Speaker 1: Oh that's are.
Speaker 2: Hello, and welcome to the show. This is the Cults
Speaker 2: of Conspiracy, and my name is Jonathan.
Speaker 3: I'm Jacob.
Speaker 2: I'm not gonna lie, dude. It feels really weird. We
Speaker 2: went two straight days with no recording at all. I'm like,
Speaker 2: I'm lost, I'm new, i don't know what to do.
Speaker 3: It's it's a little different, bro. But honestly, I liked
Speaker 3: the break right. So for anybody who doesn't know, I
Speaker 3: have a cousin who's getting married. We're recording this on
Speaker 3: Sunday right now. It's coming out on Tuesday. And you know,
Speaker 3: there we were, we were all having a little fish
Speaker 3: and trip until ead a bend, right, And anybody who
Speaker 3: knows I'm not the biggest of nature freaks. I do
Speaker 3: enjoy nature. I enjoy fishing, I enjoy hunting. I don't
Speaker 3: get to do it as much as I would like to, right,
Speaker 3: just because work and life and kids and things. It's
Speaker 3: just it's not always in the cars me to get
Speaker 3: a week in off to just go out into nature
Speaker 3: and have a good time. Right. But with that being said,
Speaker 3: I decided that this was going to be an excellent
Speaker 3: time to do a little bit of research into keeping
Speaker 3: the earth clean, okay, just overall, keeping not just America clean,
Speaker 3: but the air and the water quality and the environment itself.
Speaker 3: And a big portion of this is, or at least
Speaker 3: what we in America have been taught, recycling, right, that
Speaker 3: is the best way to try to help keep America clean,
Speaker 3: to help the environment. You want to protect the earth
Speaker 3: for future generations, and I support all of that as
Speaker 3: far as the theory of it goes, okay, but I
Speaker 3: couldn't just sit on this because the fact of the
Speaker 3: matter is that recycling is a scam and it also
Speaker 3: doubles up as a syop Jonathan, before we get started,
Speaker 3: what is your take on this? We touched on it
Speaker 3: a bit on the last Live, but I don't know.
Speaker 3: Are you of the belief that I'm kind of full
Speaker 3: of shit here? Do you believe that there might be
Speaker 3: a kernel of truth? Like, before we even get started,
Speaker 3: where do you currently sit?
Speaker 2: I'm just over here chuckling, because even when we have
Speaker 2: off days, we're still thinking about concepts and still looking
Speaker 2: into information and still got that third eye all the
Speaker 2: way open. It's like, once you got that fucking thing open, dude,
Speaker 2: it stays open. It doesn't go back to being shut.
Speaker 2: I can't turn it off.
Speaker 3: We can't turn it off. I was just trying to
Speaker 3: have a little good time fishing for some saccal a
Speaker 3: right with my family, and here we all were talking conspiracies.
Speaker 3: Right then, I'm hearing things, ooh damn Bongino and Pat
Speaker 3: Bondy and Cash to tell might be resigning because of
Speaker 3: the whole Epstein thing. And it's like, wait, first of all, no,
Speaker 3: they're not. Secondly, the reason why they're pushing under the
Speaker 3: rug is because Trump is on the list multiple times.
Speaker 3: The reason why they've changed so hard is because he
Speaker 3: told them if they don't change their tune, they would
Speaker 3: lose their job. It's come on now, y'all. But we're
Speaker 3: talking all these conspiratorial things even on off days. We
Speaker 3: can't turn this shit off, y'all.
Speaker 2: Yeah. Yeah, And speaking on that, I you know, whenever
Speaker 2: I first saw that, I was like, you know, I
Speaker 2: know that you gotta be pretty damn tight lipped. Whenever
Speaker 2: you're in the administration. You can really only say things
Speaker 2: that like you were allowed to say. You know, it's you.
Speaker 2: You can never really go outside of your your own
Speaker 2: boundaries that they have set for you. And yeah, I
Speaker 2: play ball, or they'll kick you off the ball team. Dude,
Speaker 2: that's just the way it works.
Speaker 3: I get it.
Speaker 2: But does it just turn these people into cooks? You
Speaker 2: know what I'm saying. It's like you find they probably
Speaker 2: fought their whole lives to get into these positions just
Speaker 2: to turn into the people that they were trying to
Speaker 2: replace and thing, and it's sad.
Speaker 3: It's basically And I had high hopes. I had really
Speaker 3: high hopes for Cash Hotel and for Dan Bongino. I
Speaker 3: had really high hopes for them. But either way it goes,
Speaker 3: as of this moment right now, either a they lied
Speaker 3: to us a month ago whenever they claimed that they
Speaker 3: had new evidence, and he killed himself and all these things,
Speaker 3: and now there's nobody else on the list and it's
Speaker 3: just him. Either they lied to us then, or they're
Speaker 3: about to resign because they can't keep up the lie.
Speaker 3: So either way it goes, they have no moral backbone
Speaker 3: and I have nothing for them. Yeah.
Speaker 2: So what I was thinking, Either they built up a
Speaker 2: lie so much that everybody bought into Epstein Island, and
Speaker 2: there were actors that were saying that that they were
Speaker 2: being taken advantage of and that rate there would have
Speaker 2: been the biggest sigh out because you know, Biden wasn't
Speaker 2: going to do anything about it, and we all had
Speaker 2: hopes that Trump was gonna be able to, you know,
Speaker 2: put an end to it and lock up the people.
Speaker 2: I don't know why we thought that, because back whenever
Speaker 2: he was battling Hillary, right, Oh, you know, you're you're
Speaker 2: lucky I'm not president, because you'd be in jail. Whatever happened,
Speaker 2: never happened. Nothing, never fucking happened, big fat nothing burger.
Speaker 2: So I mean, and I'm not I know that this
Speaker 2: isn't gonna be a political episode. It's just this political shit,
Speaker 2: this political shiit just keeps on stacking, and if you
Speaker 2: don't keep up with it, it's almost like it's almost
Speaker 2: like a drama, you know what I mean. It's like
Speaker 2: you missed one episode. It's like you may as well
Speaker 2: just bow out for a season.
Speaker 3: It's it's the entire drama of Aduce the theater, that's
Speaker 3: all it is. We've heard the term paid actors, how
Speaker 3: about elected actors? Same okay, actors, it's the same shit.
Speaker 3: But look, it's and I'm sorry we've said this before.
Speaker 3: You know, that's just the way it is. If you're
Speaker 3: waiting on a hero, and if you think that there
Speaker 3: is a good guy that's gonna come riding in on
Speaker 3: a white horse to save everybody, Listen, we said this before.
Speaker 3: I'm sorry. There are no good guys to be found here. Okay,
Speaker 3: that's they're not happening. This is the real world. The
Speaker 3: good guy very very often loses. And that's not just
Speaker 3: the way it's gonna play out. What we are left
Speaker 3: with is which pedophile is going to be better for
Speaker 3: the economy and keep us out of war more. I'm sorry,
Speaker 3: I don't want to just crush everyone's soul real quick,
Speaker 3: but this is just the way it is. Which shitthead
Speaker 3: paid for by corporate lobbyist bullshit greed okay, who guaranteed
Speaker 3: they have blackmail on him? And he's a team player
Speaker 3: because of the blackmail. Otherwise he wouldn't even be on
Speaker 3: the ballot in the first fucking place. Which pedophile is
Speaker 3: going to do better for America? Does this negate them
Speaker 3: being a piece of shit and a pedophile? Absolutely not?
Speaker 3: And yes, should they see justice, yes absolutely they should?
Speaker 3: Are they gonna not in this lifetime, homie?
Speaker 2: And that's the thing is that you know, I know
Speaker 2: a lot of people think that the CIA, and we
Speaker 2: know that the CIA probably had a lot to do
Speaker 2: with Epstein Island, but you know who have everything to do
Speaker 2: with it? You know who else did? Was Massad Mussad?
Speaker 2: Oh yeah, and yeah, I don't think I think that they,
Speaker 2: you know, Israel or at least its own secret or
Speaker 2: its own Central Intelligence agency, they're not going to let
Speaker 2: that go there. In that, in my opinion, is the
Speaker 2: reason why Trump kind of bent the knee and helped
Speaker 2: out Israel with Iran.
Speaker 3: That's what I Listen, It's not just Moussad, and it's
Speaker 3: not just well, we helped them with Iran because Iran
Speaker 3: hates us as much as they hate Israel. So I
Speaker 3: mean that that one. Really, even if we weren't on
Speaker 3: the best of terms of Israel, that's enemy of my enemy.
Speaker 2: Yeah, but they changed. Trump changed his tone on that
Speaker 2: real quick.
Speaker 3: Did he did.
Speaker 2: But listen, it's not just Mussad, and it's not just CIA,
Speaker 2: and it's not just FBI, and.
Speaker 3: It's not just Inner Pole. It is all of them.
Speaker 3: Every country had some type of even if it wasn't
Speaker 3: Epstein Island itself, they have their own version of that,
Speaker 3: and they're all connected. They all have these corporate shitheads
Speaker 3: and these lobbying groups and these political figures who they
Speaker 3: have to find something to blackmail them. They have to
Speaker 3: find something to have them buy the balls. And if
Speaker 3: they don't have anything, they will create things. And that's
Speaker 3: what it's all about. It's not that's the thing. I
Speaker 3: don't want to just say, Oh, you know, it's Israel
Speaker 3: and America and cohotes. Dude, it's all of them. There's
Speaker 3: no good guys here.
Speaker 2: And you don't come back from pedophilia, you know what
Speaker 2: I'm saying. Like, there's no making amends with the American
Speaker 2: people or any people of the world if you're in
Speaker 2: and and look, I get it, like we've we've we've
Speaker 2: known that Trump was on that list for quite a while.
Speaker 3: Now.
Speaker 2: We don't know exactly what he did, but one is,
Speaker 2: it's pretty fucking easy to assume, right, Like I mean,
Speaker 2: if it fucking walks like a duck and quacks like
Speaker 2: a duck, we're not gonna sit here and call it
Speaker 2: a fucking eagle, you know. It's just that's I don't
Speaker 2: want to jump to those conclusions. But there has to
Speaker 2: be a reason why that information is not being released.
Speaker 3: I'm glad you gave the description you just did.
Speaker 2: Okay, if it walks like a duck and quacks like
Speaker 2: a duck, I just listened to the Tim Dillon show.
Speaker 3: Shouts out to him, he's amazing. And this is the
Speaker 3: situation we have found ourselves in. Okay, you are saying,
Speaker 3: if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck,
Speaker 3: it must be a duck. But you will be called
Speaker 3: an anti semite and a racist and a homophobe and
Speaker 3: every other type of bad ooh ah, evil name under
Speaker 3: the sun, because how do you know it's not a goose?
Speaker 3: Well wait, wait, wait, time out, it's it's it walks
Speaker 3: like a duck and quacks like a duck. And okay,
Speaker 3: it's still a bird. It's still a bird. Okay, what
Speaker 3: is the deal. It's like, well, why do you just
Speaker 3: think that somebody be out here playing with a duck
Speaker 3: call for no reason? If it's not a duck, it
Speaker 3: could it be a personal a duck call? Why would
Speaker 3: somebody out be out here with a duck call? It's like,
Speaker 3: because people do that. It's for hunting, and it's like
Speaker 3: a thing. It's like, well, you know that's not always true.
Speaker 3: Have you ever heard of duck dynasty.
Speaker 2: These guys play with duck calls, and some of them
Speaker 2: are racists, And it's like what, I'm sorry, wait back
Speaker 2: to the point. It walks like a duck and quacks
Speaker 2: like a duck. If we're seeing this happen, that's what
Speaker 2: needs to, you know, be a thing. Well, why don't
Speaker 2: you go with your racist friends at duck dynasty? You
Speaker 2: back at and that you're getting like thrown under the
Speaker 2: bus for just thinking critically for two seconds, and they're
Speaker 2: drawing every other conclusion they ain't got shit to do
Speaker 2: with fuck, and they're bringing it all in to make
Speaker 2: you look like a psychopath when in reality, you just
Speaker 2: want us to all unanimously acknowledge that what's going down
Speaker 2: right now is completely fucked up.
Speaker 3: But you're just a beg at.
Speaker 2: I think it's one of three things. It's either Trump
Speaker 2: is a pedophile and that's why it's being covered up.
Speaker 2: Trump is covering for his pedophile friends, which is why
Speaker 2: he would be getting why he would be covering it up.
Speaker 2: Or three, it was never real to begin with. That's
Speaker 2: the only options in my mind, Like just thinking critically
Speaker 2: here what are the reasons you wouldn't want to release
Speaker 2: that information. I just I'm baffled in my own mind
Speaker 2: trying to think about it. And you got to boil
Speaker 2: it down to those three things. And we know for
Speaker 2: sure one of those three things can't be true. We
Speaker 2: know that this island existed.
Speaker 3: There are multiple victims that have come forward, there's multiple
Speaker 3: court cases and being paid off in silenced. There is
Speaker 3: not just on the island, but even his house in
Speaker 3: New York. Like going back to the nineties, this shit
Speaker 3: was going off right, the Lolita Express, the Little Black Book.
Speaker 2: You can actually find the Little Black Book of all
Speaker 2: the names on archive dot org on the way back machine,
Speaker 2: and people are looking at it and it looks legit,
Speaker 2: dude like, and we've actually read a lot of those
Speaker 2: names in the past, and you know, it wasn't officially
Speaker 2: released or anything, and I don't know, I mean, it
Speaker 2: was like somebody anonymously put it up there, but it
Speaker 2: seems really legit if you look at it.
Speaker 4: It is.
Speaker 3: I just watched I saw this list. I was I
Speaker 3: went on Instagram to see if our homegirls of the
Speaker 3: Cryptic Women's Society shouts out to them, if they had
Speaker 3: message back, and as I open Instagram, there was a list.
Speaker 3: I think it was like the first probably like two
Speaker 3: hundred names on Epstein's list, and a lot of things
Speaker 3: that were redacted from it, but the names themselves were not.
Speaker 3: These things are coming more and more to light, and
Speaker 3: so these people are saying that there was no client list,
Speaker 3: there was a sole actor in this. It's like, okay,
Speaker 3: so right off the rip, I know you're lying, okay,
Speaker 3: and not just because of an Instagram post. We have
Speaker 3: been talking about this for years now. We all know
Speaker 3: that Epstein's island existed. So one of three options is
Speaker 3: already down. So either a Trump himself is guilty, or
Speaker 3: two Trump is guilty of turning a blind eye, which
Speaker 3: in our opinion makes him equally guilty.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it's completely at that point, which is I mean,
Speaker 2: you may as well have just done it, because we're
Speaker 2: going to look at you the same exact way.
Speaker 3: That being said, I would still rather him be in
Speaker 3: the White House than Kamala, Like I think we can
Speaker 3: also acknowledge that two things can be true at the
Speaker 3: same time. I know I do. Kamala would have made
Speaker 3: it more of a slave state. Let's look at what
Speaker 3: she did with her time in California and the fact
Speaker 3: that she doesn't have brains that actually like works and
Speaker 3: shit versus Trump, who is like actually trying to make
Speaker 3: economic changes happen in this country.
Speaker 2: Sure, the same, but look, it's a slippery ass slope
Speaker 2: to say, I really you would rather a known, possibly
Speaker 2: known pedophile or somebody who is possibly known to be
Speaker 2: covering up four pedophiles equally complicit, right, just like like
Speaker 2: what like we said, so Dia Kamala when she was
Speaker 2: the Attorney General she covered for pedophiles in California all
Speaker 2: the time?
Speaker 3: Oh did she? I didn't know that. Oh, it's That's
Speaker 3: what I'm saying. There's no good guys here, y'all. There's
Speaker 3: no good guys. They are all equally shit of the
Speaker 3: same crimes, whether it's corporate greed, child labor laws, sex trafficking.
Speaker 3: I had a feel travel name your thing, it doesn't matter.
Speaker 3: They are all of the same shit birds of a
Speaker 3: shit feather. This is the facts of the matter. So, yes,
Speaker 3: kerb I would still rather him be in the position
Speaker 3: than Kamala, But I'm not happy about certain things the
Speaker 3: same with like, uh, you could have two things be
Speaker 3: true at the same time, I believe that Israel should
Speaker 3: exist as a state, and I also think Netan Yahoo's
Speaker 3: a piece of shit. Two things can be true at
Speaker 3: the same time, you see what I mean?
Speaker 2: Yeah, for sure, for sure, I mean, and we'll see
Speaker 2: how it plays out. I guess there's been a little
Speaker 2: bit of momentum because of the pushback of literally everybody
Speaker 2: on both sides. Everybody on both sides is like, yeah,
Speaker 2: let the Epstein list come out, Like, let's see who's
Speaker 2: all involved in it. We've been hearing about it for
Speaker 2: what five years now, and you know, there's been quote
Speaker 2: unquote leaks and some rumors and and you know, some
Speaker 2: people you know, talking and stuff like that, and we
Speaker 2: all know that. You know, there's some of the people
Speaker 2: for sure, like Les Wexner of Victoria's Secret and all
Speaker 2: these all the other ventures that he's in. It's like,
Speaker 2: but even he never had really anything coming at him.
Speaker 2: The only two people that have been persecuted one's dead Epstein,
Speaker 2: who dude, that nothing pissed me off more than for
Speaker 2: all of them to say, yeah, yeah, he killed himself.
Speaker 2: I'm like, no, he didn't, Like, come on, no, he didn't.
Speaker 2: And the same thing with with his life. Old Gis Lane.
Speaker 2: You know, it's like, what is she in jail? Like
Speaker 2: she's been like trafficking kids to herself.
Speaker 3: No, if there's no crime that was committed according to
Speaker 3: the official judiciary narrative right now, if no crime was committed,
Speaker 3: then why is she still in prison.
Speaker 2: There's there's just no answers, you know, And so they
Speaker 2: kind of backed themselves into a corner here. And to
Speaker 2: be honest, I mean, I'm I'm almost like, I like,
Speaker 2: it hurts me to even say this, but like I think,
Speaker 2: think I'm just off of the whole Trump train as
Speaker 2: it goes until this all gets figured out. Like I
Speaker 2: can't put any more faith in them, And that sucks.
Speaker 2: Not that I had a whole lot of faith in
Speaker 2: a president regardless, but I can't sit here and cheer
Speaker 2: on somebody who is a pedophile or covering for a pedophile.
Speaker 2: That's I mean, it's the optics of the situation.
Speaker 3: I'm not I'm not cheering them on. I am saying
Speaker 3: that I like some of the things that he has
Speaker 3: done thus far, and I don't like certain things that
Speaker 3: he has also done with this term in office. It's
Speaker 3: just what it is.
Speaker 2: I mean, what's his fucking name? Tom Hanks can create
Speaker 2: every single awesome movie known to mankind. I'm not gonna
Speaker 2: go watch him, right, you know? And I think that
Speaker 2: we got to treat all pedophiles that way, right, Like
Speaker 2: we're kind of fucking wrong if we don't.
Speaker 3: Oh no, I agree, but it is what it is, like,
Speaker 3: of the two options that were up on the ballot,
Speaker 3: it was about to be Joe Biden, who is equally
Speaker 3: guilty of all the same shit. And also so the
Speaker 3: Breezema deal with his son, and also all of the
Speaker 3: other scandals that took like like it was a bad
Speaker 3: situation regardless or Trump.
Speaker 2: Which I found it really strange about, you know, because
Speaker 2: it was a couple of years ago that Ashley Biden's
Speaker 2: diary leaked, right, yes, and now she's making Instagram posts
Speaker 2: talking about how what is it her uncle? I think
Speaker 2: because that's not his daughter. I think it's his niece
Speaker 2: something like that, either his daughter or his niece. I
Speaker 2: forget which one. But yeah, talking about like, oh, you know,
Speaker 2: I make sure that I stay up extra late so
Speaker 2: that Joe doesn't come in the shower with me. It's
Speaker 2: like she was saying that as a little girl, dude.
Speaker 2: And now you'll see her. She's making posts for him,
Speaker 2: taking pictures of him, talking about how sweet he is
Speaker 2: and how much he still cares. And it's, you know,
Speaker 2: Joe Biden's sitting at his desk basically probably you know,
Speaker 2: taking some Crayola markers and just coloring in a coloring book.
Speaker 2: And she's like, he's back to work and he's smarter
Speaker 2: than ever. And I'm like, Ashley, come, I mean, did
Speaker 2: he get you again? Like a we what are we
Speaker 2: doing here again? There is no good guys here y'all.
Speaker 2: And I hate to breathe the one to bear the
Speaker 2: bad news. There haven't been any since. I would Arguereisenhower,
Speaker 2: even Howard cover a lot of shit up though too.
Speaker 2: I mean, you're talking about politicians.
Speaker 3: But he that's my point. Though he was a four
Speaker 3: star general or five star general actually during World War Two,
Speaker 3: he was never like slated to be a career politician.
Speaker 3: I think that we could make a case to say
Speaker 3: he was probably the last president that actually truly gave
Speaker 3: a fuck. And I don't believe that he was guilty
Speaker 3: of pedophilia or any of these things, or these underhanded
Speaker 3: deals or whatever. I could be wrong. We may do
Speaker 3: an episode on him one of these days, but as
Speaker 3: of right now a time of recording, I think he
Speaker 3: was legit.
Speaker 2: But it was right before JFK. I think, right, yeah,
Speaker 2: like the one directly before JFK. And I you know,
Speaker 2: and we've heard, you know, certain things just in regards
Speaker 2: to aliens and about how you know, Eisenhower was the
Speaker 2: first one to meet an alien, the first president to
Speaker 2: meet an alien, and he briefed JFK on it. And
Speaker 2: I don't know if any of that's true, though I
Speaker 2: hope it is. Like allegedly, the story goes that Eisenhower
Speaker 2: had some people come up and say, hey, you know,
Speaker 2: we need you to meet these beings or whatever, and
Speaker 2: they like, Eisenhower met him on a golf course.
Speaker 3: Have you heard that story? I've heard about this.
Speaker 2: That's a pretty wild one. Anyway, Look, we're gonna get
Speaker 2: to recycling. We just had to get all of this
Speaker 2: off our chest because you're seeing it all transpire over
Speaker 2: the weekend and it's just like, you know, I hope
Speaker 2: that it eventually reaches a boiling point and people don't forget.
Speaker 2: I mean, it's too big to forget. The whole Epstein thing.
Speaker 2: Just to sweep it under the rug. And you see
Speaker 2: Trump He's like, are you guys still talking about that?
