions of others to concentration camps, and so you can proclaim what a great leader he was and how he was really better than Chiang Kai-shek and how Red China was freer and better than Free China, hey?

You see, you simply have no credibility. You can't make such ludicrous claims and then expect to be taken seriously. And it is comical when you attempt to compare your denial of Mao's and Stalin's mass murders and tyranny to my belief that OJ was innocent, that Japan had valid reasons to attack Pearl Harbor (which is not the same thing as saying they should have done so, and is a view that many scholars share), that the government's explanation of TWA 800 is preposterous (a view shared by a whole bunch of engineers, physicists, and pilots, including some of the top NTSB and TWA experts who were involved in the investigation), and that George B. McClellan was an effective general (Gen. Robert E. Lee, Gen. Ulysses Grant. Col. Robert Gould Shaw, Gen. George Meade, and many others said he was, as do a growing number of historians).

 

[JoeB131]

Hey, why don't you go troll threads where Mao Tse Tung is being discussed so you can once again deny that he murdered tens of millions of people and sent millions of others to concentration camps, and so you can proclaim what a great leader he was and how he was really better than Chiang Kai-shek and how Red China was freer and better than Free China, hey?

There wasn't a free China in 1945. There was Red China and Nationalist China, both of which were brutal, undemocratic regimes. Mao's regime just happened to be competent, which is why he won.

You see, you simply have no credibility. You can't make such ludicrous claims and then expect to be taken seriously. And it is comical when you attempt to compare your denial of Mao's and Stalin's mass murders and tyranny to my belief that OJ was innocent,

Guy, a famine isn't a mass murder. Sorry. I'll blame Stalin and Mao for the incompetence that led to it, as soon as you blame Trump for the incompetence that led to 1 million Covid deaths.

Oh, OJ was guilty. He even admitted it in a book.

that Japan had valid reasons to attack Pearl Harbor (which is not the same thing as saying they should have done so, and is a view that many scholars share),

No, there was no valid reason to attack because we wouldn't sell them the materials to slaughter innocent Chinese.
(You only seem concerned with dead Chinese when the Commies are killing them.) If the Nationalists or Japanese do it, you're fine with it.)

Why do you hate America?

that the government's explanation of TWA 800 is preposterous (a view shared by a whole bunch of engineers, physicists, and pilots, including some of the top NTSB and TWA experts who were involved in the investigation),

Why do you hate America?
TWA 800 exploded because of a faulty fuel tank. Period.

and that George B. McClellan was an effective general (Gen. Robert E. Lee, Gen. Ulysses Grant. Col. Robert Gould Shaw, Gen. George Meade, and many others said he was, as do a growing number of historians).

McClellan was a boob and a coward. Also a slave owner, so you can get why he didn't want to kill his fellow slave owners. Once you got Grant in there, he kicked ass and took names!

Oh, yeah, and Joseph Smith was a kiddy-diddling Con-artist. Just feel the need to throw that in.

 

[mikegriffith1]

I purposely avoided raising the climate change debate in the OP. For those who are interested, here is an informative debate over climate change between two scientists held in 2019. Both scientists remained civil and professional throughout the debate, a refreshing change from many other such debates.

If you've read little on the climate change debate and have simply accepted the simplistic positions offered by one of the two extremes, you will probably be surprised by what you learn from this debate.

 

[AHZ]

One of the biggest objections to RFK Jr. that I hear from my fellow conservatives is that he is a climate change extremist. Trump has started making this claim. But, actually, this is false. When you research Kennedy's environmental views, you discover that he holds a number of non-AOC/non-green-extreme positions on environmental policy. No, he is no Ted Cruz or Vivek Ramaswamy on the environment, but he is no AOC or Nancy Pelosi on the environment either.

Perhaps this is at least part of the reason that just last month a number of leading far-left green groups disavowed Kennedy and urged that environmentalists vote for Biden. The far-left green groups the Sierra Club and the Sunrise Movement actually argue that RFK Jr. is “rejecting science" and that "what he offers is no different than Donald Trump.” One far-left group has published an article titled "RFK Jr. Joins the War on Climate Scientists." The DNC recently claimed that “RFK Jr. has changed his tune from being an environmental lawyer to peddling conspiracy theories about the science of climate change." No, the problem is they just haven't been listening to everything he's been saying on the subject; they simply assumed that since he used to be an environmental lawyer, he agrees with every point of the leftist green agenda.

