discusseded @ discusseded @programming.dev

Posts

0

Comments

91

Joined

2 yr. ago

Sounds like there were conversation laws put in place at some point. Those laws do a great job at allowing nature to rebalance populations when people go too far with hunting.

Same, my dad is a hunter and I believe the person above is confusing trophy hunters with just hunters. While my dad hunts, I don't believe I could do the same. It's just not in me, but I have all due respect for them. Many revere nature, love animals, and hunting is an ancestral activity that pre-dates history.

Some hunters are dicks. But that doesn't mean hunting predators is a dick move. You can hunt bears responsibly, using the meat and the rest.

It's really weird to think that predator meat is somehow different from prey meat. Food all boils down to chemistry and it all ends up the same after digestion. The only difference is the microbes involved in the process, but those don't carry on into the meat. Only prions and parasites pass into the meat, and that happens basically no matter where you are on the food chain.

This is amazing. Far better than killing them off.

I ate bear meat once and it was delicious.

I'm also looking forward to a nice tuna melt sandwich.

Your take is retarded.

So true 🤣

Yes, Satan?

Here is his acknowledgement and explanation if anyone is interested:

https://youtu.be/LHg3_iYIBVQ?si=fGQiaY3IlwT0XJ2s

I did end up watching that episode. The part where Jon called him a red-pilled Smokey the Bear was really funny.

The accusation wasn't of rape but sexual assault, which is quite different, though no less wrong.

The show makes the distinction of mainstream and not. Not sure the real difference is liberal versus conservative.

And the Samoa situation is really strange, but I don't think Robert went around and told locals to not vaccinate. I said in another comment that he has something to answer for here, but saying he is responsible seems like speculation, given the evidence as presented.

I can see how the advance/change of criteria can lead to an increase in diagnosis. But I don't think it's merely a perception that has evolved. Cancer rates in youth are rising significantly. The recommended age for common cancer screens are being lowered to reflect the change.

There was a time when the use of lead was perfectly normal and the flight to eliminate it for public safety was deemed as fringe. Likewise, I feel that we have new kinds of pollutants affecting our health and I have a keen interest in knowing what's safe and what isn't, now that I have children to care for.

I see vaccinations as one of humanity's greatest achievements. mRNA technology is exciting to me. But just like scaremongering upsets me, so does hasty policy making and social policing.

That said, my family is fully up to date on vaccination schedules. But I have worries that if we let our guards down and only take in facts on authority, we'll give way to corruption due to our unquestioning nature. This is in no way limited to vaccines, in fact I hardly question vaccines at all. I'm mostly interested in industrial pollution and Robert has extensive experience in this area. That's why I favored him, as a figure who lived to expose industrial and government corruption at the cost of human health.

It might be this article.

I'm sorry, but I have respect for a guy who can expertly sex up his partner. A guy who sees sex as filthy and indignant? Nope, I don't respect that crap

Through my eyes the first guy has dignity, the second has problems.

No worries, I really appreciate your follow-up.

I agree with Robert's professed view that vaccines should have enhanced safety protocols to ensure positive health outcomes. Specifically, a long term study on ingredients and so forth. This, he claims, stems from the staggering increase in child health issues in the past forty years. It makes perfect sense to want to use US health institutions to research possible causes and get to the bottom of it. I don't trust monied interests, but I do trust the scientific method.

However, scaremongering is wrong, and that appears to be what caused the issue. It isn't perfectly clear that Robert directly has blood on his hands, but it does seem like the company he kept at the time has done some damage, and so he at least has something to answer for here.

Thanks again for getting back to me on this.

Cool, then I don't care either.

Don't care about down votes, but at least have the guts to support your decision. I'm putting my thoughts out there, you can refute them just the same.

So he and some friends found roadkill and thought it would be funny to put it in a park to give the appearance that a NY bicyclist ran it over and left it? That's supposed to make me not vote for the person?

To me that says he has a sense of humor, strange as it may be. But how is that supposed to turn me off compared to grabbing women by the pussy or approaching young women from behind and smelling their hair and pecking at them publicly? I'll take dark humor over fucked up shit any day.

Come back when you have a video of RFK doing anything as grizzly as the two formerly leading candidates. Brain worms are fairly common and only support his claim that he's an avid outdoorsman. Again, how is that something to disqualify a candidate, when the next two are both literally and publicly out of their minds?

Ok that just sounds whacky and made up. At best a mischaracterization of some obscure situation.

He's a Kennedy, I'm sure he's been around a great number of people. But of all the interviews I've seen, both before and after his intention to run for president, I never heard him refer to those people as his friends. He had rational reasons for his relationship as far as Epstein goes. I don't have any reason to believe he was a child rapist.

As far as the other two, all I can say is that famous people tend to talk to other famous people at parties. It doesn't mean RFK approves of their behavior or character. If you have evidence of the contrary I'm all ears. Cherry picked sounds bytes don't impress me so you don't have to bother with that.

Also I'm not saying he's the pinnacle of greatness. He only had to top Trump and Biden, and that's not hard to do this election. There were other Democrats I would have gladly voted for but the DNC and Biden didn't give me the chance.

I don't see how that could be possible, but if you can explain I'll keep an open mind.

The Democrats need an effective communicator that really connects with people.

I'm excited for this ticket, not because I'm Minnesotan, but because the country desperately needs Waltz, on television, at least as much as MAGAs have been. His rational and relatable mind is a remedy to the years of maddening bullshit that have been blasting us lower and lower to the depths.

I was so jaded by the Democrats and their inability to escape their ivory tower of power and even attempt to relate to me, that I was firmly resolved to vote RFK this election.

Now they offer a glimmer of hope. Here's hoping the tides are changing and they actually have conviction behind their normally hollow words. Biden has achieved some progressive agendas, and thankfully he released his grip to let others continue his surprising work.

No representation without taxation.