Speaker 3: Like yeah, but we're still talking about the reporter and yes,
Speaker 3: I understand we have floods going on. Yes, there's pressing
Speaker 3: matters that need to get situated. I get that. It
Speaker 3: also kills me to watch liberals try to blame Trump
Speaker 3: for the floods. That is fucking hysterical. I forgot. Trump
Speaker 3: controls the rainfall and is making these Okay, fine, yes,
Speaker 3: I know they make weather happen. I'll get you on this,
Speaker 3: But like they're saying that because he cut funding to FEMA,
Speaker 3: this is what caused rainfall and what caused one hundred
Speaker 3: to five hundred year flood to happen. It's like big Dolf.
Speaker 2: FEMA was never where the fuck to begin with.
Speaker 3: No, they weren't. But like, sure, anything to throw Trump
Speaker 3: under the bus. I get that. The reporter stands up
Speaker 3: and asked about this, and he just gasled him to
Speaker 3: the world and it's like, okay, wow, bro, But to
Speaker 3: that point, not a good look from Eisenhower. We had
Speaker 3: JFK and then Nixon. Okay, so Nixon was a member
Speaker 3: of Bohemian Grove where we know that pedophilic stuff has
Speaker 3: happened since they was founded.
Speaker 2: Oh so LBJ was after JFK.
Speaker 3: No, well, LBJ was JFK's VP, so when he got assassinated,
Speaker 3: LBJ became president. But I mean, like in a free
Speaker 3: and open election kind of thing, right, Yeah, But my
Speaker 3: point is Bohemian Grove is just one example. The Democrats
Speaker 3: have had their version of that for forever. So really
Speaker 3: there hasn't been a non guilty party. Okay, So yes,
Speaker 3: George Bush Senior, George Bush Junior, don't even get me
Speaker 3: started on the Clintons and all their pedophilic shit like
Speaker 3: Carter name it. They all had their hands and other
Speaker 3: parts of their bodies in very disgusting things and should
Speaker 3: be tried and like I would say, assassinated, you know,
Speaker 3: just throwing it out.
Speaker 2: But I'd love to hear what QAnon's saying about this shit.
Speaker 3: Now, fuck QAnon, Jesus Christ now. But Reagan the same
Speaker 3: way he was in Hollywood. He was a young guy
Speaker 3: in Hollywood. We have done how many episodes about what
Speaker 3: goes on in Hollywood, especially in the sixties and seventies.
Speaker 3: That's what I'm saying there. There's no innocent parties here, y'all.
Speaker 3: If their name is on a federal ballot. I hate
Speaker 3: to be the one to tell you this.
Speaker 2: They didn't get there from being really hard workers and
Speaker 2: really good freaking guys. It's not a thing. It's not
Speaker 2: Boston there, it's I don't know.
Speaker 3: I just felt right to go that route. I don't know.
Speaker 3: But beside the point anyway, put out your JFK there, sir. Yeah,
Speaker 3: yeah he was. He was a Massachusetts boy for sure.
Speaker 3: Not Boston, that's for sure. He would never be caught
Speaker 3: dead by the pores, no way. He would just rather
Speaker 3: be caught dead in Dallas or you know, tag team
Speaker 3: of Marilyn Monroe with his brother. Hey, it goes.
Speaker 2: All right, let's hear about recycling. Let's get into it. Yeah,
Speaker 2: this is something that we have kind of hinted at.
Speaker 2: We talked a little bit about it on the Live show.
Speaker 2: To be honest, I never knew that there was any
Speaker 2: shit with recycling. I just always assumed that it was
Speaker 2: a good and pure and honest thing.
Speaker 3: But you know, and.
Speaker 5: That's that's the thing, is that anytime it seems too
Speaker 5: perfect on the surface, it's like, don't look into goodwill
Speaker 5: don't look in the Salvation army like I promise you,
Speaker 5: it'll break your heart.
Speaker 3: One hundred percent. Brother. And so let's talk about recycling
Speaker 3: real quick. And it's okay if you don't know the
Speaker 3: answers to this, because I promise you and most of
Speaker 3: our listeners don't. I didn't know the answers to this,
Speaker 3: these questions I'm about to ask until I started doing
Speaker 3: the research. So let's learn to get the good cult members.
Speaker 2: I'm also gonna make sure that you'll know that this
Speaker 2: is going to be an episode where we have articles,
Speaker 2: we do have videos, and if you would like to
Speaker 2: see what we are talking about rather than just hear
Speaker 2: about it through your ear holes.
Speaker 3: Jonathan, where can they go?
Speaker 2: They can go to Patreon dot com slash Cult of
Speaker 2: Conspiracy Podcast. That link is down in the show notes below.
Speaker 2: It's the best way to be able to support us.
Speaker 2: You get the shows a couple of days in advance.
Speaker 2: You get to see all the video and all the articles.
Speaker 2: As Jacob said, you'll be able to slide into our dms.
Speaker 2: Maybe you have a show suggestion or a guest suggestion,
Speaker 2: or maybe you just want to ask Jacob what kind
Speaker 2: of beard oil he's using. You can ask all of that.
Speaker 2: You can also sign up for the Third Eye all
Speaker 2: the way open to here that will give you access
Speaker 2: to come join us every Tuesday night at nine pm Central.
Speaker 2: But probably the main reason why you come over to Patreon,
Speaker 2: let's just be real, it's because it's absolutely commercial.
Speaker 3: Yeah, buddy, we know them.
Speaker 2: Them had to be a pain in the dick, so
Speaker 2: you know, kick that dick and come over to Patreon.
Speaker 3: That's right, all right. Now that being said, I'm going
Speaker 3: to share the screen here in a moment, But before
Speaker 3: I do, where do you think recycling started? At least
Speaker 3: in America?
Speaker 2: You mean? Or what place?
Speaker 3: Let's see who do you think created it? Let's start
Speaker 3: off with the basics, right, Greenpeace, the hippies, political groups,
Speaker 3: international groups. Maybe where do you where do you think?
Speaker 3: Just go under your head answer where do you think
Speaker 3: the recycling came from? Hmmm?
Speaker 2: I would I'm just going to assume that it was
Speaker 2: a democratic.
Speaker 3: Thing, like from the Democratic Party.
Speaker 2: You mean, I mean that's where the KKK came from?
Speaker 3: True, very true.
Speaker 2: And if there's a lot of bullshit with recycling, and
Speaker 2: it's not to say that one party is any better
Speaker 2: than the other. Let's just be real, but there's a
Speaker 2: lot of shit that comes from the blue, you know
Speaker 2: what I mean?
Speaker 3: Very true? Okay, so you're you're the belief that it
Speaker 3: came from a political party or political lobbiest group, something
Speaker 3: along these lines.
Speaker 2: Probably. Yeah, I don't even know where to begin as
Speaker 2: far as like, what were the grassroots beginnings to recycling?
Speaker 3: Okay, well, let's get into it here. Do you remember
Speaker 3: the Crying Indian ad?
Speaker 5: I do.
Speaker 3: Yeah, we played that the keep America Beautiful quote unquote
Speaker 3: a public service announcement. Was the first time that what
Speaker 3: we might now call recycling was actually introduced. Okay, and
Speaker 3: if you haven't seen it, I'm gonna go ahead and
Speaker 3: play it right now. So once again, if you would
Speaker 3: like to see what we are talking about, Patreon would
Speaker 3: be the place to go.
Speaker 2: Man, it's only in the eighties or nineties that came on.
Speaker 3: This was in the seventies. Damn that far back. Yeah,
Speaker 3: so the Crying Indian commercial and some of our more
Speaker 3: seasoned listeners may remember seeing this on their color TVs
Speaker 3: in their living room. Some of our cult members that
Speaker 3: have been here for a minute has probably seen us
Speaker 3: play this ad before. But just for any of the
Speaker 3: newer cult members, or maybe this is your first time
Speaker 3: ever listening to us. Yes, if we piss you off
Speaker 3: with our political rantings at the beginning of this, my bad,
Speaker 3: but we kind of go all over here. Our add
Speaker 3: brains are what is the show? Okay? So anyway, so
Speaker 3: here it is the Crying Indian ad, the PSA that
Speaker 3: started the recycling industry.
Speaker 1: Some people have a deep, abiding respect for the natural
Speaker 1: beauty that was once this country, and some people don't.
Speaker 3: People stop collution. People can stop it. Okay. Now, for
Speaker 3: anybody who doesn't know the guy, the Indian himself, we're
Speaker 3: going to talk about him. He's not Native. He's actually
Speaker 3: a Sicilian dude. But like you know, the commercial was
Speaker 3: to push a fake narrative, and it makes sense they
Speaker 3: would use a fake Native American for this purpose.
Speaker 2: Yeah, that sounds about right. Yeah he didn't really. I mean,
Speaker 2: take away the feather and the long hair and the
Speaker 2: garb and everything that he's wearing. You can tell by
Speaker 2: his face he's not Native American at all.
Speaker 3: No, dude, not even a little bit. So now let's
Speaker 3: learn the shocking truth behind the Crying Indian commercial. This
Speaker 3: is a ranker article. Let's get into it.
Speaker 2: Even if you weren't watching television in the nineteen seventies,
Speaker 2: you heard about the Crying Indian commercial. A Native American
Speaker 2: man in traditional garb canoes canoes through a trash filled river,
Speaker 2: pass factories, and along crowded highways, all while a narrator
Speaker 2: bemoans the deterioration of the natural world. The commercial ends
Speaker 2: with a zoom in on the man's face as a
Speaker 2: tear rolls down his right cheek. This visually striking scene
Speaker 2: has become synonymous with environmental activism and personal responsibility when
Speaker 2: it comes to tackling pollution. The Crying Indian commercial was
Speaker 2: developed by the nonprofit Keep America Beautiful or CAB, with
Speaker 2: a stated mission in quotes to inspire and educate people
Speaker 2: to take action every day to improve and beautify their
Speaker 2: community environment. The Crying Indian PSA was part of a
Speaker 2: larger decades long collaboration between CAB and the Ad Council,
Speaker 2: founded in nineteen forty one to work with advertising groups
Speaker 2: on public service campaigns designed to stimulate the commedy economy
Speaker 2: by promoting business during World War Two. Why was CAB
Speaker 2: or what was it called?
Speaker 3: Again?
Speaker 2: The America Beautiful? But for lack of you know, for
Speaker 2: the brevity of it.
Speaker 3: Just so everyone knows when we say CAB for the
Speaker 3: rest of this article, it's KAB. Keep America Beautiful.
Speaker 2: Yeah, we're not talking about electro Nick's boy, you know
Speaker 2: what I mean. Why was CAB working with an industry
Speaker 2: focused organization like the AD Council to raise awareness about
Speaker 2: environmental concerns. The truth is CABS founders were not as
Speaker 2: invested in anti pollution activism as their campaign indicated, and
Speaker 2: their real motivation was to deflect responsibility for reducing waste
Speaker 2: from corporate interest and onto people. The Crying Indian is
Speaker 2: just the tip of the iceberg. They missed the They
Speaker 2: missed the mark there. They could have said tip of
Speaker 2: the spear. They could have That would have been too good.
Speaker 2: The Crying Indian is just the tip of the iceberg.
Speaker 2: That represents CAB's marketing output and initiatives, which spanned from
Speaker 2: its inception in the nineteen fifties to the present.
Speaker 3: Now let's learn more about this. Keep America Beautiful was
Speaker 3: founded in nineteen fifty three by the packing and beverage industry. Now,
Speaker 3: what do we mean by package and beverage? For the record, yes,
Speaker 3: the ten cans, coke cans, and glass bottles and all
Speaker 3: of this, but not just them packing industry as far
Speaker 3: as packaging goods to travel and transport from point A
Speaker 3: to point B, everything from cardboard boxes to big plastic
Speaker 3: toats full of chemicals. On this website, CAB says it all.
Speaker 3: It was formed in nineteen fifty three when a group
Speaker 3: of corporate and civic leaders met in New York City
Speaker 3: to bring the public and private sectors together to develop
Speaker 3: and promote a national cleanliness ethic. These corporate and civil
Speaker 3: leaders quote unquote were members of wealthy packaging and beverage
Speaker 3: companies including American Can Company, Owen's, Illinois Glass Company, Coca Cola,
Speaker 3: and Dixie Cup. Unable to deny the products they manufactured
Speaker 3: were contributing to litter and waste build up across the country,
Speaker 3: they decided to tackle the problem by pointing fingers at
Speaker 3: people buying and using their products. Through its efforts, cawboying
Speaker 3: to make the public believe it was their responsibility to
Speaker 3: dispose of these products correctly, not the responsibility of the
Speaker 3: companies to be more focused on sustainable practices. These packaging
Speaker 3: industry spokes people also justified their stance by claiming it's
Speaker 3: what consumers wanted. They preferred the convenience of reusable over
Speaker 3: the hassible of refillables.
Speaker 2: Unreal and so always everybody else's dude, that's a gas
Speaker 2: light and shit right there. You know, Yes, it's not
Speaker 2: a hard problem. We're just making it. We're not the
Speaker 2: ones that are throwing it out, which I mean, to
Speaker 2: be honest, I'm not gonna say that they're zero percent, right.
Speaker 2: I mean, we have to take some responsibility as well
Speaker 2: and learn how to throw shit in trash and all that.
Speaker 2: But let's just be real, dude. I mean, this is
Speaker 2: something that they could have done from the very beginning,
Speaker 2: created you know, sustainable products that maybe nature would take
Speaker 2: over or something like that. You know, because they have
Speaker 2: like certain cardboards now that like if it gets thrown
Speaker 2: out or if it gets you know, littered somewhere, that
Speaker 2: the forest will just take it back right.
Speaker 3: Right, but keep them with papers and cardboards for the
Speaker 3: most part, are biodegradable, right, And yes, a stack of
Speaker 3: them will take forever to decompose, but you can process
Speaker 3: them and make them easier for the earth to reabsorb
Speaker 3: kind of thing. And I get this, but you understand.
Speaker 3: I think back in the day of the fifties when
Speaker 3: this was popping off here, the milkman would come to
Speaker 3: your house with a six pack of glass milk bottles
Speaker 3: and you would drink them, and he would take the
Speaker 3: empties and he would go back to the dairy and
Speaker 3: refill them and then bring them back to you. This
Speaker 3: was a cultural thing in America that went by the
Speaker 3: wayside in favor of one time, single use milk jugs
Speaker 3: that you would buy from the store. And they use
Speaker 3: this whole convenience thing to make that. So you realize
Speaker 3: that Coca Cola could have done something very similar. Yes
Speaker 3: they have glass coke bottles, and yes those are recyclable,
Speaker 3: but they chose to go more in the realm of plastic.
Speaker 3: And I should also get that distinction here. The main
Speaker 3: bad guy in the recycling world is plastics. Okay, And
Speaker 3: we're gonna talk about all these things more in depth,
Speaker 3: I promise you. But I'm not saying that recycling in
Speaker 3: and of itself one hundred percent is bullshit. Most glass
Speaker 3: products and most metal products are one hundred percent recyclable. Yeah,
Speaker 3: and it's very easy. You could take you an aluminum
Speaker 3: can smelt it down, re pour it into a mold,
Speaker 3: and you have another can. It is a thing. Yes,
Speaker 3: it might be a little expended to you know, melt
Speaker 3: it and do all these things, but it's not like
Speaker 3: this is going into the earth. Glass. Very similarly, if
Speaker 3: you go to buy a Mexican coke from your local
Speaker 3: Mexican restaurant, if you look, you could actually probably peel
Speaker 3: back the label on the Coca cola and see that
Speaker 3: it at one time was a phantom bottle or a
Speaker 3: sprite bottle, or even a pepsi It doesn't matter. They
Speaker 3: can actually recycle glass, and a lot of places will
Speaker 3: do very successfully. The big bad guy that's hurting the
Speaker 3: earth is plastics.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it's some wine companies do that too, they kind
Speaker 2: of recycle old wine bottles and stuff like that. Yeah,
Speaker 2: I was gonna say. What's funny is is that this
Speaker 2: was all put on by the AD Council. And so
Speaker 2: if you if you have been following us for a
Speaker 2: few years, you'll know that the AD Council was definitely
Speaker 2: complicit in all of the pushing of dairy products, right like,
Speaker 2: and we did a whole show on that a few
Speaker 2: years ago, and so and also think about what the
Speaker 2: AD Council is doing now. I mean, how many billboards
Speaker 2: are reminding you that vaping is horrible and it's even
Speaker 2: worse than smoking cigarettes. And I'm like, you know, I'm
Speaker 2: not here to say that vaping is good for anybody,
Speaker 2: but I can help but to think that they're they're
Speaker 2: not worried about your health and they're more concerned about
Speaker 2: lining the pockets a big tobacco.
Speaker 3: Right, one hundred percent, Like, there's not I know this
Speaker 3: is going to be a controversial hot take. Do your
Speaker 3: research on it. There is no independent lab study independent
Speaker 3: should throw that word out big bold and underlined, no
Speaker 3: independent lab study that can verify that vaping is less
Speaker 3: or is more harmful than smoking tobacco. As a matter
Speaker 3: of fact, all independent lab studies show that it is
Speaker 3: substantially better than it's still bad for you. I'm not
Speaker 3: denying that there is still you're doing harm to your body.
Speaker 3: It's basically, yeah, but it's vegetable glycerine. It's it's you know,
Speaker 3: I wanted to say season, but it's it's basically, you know,
Speaker 3: I mean, it's.
Speaker 2: Candy flavorings, vegetable glycol which is a more refined version
Speaker 2: of vegetable oil, and nicotine, which is not harmful.
Speaker 3: That's it. Those are the three things.
Speaker 2: Right right, And a lot of the vape stores they
Speaker 2: they make it in how and you can see exactly
Speaker 2: what products they're using. And so I'm again, I'm not
Speaker 2: trying to sit here and say that vaping is good
Speaker 2: for anybody. I mean, I would love nothing more than
Speaker 2: to quit vaping, and I've tried it. It's just Nicotine's
Speaker 2: a motherfucker, dude. But you know, it's it's just the
Speaker 2: things that they push are never sincere, they're never genuine.
Speaker 2: They always have you know, an ace up the sleeve,
Speaker 2: and you know, and that's the crazy thing. It's like
Speaker 2: where was all this pushback, you know, trying to get
Speaker 2: the tobacco industries out of here, But as soon as
Speaker 2: vaping rolls around, it's it's all of a sudden, a
Speaker 2: huge issue, like why haven't all of these different vaping
Speaker 2: companies that have like gotten kicked to the kick to
Speaker 2: the curb jewel I think was the first one, and
Speaker 2: you know, because they were making all those different flavors
Speaker 2: and who the fuck smoke's a jewel anymore? You know,
Speaker 2: they still got them around, but and the same thing. Dude,
Speaker 2: you can't get geek bar anymore. Do you know that
Speaker 2: I just bought one in Arizona there that's gonna be
Speaker 2: one of the last ones you'll ever buy.
Speaker 3: Really Yep, damn, I mean it's But that's my point.
Speaker 2: It's all being done by lobby groups, by ad councils
Speaker 2: and the it's not there's no actual things to back
Speaker 2: this claim.
Speaker 3: But to get back to it, right, You ever seen
Speaker 3: the show mad Men? Oh yeah, John Ham, Dude, he's
Speaker 3: the man. You remember that scene where they go on
Speaker 3: a picnic and they just like dump their trash in
Speaker 3: the middle of the park and dip out. Yep, that
Speaker 3: was kind of a cultural thing, not just for like
Speaker 3: rich swanky Americans. Pretty much everybody just dump their trash
Speaker 3: wherever they want and said fuck it, the same way
Speaker 3: that India still does it to this day. But besides,
Speaker 3: we're gonna get to the other countries and all that
Speaker 3: in a minute. My point is that they wanted to
Speaker 3: make it a you problem. It's your fault that the
Speaker 3: earth is dying, not us making five hundred tons of
Speaker 3: plastic single use bottles that can't be decomposed or recycled.
Speaker 3: It is your fault for buying them, and that was
Speaker 3: what this push was about. So then how did they
Speaker 3: start this process. They had to pull on the heart
Speaker 3: strings kind of make people feel guilty, right, but they
Speaker 3: had to give them a virtuous way out into recycling.
Speaker 3: We're gonna get to it all. Let's keep going here
Speaker 3: the crying Indian commercial and you.
Speaker 2: Know what, just to add on top of that too.
Speaker 2: I feel like they it seems like a foreign concept
Speaker 2: that you would just be able to refill your your
Speaker 2: coke bottle or whatever. But it's really not that crazy.
Speaker 2: Whenever you think about other things that we are regularly
Speaker 2: refilling and not getting a new one of every single time,
Speaker 2: like things right your gas tank for example. Think about
Speaker 2: like if you have a Tesla, you're getting that same
Speaker 2: battery charged every single time, and especially nowadays, everybody's getting
Speaker 2: the Stanley cubs or or whatever. Like why can't there
Speaker 2: be some kind of some kind of code or something
Speaker 2: that's that you you just buy a sticker or something
Speaker 2: like that and you go get it refilled somewhere or
Speaker 2: something along those lines, you know what I mean.
Speaker 3: No, one hundred percent, how many of these places have those?
Speaker 3: Like really as coke machines where you go and you
Speaker 3: select the type of coke, and hell, there's like eight
Speaker 3: different flavorings you could do, right, and it's like a
Speaker 3: food you know, restaurants and things like that. But we
Speaker 3: also have those you you do your own Mountain do
Speaker 3: at the house, right, you do your own bubbly Yeah.
Speaker 3: And the little carbonated.
Speaker 2: Water thing soda stream Yeah, okay, you understand that it
Speaker 2: is a real thing that we could have where you
Speaker 2: would have a reusable, refillable bottle and you would go
Speaker 2: up to instead of a coke machine to buy a
Speaker 2: twelve ounce coke, you would just go to the machine,
Speaker 2: pay your money and refill your reusable bottle. That could
Speaker 2: have been a thing that we had, but they chose
Speaker 2: to only offer these non recyclable options.
Speaker 3: Yeah. Yeah.
Speaker 2: And that's the thing with those those soda streams. I mean,
Speaker 2: we don't have any connection to them, but I fucking
Speaker 2: love that company.
Speaker 3: Okay.
Speaker 2: And all you do, you just refill your co two
Speaker 2: whenever it runs out, and you get some of the
Speaker 2: whatever your favorite pop is. Yes, I said pop. I'm
Speaker 2: gonna always call it pop. And you know, you just
Speaker 2: get the syrup mix it in there.
Speaker 3: Dude.
Speaker 2: And it's way fresher than any other drink that you'll
Speaker 2: ever get at the store.
Speaker 3: Too.
Speaker 2: You're getting it literally freshly carbonated. It's the best way.