Why are green extremists unhappy with RFK Jr.? Because he:

-- Rejects the extreme call for an immediate end to oil and gas production and insists that this should only be done when suitable alternatives are available: "Existing productive oil and gas fields will only be phased out as suitable alternatives are available, so that people and the economy can transition smoothly to new technologies."

-- Rejects the extreme call for an immediate end to fracking. He recognizes that "an immediate and total ban on fracking would devastate the U.S. economy, and is therefore unrealistic."

-- Opposes Biden's huge subsidies for green energy.

-- Argues that Biden has given away "billions of dollars of taxpayer money for false environmental solutions."

-- Says Biden's carbon pipeline is a "boondoggle."

-- Has pledged to work to end Biden's carbon capture projects funded in the Inflation Reduction Act.

-- Wants to reduce federal subsidies for clean energy.

-- Has refused to commit to maintaining Biden's new regulations on cutting emissions from vehicles and power plants.

-- Opposed a Dutch effort to reduce the use of fertilizer because he thought it was unfair to small farmers.

-- Says he is open to supporting more nuclear power plants as long as they are safe (but he does not think their construction and disposal operations should be subsidized with taxpayer money). He has been willing to have extensive discussions with nuke power supporters. He forthrightly makes clear that he is skeptical of nuke power's safety but that he would support expanding nuclear power if he were convinced it was safe and economically competitive without subsidies. Even this guarded position is unacceptable to green extremists, as is his willingness to hold dialogues with pro-nuke advocates.

-- Hired as his Communications Director someone who has criticized the hysteria over global warming. (LINK, LINK, LINK, LINK, LINK, LINK, LINK)

Again, I am not saying that RFK Jr. is a Ted Cruz on climate change and the environment, but I am saying that he is no AOC or Sierra Clubber on the environment, that he's not going to do anything reckless on energy policy that will damage the economy or put thousands of people out of work. In point of fact, in most cases, he actually favors a free market approach to energy and energy production.

you've lost.

you're running from environmentalism.

you don't get more running from environmentalism than trump.

Trump cancelled the Paris accords.

 

[JoeB131]

I purposely avoided raising the climate change debate in the OP. For those who are interested, here is an informative debate over climate change between two scientists held in 2019. Both scientists remained civil and professional throughout the debate, a refreshing change from many other such debates.

If you've read little on the climate change debate and have simply accepted the simplistic positions offered by one of the two extremes, you will probably be surprised by what you learn from this debate.

Blah, blah, blah.

The world is getting warmer.
Human activity is responsible
Something needs to be done.

Brain-worm has no ideas.

 

[mikegriffith1]

Blah, blah, blah.

The world is getting warmer.
Human activity is responsible
Something needs to be done.

Brain-worm has no ideas.

Yeah, and Mao Tse Tung did not kill millions of Chinese but was a good leader who brought peace and stability. And there was no such thing as Free China. And Red China was freer than Free China (i.e., the Republic of China on Taiwan). Joseph Stalin likewise did not kill millions of Russians but was a fine leader who also brough peace and stability. You're a genuine loon.

I'm guessing you didn't even bother to watch the video, since you are loathe to read or view anything that you know challenges what you want to believe.

 

[JoeB131]

Yeah, and Mao Tse Tung did not kill millions of Chinese but was a good leader who brought peace and stability. And there was no such thing as Free China. And Red China was freer than Free China (i.e., the Republic of China on Taiwan). Joseph Stalin likewise did not kill millions of Russians but was a fine leader who also brough peace and stability. You're a genuine loon.

Sure they killed millions, that's what happens in civil wars. Lincoln didn't kill millions, but he killed a lot. Oh, wait, you think Lincoln was a commie, too!

I'm guessing you didn't even bother to watch the video, since you are loathe to read or view anything that you know challenges what you want to believe.

Naw, I don't bother watching Climate Deniers, Flat-earthers or any other unscientific loons.

The scientists are clear on this point. The world is getting warmer and people are responsible. Everything else is just noise.