Speaker 3: That's my point. All you would need is the same
Speaker 3: like the Coca Cola guy that comes and refills the
Speaker 3: machines there there. It could have been a version of
Speaker 3: this world where he would come and refill the syrup
Speaker 3: and the co two tank and that would be it. It's
Speaker 3: the same infrastructure, the same logistics of moving things from
Speaker 3: the Coca Cola bottling company and manufacturing company to the
Speaker 3: machines for the consumers to buy. It's the same thing.
Speaker 3: They chose to do it this way. We will talk
Speaker 3: about why later on, I promise you. Because it's it
Speaker 3: all comes down to the money, dude. It all comes
Speaker 3: down to the dollar and cents of it all. But anyway,
Speaker 3: so in the fifties and sixties, the litter problem got
Speaker 3: to be really bad, right, and it wasn't just a
Speaker 3: thing that they really cared about making America clean and
Speaker 3: keep America beautiful in all this, but they had to
Speaker 3: start the keep America Beautiful ad campaign. The Crying Indian was.
Speaker 2: The first commercial, the first like real initiative taken by CAB.
Speaker 2: Oh yeah, he was the Captain America for recycling bro.
Speaker 3: And of course Cabin Marshall on Earth Day nineteen seventy one.
Speaker 2: So the first Earth Day was organized in nineteen seventy
Speaker 2: a sign of consciousness, of a consciousness shift for the
Speaker 2: American public, especially among youth. CAB corporates interests watch fearfully
Speaker 2: as students organize demonstrations against soft drink companies in the
Speaker 2: weeks around Earth Day on April twenty second. These companies
Speaker 2: were so concerned about demonstrations that FBI agents were posted
Speaker 2: at plants and factories all over the country to monitor
Speaker 2: in quotes, radicals during process radical recyclers. That's crazy, I.
Speaker 3: Mean, to be fair, we do have like green peace
Speaker 3: and shit to like try to start fights with fishing boats.
Speaker 3: So like, environmental radicals are absolutely a thing. They have
Speaker 3: been for a while, so all right.
Speaker 2: Well and especially during you know the seventies, that's hippie
Speaker 2: time right there. So yeah, by the next Earth Day,
Speaker 2: CAB in conjunction conjunction with the ad Council was ready
Speaker 2: with the crying Indian commercial. They adopted a symbol of
Speaker 2: the counterculture as well as the growing Native American resistance
Speaker 2: to blend their message and messaging into the movement. The public,
Speaker 2: unaware of the interest groups financially backing the commercial, saw
Speaker 2: it as an effective public service announcement. It was so
Speaker 2: popular that TV stations wore through their video recordings of
Speaker 2: the commercial, often requesting additional copies from the ad Council.
Speaker 3: Damn absolutely, dude. Now. The commercial was part of a
Speaker 3: campaign designed to tap into the new environmental movement's focus
Speaker 3: on pollution. The Crying Indian commercial pointed to a larger
Speaker 3: messaging shift with CAB within cab rather, it's a Its
Speaker 3: non corporate sponsors were pushing to change its focus from
Speaker 3: the litter and pollution or sorry, it was from litter
Speaker 3: quote unquote to pollution quote unquote. They had to change
Speaker 3: the wording, they had to change the verbiage. We've seen
Speaker 3: lobbying groups and politicians do this exact same thing in
Speaker 3: our modern day and age. Are we not so? Even
Speaker 3: back in nineteen seventy one, they said, it's not litter,
Speaker 3: you're polluting the earth. You're not littering the streets of
Speaker 3: your town, you're polluting the globe. How dare you?
Speaker 2: I would say that the factories are the polluting and
Speaker 2: the litter. I mean, I mean, you see littering all
Speaker 2: the time. People litter, but I wouldn't call that fucking polluting.
Speaker 2: That's weird to make that shift like that, But the.
Speaker 3: Keep America Beautiful campaign wanted every person that's throwing a
Speaker 3: cigarette butt out of their car to know that they
Speaker 3: are polluting with this. By the late sixties, pollution was
Speaker 3: a major problem in American cities, from pervasive smog to
Speaker 3: oil spills to rivers catching on fire. The decade ended
Speaker 3: on a dismissal note, as activists began and emphasizing the
Speaker 3: role corporations were playing in perpetuating pollution. Cab knew it
Speaker 3: needed to change its narrative. The ad Cancel AD Council
Speaker 3: rather hired a new agency, Marstellar, to design the Crying
Speaker 3: Indian campaign. Marsteller is also one of these ad groups
Speaker 3: that like when you look into certain symbolism and how
Speaker 3: it plays on the American psyche and you want to
Speaker 3: talk about like ancient occult knowledge that they know and
Speaker 3: that's why they interject in commercials. That's one of the groups.
Speaker 3: There's a lot of them. There's a lot of ad
Speaker 3: agencies out there, but Marsteller is one of the ones
Speaker 3: that like was really hot and heavy with it back
Speaker 3: in the day.
Speaker 2: Oh dude. And that's the thing. Even with like especially
Speaker 2: ad agencies, I'm sure they know about, you know, how
Speaker 2: to manipulate symbolism and play to the subconscious like animalistic
Speaker 2: part of your brain that remembers you know what I mean, Like,
Speaker 2: there's something just so inherently evil about manipulating the mind
Speaker 2: of the people that don't even know that that kind
Speaker 2: of shit exists.
Speaker 3: Absolutely correct, and they've been doing this for a very
Speaker 3: long time. By the way, it didn't the manipulation of
Speaker 3: people's minds by advertisements that didn't start in this timeframe.
Speaker 3: I mean. Fuck, there's ancient rome used to do a
Speaker 3: very similar version of like logos and marketing, and they
Speaker 3: would say, like, only the real Romans eat bread from
Speaker 3: this bakery.
Speaker 2: Yeah, yes, it definitely goes all the way back. It's
Speaker 2: just the first thing has changed. And I would actually
Speaker 2: say that it's gotten even better. I mean, if it
Speaker 2: wasn't so evil, it's gotten way better as far as
Speaker 2: it being able to just slide it right on past
Speaker 2: your psyche and into your subconscious right.
Speaker 3: Anyway, back to the point here, they were hoping to
Speaker 3: tap into feelings of exasperation over the environmental crisis while
Speaker 3: continuing to divert attention away from industry. The vice president
Speaker 3: of Marstellar at the time told the AD Council is
Speaker 3: a direct quote, the problem was the attitude and the
Speaker 3: thinking of individual Americans. They considered everyone else but themselves
Speaker 3: as polluters. Also, the never correlated pollution with litter. The
Speaker 3: mindset of the public had to be overcome. The objective
Speaker 3: of the advertising, therefore, would be to show that polluters
Speaker 3: are people, no matter where they are in industry or
Speaker 3: on a picnic. With the crying Indian commercial cab was
Speaker 3: able to drive home the idea that individuals are the
Speaker 3: source of the emerging environmental catastrophes. As the commercial ends,
Speaker 3: focusing in on the tear on the man's face, a
Speaker 3: narrator sadly announces, people start pollution, people can stop it.
Speaker 3: Oh my god, right, Yes, it had to make you
Speaker 3: feel bad. How dare you litter and pollute the earth?
Speaker 3: And granted, yes, there is something to be said for that,
Speaker 3: I can agree. Throwing out a styropham plate of food
Speaker 3: at this dude's feet and all that which was done
Speaker 3: on purpose as a part of the thing that is
Speaker 3: not a good thing. You shouldn't be littering. It doesn't
Speaker 3: turn form pollution. And we can agree on that. But
Speaker 3: that wasn't the thing saying that people are causing a
Speaker 3: drop in the bucket. It was a thing saying that
Speaker 3: people were causing the main problem. Bro.
Speaker 2: Yeah, but look at what you're making available, you know,
Speaker 2: Like it's like we're we're we we think the same
Speaker 2: on certain things, like, for example, we think that all
Speaker 2: drugs should be legal, all of them. Like, look, if
Speaker 2: people are people are gonna do it one way or another,
Speaker 2: whether you make it illegal or not. I mean, let
Speaker 2: that person decide what they want to do with their life.
Speaker 2: Nobody has an issue with somebody drinking themselves to death,
Speaker 2: but right, and nobody has an issue with somebody sitting
Speaker 2: at home eating candy and chips and soda and all
Speaker 2: this other shit, you.
Speaker 3: Know, becoming morbidly obese and becoming a hassle and a
Speaker 3: hindrance on every person in their life.
Speaker 2: Oh well, that's just their personal choice. How dare you
Speaker 2: fat shame them? That's what I'm saying. And so so
Speaker 2: I think that if you give you got to give
Speaker 2: people the option. But also conversely with that, whenever you
Speaker 2: do give people the option, it's like in this can
Speaker 2: and probably will go south. That's when you acknowledge this.
Speaker 2: That's what I'm trying to say. Yeah, it can and
Speaker 2: it will go south. You got to if you're the government,
Speaker 2: remember like, and it just stated right there that we
Speaker 2: have to change the mindset of the American people. Remember
Speaker 2: what government means, you know, it means to control the mind.
Speaker 2: That's all thereafter And and I kind of I mean,
Speaker 2: I would say that's mostly what their job is.
Speaker 3: I want to break down the word government. But it's
Speaker 3: not actually to control the mind. It's to control the
Speaker 3: foundation on which a principle is a long story short. Yes,
Speaker 3: I'm with you. The ad campaigns and the ad councils
Speaker 3: and especially the crying Indian commercial. It was a guilt trip,
Speaker 3: that's all it ever was. And the dude in charge
Speaker 3: of the marsh Stellar Ad Council literally just told us this.
Speaker 2: Wait, are you saying that government doesn't equal governed mind? Control? Control?
Speaker 2: Mint is mine? That's not you're saying the mint incorrect.
Speaker 3: Mint does not always mean mind. That's like saying establish mint.
Speaker 3: So it's the mind of what was established. No, it's
Speaker 3: a foundation on which it was founded upon. It's it
Speaker 3: depends on the context of the word. The etymology can
Speaker 3: mean different things. That's all I'm saying, And we don't
Speaker 3: need to spend a whole bunch of time on that.
Speaker 3: We could talk about that later. But what I'm saying
Speaker 3: is that, yes, the government in this case, the lobbying groups.
Speaker 3: See the ad Council, y'all, is a lobbying group, and
Speaker 3: it is also used by lobbying groups to push certain
Speaker 3: narratives to change public opinion to where they don't have
Speaker 3: to make corporate CEOs change their mind. They need to
Speaker 3: get the public to change the mind and change the
Speaker 3: culture to where the CEO is way removed from what's
Speaker 3: actually happening on the ground. This is the slide of hand.
Speaker 2: Yes, yes, that's what I'm That's basically what I'm trying
Speaker 2: to get to is that the people that should be
Speaker 2: held liable are pushing it down to basically its own consumers,
Speaker 2: you know, And that's very slight of handish.
Speaker 3: Very much so. And even to further the sleight of
Speaker 3: hand in the bullshit here, like we brought up earlier.
Speaker 3: Let's learn a little more here. The actor who starred
Speaker 3: in the commercial, Ironized Cody, as he was later confirmed
Speaker 3: or his stage name, was an Italian American, not even
Speaker 3: a Native American. They couldn't have even hired an actual
Speaker 3: Indian to play the role of the Indian man.
Speaker 2: Well, yeah, they don't need to be paying anybody at
Speaker 2: the res it's bullshit.
Speaker 3: So yeah, a Sicilian guy who has a better shot
Speaker 3: of being cast in a Mafia movie was the guy
Speaker 3: they chose for this. Let's keep going.
Speaker 2: Adding to the campaign's artifice is the fact that the
Speaker 2: actor who played the crying Indian was in fact an
Speaker 2: Italian American born Espera Oscar Oscar de Cordi, and establish
Speaker 2: Hollywood actor who portrayed Native Americans in westerns DA Cordi
Speaker 2: adopted the name Ironized Cody. I don't know if there's
Speaker 2: ever going to be an Ironized Cody, you know what
Speaker 2: I'm saying.
Speaker 3: That's like, that's the most ridiculous name.
Speaker 2: That's like sure, that's like flying Eagle Jessica, Like that's
Speaker 2: just never going to work, you know, right, I forgot
Speaker 2: old Thunderbird Abigail over here. My bad like, what, oh so,
Speaker 2: anyhow ironized Cody? He wore a wig and don native
Speaker 2: American costuming. D Cordy passed in quotes as Native American
Speaker 2: on and off the screen, appearing in public as Ironized Cody.
Speaker 2: The use of a native a non native actor shows
Speaker 2: that CAP did not care about investing in the truth.
Speaker 2: It was interested in using the visual symbol of a
Speaker 2: crying Native American man to protect its interest. Even the
Speaker 2: tear on de Courdy's cheek was fake, of course it was.
Speaker 2: The effect was created with the help of glycerin.
Speaker 3: And mentioned right here. This is a picture of him
Speaker 3: next to old Jimmy Carter in the Oval office. Again,
Speaker 3: there's no good guys to be found anywhere, y'all. I'm sorry.
Speaker 2: That's literally like a perfect picture of two birds of
Speaker 2: the literal same shit feather.
Speaker 3: And Okay, you know what, I think that the whole
Speaker 3: appropriate cultural appropriation typically is really stupid. Okay, Like how
Speaker 3: your little kid wants to dresses Mwana for Halloween this year? Okay,
Speaker 3: but how dare you appropriate Polynesian culture? Shut up, shut up? Okay,
Speaker 3: that's stupid. Let the kids have fun. But this I
Speaker 3: get if a Native American tribe wanted to sue the
Speaker 3: Dcordi family for their relative making money off of cultural
Speaker 3: appropriation and all, like, yo, okay, we can have this conversation.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I think that's that's only right. I mean, think
Speaker 2: about it. For example, Let's say you up and up
Speaker 2: your own convenience store, right, and you want to start
Speaker 2: printing your own products because by printing your own products,
Speaker 2: you don't want to have to pay that company a
Speaker 2: little percentage for using their logos or their symbols or whatever.
Speaker 3: Right.
Speaker 2: But let's say you, you know, for some reason, you
Speaker 2: want to create your your own Captain America. But this
Speaker 2: is Jacob's Convenience store, and so it's not going to
Speaker 2: be a Marvel Captain America. It's going to be your
Speaker 2: Captain America. Marvel has every right to come for that
Speaker 2: ass right, every single right. And the same thing goes
Speaker 2: here like that, that is absolutely a slap in the face.
Speaker 2: I would say, I agree, right, And yes, although the
Speaker 2: message was sent and like it was heartfelt by the
Speaker 2: American people and all of these things, bro, there are
Speaker 2: thousands of Native Americans that would have absolutely done that role,
Speaker 2: like without a shadow of a doubt.
Speaker 3: Because anything to make the white man feel guilty. They
Speaker 3: would have been on board. They probably would have done
Speaker 3: for fucking free. But sure, let's hire the Sicilian guy.
Speaker 2: Yeah. So, in nineteen sixty, CAB partnered with the AD
Speaker 2: Counsel to career a national beautification campaign. Yes, indeed, interesting,
Speaker 2: all right, So the partnership between the AD Council and
Speaker 2: CAB started in nineteen sixty. The AD Council managed several
Speaker 2: successful public marketing campaigns in the decades leading up to
Speaker 2: this collaboration, and the advertising companies commissioned to work with
Speaker 2: CAB on their behalf developed an accusatory language to push
Speaker 2: the litter problem into public discourse. During this summer and fall,
Speaker 2: all media will participate in an accelerated campaign to help
Speaker 2: curb the massive defacement of the nation by thoughtless and
Speaker 2: careless people, wrote David Beard in nineteen sixty one, advertising
Speaker 2: director of Reynolds Metal Company. That's hilarious and a CAB
Speaker 2: member over that, and.
Speaker 3: By Reynolds, for the record, we do in fact mean
Speaker 3: Reynolds rap as an aluminum foil.
Speaker 2: Oh shit, all right.
Speaker 3: Yes, big time, big dude CEO. And we should also
Speaker 3: mention that he was a member of CAB.
Speaker 2: Of course he was so. Over the next few years,
Speaker 2: Yard's comments escalated, as he told newspapers in nineteen sixty
Speaker 2: three in quotes, the litter bugs are on the loose,
Speaker 2: and we're counting on you to take up arms against them.
Speaker 3: M f Absolutely, they're trying to make this like a
Speaker 3: smoke of the bear. Only you can prevent forest fires thing,
Speaker 3: which like, okay, I don't want more forest fires, but
Speaker 3: they wanted that same energy to be the war against
Speaker 3: the litterbugs.
Speaker 2: What's the I can never remember it. What's the name
Speaker 2: of the drug that the Chinese are pushing across the
Speaker 2: Mexican border?
Speaker 3: Fentanyl?
Speaker 2: Fentanyl? Right, That's like if I became a fentanyl dealer, right,
Speaker 2: and I'm pushing it to everybody. I'm like, yo, forget
Speaker 2: about heroin, forget about.
Speaker 3: Math, forget about this.
Speaker 2: You need this, right, And then walking down the streets
Speaker 2: and saying, my god, these people are overdosing on fentanyl.
Speaker 2: What a bunch of morons. It's like, you're the one
Speaker 2: that fucking gave it to him.
Speaker 3: Ah, one hundred percent. Well that's a conversation for the
Speaker 3: war on drugs, which we have done an episode about.
Speaker 3: But I'm with you one hundred percent it, bro.
Speaker 2: Yeah, so let's see. At the same time, the AD
Speaker 2: Council created its first mascot, a young girl in a
Speaker 2: white dress named Susan Spotless. She first appeared in nineteen
Speaker 2: sixty four, expressing shock over the refuse over the refuse
Speaker 2: her parents discarded in public places, in essence, pointing her
Speaker 2: finger at the outside world for contributing to the mess.
Speaker 2: Through this narrative, the AD Council made littering a family affair,
Speaker 2: using guilt to target audiences. Daddy, you forgot every litter
Speaker 2: Every litter bit hurts, Susan warned in one ad. Every
Speaker 2: litter bit hurts became one of the most popular slogans
Speaker 2: of the era.
Speaker 3: Yeah, they had their own. Uh what's that chick? How
Speaker 3: dare you? Was that?
Speaker 2: Oh shit, Greta thumber To Thumberg.
Speaker 3: Yeah yeah, yeah. So just so everybody's clear, Greta Thunberg
Speaker 3: was also created. Now I'm gonna say created by her parents.
Speaker 3: I don't mean like they fucked and had a kid
Speaker 3: about it, like okay, No, I'm saying her being this
Speaker 3: poster child for you took my future. How thank you? Yeah,
Speaker 3: I'm saying it like that because she's you know, retarded,
Speaker 3: but anyway, so she was created by her parents to
Speaker 3: be the fucking face of this movement, the exact same
Speaker 3: way that Susan Spotless was created in nineteen sixty four.
Speaker 3: It's literally a RNSOM repeat. There's nothing new under the.
Speaker 2: Sun, nothing ever new. It's just taken it. It's taken
Speaker 2: mister coach Clin's playbook and calling it your plays is
Speaker 2: really what's going on.
Speaker 3: That's it, dude. Now. The Beautifications campaign's purpose was to
Speaker 3: make glittering an individual not corporate problem. Okay. The efforts
Speaker 3: of CAB and the AD Council paid off. While the
Speaker 3: public assumed responsibility for the waste piling up, The packaging
Speaker 3: industry watched as sales of disposable containers skyrocketed three percent
Speaker 3: in nineteen sixty jumped to twelve percent of total container
Speaker 3: sales in nineteen sixty six. The rates continued to spike
Speaker 3: from there. So never mind the fact that what they
Speaker 3: were buying was really the cause of the problem, they
Speaker 3: just kept buying more, okay. Framing the litter problem as
Speaker 3: disrespectful to the American landscape and calling those who don't
Speaker 3: clean up after themselves litter bugs allowed these industries to
Speaker 3: evade responsibility for the roles they played in the manufacture
Speaker 3: of disposable containers. Is a direct quote here. This is
Speaker 3: from the ad the campaign manager David Hart after a
Speaker 3: nineteen sixty seven CAB meeting. Direct quote here. There seemed
Speaker 3: to be a mutual agreement that our soft cell quote
Speaker 3: unquote used in previous years could now be replaced by
Speaker 3: a more emphatic approach to the problem. By saying that
Speaker 3: those who litter are slobs. Oh, CAB was, Oh yeah,
Speaker 3: they shifted the entire narrative and they got the culture
Speaker 3: on it. Now you get looked at like a psycho
Speaker 3: for littering, which again I'm not saying that littering is good,
Speaker 3: but I'm saying instead of just kind of seeing it
Speaker 3: and be like that fucking guy and walking away, they
Speaker 3: were making it like a war on the litter bugs.
Speaker 2: That's like somebody wearing a mask hat and everybody else
Speaker 2: who is anti MAGA, assuming that that person wearing the
Speaker 2: MAGA hat is a racist, bigoted pedophile.
Speaker 3: Yes, same thing, one hundred percent. CAB was careful to
Speaker 3: keep the bottles and cans produced by its sponsors out
Speaker 3: of ad council campaigns, which continued to use children to
Speaker 3: evoke emotional responses and viewers. Another direct quote here. Litter
Speaker 3: is not pretty, litter is not healthy, litter is not clean,
Speaker 3: litter is not American. Yeah, that's how they rolled it.
Speaker 3: Man and the people bought it hook line and sinker.
Speaker 3: A year after CAB was founded, Vermont banned non reusable
Speaker 3: beverage containers in nineteen fifty three. Vermont became the first
Speaker 3: state to ban non reusable beverages. Single use packaging was
Speaker 3: in its infancy, and the industry is responsible for it
Speaker 3: anticipated monumental profits from phasing out reusable containers. These same
Speaker 3: companies came together to form CAB a few months after
Speaker 3: Vermont's law was passed. See, they are already could see
Speaker 3: the writing on the walls, and they thought that there
Speaker 3: would be some do gooders out there who actually care,
Speaker 3: that would make it to where you can't use you know,
Speaker 3: these these single use bottles. So they wanted to get
Speaker 3: ahead of it and shift the narrative.
Speaker 2: You know, it's funny too, And I brought it up,
Speaker 2: you know, a couple of shows ago. But I was
Speaker 2: I had heard somebody made mention about how uh because
Speaker 2: we've always heard that you're not supposed to refill your
Speaker 2: water bottles. Like let's say you got a Dasani or
Speaker 2: Aquafina or Walmart water bottle or whatever, you're not supposed
Speaker 2: to reuse them because there's going to be extra plastic
Speaker 2: in there that you're that you're taking out. And it's like, dude,
Speaker 2: that's literally the fucking the the the water companies and
Speaker 2: the coke companies and all of them saying like, yeah,
Speaker 2: don't refill it because they want you to continue buying
Speaker 2: more water. If you buy a twenty four pack of
Speaker 2: Dasani or whatever, and whenever you're done, you refill it
Speaker 2: with your sink water or with whatever your filtered water
Speaker 2: situation is, and you just put it back in there. Well,
Speaker 2: that's going to be losing the the company's more money,
Speaker 2: so of course they're going to say that refilling the
Speaker 2: recyclable or disposable water bottle is worse for you, right, Like,
Speaker 2: it's all fucking manipulation.
Speaker 3: So we're gonna give this. I'm with you right now.
Speaker 3: Let's do a little thought experiment. You and I right
Speaker 3: now and all the good cult members listening, do this
Speaker 3: on your own, Okay, Let's say you grab Adasani water bottle, okay,
Speaker 3: and you drink the contents of said water bottle, and
Speaker 3: then you refill it, and you are of the belief
Speaker 3: that refilling it is somehow going to leach harmful chemicals
Speaker 3: from the plastic to your body, and so that's why
Speaker 3: they tell you not to reuse it. Okay. How long
Speaker 3: do you think it was that that bottle of water
Speaker 3: that you just drank was in that bottle from the
Speaker 3: manufacturing facility onto a pallette or into a case, then
Speaker 3: onto a pallet, then into the back of an eighteen
Speaker 3: willer to the store where you bought it. Who knows
Speaker 3: how long it was in the back, how long was
Speaker 3: on the shelf? How long all of these things, and
Speaker 3: then for you to drink it. Do you think somehow
Speaker 3: that that was a week a day or do you
Speaker 3: think it probably was more like six months time? Okay?
Speaker 2: Yeah, Well, and then you also got the sun beaten
Speaker 2: down on them too. If they're sitting outside.
Speaker 3: Exactly now, the chemicals that were leached from the plastic
Speaker 3: to the water you just drink them that they have
Speaker 3: gotten way more leached in the weeks building up to
Speaker 3: you cracking that bottle open. Well, it was sealed. That's
Speaker 3: not what I just said. It was sealed within plastic,
Speaker 3: which we're gonna talk about a theory to have on
Speaker 3: plastic in a bit. But beside the point you refilling
Speaker 3: it and then drinking it right behind that, we're talking
Speaker 3: about a hangtime here of a day or two in
Speaker 3: a plastic bottle as opposed to a hangtime of weeks
Speaker 3: in that same bottle. I'm sorry, that's fucking retarded.
Speaker 2: And it's probably better for you to buy a bottle
Speaker 2: of aquafina if you're going that route. I mean, I
Speaker 2: know a lot of people aren't drinking you know, water
Speaker 2: from plastic bottles anymore. You probably should if you can't,
Speaker 2: or if you can, right, but if you do, it's
Speaker 2: probably better for you to like literally take that fucking bottle,
Speaker 2: open it up, dump it on the ground, and refill
Speaker 2: it with hose water. It's probably safer for you. I
Speaker 2: am personally of the belief that you just said correct things.
Speaker 2: And also that's just me, and also Dasani. Nobody should
Speaker 2: ever be drinking Dasani. Just to let you know, it
Speaker 2: is a Coca Cola company, and the reason, dude, they
Speaker 2: do a lot of crazy shit to that water. So
Speaker 2: one they add a lot of salt. So do you
Speaker 2: keep on wanting to drink more and more and more,
Speaker 2: And yeah, we need our electrolytes and we need our
Speaker 2: salts and everything. But that's not the reason they do it.
Speaker 2: That's almost like you know, your public water saying that
Speaker 2: we put fluoride in your water to help your teeth.
Speaker 2: That's not the reason, you know, it's they don't give
Speaker 2: a fuck about your health. And the same thing goes
Speaker 2: with why they're putting salt in it. It's one to
Speaker 2: preserve and also and it'll also help like you know,
Speaker 2: get rid of any kind of mold or whatever that
Speaker 2: may develop in there or whatever over the course of time.
Speaker 2: But it's like it's it's it's causing you to want
Speaker 2: to go back and drink and drink and drink more.
Speaker 2: It's wanting to turn you into a return customer more
Speaker 2: often by adding more salt to the water. So Dsani,
Speaker 2: by and large, is one of the worst waters that
Speaker 2: you can buy.
Speaker 3: Well, I agree, but also keep in mind smart water,
Speaker 3: it's still a plastic bottle aquafina, uh name. It doesn't
Speaker 3: matter all of them. Kent would all of these, even
Speaker 3: the natural spring water bottles that you're buying in a disposable,
Speaker 3: single use plastic bottle, it's all pretty much the same thing.
Speaker 3: They're using the exact same type of plastic. And although well,
Speaker 3: this water was from a spring, this water was from
Speaker 3: a distillation unit. That's why it's smart water. It's like
Speaker 3: from the clouds. It's H two. Oh is h two?
Speaker 3: Oh is H two? Oh Okay, I'm very sorry to
Speaker 3: be the one to be to break the news to y'all.
Speaker 3: If it's from a single use plastic bottle, it's not
Speaker 3: good for you regardless, But we're gonna get you.
Speaker 2: I mean, And what's that death water that you like?
Speaker 2: What's that one with liquid death? Okay, that's out of
Speaker 2: an aluminum can.
Speaker 3: Probably those are recyclable, right and so okay, Like, if
Speaker 3: you're gonna go that route, drink those, but those are
Speaker 3: still single use. Meanwhile, you can buy a water filter
Speaker 3: at your house and get gallons of the shit. Oh
Speaker 3: it's just me.
Speaker 2: I mean, and I know that the water filters. I
Speaker 2: have two of those Britta like gallon tanks and it's
Speaker 2: not the best. I mean, you could always do better.
Speaker 3: I know.
Speaker 2: People talk about the there's this one filter it's called
Speaker 2: the Murky Water filter or something like that, that is
Speaker 2: said to get rid of all of the chemicals, including
Speaker 2: the floor ride. But you know, not everybody has an
Speaker 2: extra fucking twenty five hundred dollars to install a filtration system.
Speaker 2: So you gotta do what you gotta do.
Speaker 3: But understand that bottles are just the tip of the iceberg.
Speaker 3: How many things do we buy that are in plastic
Speaker 3: wrapping or even at the store. You're buying your own groceries.
Speaker 2: Most things those things meet. You're going to buy meat
Speaker 2: from your local butcher, you're still giving it on a
Speaker 2: styrofoam plate wrapped in cell a phane.
Speaker 3: It's plastic on plastic. So it's not just the bottles.
Speaker 3: Don't think we're just sitting on the Coca Cola and
Speaker 3: bottling industries, although they are a really big culprit. There
Speaker 3: are so many different avenues to go down here. We
Speaker 3: are literally just at the tip of this iceberg. But
Speaker 3: back to the whole conversation here.
Speaker 2: So you want to jump back into reading, Yeah.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I'll take it on this one. So, like I said,
Speaker 3: Vermont was the first state to outlaw non reusable water bottles,
Speaker 3: and they didn't want that. They wanted reuse or they
Speaker 3: wanted single use bottles to be the way they needed
Speaker 3: this to be because it was better for them for
Speaker 3: profit margins. So they had to get ahead of this,
Speaker 3: which is why they started the entire ad agency in
Speaker 3: the first place to lobby against this shit. Afraid the
Speaker 3: train would spread to other states, executives from CAV got
Speaker 3: to work defining their new nonprofit as a beautification organization,
Speaker 3: aiming to educate the masses about how to clean up
Speaker 3: all the trash around them. Behind the scenes, CAB members
Speaker 3: squashed bills that sought to eliminate single use products. They succeeded,
Speaker 3: and four years later Vermont's law lapsed. As the plastics
Speaker 3: industry grew and merged with the beverage and manufacturing world
Speaker 3: in the mid nineteen fifties, the chance to capitalize off
Speaker 3: the mounds of non biodegradable refuse began scattering or scattered
Speaker 3: around the planet became more and more alluring. At a
Speaker 3: plastics conference around this time, one speaker looked out at
Speaker 3: the audience and proclaimed, your future is in the garbage wagon.
Speaker 2: Wow.
Speaker 3: A plastics conference said that your future is in the
Speaker 3: garbage wagon, basically saying that if we want to continue
Speaker 3: making that money, we need to get heavily involved with
Speaker 3: plastics and we're going to talk about why that's more
Speaker 3: economical than recycling later, which is crazy at the fact
Speaker 3: that they knew that recycling was not like scalable and
Speaker 3: they still ran with it. Anyway, to continue the narrative,
Speaker 3: we're going to get to it all.
Speaker 2: Well, yeah, they want the public to be seen as
Speaker 2: the sinners essentially, so that they are not being looked
Speaker 2: at as the people who are essentially the root cause
Speaker 2: of everything, of all this pollution and everything. So yeah,
Speaker 2: So when state legislators began pushing bottle bills in the
Speaker 2: early nineteen seventies, CAB publicly opposed them. In nineteen seventy two,
Speaker 2: Oregon and Vermont passed bottle bills, which incentivize consumers to
Speaker 2: return their bottles to recycling centers by providing a five
Speaker 2: cent return per item. When California began moving toward its
Speaker 2: own bottle bill in nineteen seventy four, CAB decided to
Speaker 2: publicly oppose these measures. After a story leaked about American
Speaker 2: Can Company chairman William F. May calling bottle bill supporters
Speaker 2: communists at it's always somebody calling somebody a communist.
Speaker 3: Oh dude, during the Cold War, that was that was
Speaker 3: a cuss. To call someone a kami is basically saying
Speaker 3: that you're not even human, because I still believe that
Speaker 3: commies aren't humans actually, but neither here nor.
Speaker 2: There anyhow, So he called the bottle bill supporters communists
Speaker 2: At a CAB Board of Directors meeting in nineteen seventy six,
Speaker 2: the Environmental Protection Agency or the EPA, and seven environmental
Speaker 2: groups left the CAB non Corporate Advisory Board. That November,
Speaker 2: bottle bills passed in Michigan and Maine. Even though ten
Speaker 2: states in total were able to pass bottle bills that
Speaker 2: are active to this day, CAB still achieved its goal
Speaker 2: of directing the conversation away from whether or not disposables
Speaker 2: were good for the public to begin with. CAB continues
Speaker 2: to oppose bottle bill efforts, and it invested fourteen million
Speaker 2: dollars between nineteen eighty nine and nineteen ninety four to
Speaker 2: defeat the National bottle Bill.
Speaker 3: So, if you ever look at one of your cans
Speaker 3: right just throwing out it's a bottle bill, but it
Speaker 3: also goes for other recycles, there will be a list
Speaker 3: of cities or states, I should say, where you can
Speaker 3: recycle it for a certain amount of money, usually five cents,
Speaker 3: ten cents, whatever the case is. There's a reason why
Speaker 3: there's only certain states where that's actually a thing, and
Speaker 3: why most states just send it to the landfill regardless,
Speaker 3: or to other places that we will get into. But yeah,
Speaker 3: that was all done by a lobbying group and an
Speaker 3: ad campaign group. Absolutely.
Speaker 2: Now it's funny because if you look, you know, especially
Speaker 2: at like the bottles, it'll say, you know, if you
Speaker 2: bring it to California, if you bring it to Maine,
Speaker 2: and those are always like the two big states or
Speaker 2: the two main states that I remember, California and Maine,
Speaker 2: which makes sense because that was two of the original
Speaker 2: ten of the bottle bill bill. Absolutely, and even to
Speaker 2: further that point, during this timeframe, do you you remember
Speaker 2: watching The Sandlot Right? Of course that movie was shot
Speaker 2: in the early nineties, but it was based in the
Speaker 2: fifties or maybe the sixties.
Speaker 3: I forget around which time frame, but it was back
Speaker 3: in these days. When he hit the Babe Ruth ball
Speaker 3: over the fence, they they had to make a replica
Speaker 3: to put on the shelf until they could figure out
Speaker 3: a way to get the ball back from the beasts.
Speaker 3: The whole nine Yeah, what it Beennie the jet Rodriguez
Speaker 3: tell them. He's like, all right, guys, go and get
Speaker 3: all the bottles and cash them in. We need ninety
Speaker 3: eight cents. We got to buy us a ball. You
Speaker 3: could go and cash in bottles at that time to
Speaker 3: get a few cents, and you could use it for things.
Speaker 3: That was a thing then, that is in certain states
Speaker 3: that is still a thing. It's not a thing everywhere.
Speaker 2: Yeah, most of the time, it's just people that are
Speaker 2: going around collecting aluminum and metal products. They're not even
Speaker 2: so much worried about glass or anything like that anymore.
Speaker 3: And honestly, they're going to a scrap yard to get
Speaker 3: weight for the aluminum. And it's not a lot. But
Speaker 3: you know, if you're a homeless guy who's trying to
Speaker 3: get your drinking money for the day, you can collect
Speaker 3: five trash bags of cans off the side of the
Speaker 3: road and bring them in. You can get you literally
Speaker 3: a few dollars to go buy you a bottle of
Speaker 3: oe for the evening, Like I get it.
Speaker 2: Unless you get your hands on some copper you.
Speaker 3: Know, well, yeah, scrapping copper is way more useful in
Speaker 3: that regard, which, again not a shameless plug. We might
Speaker 3: as well. We will be having these gorgeous Cult of
Speaker 3: Conspiracy copper coins available at cocsilver dot com. If you
Speaker 3: would like to get your start in the buying and
Speaker 3: selling and trading of gold and silver bullion, then come
Speaker 3: check us out at cocsilver dot com. The link is
Speaker 3: of the description below. Listen, we're not telling you to
Speaker 3: go scrap silver or scrap copper. What we are saying
Speaker 3: is that these precious metals are going to retain the
Speaker 3: value regardless because they are something that is valuable and useful. Silver,
Speaker 3: especially right, gold has always maintained a value. Silver there
Speaker 3: is a finite amount of it, and we are losing
Speaker 3: it every day. Every time a Tomahawk missile goes off,
Speaker 3: the Earth loses five hundred dollars worth of silver because
Speaker 3: of all the electrical components that are within that missile system.
Speaker 3: And I'm not saying that we're just sending missiles NonStop,
Speaker 3: but at the same time, silver is used in a
Speaker 3: lot of electrical components, so there is an intrinsic value
Speaker 3: to it aside from what the market says, it is right.
Speaker 3: If you would like to get your hands on some
Speaker 3: silver and gold before it is way too expensive to
Speaker 3: even fathom getting your hands on, then come check us
Speaker 3: out ccsilver dot com again. The link is in the
Speaker 3: description below, And thank you all the good cult members
Speaker 3: that have gone and done so and taken a little
Speaker 3: bit of your financial future into your own hands. More
Speaker 3: and more of y'all are getting on and getting involved
Speaker 3: with this, and I am so proud of y'all.
Speaker 2: Hell yeah, shout out to the good cult members out there.
Speaker 2: It is one of the best future moves that you
Speaker 2: can make without a doubt, because then is that it
Speaker 2: never it's not gonna lose value. It is kept its
Speaker 2: value or gotten better in value since the beginning of time.
Speaker 2: Could argue, you could argue, right, bro.
Speaker 3: There are so many people that are getting to retirement
Speaker 3: age right now that are unable to retire because the
Speaker 3: market is just what it is and maybe some of
Speaker 3: their investments didn't do well for them, or whatever the
Speaker 3: case is. You have more and more people that are
Speaker 3: making the decision that they're gonna have to work till
Speaker 3: they die, and that's just what it is Oh, they
Speaker 3: could just draw Social Security. Bro That system is already
Speaker 3: starting to go belly up, and the baby boomer generation
Speaker 3: is going to absolutely bankrupt it. Now. I'm not selling
Speaker 3: all the good cult members to put all of their
Speaker 3: eggs in the silver and gold basket, but every single
Speaker 3: financial advisor will tell you that you need to have
Speaker 3: a diverse portfolio, and every single financial advisor that's worth
Speaker 3: a fuck will tell you to at least have something
Speaker 3: in precious metals. Okay, it's still affordable, right now, do
Speaker 3: your future self a favor and invest. We have a
Speaker 3: good deal going on with seven k Cocsilver dot com
Speaker 3: is where you can go and get.
Speaker 2: Your start anyway, fucking name thanks plugover all, right, getting
Speaker 2: back to it, So, CAB collaborated with the US Brewers
Speaker 2: Association to create the Clean Community System In nineteen seventy five,
Speaker 2: while the bottled bill debate was in full swing, CAB
Speaker 2: decided to establish a program that could be introduced in
Speaker 2: communities as an alternative to these bills. The Clean Community
Speaker 2: System concerned about the possibility that environmental groups would use
Speaker 2: the momentum gained by the bottle bills to push for
Speaker 2: packaging regulations CAB member the US Brewers Association proposed the
Speaker 2: idea of a community program to tackle litter control in
Speaker 2: nineteen seventy five. It was introduced to the public in
Speaker 2: seventy six, and communities across the nation signed on, believing
Speaker 2: they were participating in an act of public good. Before
Speaker 2: resigning from the CAB board in seventy six, EPA member
Speaker 2: Thomas Williams wrote a memo about his concerns over the
Speaker 2: Clean Community System, insisting its purpose was to focus the
Speaker 2: attention of hundreds of communities on anti litter campaigns. When
Speaker 2: successfully inaugurated, it tends to abort any local efforts to
Speaker 2: institute beverage container deposit systems, placing emphasis on these street
Speaker 2: cleaning and other litter control activities. Through the Clean Community System,
Speaker 2: CAB pushed several substitutions for bottle bills. One such option
Speaker 2: was a litter tax, a nominal tax on manufacturers and
Speaker 2: retailers used to fund litter clean up organizations and participating Still,
Speaker 2: critics felt these clean up groups were put in place
Speaker 2: to make the package and beverage industries appear to be
Speaker 2: taking action against pollution when they were actually doing very little.
Speaker 2: One of one president of Nebraska Sierra Club in the
Speaker 2: seventies summarized his feeling by writing in quotes, I'm tired
Speaker 2: of pumping money into front organizations whose goal is to
Speaker 2: educate and plant flowers. My ditch is filled with cans
Speaker 2: and bottles. Legislation mandating deposits would stop litter before it starts,
Speaker 2: but CAB never supported the bottle bill.
Speaker 3: So when they could have put more emphasis on the
Speaker 3: recycle spots right the actual buildings and the infrastructure to
Speaker 3: where people could go out of their way to recycle
Speaker 3: these things because they want to be good, they want
Speaker 3: to be virtuous, they want to fight the litter problem. Instead,
Speaker 3: they just put it towards more ads and more optics
Speaker 3: to make it appear like they were doing things. In reality,
Speaker 3: they were doing little to nothing to help the situation.
Speaker 3: But anytime there was a group doing something, oh, it
Speaker 3: was a perfect time for a photo op, wasn't it.
Speaker 2: Oh yeah, of course. So by the nineteen sixties, CAB
Speaker 2: claimed seventy million members. The ad Council and CAB began
Speaker 2: to look beyond advertising in the late nineteen sixties, supporting
Speaker 2: actions like collections programs or trash pickups and parks around
Speaker 2: the country. These publicly funded initiatives were supported by environmental
Speaker 2: organizations across the board, most of which believed that they
Speaker 2: were participating in an important collective movement to save the environment.
Speaker 2: During the nineteen sixties, CABS membership reached seventy million people,
Speaker 2: a third of Americans at the time. Damn a third, dude.
Speaker 3: The Council did a very good job of spreading the word,
Speaker 3: and people were joining again, thinking and believing that they
Speaker 3: were trying to help the problem.
Speaker 2: Yeah. So membership ranged from individuals to municipalities to private businesses.
Speaker 2: In nineteen sixty five, Old Lady Bird Johnson, the first
Speaker 2: Lady publicly expressed her support for a Highway Beautiful project,
Speaker 2: telling Americans in her quotes, ours is a blessed and
Speaker 2: beautiful land, but much of it has been tarnished. What
Speaker 2: can you do? Look around you, at the littered roadside,
Speaker 2: at the polluted stream, the decayed city center. We need
Speaker 2: urgently to restore the beauty of our land. How many
Speaker 2: of you have ever seen the adopt a highway posters? Right,
Speaker 2: I thought about it.
Speaker 3: Or you're driving down a highway and you say, this
Speaker 3: highway was adopted by this VFW hall this boy Scout troop,
Speaker 3: this Masonic lodge, whatever the case was. All of this
Speaker 3: was done in this attempt.
Speaker 2: Could you imagine cult of conspiracy highway.
Speaker 3: Let's fucking well. I mean, sometimes they'll name the highway
Speaker 3: after whoever did it, but typically you just get a
Speaker 3: sign saying this highway was adopted by this group. And
Speaker 3: yet it's advertisement And yes it's great for the optics,
Speaker 3: but at the same time, all that is is free
Speaker 3: litter cleanup that the government doesn't have to pay for,
Speaker 3: and it does nothing to actually stop the mass production
Speaker 3: of the materials that's being littered in the first fucking place.
Speaker 2: I know that road and this is just for people
Speaker 2: who might be living in Louisiana, Uh, mainly Ascension Parish,
Speaker 2: but you you know that road that's right on side
Speaker 2: of Domino's. It's called Ascension Parish Road or some shit
Speaker 2: in Praieval off a airline.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 2: I always thought about just like reaching out and being
Speaker 2: like that is such a bland name. How much would
Speaker 2: it cost just to buy that little road? It's I mean,
Speaker 2: it ain't but a quarter mile, you know what I'm saying,
Speaker 2: Like it would be cool to just rename that instead
Speaker 2: of Ascension Parish Road. How fucking boring, you know what
Speaker 2: I mean? I wonder how much that would cost. Maybe
Speaker 2: a couple grand I don't know.
Speaker 3: I've never looked into renaming a street to see, like
Speaker 3: whose palms you gotta grease to like make that happen.
Speaker 3: But yeah, I mean maybe that'd look in it.
Speaker 2: That would be awesome, and I would track down all
Speaker 2: you litterbugs out there on our road.
Speaker 3: Mine will be a clean highway.
Speaker 2: Yeah buddy. If we gotta get a fucking uh crying
Speaker 2: actor Indian to promote that, then we will.
Speaker 3: Oh no, we're in Louisiana. We just get a crying cagun.
Speaker 3: I know plenty of them that like, they don't cry.
Speaker 3: But I could put a little gli call right there
Speaker 3: by their eye, make it look or glister or whatever
Speaker 3: it was, to make it look like they're crying. Ain't nothing,
Speaker 3: that's a that's an eye dropper, away, dude, for clear
Speaker 3: eyes for real, you know that's all. You just give
Speaker 3: them some eyes for quick, just eye drops. They turn
Speaker 3: and look like they're crying. Hey man, why'all put all
Speaker 3: that trash on my road? Yeah? I could sell Oh
Speaker 3: we got this. We could make this a thing.
Speaker 2: Well, you know, it'd be even more funny too, is
Speaker 2: like you know how the kuon asses they always trying
Speaker 2: to make something into a pelt or something into a hat.
Speaker 2: If we could just get them to like get on
Speaker 2: the side of the road, like this will be our
Speaker 2: commercial for it. They get on the side of the
Speaker 2: road and they make like a milk carton hat that
Speaker 2: they just rock around everywhere. That would be the most
Speaker 2: Louisiana shit I've ever seen.
Speaker 3: We have them pull up on a p row, you
Speaker 3: know what I'm saying, They get out and somebody throws
Speaker 3: a bunch of trash by their feet. Oh dude, we
Speaker 3: could remake that add so much better and actually use
Speaker 3: a real cage in for that shit.
Speaker 2: Yeah yeah, Well, and we have a buddy in advertising too,
Speaker 2: we might be able to make that happen.
Speaker 3: Wait, we're gonna put a pin in that one.
Speaker 2: Hell are you so?
Speaker 3: Do I do this? If for nothing else, just to
Speaker 3: throw it in the face of the recycling being such
Speaker 3: a scam and, as we are learning right now, a
Speaker 3: total fucking siop. So.
Speaker 2: In the decades since the famous ad, cab has launched
Speaker 2: new campaigns and initiatives across the country. As recycling rose
Speaker 2: in popularity during the nineteen eighties, CAB transformed the Clean
Speaker 2: Community System, which was renamed the Keep America Beautiful System,
Speaker 2: from an anti littering initiative to a pro recycling one.
Speaker 2: It was executed in more than four hundred cities, and
Speaker 2: CABS founding or funding blossomed. The organization looked beyond beverage
Speaker 2: and packing packaging industries for collaboration and started a partnership
Speaker 2: with the waste disposal industry that persists into the present.
Speaker 2: Since this shift, CAB remains careful about how it frames
Speaker 2: its support recycling. When it launched the campaign Let's Not
Speaker 2: Waste the nineteen nineties, that was the name of the campaign.
Speaker 2: Instead of emphasizing the importance of recycling methods, CAB prep
Speaker 2: CAB presented the public with five ways to tackle solid
Speaker 2: waste excess source reduction, recycling, composting, incineration, and sanitary landfilling.
Speaker 2: During a nineteen ninety three public video conference, CAB president
Speaker 2: Roger Powers told people in quotes, while recycling can be
Speaker 2: an important method of dealing with our waste in some communities,
Speaker 2: it is not the only option in order to safely
Speaker 2: and effectively manage trash. The public must be informed of
Speaker 2: every alternative.
Speaker 3: Real quick, real quick. Let's go over those five just
Speaker 3: for a second. Here, source reduction, Well, what does that mean.
Speaker 3: It means that the public will make a conscious effort
Speaker 3: to produce less trash. Okay, all right, that's one. I'm
Speaker 3: with you. Number two recycling, and again there are certain
Speaker 3: materials that are absolutely one h two percent recyclable and
Speaker 3: we should be doing that. I'm with this. Number three composting,
Speaker 3: so basically any of your food that you would usually
Speaker 3: throw out or not all that I want to say
Speaker 3: that because you'll attract like rodents and shit, but like
Speaker 3: there are things that you could put into a compost pile,
Speaker 3: which you should be doing that anyway. But we should
Speaker 3: also be growing our own food, which is why you
Speaker 3: would be composting. Unless you have a garden, you're not
Speaker 3: going to compost. Let's be real here. Number four the incineration,
Speaker 3: so burning your trash, because we see so many times
Speaker 3: where that's so good for our clean air. Right, no
Speaker 3: one's ever had an issue of people burning their own
Speaker 3: trash before. And number five sanitary landfilling. And how many
Speaker 3: times have we heard about a landfill that had one
Speaker 3: of those liners that ripped and now all the toxic
Speaker 3: shit is leeching out into the earth. But yes, of
Speaker 3: course that's a better option by yeah, okay, just want
Speaker 3: to stop and make sure we talked about those real quick.
Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, well, you know, it's uh, none of that
Speaker 2: is really good. And to be honest, I wish there
Speaker 2: was a way that we could just burn our trash
Speaker 2: like that seems like, you know, it's gonna maybe it's
Speaker 2: gonna reduce the size of it obviously. You know, maybe
Speaker 2: maybe if you have some kind of ash catcher or
Speaker 2: some kind of filter, maybe the trash companies or maybe
Speaker 2: these packaging programs would be able to pay for every
Speaker 2: household to be able to have one of those kind
Speaker 2: of things. Could be something very simple, or we can
Speaker 2: just go full on back to the fucking future with
Speaker 2: it and just find a way to be able to
Speaker 2: use it as a fuel source. Nobody's gonna be throwing
Speaker 2: trash to the sidebad at that point.
Speaker 3: We're gonna talk about that as an option here in
Speaker 3: a bit, because there is a way to do that,
Speaker 3: But that's strictly just for plastics, right, So here's where
Speaker 3: I'm at with it. Cardboard and paper. Dude, I burn
Speaker 3: all that. I absolutely Once a week we start a
Speaker 3: fire and we burn shit. First of all, I love
Speaker 3: starting fires, not as a pyrope, but just it's very
Speaker 3: it's calming to me to build a good fire, right
Speaker 3: number one? Number two, glass and ten cans and soup
Speaker 3: cans and coke bottle. Yes, we should be recycling those,
Speaker 3: and I can understand that source reduction. We should be
Speaker 3: making less trash, and I agree with that. We America
Speaker 3: is are the largest trash producers on Earth.
Speaker 2: We're gonna talk about all of that here in a bit.
Speaker 2: Uh Recycling.
Speaker 3: Composting, yo, unless you have a garden, you're not gonna
Speaker 3: think to compost. And that's also not even a drop
Speaker 3: in the bucket. That is a tenth of a drop.
Speaker 3: That's a nano drop in a bucket. Do you personally?
Speaker 3: Composting doesn't help the earth on that level unless you're
Speaker 3: doing it to scale.
Speaker 2: That's a singular count here, sir.
Speaker 3: Right and centeration. Okay, certain things that can burn, I'm
Speaker 3: with you. Sanitary landfilling. There are ways to do landfills,
Speaker 3: and I'm not saying that that is not a viable option.
Speaker 3: But also there are so many landfills that have done
Speaker 3: it wrong for so long that we are now seeing
Speaker 3: come through to fruition. And it's just that's my point.
Speaker 3: It's not none of these are necessarily good, or some
Speaker 3: of them are good. Yes, we should be making less trash.
Speaker 3: That's a good option. I like that, but none of
Speaker 3: them are scalable realistically.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it's got to start with the corporations, I think absolutely.
Speaker 3: But anyway, let's continue here.
Speaker 2: So in nineteen ninety four, CAB published it's four hundred
Speaker 2: thousand dollars study The Role of Recycling of Recycling in
Speaker 2: Integrated Solid Waste Management of the Year two thousand, once
Speaker 2: again shaping recycling as practice with limitations. One doubter fired back,
Speaker 2: writing in quotes, I find myself questioning the agenda behind
Speaker 2: the study. The report reminds us that it is cheaper
Speaker 2: to send solid waste to the landfill. Well, I can
Speaker 2: easily argue that tossing solid waste in the river is
Speaker 2: even cheaper.
Speaker 3: Ah, And interesting how that is. And I'll kind of
Speaker 3: cut to the chase on the whole. Using plastic to
Speaker 3: make a fuel source, it's very possible.
Speaker 2: It doesn't make very high grade fuels. But you can
Speaker 2: use it to make fuels.
Speaker 3: But it's also expensive to turn a bunch of plastic
Speaker 3: waste into a like ignitable fuel source because it's all hydrocarbons,
Speaker 3: it's all from crude oil. But I mean, I'll tie
Speaker 3: in later to my theory about plastic bottles and plastics
Speaker 3: in general that we are using.
Speaker 2: But I mean, it's it's expensive until you get some
Speaker 2: big money and some big push behind it, and surely
Speaker 2: somebody with the means to be able to push that
Speaker 2: kind of study. And you know, there's a lot of
Speaker 2: brilliant fucking people out there in the world, and usually
Speaker 2: those very brilliant people that find alternative fuel sources, they
Speaker 2: end up dead a week later as soon as they
Speaker 2: get done publishing it. Maybe if we just stop killing.
Speaker 3: Those people, maybe if we keep around.
Speaker 2: The people that found a way to be able to
Speaker 2: run a car off of water or run a car
Speaker 2: off of plastic, maybe if we didn't fucking suicide them,
Speaker 2: then we might be able to not have to worry
Speaker 2: so much about the whole recycling issue. But no, we
Speaker 2: like to, we like to, you know, we don't kill them.
Speaker 2: They just suicide themselves for some reason. They just always
Speaker 2: kill themselves. I mean, they come up with one of
Speaker 2: the best inventions in all of humanity, and they just
Speaker 2: can't help it. I mean, they are so eating themselves, allied,
Speaker 2: so rotten on the inside, they can't stand to look
Speaker 2: at themselves in the mirror anymore. They just have to
Speaker 2: kill themselves.
Speaker 3: You know, It's just crazy how that works out. Man,
Speaker 3: as soon as some amazing, world changing technology comes out,
Speaker 3: the creator just feels so burdened with his genius that
Speaker 3: he just can't He can't wake up tomorrow morning. He's
Speaker 3: over it.
Speaker 2: It's like if I cured cancer, and I'm like, you
Speaker 2: know what, I really just I did the world. I
Speaker 2: did the world dirty by doing that. I'm just I
Speaker 2: can't stand to even live with myself anymore. I'm just
Speaker 2: gonna kill myself. Ridiculous, you know, it is.
Speaker 3: It is anyway. So cabs invest continue to watch their
Speaker 3: industries thrive, while Keep America Beautiful continues to roll out
Speaker 3: beautification and community based recycling initiatives, including twenty thirteen's I
Speaker 3: Want to Be Recycled campaigns. Its corporate sponsors have turned
Speaker 3: to the manufacture and processing of disposables into a cash crop.
Speaker 3: On its website, CAB lists its corporate sponsors, which includes PepsiCo,
Speaker 3: Coca Cola, Anheuser Busch, h and M, Waste Management, and McDonald's.
Speaker 3: These organizations represent some of the wealthiest businesses in the world.
Speaker 3: In twenty sixteen, the solid waste industry generated sixty billion
Speaker 3: dollars in revenue, a set of increase from the thirty
Speaker 3: nine billion in two thousand. The industry's profits will exceed
Speaker 3: eighty one billion dollars by twenty twenty three. This is
Speaker 3: a twenty twenty two arcow I should say so eighty
Speaker 3: one billion dollars in the solid waste industry right. The
Speaker 3: global plastics market is expected to surpass six hundred billion
Speaker 3: in profits by twenty twenty. With a consumer market overwhelmed
Speaker 3: by disposables, The demand for plastics globally will be over
Speaker 3: three hundred and thirty million tons in twenty twenty. Three
Speaker 3: hundred and thirty million tons.
Speaker 2: And this was before COVID, when people were just Amazon
Speaker 2: ordering everything.
Speaker 3: To their house.
Speaker 2: That's just the demands for the plastic. Three hundred and
Speaker 2: thirty million tons of plastic that is being demanded by
Speaker 2: the public for whatever You're going to.
Speaker 3: Buy anything from the plastic wrapping on your Snickers bar,
Speaker 3: to the container that you're buying your food into the
Speaker 3: plastic bottle, so anything, it's just plastics.
Speaker 2: In general to everything. Yeah.
Speaker 3: Yeah, the production of plastics requires fossil fuels. Yes, we
Speaker 3: are talking about crude oil, and corporations like Shell and
Speaker 3: Exxon Mobile are currently investing in the construction of new
Speaker 3: plastics facilities in the United States that will be operational
Speaker 3: within the next decade. These factories will quote unquote help
Speaker 3: fuel a forty rise in plastic production. Oh my god. Yeah. Meanwhile,
Speaker 3: cab prospers too, bring in over eight million in twenty sixteen,
Speaker 3: to ninety four percent of which came from outside contributors.
Speaker 3: It's a lobbying groom, you know.
Speaker 2: They really care so much, but they got to make
Speaker 2: a little cheese off the top.
Speaker 3: Of course, always they're not doing it for the health.
Speaker 3: They say they're doing it for the health of the world,
Speaker 3: but that's not true.
Speaker 2: It's amazing how all of these these these companies that
Speaker 2: are so concerned about the environment, all of the big dogs,
Speaker 2: all the chairmen's, all the CEOs, all of the people
Speaker 2: on the board, they all god, they all just somehow
Speaker 2: get to these meetings in drivate jets. You know, it's like, God,
Speaker 2: I just love people who are fucking oxymoronic contradictors.
Speaker 3: Yeah, it's crazy how this really does play out, brother.
Speaker 2: And people don't even I mean, there are a lot
Speaker 2: of people out there with that dirt eye all the
Speaker 2: way open that are able to look at these people
Speaker 2: as the scam artists that they are. But there are
Speaker 2: so many people that just fall victim to all of
Speaker 2: this rhetoric that they are just having their mind manipulated
Speaker 2: into believing that these are really good people. It's like,
Speaker 2: let's hold these people at a higher pedestal. If you're
Speaker 2: going to come out here and you're gonna be talking
Speaker 2: about carbon tax credits, you're gonna be worried about the environment.
Speaker 2: You're worried about the littering in the ocean and on
Speaker 2: landfills and everything, you better be the best frontman for
Speaker 2: that that anybody's ever seen, because there's going to be
Speaker 2: people that are going to point to well, you gotta
Speaker 2: a big old diesel truck, or you got a yacht,
Speaker 2: or you got a jet plane. It's like, you can't
Speaker 2: tell me to stop littering and stop polluting. If you're
Speaker 2: one of the main contributors to doing.
Speaker 3: It talking about you. Leo DiCaprio, Fucking Leo.
Speaker 2: At least he's Dayton order women these days.
Speaker 3: Oh, he's going to like what twenty seven year olds.
Speaker 2: Now, twenty eight, twenty nine, something like that.
Speaker 3: Yeah, look at him.
Speaker 2: Good like dating adults. That's new for him. Yeah, it's uh,
Speaker 2: it's kind of it's kind of strange. Most people, you know,
Speaker 2: we're looking at him, looking at all the brand new
Speaker 2: cars that he was buying with no mileage on him yet,
Speaker 2: and they were like, wait a second, you need you
Speaker 2: need something with about one hundred thousand miles on at first,
Speaker 2: at least twenty thousand miles.
Speaker 3: Let's just get you know what I'm saying, It's like.
Speaker 2: Stop, stop fucking taking all of our versions Leo.
Speaker 3: God, oh my god. Yeah that was a whole not
Speaker 3: just saying there's other people on the same thing. But
Speaker 3: I only bring up Leo because that was exactly what
Speaker 3: he did. When he finally won the Oscars, he said
Speaker 3: the global warming was the biggest threat facing us this
Speaker 3: in our day and age. Then the World Cup happens
Speaker 3: in Rio and he brings his private yacht, which burns
Speaker 3: like hundreds of gallons of diesel a day and parks
Speaker 3: it off the coast of Brazil. He doesn't actually like
Speaker 3: attend the World Cup, that's what the fucking pores dude. No,
Speaker 3: of course, he's just doing like the most upscale tailgating
Speaker 3: I've ever seen in my life. And to be almost
Speaker 3: to bitch it us.
Speaker 2: I don't have a problem with people owning yachts and
Speaker 2: sailing them. That's I don't have an issue with that.
Speaker 2: If you got that money. Best believe, if I was
Speaker 2: a billionaire, I'd have a fucking yacht too, and I
Speaker 2: would have a private jet, and I would have all
Speaker 2: these awesome things.
Speaker 3: But I wouldn't be talking shit to people who are
Speaker 3: burning diesel and like blowing black smoke in the air.
Speaker 3: I'm doing me, you're doing you? Like, how about you
Speaker 3: each mind our business?
Speaker 2: But isn't that a perfect allegory for this exact episode,
Speaker 2: Like ye, those very people that are saying that it's
Speaker 2: it's we're the polluters, we're the litterers whenever you know,
Speaker 2: they're kind of the biggest douches of.
Speaker 3: Them all agreed, And I mean again, like George Carlson said,
Speaker 3: we have the audaci. I think that's some plastic bags,
Speaker 3: some some plastic bottles are gonna kill Mother Earth. I'm
Speaker 3: not saying that we should minimize the severity of these
Speaker 3: toxic things on our planet. Yes, we should handle the problem.
Speaker 3: But also, bro the Earth has been through multiple ice ages,
Speaker 3: some plastic bottles, like we're making it more uncomfortable for ourselves.
Speaker 3: We're littering our environment and like all these things. But
Speaker 3: like big dog, we got we got the Earth has
Speaker 3: got the Earth covered. Okay, Yeah, it's like.
Speaker 2: I think that the you know, in just getting a
Speaker 2: little bit deeper into even the whole carbon thing. It's like,
Speaker 2: if the Earth really had a problem with any of
Speaker 2: the carbon, it wouldn't erupt fucking volcanoes that are going
Speaker 2: to produce way more carbon than all of humanity over
Speaker 2: the course of one hundred fucking years out of just
Speaker 2: one little eruption, right like it. So obviously the Earth
Speaker 2: probably doesn't really give that much of a fuck about carbon.
Speaker 3: So why are you saying that the Earth does. I'll
Speaker 3: give you another one. I don't think the Earth gives
Speaker 3: that much of a fuck about us. I'm sorry, I
Speaker 3: don't really think it does. Oh, it's the mother Earth.
Speaker 3: We're connected, we're not. We're not. The Earth is an
Speaker 3: independent thing. We are.
Speaker 2: The Earth is a living thing. And some people will
Speaker 2: say that it's a conscious being. I I'm kinda of that.
Speaker 3: But but that conscious being doesn't give a fuck about us.
Speaker 2: Well, I'm not saying that. I mean, it provides nourishment
Speaker 2: for us.
Speaker 3: It's doing its thing and we are taking the nourishment
Speaker 3: from it.
Speaker 2: Well that's to say that we're not native to Earth.
Speaker 2: Then would you say.
Speaker 3: That, no, we are.
Speaker 2: But that's that's it's not the same thing, dude, Like
Speaker 2: the animals the same way the Earth doesn't care about
Speaker 2: the deer.
Speaker 3: The Earth is doing earth shit. It's making trees and
Speaker 3: making grass because that's what the earth does. The animals
Speaker 3: are eating of the grass the earth and doing that
Speaker 3: for the animals. That's just happening independently, and it's all
Speaker 3: working in a harmonious balance. But it's like those are
Speaker 3: separate entities.
Speaker 2: I mean, you can't say that they're not connected and
Speaker 2: then also say that it's harmonious.
Speaker 3: I'm saying that two things can be true at the
Speaker 3: same time.
Speaker 2: Interesting. Interesting, I mean I disagree, but I understand where
Speaker 2: they're coming from but anyhow, so it says these campaigns
Speaker 2: have had minimal impact on recycling rates and plastics lotion
Speaker 2: is worse than ever. We've all seen images of plastic
Speaker 2: islands floating in the ocean or mountains of plastic growing
Speaker 2: on land. But just how much plastic has been produced
Speaker 2: since the disposables industry, backed by CAB took off in
Speaker 2: the nineteen fifties. According to a study published by Science
Speaker 2: Advances in twenty eighteen, eight point three billion metric tons
Speaker 2: of plastic has been produced, six point three billion metric
Speaker 2: tons has become plastic waste. Of that, only nine percent
Speaker 2: has been recycled. The vast majority, seventy nine percent is
Speaker 2: accumulating in landfills or sloughing off in the natural environment
Speaker 2: as litter. That means that ninety one percent of plastic
Speaker 2: is not recycled. Yeah, holy shit, dude, what was that
Speaker 2: six point eight point three billion metric tons of plastic?
Speaker 2: Oh my god, that's a literal metric.
Speaker 3: Fteen in twenty eighteen. Dude, in twenty eighteen, eight point
Speaker 3: three billion metric tons.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean, obviously it's going to get substantially worse
Speaker 2: every year, only gone up it's only gone up right.
Speaker 2: So today Americans toss out close to three hundred pounds
Speaker 2: of solid waste a year, a third of which is packaging.
Speaker 2: The industry is responsible for the proliferation of these non
Speaker 2: biodegradable single use products, have been unwilling to adapt or
Speaker 2: accept the role that they play in polluting the planet. Instead,
Speaker 2: they rely on shipping plastic refuse is it rip refuse
Speaker 2: refuse trash okay plastic trash to other countries, or incinerating plastic,
Speaker 2: which releases toxic chemicals into the atmosphere. It is also
Speaker 2: becoming more apparent to scientists the plastic industry is a
Speaker 2: major contributor to climate change since the material is derived
Speaker 2: from fossil fuels. These industries, including CAB sponsors, understand that
Speaker 2: the cost of recycling in America placed on municipalities is
Speaker 2: unaffordable due to the lack of the lack of infrastructure
Speaker 2: anti technology to keep up with the amount of materials produced.
Speaker 2: For decades, America exported most of its recyclables to China,
Speaker 2: but China ended this arrangement in twenty eighteen. Recycling programs
Speaker 2: across the country are at risk, and the problem is
Speaker 2: projected to get worse as long as the disposables industry
Speaker 2: and its partners refuse to support bottle bills, invest in
Speaker 2: more recycling facilities, and make products that are easier to reprocess.
Speaker 2: So there's a lot of things to unpack with this
Speaker 2: one article, okay, And like we said, it's not the
Speaker 2: glass in the metal, Okay, it is the plastics that
Speaker 2: is the real evil as far as the recycling game
Speaker 2: is concerned.
Speaker 3: I got a Forbes article here beyond the plastics, the
Speaker 3: myths and truths about recycling and the potential solution. I'm
Speaker 3: gonna go ahead and read into this one now, but
Speaker 3: just before I do, they were correct about a lot
Speaker 3: of those things. The recycling rates the amount that each
Speaker 3: human produces in America three hundred pounds a year that
Speaker 3: we individ you will make three hundred pounds, I will
Speaker 3: make three all these things, and yes there's varying degrees
Speaker 3: of that. Some make more than others. That's an on
Speaker 3: average thing. But that is a yearly rate, end over end,
Speaker 3: that is not going to go down anytime soon unless
Speaker 3: some very drastic changes are made. But they're not going
Speaker 3: to get made. Was that because the companies?
Speaker 2: Was that per individual or per household to three hundred pounds.
Speaker 3: Per individual sir damn. Yeah, and we have our over
Speaker 3: what three hundred and sixty five billion people living in
Speaker 3: this country million excuse me, a million? Woweh million. So
Speaker 3: that's my point. You do the math on that, and
Speaker 3: it's not a pretty number of what it looks like.
Speaker 3: But then what do we do with these materials? How
Speaker 3: do we dispose of them properly? We're gonna get to
Speaker 3: it all in a minute, but now let's read into
Speaker 3: this Forbes article here the pervasiveness of plastic has become
Speaker 3: a global concern and estimated two hundred and forty two
Speaker 3: million metric tons of it's generated every year, and the
Speaker 3: United States is one of the top generators. Actually, correction,
Speaker 3: it is the top generator on earth and has been
Speaker 3: for quite some time. The consumerist nation thing, we buy
Speaker 3: bye bye all that, yet we buy shit that's in plastic.
Speaker 3: So keep that in mind.
Speaker 2: I mean, who's even a close second? Who would you say.
Speaker 3: The problem is? Whenever I say who the close second is,
Speaker 3: there's a reason why they're a close second. It'd be
Speaker 3: China and India. But also it's not because there's such
Speaker 3: a consumerist nation it's because we outsourced and they buy
Speaker 3: our trash from us. But we're gonna get to that
Speaker 3: in a minute with Operation Long Sword or National Sword
Speaker 3: when twenty eighteen. But anyway, anyway, So while recycling sounds
Speaker 3: like a simple solution, it's not. Plastic recycling has proven
Speaker 3: to be ineffective, as evidenced by a shocking statistic from
Speaker 3: Our world in data. Out of the five point eight
Speaker 3: billion metric tons of plastic waste generator between nineteen fifty
Speaker 3: and twenty fifteen, only about nine percent of it has
Speaker 3: been recycled. And I shall also make mention it has
Speaker 3: never gone over nine percent. Like the best year, maybe
Speaker 3: we will achieve nine percent successful recycling. That is such
Speaker 3: a very small number, and usually it's a lot lower
Speaker 3: than that. The rest has been left to be incinerated,
Speaker 3: land filled, or littered. On top of that, a more
Speaker 3: recent report from nonprofit the Last Beach Cleanup and advocacy
Speaker 3: group Beyond Plastics found that the number of found that
Speaker 3: number to be even lower, with only five percent to
Speaker 3: six percent of the US plastic ways converted into products
Speaker 3: in twenty twenty one. It can be hard to believe
Speaker 3: that so little plastics has actually been recycled, considering how
Speaker 3: commonplace recycling has become. But the truth is, plastic is
Speaker 3: not easy to recycle. Plastic products are usually made up
Speaker 3: of a mixture of chemicals that can create difficulties in
Speaker 3: the recycling process, and it's harder to isolate the base
Speaker 3: materials that can be recovered and reused. So how come
Speaker 3: environmental campaigns frame recycling as such a simple solution. The
Speaker 3: plastic problem isn't a new one, of course, but I
Speaker 3: learned more about this wide ranging consequences during a recent
Speaker 3: conversation with Judith inc Unk I don't know, President of
Speaker 3: Beyond Plastics. The nationwide project has based in Bennington College
Speaker 3: in Bennington, Vermont, pairs the experience of environmental policy experts
Speaker 3: with creative college students to achieve the institutional, economic, and
Speaker 3: societal changes needed to combat the plastic pollution crisis. During
Speaker 3: our conversationc inc, how would you say that word? Ink?
Speaker 2: Ink ink man e n C k ink alex smoke right, Okay.
Speaker 3: Fair enough. Inc addressed the crucial need for companies to
Speaker 3: be hailed accountable for the environmental impacts their products make,
Speaker 3: as well as the major problem with chemical recycling and
Speaker 3: the abundance of greenwashing among companies taking environmental action. We're
Speaker 3: going to talk about greenwashing more in depth at the
Speaker 3: end of this thing. Extended producer responsibilities, so as I
Speaker 3: share in my first article from the conversed conversation with inc,
Speaker 3: the first step she suggests to combat the plastic problem
Speaker 3: is to create clear and measurable requirements in extended producer
Speaker 3: responsibility EPR policies with an emphasis on reduction. EPR is
Speaker 3: the concept that manufacturers and importers should be held responsible
Speaker 3: for the environmental impacts of their products throughout their life cycle.
Speaker 3: Although many environmental groups agree that putting these policies into
Speaker 3: place is important, many special interest groups have taken advantage
Speaker 3: of legislators who lack policy depth on such a complicated issue,
Speaker 3: and as such have developed their own EPR bills. Take
Speaker 3: for example, the American Legislative Exchange Council or ALEC, which
Speaker 3: is known for writing model legislation with the major corporations,
Speaker 3: typically the same companies that fund ALEC. Interesting how that
Speaker 3: works out right, then encouraging their introduction through legislative partners nationwide.
Speaker 3: This is a lobbying group that's all. This all boils
Speaker 3: down to they drafted an alternative EPR bill on the
Speaker 3: topic of plastics. But these model bills are coming directly
Speaker 3: from the packaging industry. So literally, they're saying, Oh, we're
Speaker 3: going to pass this new plastic policy. Well, who's paying
Speaker 3: your paychecker quick? Oh the plastics industry. Well, I bet
Speaker 3: there's a conflict of interest here. I mean, I'm not sure,
Speaker 3: but damn that's.
Speaker 2: About as good as an idea. Is the irs auditing
Speaker 2: the irs, exactly right.
Speaker 3: Many EPR proponents argue that putting fees on packaging will
Speaker 3: result in packaging changes and improvements, and although that's a
Speaker 3: well intentioned theory, INC says companies will likely pass on
Speaker 3: these fees to consumers. Absolutely, if they have to pay
Speaker 3: the fee, their product just got marked up a little bit.
Speaker 3: That's that's how this goes. They're not paying shit, They're
Speaker 3: absolutely not. But their product might go up twenty five
Speaker 3: cents a dollar, however much their fine would have been. Huh.
Speaker 2: Some of the bills currently being proposed give too much
Speaker 2: control to companies, which tend to find ways around their
Speaker 2: responsibilities if they are not meticulously defined. INC says that
Speaker 2: even more problematic is that many of these bills allow
Speaker 2: for chemical recycling. The problem with chemical recycling is until
Speaker 2: twenty eighteen, the US ship nearly half of its plastic
Speaker 2: recycling to other countries, mostly China.
Speaker 3: We shipped it to them and basically paid them to
Speaker 3: handle that problem for US. But in twenty eighteen, chrying
Speaker 3: to stop taking any plastics that wasn't pristinely sorted. We're
Speaker 3: gonna talk about contaminated recyclables here in a bit, but anyway,
Speaker 3: other countries soon follow suit, and as such, plastic began
Speaker 3: to pile up in the United States, where it was
Speaker 3: land filled or routinely or routed to incinerators to be burned.
Speaker 3: Incineration sometimes called chemical recycling. Incineration sometimes called chemical recycling,
Speaker 3: has been hailed as a promising new recycling technology. But
Speaker 3: it's not a magical solution. We're talking about burning trash, y'all.
Speaker 3: That's not a magic solution. That's not new. We're talking
Speaker 3: about burning plastics that release chemicals and black smoking to
Speaker 3: the air, which is toxic. It's being hailed as a
Speaker 3: promising new recycling technology. These people are out of their
Speaker 3: fucking mind.
Speaker 2: It just reminds me of fucking wow, what was that
Speaker 2: castaway movie with Tom Hanks, not to give him a
Speaker 2: good shout out, but I do love that movie whenever
Speaker 2: he's out there on the fucking island and he starts
Speaker 2: a fire and he's.
Speaker 3: Like, fire, I create fire. It's a new technology.
Speaker 2: And that's a fucking they're saying it's a promising new technology.
Speaker 2: You mean fire is that new technology?
Speaker 3: And I'm sorry, I personally know fifty to one hundred
Speaker 3: veterans that are currently suffering from lung damage from the
Speaker 3: burn pits of burning trash in country. So right off
Speaker 3: the rit I can tell you that'sulyon.
Speaker 2: Oh yeah, there was that whole thing too with what
Speaker 2: was it, uh, Because whenever veterans go overseas, they have
Speaker 2: to like piss into holes and shit and there's always
Speaker 2: somebody that has to clean all that stuff out.
Speaker 3: Oh yeah, oh yeah, we burn shit, like absolutely, I've
Speaker 3: burned shit before. It's the worst, but like that's that's
Speaker 3: what you do. Whenever you make a straddle trench happen
Speaker 3: where you got like a porter shitter And it's not
Speaker 3: like the nice blue ones that we have in America.
Speaker 3: It's a wooden box with a glorified bucket at the bottom,
Speaker 3: and every few days, you got to yank the bucket out,
Speaker 3: dump a five gallon bucket of diesel fuel in it,
Speaker 3: and burn it. And you gotta stir it with a
Speaker 3: fence post to make sure that it all gets burned.
Speaker 3: That's you're breathing that shit literally in and then these
Speaker 3: people have lung issues. So yeah, I'm sorry, but incineration
Speaker 3: is not a promising new recycling technology. It's it will
Speaker 3: kill you. But like, okay anyway, And unfortunately, many of
Speaker 3: the new EPR bills that are being introduced include language
Speaker 3: that will allow for chemical recycling aka.
Speaker 2: Burning the shit is another quote here. Chemical recycling is
Speaker 2: not recycling.
Speaker 3: Inc says it takes waste plastic, heats at high temperatures
Speaker 3: and then creates a low grade fossil fuel. Now, incineration
Speaker 3: is not this low grade fossil fuels that you're making
Speaker 3: with these plastics, which is not a bad solution to
Speaker 3: your point that you brought up earlier, But the problem
Speaker 3: is that it is extremely expensive and for the amount
Speaker 3: of fuel that you're using to melt the plastics into
Speaker 3: a viable fuel source, it's kind of like wind turbines.
Speaker 3: You're never going to get out even an equal amount
Speaker 3: of what was used to create the craft or create
Speaker 3: the product.
Speaker 2: So the amount of natural gas that you need to
Speaker 2: do the heating and the pressurization of this tank of
Speaker 2: plastic to make it into a low grade biodiesel or something,
Speaker 2: it's not going to create enough diesel to outweigh the
Speaker 2: amount of natural gas.
Speaker 3: That went into it.
Speaker 2: It's not even worth it at that point exactly.
Speaker 3: And I'm not saying that we can't figure out that
Speaker 3: technology later on, but we are currently not at a
Speaker 3: place where we have that. But anyway, as the Natural
Speaker 3: Resource Defense Council in our DC explains in a twenty
Speaker 3: twenty two analysis, chemical recycling typically falls into two categories,
Speaker 3: plastic to fuel and plastic to chemical. Plastic to fuel
Speaker 3: conversion involves prilosis and gasification, both of which use heat
Speaker 3: and chemical processes to break down plastic waste into products
Speaker 3: that are turned into fuels. Plastic to chemical processes use
Speaker 3: treatments such as heat and solvents to create feedstocks that
Speaker 3: proponents claim can be turned into other chemicals and new plastics.
Speaker 3: Both categories are teeming with health, environmental, social, and economic concerns,
Speaker 3: So right off the rip, both of these options are
Speaker 3: there's massive red flags, multiple massive red flags on the
Speaker 3: play for both of them. But they're saying that they're
Speaker 3: promising new solutions. Specifically, plastic to fuel converts and produces
Speaker 3: harmful air pollution and greenhouse gases when burned. The NRDC
Speaker 3: found that Aglix a Gillix Okay, an organ get based
Speaker 3: processing plant hailed as a gold standard of chemical recycling,
Speaker 3: has produced hundreds of thousands of pounds of toxic waste
Speaker 3: in a single year. Cool In addition, many and this
Speaker 3: is an organ dude, these people care about the environment
Speaker 3: and this place that everybody's giving their plastics to because
Speaker 3: oh they're recycling it. It's good for hundreds of thousands
Speaker 3: of pounds of toxic waste in a year.
Speaker 2: I don't know if everybody in organs about that life,
Speaker 2: you know.
Speaker 3: I feel like most are. Well.
Speaker 2: There was the whole Portland Chaz situation, and they were
Speaker 2: definitely not recycle of the mind of being recycling, you
Speaker 2: know what, and very.
Speaker 3: Green of them. I see what you're saying for sure.
Speaker 3: In addition, many of these facilities are in or near
Speaker 3: low income communities with residents who are more vulnerable to
Speaker 3: health risks. Basically, you put a chemical melting plant next
Speaker 3: to the hood, and the people around that place are
Speaker 3: now suffering from all kinds of health issues, and well,
Speaker 3: you know.
Speaker 2: Don't care better the people than the earth though, right.
Speaker 3: Exactly exactly, So if chemical recycling is not the solution,
Speaker 3: then why do so many proposed EPR policies green wash
Speaker 3: plastic to fuel processes as recycling Because it's simpler and
Speaker 3: less expensive. Of course, this is true among many of
Speaker 3: the environmental actions various companies have taken up. Now, we're
Speaker 3: not gonna get into the green washing just yet. I'm
Speaker 3: actually gonna save that for a little bit later here,
Speaker 3: but I feel like it needs to be made mention
Speaker 3: of this. Now, Plastics are not biodegradable, Okay, Now paper
Speaker 3: is biodegradable. Glass not so much. But I mean it's
Speaker 3: from sand, so it's not gonna necessarily hurt the earth
Speaker 3: to bury glass. But there's like you could use it again,
Speaker 3: so why would you? Right? Cans are technically biodegradable, but
Speaker 3: it takes like five hundred years for a coke can
Speaker 3: to go back to its or state and be returned
Speaker 3: to the earth, So like by definition it's biodegradable, but
Speaker 3: it's not that's not what we should be doing with it. Right.
Speaker 2: But I know what you're about to say, good cult
Speaker 2: members out there. If recycling doesn't work, then wait a minute.
Speaker 2: If plastics, right, they're not biodegradable.
Speaker 3: Now they can weather into something called microplastics. We will
Speaker 3: get to that in a little bit. They can weather
Speaker 3: and deteriorate into microplastics. But they do not ever get like,
Speaker 3: they don't go back to the Earth in any kind
Speaker 3: of natural way. You can't get rid of them. But
Speaker 3: I know what you're about to say.
Speaker 2: But Jacob, what about the green triangle on all the
Speaker 2: plastic bottles we see? What about the little recycling logo
Speaker 2: with the number inside of it? This means that it
Speaker 2: can be recycled, right, Well, let's just learn a little
Speaker 2: bit about that, right. They would have you pretty much
Speaker 2: who doesn't know, huh, that's what they would have you believe.
Speaker 3: That's what they would have you believe, dude. Now, for
Speaker 3: anybody who doesn't know, the little green triangle icon with
Speaker 3: the number inside of it was created by a college
Speaker 3: student and he got paid twenty five hundred dollars for
Speaker 3: and he ended up going to Stockholm for some school
Speaker 3: with it. But here's a quick little story about the
Speaker 3: creator of the recycling logo. You may or may not
Speaker 3: know about this, but they pretty much screwed this kid.
Speaker 2: How a student designed the recycling logo and got him
Speaker 2: easily twenty five hundred bucks. In nineteen seventy, Gary Anderson
Speaker 2: was a twenty three year old college student at the
Speaker 2: University of Southern California when a Chicago container company held
Speaker 2: a design contest to raise awareness about the environment. Anderson's
Speaker 2: submission won, and it became the internationally recognized recycling logo
Speaker 2: and a design classic that ranks with the Coca Cola
Speaker 2: and Nike marks for sheer ubiquity.
Speaker 3: I mean, it's a very very recognizable logo, right, and
Speaker 3: it's it is one of those logos that has made
Speaker 3: its way not just in America but around the world.
Speaker 3: People know that that is the symbol for recycling. And
Speaker 3: I mean yeah, I.
Speaker 2: Mean essentially, it's kind of like a new age or boros.
Speaker 2: If you think about it, snake eating its tail, you know,
Speaker 2: that's that's that's really what the snake. The whole idea
Speaker 2: of the or boros and the snake eating its own
Speaker 2: tail is that it's recycling. Into itself or it's you know, uh,
Speaker 2: coming back. It's gonna be reborn and recycle and come
Speaker 2: back and live it and continue. So it's kind of
Speaker 2: the same thing there, you go.
Speaker 3: You want to talk about some occult symbolism being used
Speaker 3: and being a thing that our logo, Our brain sees
Speaker 3: that and it's a logo and it just knows what
Speaker 3: this is. One hundred percent with you, dude. That's the
Speaker 3: whole principle of recycling, right to give something old new life.
Speaker 3: That's that's the entire principle. This glass coke bottle, I
Speaker 3: could throw it away or I could recycle it and
Speaker 3: it will have a new life and it will be
Speaker 3: refilled with a beverage and someone else will be able
Speaker 3: to use it.
Speaker 2: And that's the entire principle. So yeah, yeah, help plastic
Speaker 2: reincarnate you know. Well no, I've not plastic, but we'll
Speaker 2: get to that in a moment. Well that's the idea
Speaker 2: behind the logo, you know.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 2: So Financial Times magazine ran a first person retrospective in
Speaker 2: which Anderson recounts the experience. This is his words. He goes,
Speaker 2: it didn't take me long to come up with my design.
Speaker 2: A day or two. I almost hate to admit that now,
Speaker 2: but I had already done a presentation on recycling wastewater,
Speaker 2: and I'd come up with a graphic that described the
Speaker 2: flow of water from reservoirs through the through to consumption.
Speaker 2: So I already had arrows and arcs and angles in
Speaker 2: my mind. The problem with my earlier design is was
Speaker 2: that it seemed flat, two dimensional. When I sat down
Speaker 2: to enter the competition, I thought back to a field
Speaker 2: trip in elementary school to a newspaper office where we'd
Speaker 2: seen how paper was fed over rollers as it was printed.
Speaker 2: I drew on that image. The three arrows in my
Speaker 2: final sketch look like strips of folded over paper. I
Speaker 2: drew them in pencil and then traced over everything in
Speaker 2: black ink. These days, with computer graphic packages, it's rare
Speaker 2: that designs are are quite as stark. So, despite the
Speaker 2: clear talent for the medium, Anderson actually became an architect
Speaker 2: or an architect rather than a graphic designer, and ironically
Speaker 2: learned to lament environmental regulations from time to time. But
Speaker 2: I won't spoil the whole story here. Check out the
Speaker 2: full Okay, we don't need to yeah that a thing.
Speaker 3: So Basically, this kid came up with an idea and
Speaker 3: he got paid. It was a contest and it was
Speaker 3: like a He got two thousand dollars for one portion
Speaker 3: of the contest, and I think he got like five
Speaker 3: hundred dollars in a royalty of some type. He used
Speaker 3: it to go to Stockholm and go to school for
Speaker 3: like a semester or something to take a course out
Speaker 3: that way, which is fine, but keep in mind he
Speaker 3: became an architect and ended up hating regulations that got
Speaker 3: in the way of him making money. So take that
Speaker 3: with whatever grain of salt you want. But now the
Speaker 3: logo self a little triangle there. Okay, we know what
Speaker 3: that symbol means. But when it comes to plastics, what
Speaker 3: about that little number inside the triangle? Have you ever
Speaker 3: thought about what that might.
Speaker 2: Be, Jonathan, I just assumed that that was the it's
Speaker 2: like you see on the back of like big tanker trucks,
Speaker 2: like a biohazard kind of number. I assumed that that's
Speaker 2: what it was.
Speaker 3: So once upon a time someone told me that that
Speaker 3: was the number of reuses that that bottle was able
Speaker 3: to take before the chemicals would start leaching out of it.
Speaker 3: To the point we made earlier. That made no sense
Speaker 3: to me, but sure I ran with it because I
Speaker 3: didn't think to do any kind of real researcher digging
Speaker 3: into it. Just so everybody's clear, the little number inside
Speaker 3: the triangle is actually an industry code for to label
Speaker 3: what type of plastic is being used on that part
Speaker 3: of the bottle, right, So number one is PET, number
Speaker 3: two is HDPE. We'll get to all of these in
Speaker 3: a moment.
Speaker 2: But these basically different types of plastic then.
Speaker 3: Exactly exactly, So number three, six, and seven are literally
Speaker 3: not recyclable, like zero percent recyclable. So number three is PVC.
Speaker 3: We all know what PVC pipe is, right. If you
Speaker 3: see a low recycled symbol with the number three in it,
Speaker 3: that would be polyvinal chlory. That's what that is. Number
Speaker 3: six is polystyrene styrofoam essentially, and number seven literally every
Speaker 3: fucking thing else that's not listed in the first six,
Speaker 3: and none of those are recyclable. There's only I looked
Speaker 3: it up.
Speaker 4: Bro.
Speaker 3: There is the strangest chain of events with the sheer
Speaker 3: amount of luck thrown in that you could possibly recycle
Speaker 3: one of these things and it gets used for the
Speaker 3: intended purpose mostly those just get thrown straight to the landfill.
Speaker 3: But why do they put it in the recycling logo
Speaker 3: you might ask to make you feel good for recycling.
Speaker 3: It's a psi op, that's literally it now.
Speaker 2: Number one and two that would be PET, which is
Speaker 2: poly ethyl.
Speaker 3: Shit. I forgot to write that down. PET, it's a
Speaker 3: type of plastic. And number two which is HDPE, which
Speaker 3: is high density polyethylene. Basically milk jugs and coke bottles.
Speaker 3: That is the types of plastic that they are, and
Speaker 3: they have at least some fucking snowballs chance in hell
Speaker 3: of actually being recycled. So unless it's the little triangle
Speaker 3: that you see on your plastic bottle with a number
Speaker 3: one or number two inside of it, it's going to
Speaker 3: a landfill. There's no way around that.
Speaker 2: PET plastic stands for polyethylene terra thlate.
Speaker 3: Thank you, I forgot what that tea stood for. But yeah,
Speaker 3: So basically what I'm saying, the milk jug type of
Speaker 3: plastic and your coke and water bottle type of plastic, yes,
Speaker 3: there is a chance in hell that they could be recycled.
Speaker 3: More often than not, they're not going to. But that's
Speaker 3: because of contamination, which we'll get to in a moment, which.
Speaker 2: Is actually an amazing that even they would ever even
Speaker 2: get to nine percent in a whole year recycling, if
Speaker 2: you're running off of those stipulations, like nine percent is
Speaker 2: a pretty fucking good feat at that point, I would think.
Speaker 3: But it's usually somewhere between five and seven percent of
Speaker 3: all plastics that clean that they can be recycled all honestly,
Speaker 3: it's it's one out of every twenty coke bottles are
Speaker 3: actually being recycled.
Speaker 2: So you're saying that they keep so what was it,
Speaker 2: numbers three, six, and seven are unrecyclable. Yeah, and they
Speaker 2: put those numbers on there, and they keep the recycling
Speaker 2: logo the sigil, let's just call it, and they keep
Speaker 2: that on there just to make you feel good about recycling.
Speaker 2: And and here's the sih op within that, if you
Speaker 2: think about it, just like from a psychological standpoint, even
Speaker 2: though you know or even though they know that those
Speaker 2: are not recyclable, they're still putting it on there because
Speaker 2: now it's essentially telling the people, look, you gotta recycle.
Speaker 2: We put the little recycling thing on there. You have
Speaker 2: to do it, and that way, whenever it's not recycled,
Speaker 2: or it can't be recycled. They can, they can put
Speaker 2: all the blame on the public because we had that logo.
Speaker 2: It's your fault, exactly. It is a virtue signal.
Speaker 3: It's a guilt trip, and or it makes you feel
Speaker 3: good to recycle these things because you feel like you're
Speaker 3: doing good for the earth.
Speaker 2: It's a complete mind fuck. Everything's a fucking scam, dude.
Speaker 2: Every single thing is a scam. I'm so tired of
Speaker 2: this shit, dude, like ever, so tired of just people
Speaker 2: lying to you. They seem they seemingly care, they seemingly
Speaker 2: are genuine, they seemingly are sincere. You know, it's like
Speaker 2: it just reminds me of the whole like the Rock
Speaker 2: and Oprah situation. With the Maui fires, they're trying to
Speaker 2: make everybody else say, if you could only contribute just
Speaker 2: a couple of dollars, It's like, bitch, both of y'all
Speaker 2: are billionaires, fucking contribute a little something, you know, Like literally,
Speaker 2: between you two, you could rebuild all of Maui.
Speaker 3: You could. You could. Now let's talk about this, the
Speaker 3: virtue signaling of it. Right. So now, polls show that
Speaker 3: a third of all Americans recycle. First of all, I'm
Speaker 3: gonna call bullshit on that. Who can really trust the pole? Like,
Speaker 3: does that mean that the person polling was like, yeah,
Speaker 3: if I have the option, Like there's at the airports,
Speaker 3: there's a trash pile and a recycling pile right there,
Speaker 3: and I've thrown a coke bottle into a recycling bin
Speaker 3: before I recycle. Or how many of these people were
Speaker 3: actually saying no, I actively break apart my trash and
Speaker 3: I am like separating it by color and by this
Speaker 3: and by this, and I actually recycle. Who fucking knows.
Speaker 3: But allegedly the poles quote unquote show that a third
Speaker 3: of all Americans recycle. But again, I'm calling bullshit on that.
Speaker 3: But it is understood that America produces the largest amount
Speaker 3: of waste in the world annually, and our recycling centers
Speaker 3: simply can't keep up. If that is a true number,
Speaker 3: and if a third of Americans are actually over one
Speaker 3: hundred million people are actively recycling the correct way, we
Speaker 3: don't have enough recycling centers to actually handle that kind
Speaker 3: of influx of them. That's just not in the cards.
Speaker 3: So what did our boomer politicians do to fix quote
Speaker 3: unquote the problem when the time came, they outsourced because
Speaker 3: that's the only thing these fuckers know how to do
Speaker 3: is outsource it to someone else and make it someone
Speaker 3: else's problem. I know, I'm not just trying to shoot
Speaker 3: on boomers, but also, like, for fuck's sake, don't ever
Speaker 3: like attack a problem head on, blame someone else for
Speaker 3: it once you outsource it to them, and then they
Speaker 3: couldn't handle the problem, so you have a finger to
Speaker 3: point rather than a solution to the anyway.
Speaker 2: Not to be pony here, but did they literally kick
Speaker 2: the can down the road?
Speaker 3: That is literally what they did. Yes, literally and figuratively,
Speaker 3: and mostly they outsource it to China. Now, China and
Speaker 3: Indonesia are responsible for around five million tons of plastic
Speaker 3: in the ocean every year, which is about one third
Speaker 3: of all global debris.
Speaker 2: That is oh my god, that is absurd.
Speaker 3: Have you heard of the plastic Island, Jonathan.
Speaker 2: I have?
Speaker 3: Yeah, good COLT members, just give you two right, Oh yes,
Speaker 3: it is good COLT members. If you've never heard of
Speaker 3: the plastic Island, let me go ahead and show you
Speaker 3: this little video and let's learn about it together, shall This.
Speaker 2: Is the great Texas?
Speaker 3: Oh yes, and it's growing bro every year. And it's
Speaker 3: not the only one, it's the largest one. But yeah,
Speaker 3: let's oh buckle up, it's it's disgusting bro.
Speaker 4: Pacific garbage Patch, also known as the Pacific trash Vortex,
Speaker 4: is an area in the North Pacific where circulating water
Speaker 4: currents and wind movements have created an island like area
Speaker 4: of concentrated floating plastic garbage. Constantly growing, it is believed
Speaker 4: to increase in size tenfold every decade. American oceanographer Charles
Speaker 4: Moore first encountered the garbage patch, also known as trash Island,
Speaker 4: in nineteen ninety seven when returning to California after finishing
Speaker 4: the Los Angeles to Hawaii Transback yacht race, and reported
Speaker 4: that it took him seven full days to cross it.
Speaker 4: Twenty years later, and this monstrosity measures around one point
Speaker 4: six million square kilometers and contains approximately eighty thousand tons
Speaker 4: of plastic. That's over twice the size of Texas and
Speaker 4: five hundred times heavier than a house. A surprising thing
Speaker 4: about this area is that, despite its size, it is
Speaker 4: virtually invisible to satellites and aircraft. This is because ninety
Speaker 4: four percent of it is made up of minute fragments
Speaker 4: of plastic called microplastics. This complicates any location and clean
Speaker 4: up process because it means the plastic can only be
Speaker 4: located and retrieved by boat. These microplastics measure just a
Speaker 4: few millimeters in diameter, which also makes it very hard
Speaker 4: to remove and from the ocean without removing a large
Speaker 4: amount of important sea life with them. Another thing that
Speaker 4: complicates this clean up process is that because this plastic
Speaker 4: island is out in the middle of the ocean, miles
Speaker 4: away from any land, no country will accept responsibility for
Speaker 4: its cleanup, and with no funding, it is just left
Speaker 4: to grow. Perhaps the most troubling thing about this floating
Speaker 4: island of trash is that it isn't unique. There are
Speaker 4: similar garbage patches in the North Atlantic discovered in two
Speaker 4: thousand and nine, the Indian Ocean discovered in twenty ten,
Speaker 4: the South Pacific discovered in twenty eleven, and the South
Speaker 4: Atlantic discovered in twenty seventeen. There was even one discovered
Speaker 4: fairly recently in the Mediterranean Sea. There are various nonprofit
Speaker 4: organizations attempting to solve this problem, but they are drastically underfunded,
Speaker 4: and while projects like Mister Beasts Team Seas plan to
Speaker 4: raise thirty million dollars in two months to remove thirty
Speaker 4: million pounds of trash from our oceans are admirable and applaudable,
Speaker 4: they are neither practical nor economical. Thirty and eighty million
Speaker 4: pounds of plastic enter our seas every single day, So
Speaker 4: in the two months it took to remove thirty million pounds,
Speaker 4: approximately three billion pounds more entered, and at a cost
Speaker 4: of one dollar a pound. Today, you would need around
Speaker 4: three hundred and seventy trillion dollars to clear what is
Speaker 4: currently in the ocean, and every day that passes you'll
Speaker 4: need three billion dollars more. It seems the only way
Speaker 4: we can really tackle this problem is to adapt. To
Speaker 4: make changes in our lives to reduce our own dependency
Speaker 4: on plastics and therefore the amount of plastic that ends
Speaker 4: up in our ocean. Stop buying bottled water, avoid takeout
Speaker 4: food that uses single use plastics, recycle all we can,
Speaker 4: avoid buying items with excessive packaging, avoid products that contain microbeads,
Speaker 4: and understand that any plastic products that we don't recycle
Speaker 4: sooner or later will end up in our oceans, and
Speaker 4: that if we as the consumer don't buy plastic. The
Speaker 4: manufacturers won't produce it.
Speaker 3: Okay, real quick, real quick. Everything they talked about with
Speaker 3: the plastic island, that was the sportant part. But how
Speaker 3: do we solve this by reducing our own use of it?
Speaker 3: Bro Reducing our use of plastics doesn't fix the fucking
Speaker 3: island in the ocean currently as we speak.
Speaker 2: Also, how about instead of putting it on the people,
Speaker 2: maybe let's hold the corporations a little bit more liable
Speaker 2: about this.
Speaker 3: Right?
Speaker 2: You see that even then as they're trying to tell
Speaker 2: us about the problem, the guilt tripped you.
Speaker 3: This was that phase change right before your eyes. Good
Speaker 3: cult members, you've seen.
Speaker 2: It, Yeah, right on the screen. This is probably brought
Speaker 2: to you by the ad council A.
Speaker 3: But you saw that right. Even mister Beast with all
Speaker 3: of his resources, he donated thirteen million and cleaned up
Speaker 3: three hundred million, eight billion hit the ocean that timeframe.
Speaker 3: So it literally didn't it helped, but like to what end?
Speaker 2: Yeah, it was basically just a waste of time at
Speaker 2: that point.
Speaker 3: Sadly, So remember how I said, the plastics don't buy iodegrade,
Speaker 3: they don't break down. They in the ocean will denegrate
Speaker 3: into microplastics, which is what's floating in our balls right now,
Speaker 3: but they don't go away, and it makes it damn
Speaker 3: near impossible to clean up because, yeah, you could pick
Speaker 3: up a bottle that's floating in the water. Once that
Speaker 3: degrades into microplastics, you have to like filter the water
Speaker 3: out to collect all of it. It's extremely labor intensive.
Speaker 3: It takes a lot of time and a lot of money.
Speaker 3: So they were saying this video came out three years ago,
Speaker 3: and they were saying that at that moment, it would
Speaker 3: take three hundred and seventy trillion with a T dollars
Speaker 3: to clean up that one trash island. But they already
Speaker 3: know that there's five more.
Speaker 2: So I just looked up. I was interested. Are micro
Speaker 2: you know, cause we're talking about microplastics. Are they essentially
Speaker 2: forever chemicals?
Speaker 3: You know?
Speaker 2: And it says microplastics themselves are not classified as forever chemicals,
Speaker 2: but they can contain or be associated with such chemicals
Speaker 2: like pfas, which do not break down easily in the environment.
Speaker 2: But both microplastics and forever chemicals post significant health and
Speaker 2: environmental risks, so you know too, Now, basically the same thing.
Speaker 3: Now, where did this trashed island come from?
Speaker 2: In the Pacific Ocean, you might ask, right, because America
Speaker 2: has been attempting to clean themselves up since the fifties
Speaker 2: and sixties, right, and the crying Indian ad ran in
Speaker 2: nineteen seventy one.
Speaker 3: Right, So we outsourced to China. And I don't know
Speaker 3: if anybody's paid attention to China's pollution practices, but they
Speaker 3: don't give a fuck about the earth. Pretty Much everything
Speaker 3: we sent to them to deal with ethically, quote unquote,
Speaker 3: they just dumped in the ocean because it's out of sight,
Speaker 3: out of mind for us, and as soon as they
Speaker 3: get it's out of mind, out of sight for them.
Speaker 3: So they actually bought it for pennies on the dollar,
Speaker 3: got paid in American tax dollars, and did nothing but
Speaker 3: dump it into the ocean anyway. And they did that
Speaker 3: up until twenty eighteen with the introduction of Operation National Sword.
Speaker 3: This is a Wikipedia article, and I'm not going to
Speaker 3: bring an article page and I'm not gonna read the
Speaker 3: whole thing, but just so everybody gives a good understanding
Speaker 3: of what this is, the Operation National Sword or ONS,
Speaker 3: was a policy initiative launched in twenty seventeen by the
Speaker 3: government of China. Yes, we mean the CCP and Jijaping
Speaker 3: to monitor and more stringently review recyclable waste imports, not
Speaker 3: the recyclable waste that they were producing. They wanted to
Speaker 3: basically get all countries to stop sending them their shit
Speaker 3: and their garbage. By the first of January twenty eighteen,
Speaker 3: China had banned twenty four categories of solid waste, and
Speaker 3: it also stopped importing plastic waste with a contamination level
Speaker 3: of above zero point zero five percent, which was significantly
Speaker 3: lower than the two ten percent and it previously allowed.
Speaker 3: So what do I mean by that? All right? I
Speaker 3: just had an energy drink in my hand, okay, and
Speaker 3: I drank it and there was still at least a
Speaker 3: few drops left of energy drink in the bottom of
Speaker 3: the can. Okay. So the basically China would have accepted
Speaker 3: it if the can was ten percent full, that is
Speaker 3: a ten percent food contamination for that aluminum can, A
Speaker 3: right with me, they would have taken that. Then they
Speaker 3: changed it that it has to have less than half
Speaker 3: a percent actually, excuse me, less than a point zero
Speaker 3: five percent contamination. I hate to break it to you.
Speaker 3: The majority of the plastics that we are talking about
Speaker 3: here have a contamination level over that. And we're gonna
Speaker 3: discuss what happens with contaminated recyclables here in a bit.
Speaker 3: But anyway, they were accepting ten percent contamination. Now it's
Speaker 3: zero point zero five percent. Now before the policy, China
Speaker 3: will importing the vast majority of recyclables from North America
Speaker 3: and Europe. For two decades, this practice of buying recyclables
Speaker 3: brought raw materials for the growing industrial capacity of China,
Speaker 3: but also brought a lot of contaminated recyclables which ended
Speaker 3: up accruing in China, causing other environmental concerns such as
Speaker 3: air and water pollution. Now what do I mean by that?
Speaker 3: They started burning it, which created the crazy smog that
Speaker 3: you see. How many times have we seen pictures of
Speaker 3: China where the people are walking around with masks on
Speaker 3: their face because the smog is so bad.
Speaker 2: Some of that is because of their cars and burning
Speaker 2: of fossil fuels. The rest of that is from the
Speaker 2: burning of fossil fuels in the form of burning plastics,
Speaker 2: because plastics come from crude oil, and that's literally what
Speaker 2: they are. All those chemical components that we talked about
Speaker 2: are crude.
Speaker 3: Oil derivatives, and burning them produces black smoke, which in
Speaker 3: turn helps the whole small situation and water pollution. What
Speaker 3: do I mean by that dumping trash load after trash
Speaker 3: load after trash load into the China Sea.
Speaker 2: That's what I mean by the way you just made
Speaker 2: me like question my own mind. There, point zero five
Speaker 2: percent is five percent?
Speaker 3: No point zero five percent. You don't move the decimal
Speaker 3: place two over for five percent. This one percent is
Speaker 3: one point zero zero percent. We're already at that place.
Speaker 2: No, no, no, no, one point zero.
Speaker 3: Is one percent.
Speaker 2: No, it's a fraction. So to make up up, to
Speaker 2: make up one hundred percent would be you know, in
Speaker 2: in this kind of way, would just be one No.
Speaker 3: No, no, dude, ten percent is ten point zero. They
Speaker 3: are saying it's point zero five percent.
Speaker 2: No, no, no, I just looked it up. That's what
Speaker 2: I'm trying to tell you.
Speaker 3: No, dude, you're not listening. They already had the percent
Speaker 3: thing here. We're not doing the jumping over two splaces
Speaker 3: to go from a decimal to a percent. This is
Speaker 3: a decimal of a percent. This is a fraction of
Speaker 3: a percent.
Speaker 2: Damn. So what is that a twentieth of one percent
Speaker 2: would be pointed.
Speaker 3: This is yeah, so this is the tenth spot, that's
Speaker 3: the one hundred spots. So basically that's what it's saying.
Speaker 2: Holy, So five hundredths aka one twentieth of a percent of.
Speaker 3: Contamination, damn. And they were accepting ten percent. So like
Speaker 3: like I said, that coke can the aerage you drink
Speaker 3: can if it had ten percent left of the ergy drink,
Speaker 3: China would have accepted it. Now it has to have
Speaker 3: less than zero point zero five percent for the going
Speaker 3: to happen. Exactly exactly, this is what they did. It's
Speaker 3: like one drop, not even that's a fraction of a drop.
Speaker 3: Crazy And so so China, because of this Operation National
Speaker 3: Sword twenty eighteen, decide they're no longer going to be
Speaker 3: taking the trash of America in Europe. And I mean,
Speaker 3: I don't disagree with them on this. I understand what
Speaker 3: they're going after here. We should be addressing our problems,
Speaker 3: not outsourcing it to China. I know there's a crazy
Speaker 3: concept for our politicians to like get behind here, but
Speaker 3: this is what really does need to happen now. Like
Speaker 3: we said, China and Indonesia are responsible for around five
Speaker 3: million tons of plastic waste in the ocean every year.
Speaker 3: That's current. That is not what they were doing in
Speaker 3: twenty fifteen. Those numbers are appalling, and that is why
Speaker 3: the largest trash island is between the coast of America
Speaker 3: and China right now.
Speaker 2: God, okay, yep, So anyway, I mean, eventually this is
Speaker 2: all gonna catch up to humanity, right like it has to.
Speaker 3: Oh yeah, oh, it's already doing it right now. Dude,
Speaker 3: the guy that was uh racing from China to Hawaii,
Speaker 3: it took him seven days to sail through plastic island.
Speaker 2: I mean twice the size of Texas. I mean, think
Speaker 2: about it, Like, if you're starting at one end of Texas,
Speaker 2: Like let's just say you're starting at the east side
Speaker 2: and you're traveling to the west side, it takes ten
Speaker 2: hours to get through Texas driving at seventy seventy five
Speaker 2: eighty miles an hour, So twice the size of that
Speaker 2: I mean. Good God.
Speaker 3: So, whenever China did this new initiative, the recycling centers
Speaker 3: in America are the big cities anyway, panicked and stopped
Speaker 3: recycling altogether because although they told the American public that
Speaker 3: they were recycling it and reusing it, and all this
Speaker 3: they knew the truth. They were putting it either in
Speaker 3: landfills or more often than not, shipping it to China.
Speaker 3: Now that China's not taking anymore, they couldn't just hold
Speaker 3: on to the trash that was coming their way, so
Speaker 3: they just shut down. Okay, now most places started using
Speaker 3: landfills instead, but even still, there's only so many landfills
Speaker 3: to go around. And you can't put contaminated stuff into
Speaker 3: a landfill. Well, it depends on what the contamination is.
Speaker 3: Chemical is different than food. There's levels to this shit.
Speaker 3: But why does recycling fail? Why does recycling plastics fail?
Speaker 3: Long story short. Virgin plastics and what I mean by that,
Speaker 3: are like the first time that that Dasani water bottle
Speaker 3: is ever actually bought and used, that's considered virgin plastic
Speaker 3: first use, right. Virgin plastics are cheaper to make than
Speaker 3: it is to recycle old plastics. For you to take
Speaker 3: that plastic from that Dasagne bottle and melt it down
Speaker 3: and pour it into another mold and create another Dasaani
Speaker 3: bottle is exponentially more expensive than for you to just
Speaker 3: drill for more oil and use that oil to make
Speaker 3: another bottle exponentially more expensive.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I see, and this is never going to happen.
Speaker 2: But I would actually suggest to all of these uh,
Speaker 2: you know, the the plastic bottle companies and you know,
Speaker 2: the glass bottle, the aluminum cans, all that kind of stuff,
Speaker 2: I would actually suggest that they should be held liable
Speaker 2: for you know, for this trash island, for the you know,
Speaker 2: certain landfills and everything. If we held them accountable instead
Speaker 2: of just saying that it's just on the people and
Speaker 2: you got to stop littering, I mean, it doesn't really
Speaker 2: matter because first of all, recycling's a fucking scam. And
Speaker 2: even if you did, most of it's going to end
Speaker 2: up in a landfill anyway. Who's that really helping long term?
Speaker 2: And So if we held the companies and the corporations
Speaker 2: that are actually producing all of these plastics and everything,
Speaker 2: if we held them liable, I guarantee you there would
Speaker 2: be a lot less of it, right, like you got
Speaker 2: to cut the head on the snake off.
Speaker 3: So here's the worst part. They knew, and by they,
Speaker 3: I mean like the corporate groups in America that we're
Speaker 3: trying to push the recycling narrative and all of that lobbyist,
Speaker 3: they knew that recycling isn't a scalable thing, but they
Speaker 3: pushed it anyway. Leaked documents from the American Chemical Council
Speaker 3: confirmed it just a few years ago. They knew it
Speaker 3: even way back in the seventies that this was not
Speaker 3: going to be something that could actually be viable, Like
Speaker 3: there's no way that we'll ever be able to scale
Speaker 3: up recycling enough to fix the problem that we're creating.
Speaker 3: But we're going to create the problem anyway and tell
Speaker 3: people that recycling is the thing. They knew it, and
Speaker 3: there has been leaked documents that have come to light
Speaker 3: to confirm this. This is an article from a group
Speaker 3: called grist okay, and this is only from a few
Speaker 3: years ago. A new report calls chemical recycling a dangerous deception,
Speaker 3: and a former plastic lobbyist agrees, a plastic lobbyist.
Speaker 2: You heard that, what a real piece of shit you
Speaker 2: gotta be to be a plastic lobbyist.
Speaker 3: And they knew because this is the same thing chemical recycling,
Speaker 3: plastic recycling. This is literally into changeable dialogue. But they
Speaker 3: told the world that this was a that we could
Speaker 3: totally do this. It's on you to recycle. That's why
Speaker 3: you're killing the earth, and this and this. They knew
Speaker 3: what they were doing, they knew how harmful it was,
Speaker 3: and they still pushed it and promoted it, knowing that
Speaker 3: in the best case scenario, we could never scale recycling
Speaker 3: enough to combat the bad that was being done.
Speaker 2: But they said, fuck it and send it anyway. Let's
Speaker 2: read into I mean, here's the thing. Shifting the blame
Speaker 2: does not solve the problem.
Speaker 3: No, no, it doesn't.
Speaker 2: So anyway, it says. As petrochemical companies continue to inundate
Speaker 2: the world with cheap plastic products and packaging, much of
Speaker 2: which is designed to be used once and then thrown away,
Speaker 2: they've been heavily promoting one solution called chemical recycling. This
Speaker 2: catch all term refers to processes and in technologies that
Speaker 2: break plastics into their molecular building blocks and turn them
Speaker 2: into new products. In theory, chemical recycling is a promising
Speaker 2: way to deal with so called hard to recycle plastics
Speaker 2: like wrappers and bags, which can't be recycled using conventional methods.
Speaker 2: But a new report from the nonprofits Beyond Plastic and
Speaker 2: the International Pollutants Elimination Network or IPN, says chemical recycling
Speaker 2: is a dangerous deception that will only exacerbate pollution and
Speaker 2: environmental injustice while failing to address the plastic crisis. The
Speaker 2: landscape of chemical recycling is littered with pollution and failure,
Speaker 2: and relying on it is a end quote, unreliable and
Speaker 2: polluting approach to resolve the plastic the global plastic crisis,
Speaker 2: the deputy director of Beyond Plastics said, and she and
Speaker 2: the report co authors called on President Joe Biden to
Speaker 2: place a national moratorium on new chemical recycling options in
Speaker 2: the US and urged international negotiators to disavow the process
Speaker 2: as part of the Global Plastics Treaty that will be
Speaker 2: discussed during a third round of negotiations in Nairobi later
Speaker 2: this month.
Speaker 3: Yeah, they went to I forgo to talk about global
Speaker 3: plastic solutions. I find that to be ridiculously ironic in
Speaker 3: and of itself.
Speaker 2: But never mind, Well, at this moment, because China doesn't
Speaker 2: want to take our trash, maybe we can ship it
Speaker 2: to Africa.
Speaker 3: Now, ah, you already see where it's going. Because never
Speaker 3: mind us solving the problem, Let's find someone else to
Speaker 3: fucking outsource the problem too. I swear to God, the
Speaker 3: Boomers anyway.
Speaker 2: Yeah, once once you've already you know, committed to all
Speaker 2: the slave labor with the mining, maybe we can just
Speaker 2: dump all of our trash into the mining ports. Essentially,
Speaker 2: why not.
Speaker 3: You know, it's Africa. It's like, no, dude, no, no, no,
Speaker 3: we could just fix the problem, like y'all could just
Speaker 3: stop doing this shit.
Speaker 2: But anyway, beyond plastics and ipens, one and fifty nine
Speaker 2: page report begins with an overview of the plastic pollution
Speaker 2: crisis in companies undeniable failure to address it through conventional
Speaker 2: recycling methods. According to the Department of Energy, the US
Speaker 2: plastics recycling rate is still only about five percent, despite
Speaker 2: decades spent trying to scale it up.
Speaker 3: Or how earlier I said, like the best year we
Speaker 3: got to nine percent on average, dude, it's somewhere between
Speaker 3: five to seven. Like that's that's just how it goes.
Speaker 2: Notably, this view is supported in a foreword by Lewis Freeman,
Speaker 2: a former vice president of Government Affairs for the Society
Speaker 2: of Plastics Industry, a major lobbying group that in twenty
Speaker 2: sixteen changed its name to the Plastics Industry Association. According
Speaker 2: to Freeman, the plastics industry has long known that recycling
Speaker 2: couldn't realistically manage a significant amount of plastic waste, but
Speaker 2: has spent millions of dollars convincing the public otherwise. Freeman
Speaker 2: implies that chemical recycling is an extension of this deception
Speaker 2: and raises doubts that it will contribute to an industry
Speaker 2: target of end quotes reusing, recycling, or recovering one hundred
Speaker 2: percent of plastic packaging in the US by twenty forty.
Speaker 2: That's laughable.
Speaker 3: That is now. It's a great goal. It's a great
Speaker 3: goal to set, but you already know that it's a
Speaker 3: goal that cannot be achieved. Period. But you're going to
Speaker 3: spend millions, if not billions of dollars to save this
Speaker 3: multi trillion dollar industry every year, and you're just going
Speaker 3: to lobby your little ass off in DC to where
Speaker 3: laws can be passed, not talking about regulations. If anything,
Speaker 3: it's deregulating these plastic industries. Yeah.
Speaker 2: So, the Plastics Industry Association did not respond to Grist's
Speaker 2: requests for comment of Shocker to assess the state of
Speaker 2: chemical recycling in the United States beyond plastics, and IPIN
Speaker 2: and IPEN looked at the countries eleven chemical recycling facilities
Speaker 2: and found that only three are dedicated exclusively to producing
Speaker 2: feedstocks for new plastic products. The rest produce fuel to
Speaker 2: be burned, sometimes in combination with chemicals for industrial use.
Speaker 2: Four facilities are registered with the Environmental Protection Agency as
Speaker 2: generators of hazardous waste, and seven of them are located
Speaker 2: in areas where there is a higher than average concentration
Speaker 2: of people of color.
Speaker 3: Of course, again shocker how that one plays out right.
Speaker 2: This trend aligns with a pattern of environmental injustice within
Speaker 2: the plastics industry, which has concentrated pollution intensive plastic production
Speaker 2: facilities near black and low income communities in Louisiana, Texas
Speaker 2: and Pennsylvania. Oh, three of the states that I've lived in.
Speaker 2: That makes sense. I'm just saying those are the three,
Speaker 2: Ain't it fucking shocker? Meanwhile, the report finds that most
Speaker 2: of the facilities are working only at a pilot or
Speaker 2: demonstration scale and not at full capacity, despite efforts dating
Speaker 2: back to the nineteen eighties to scale up chemical recycling technologies.
Speaker 2: Even if these eleven facilities were processing as much as
Speaker 2: much plastic as they say they can, beyond plastics and
Speaker 2: ipen estimate that they would only go through four hundred
Speaker 2: and sixty thousand metric tons of plastic waste per year,
Speaker 2: which is less than one point three percent of the
Speaker 2: amount generated in the US annually.
Speaker 3: So best case scenario, they can only go for a
Speaker 3: fraction of a drop into the metric bucket of what's
Speaker 3: going on here, and they're only operating at a ooh,
Speaker 3: look what we can do type of scale. They're not
Speaker 3: running at full tilt.
Speaker 2: These findings are consistent with those of other nonprofits and
Speaker 2: media outlets. A twenty twenty one Reuter's investigation, for example,
Speaker 2: found that thirty chemical recycling projects announced by twenty four
Speaker 2: companies were either still operating on a modest scale or
Speaker 2: it closed down with or while more than half were
Speaker 2: years behind schedule. A more recent investigation into one facility
Speaker 2: in North Carolina found that much of the plastic processed
Speaker 2: was disposed of as a toxic waste, despite advertisements claiming
Speaker 2: it to be an environmental success story.
Speaker 3: So real quick, you know we're going to talk about
Speaker 3: contamination here in a moment, but that is what they
Speaker 3: classify as toxic waste. You've heard the theory about like
Speaker 3: don't throw, don't recycle, greasy pizza boxes, because that's contamination.
Speaker 3: We talked about this before. Do you know what they
Speaker 3: do whenever they find one greasy pizza box in the
Speaker 3: recycling truck, the entire truck is considered contaminated and it
Speaker 3: all goes to a toxic waste landfill. Now, let's just
Speaker 3: say that your house recycles responsibly, right, your one house
Speaker 3: does it the right way. Let's say you're street all
Speaker 3: recycled a correct way. What are the chances that every
Speaker 3: single bin that that recycling truck is going to pick
Speaker 3: up that day, every single person is doing it to
Speaker 3: that level, washing out their uh, peanut butter jars, rinsing
Speaker 3: out their coat cans after they're done drinking them, and
Speaker 3: that that truck is going to be one contaminated.
Speaker 2: Well, and this is where you find the scam out
Speaker 2: right here, because they didn't educate people on that. Like
Speaker 2: I didn't know that, literally, I didn't know that. You know,
Speaker 2: even a pizza box was contaminated and not not able
Speaker 2: to be recycled if it had a bit of grease
Speaker 2: on What pizza box doesn't have a bit of grease
Speaker 2: on it?
Speaker 3: Exactly exactly, So the smallest bit of food contamination. The
Speaker 3: entire truck is considered contaminated. So even though you are
Speaker 3: doing your part in recycling and trying to help in
Speaker 3: all this, that doesn't mean that your neighbor or some
Speaker 3: guy two neighborhoods down that's also on that same recycling
Speaker 3: truck is doing it to that level. So all of
Speaker 3: your efforts end up in the same fucking landfill as
Speaker 3: if you were to just throw it in the trash well.
Speaker 2: And that's the trap right there, because they know that
Speaker 2: they don't even really care to educate the public on that.
Speaker 2: And and that's the thing. If you really cared, you
Speaker 2: would educate the public on what contamination is and what
Speaker 2: contamination isn't, right, because those people would be at least
Speaker 2: the people who are super into recycling, those people would
Speaker 2: be a little bit more of the mind to put
Speaker 2: that in another bin, right, because there are a lot
Speaker 2: of people out there that genuinely care about recycling. There's
Speaker 2: nothing wrong with that. I think it's a beautiful thing.
Speaker 2: We should be caring about that if it actually worked.
Speaker 2: But that's the thing doesn't in all of this, dude,
Speaker 2: the plastics themselves most cannot be recycled, but they won't
Speaker 2: educate you on that, right. The glass bottles and the
Speaker 2: mason jars and the metal, the tin cans, all that
Speaker 2: these can be recycled, and most of them do get
Speaker 2: recycled because it's actually economically sound for you to do so.
Speaker 2: Plastics are the main issue here, and of course they're
Speaker 2: not going to educate you on it because they don't care.
Speaker 3: It's going to the landfill anyway, or it's gonna get burned.
Speaker 2: They never cared in the beginning, which is why they
Speaker 2: never cared to educate anybody on it. It's just hey,
Speaker 2: you know, like that, And that's that's really the the
Speaker 2: the brilliance behind all of it in the first place
Speaker 2: is that it's it's almost a fail safe if you
Speaker 2: think about it, that no matter what the corporations or
Speaker 2: the people that are worried about carbon taxing, or the
Speaker 2: people worried about pollution and people worried about you know,
Speaker 2: littering and all that stuff, they always have a fallback
Speaker 2: option to blame the public because you're never going to
Speaker 2: get one hundred percent of people to do what is right.
Speaker 2: It's never going to happen. People even if they believe
Speaker 2: that littering is a bad thing. If they're being told
Speaker 2: what to do and they don't care about the system,
Speaker 2: or if it's fucked the system, You're never going to
Speaker 2: get one hundred percent of people to do one thing.
Speaker 3: It's dude, look a shopping card example. I always give
Speaker 3: one hundred percent. That is a clear sign that even
Speaker 3: though you can see what you need to do and
Speaker 3: there are others that are doing it, you'll watch people
Speaker 3: say fuck it. That's the thing.
Speaker 2: And I actually recently heard and I think there was
Speaker 2: actually a good cult member that said it on the
Speaker 2: live show. And then somebody else recently told me too
Speaker 2: that because I asked them, I was like, do you
Speaker 2: do you? You know, I asked the weird questions whenever
Speaker 2: I'm talking to people, like do you always push the
Speaker 2: buggy back to the to the cardholder? And they're like, honestly, no,
Speaker 2: I don't. And my reason is is because I'm a
Speaker 2: single mom, I have two kids. I'm not walking away
Speaker 2: from my fucking car to go push this into the
Speaker 2: card holder and leaving my kids by themselves. I'm like,
Speaker 2: that's actually logical, it makes sense.
Speaker 3: I get it. I'm not judging those that do. I'm
Speaker 3: just or don't Rather I'm just saying that that's a
Speaker 3: clear sign that you will never get one hundred percent
Speaker 3: of people to get on board with any fucking thing. Ever,
Speaker 3: There's always gonna be outliers, there's always gonna be reasons,
Speaker 3: there's always gonna be exceptions, there's always gonna that that
Speaker 3: doesn't fucking matter. It's all a part of it.
Speaker 2: I mean, even think about because what is it like
Speaker 2: not even fifty percent of like voters or people that
Speaker 2: can vote vote every year, right, And it's like, and
Speaker 2: those people will complain about the economy, they'll complain about policies,
Speaker 2: they'll complain about abortion or whatever the fuck, but then
Speaker 2: they don't even show up. And I understand why because
Speaker 2: I don't think that our vote really gives a fucking
Speaker 2: I don't think it even makes a difference, to be
Speaker 2: honest with you, at this point, you know, the the
Speaker 2: one possible white horse that we is covering up Epstein
Speaker 2: fucking Island. Okay, So I mean I get it, but
Speaker 2: it's like, yeah, you're never gonna get one hundred percent
Speaker 2: of people to do one thing. That's never gonna ever happen.
Speaker 3: Ever, there's always gonna be somebody to do the opposite,
Speaker 3: just to do the opposite because fuck them.
Speaker 2: Oh dude, It's just like, you know, we have certain
Speaker 2: listeners who listen to every single episode, yet after at
Speaker 2: the end of every episode leave a review telling us
Speaker 2: about how much we suck.
Speaker 3: It's like, why are you still listening? You know?
Speaker 2: Like, but people just love to complain, and they love
Speaker 2: to not even just complain, they just want to be
Speaker 2: adversarial at that time.
Speaker 3: I should mention that too. I over the weekend, I
Speaker 3: went to the Spotify and I was kind of reading
Speaker 3: some of the comments on some of the episodes. Y'all
Speaker 3: are some assholes, not just to us. They have people
Speaker 3: fighting each other in the comment section under our videos
Speaker 3: or under our episodes, I should say, And it's like, Bro,
Speaker 3: everybody's in sale to their opinion. People have the to
Speaker 3: be wrong. It's okay, but like, y'all ain't gotta be
Speaker 3: y'a ain't gotta be shitty to nobody. Y'all have to
Speaker 3: be shaded us, although we open ourselves up to that conjecture,
Speaker 3: and like, that's a part of it. You chalk it
Speaker 3: up to the game. Y'all ain't gotta be shitty to
Speaker 3: each other. Play nice, let's be let's be homies about it.
Speaker 2: Come on, now, Well, there's a lot of people that
Speaker 2: you know are keyboard warriors and they hide behind a
Speaker 2: screen and they would never say that to anybody in public,
Speaker 2: and they would never say, you know, they would never
Speaker 2: cuss out either one of us or anybody that they're
Speaker 2: you know, attacking in the comments. But you know, because
Speaker 2: you have the defense guard right up in front of
Speaker 2: you all, I'm gonna come with the name of Needle
Speaker 2: Dick sixty nine, and nobody's ever gonna know that it's me,
Speaker 2: you know what I mean. And so I don't know,
Speaker 2: I mean, modify comments, be wild, whatever, it's fine.
Speaker 3: Oh yeah, it's whatever. But anyway, way back to the
Speaker 3: point here, so they already knew that there's no way
Speaker 3: they're gonna be able to recycle to that level. And
Speaker 3: you're right as far as the education goes, even if
Speaker 3: you were to inform the public, how many people would
Speaker 3: actually do it anyway?
Speaker 2: And that's what I'm saying. You can always the system
Speaker 2: was never set up to clean the atmosphere, to clean
Speaker 2: the earth or anything. The system was always set up
Speaker 2: to push blame onto anybody. But the people that are producing.
Speaker 3: It exactly, because again it's your fault that the company.
Speaker 3: Never mind the fact the company name name, the one
Speaker 3: doesn't matter, Coke, Pepsi, whatever. It's not their fault that
Speaker 3: they're producing five hundred tons of non recyclable trash that
Speaker 3: they know is going to end up in the ocean
Speaker 3: every week. That's not the point you or the problem
Speaker 3: for buying it. That is your fault. You did this,
Speaker 3: random citizen who's mining their own business. You should feel
Speaker 3: guilty about the earth dying.
Speaker 2: Well, and you saw it. You know. The people that
Speaker 2: are part of these lobbyist organizations are Coke, r Pepsi,
Speaker 2: are Anheuser Busch, which are like the main contributors, right.
Speaker 3: Yep, oh yeah, and again we're gonna get back to
Speaker 3: this article now. But they've known that from the beginning,
Speaker 3: and they did it strictly to shift the blame away
Speaker 3: from them so that the people got more regulations on
Speaker 3: what they can and can't do. Meanwhile, their industry got
Speaker 3: less restrictions and less laws telling them that they couldn't
Speaker 3: do certain things. But let's keep going.
Speaker 2: The only thing that actually the only thing actually being
Speaker 2: recycled is the myth that recycling will solve the plastic
Speaker 2: pollution crisis. The new report says it raises concern about
Speaker 2: a spate of state level laws backed by the American
Speaker 2: Chemistry Council what a name, an industry lobbying group to
Speaker 2: promote chemical recycling, including by loosening airror emission controls and
Speaker 2: eliminating monitoring requirements. At least twenty states have passed such
Speaker 2: deregulation laws. Well, that's good, as the American Chemistry Council
Speaker 2: did not respond to Grisk requests for comment obviously. A
Speaker 2: spokesperson for Altero, which operates a chemical recycling facility in Akron, Ohio,
Speaker 2: said the report was riddled with many misleading and erroneous conclusions,
Speaker 2: and specifically described as defamatory the claim that its facility
Speaker 2: was nearing the limits of its air emissions permit while
Speaker 2: operating at below full capacity. The company said Beyond Plastics
Speaker 2: conveniently ignored publicly avoid publicly available documents from a local
Speaker 2: air quality regulator showing that its facilities emissions are significantly
Speaker 2: below the limits of the air emissions permit. So Beyond
Speaker 2: Plastics said Altera's criticism was not based on fact, and
Speaker 2: that the documents the company provided do not negate previous
Speaker 2: findings showing that its facility had nearly violated its air
Speaker 2: emissions permit and that the Ohio EPA decided on two
Speaker 2: occasions not to take enforcement action against it. We stand
Speaker 2: on our report, said Judith and Beyond, Plastic president and
Speaker 2: former regional administrator of the oh Of course she was
Speaker 2: former fucking regional administrator for the EPA. These locks, they
Speaker 2: bounced back and forth. Well, we're going to work for
Speaker 2: the EPA, we really care. Well, let me let me
Speaker 2: be a lobbyist for a fucking plastic company.
Speaker 3: Now, this is interesting. This is the thing.
Speaker 2: You know, we say it all the time with Plastic.
Speaker 2: You know people that are working for Pfizer then they
Speaker 2: go and work for the who. It's like, that is
Speaker 2: how you infiltrate. That is infiltration one oh one. You're
Speaker 2: shaping public perception into into making people believe that organizations
Speaker 2: like you know, these these plastic lobbyists are are fighting
Speaker 2: for the good and fighting for earth. Meanwhile they're jumping
Speaker 2: back over the EPA making it seem like they actually
Speaker 2: give a shit. Well, if every if you have the
Speaker 2: EPA and you have corporations, and you have lobbyists, that
Speaker 2: are all pro earth and pro atmosphere and all this stuff.
Speaker 2: How is it possible that every single fucking landfill is
Speaker 2: overly full? How is it possible that there is a
Speaker 2: giant floating plastic island in the middle of the ocean
Speaker 2: twice the size of Texas if everybody truly cared? How
Speaker 2: is that fucking is all that uh littering growing?
Speaker 3: It's crazy? You can maybe do this thing where you
Speaker 3: follow the money, right, It's really easy to draw. You
Speaker 3: don't have to put pins on a corkboard. You don't
Speaker 3: even have to do that. It's literally a Google search
Speaker 3: followed by a Google search followed by the holy shit
Speaker 3: here we are. Just follow the money trail and it
Speaker 3: will always lead you to the truth. These people don't
Speaker 3: actually give a fuck, and they're gonna tell you, oh,
Speaker 3: we are well below the permissible limits, and this, this
Speaker 3: and this. Meanwhile, the reports that they all the publicly
Speaker 3: available documents that they released show that they are literally
Speaker 3: right at the cusp of being out of compliance and
Speaker 3: they are not operating in full capacity. You can you
Speaker 3: could try to sell that and spend those words any
Speaker 3: way you want. But that's just the facts.
Speaker 2: Beyond plastics said Altera's criticism was not based on fact
Speaker 2: and that the documents. Oh I already read that.
Speaker 4: Yeah.
Speaker 2: Another operator, Nexus Circular sent Grist snippets of its websites
Speaker 2: FAQ page describing the chemical recycling process, and third Exon
Speaker 2: Mobile said chemical recycling was a proven, scalable technology to
Speaker 2: turn plastic ways that would otherwise go to a landfill
Speaker 2: or incineration into valuable new products.
Speaker 3: Oh, Exon Mobile knows that right. I mean, even if
Speaker 3: you were to find a facility where you can scale
Speaker 3: it and all these things, it is literally the same
Speaker 3: conversation as the wind turbines. There is no way that
Speaker 3: that wind turbine is going to produce enough power to
Speaker 3: compensate for the amount of energy it took to construct it.
Speaker 3: There is no way that you're going to get these
Speaker 3: plastics to even to be used as a fuel source
Speaker 3: and produce enough energy from burning that fuel source as
Speaker 3: it took to create the fuel source in the first place.
Speaker 3: It is a net negative overall.
Speaker 2: Well, and that's the thing, Like, I don't want to
Speaker 2: hear from Exon Mobile telling me that it is a
Speaker 2: scalable technology that would work. I don't want to hear
Speaker 2: from the people that stand to gain from pushing this
Speaker 2: kind of idea. I want to hear from the people
Speaker 2: who are are the ones that are vetting it, the
Speaker 2: ones that are investigating it, the ones that are actually
Speaker 2: you know, outside people looking at it from a different
Speaker 2: point of view that don't necessarily have anything to gain.
Speaker 2: Problem is, there isn't anybody like that.
Speaker 3: It doesn't exist, right, you.
Speaker 2: Know, the lobbyist lobbyists work for the companies, they always will.
Speaker 3: The EPA.
Speaker 2: We just saw right there the fucking person that was
Speaker 2: working for the lobbyist organization used to work for the
Speaker 2: EPA and just bouncing back and forth.
Speaker 3: This is all just a fucking game to these people. Now,
Speaker 3: I know someone's gonna say that, Well, maybe they were
Speaker 3: working for the EPA because they really believed in what
Speaker 3: they were doing right, and they wanted to make it better.
Speaker 3: And then when they saw that they couldn't do it
Speaker 3: that way, they decided to go with this Beyond Plastics group,
Speaker 3: which is a group trying to stop the use of
Speaker 3: the plastics and all these things, and that's why they
Speaker 3: just got disgusted with the organization of it. So they
Speaker 3: started and went for this other thing. And I could
Speaker 3: maybe see that in some cases, but again, follow the
Speaker 3: money and it paints a different picture.
Speaker 2: Pure Cycle, which runs a polypropylene purification plan in Iron
Speaker 2: Town or Ironton, Ohio, disputed Beyond Plastics characterization of the
Speaker 2: plant's processes as chemical recycling. Six of six of the
Speaker 2: other seven companies whose chemical recycling facilities are named in
Speaker 2: the new report did not respond to Risk regrests for comment.
Speaker 2: Prima America Corporation, which operates a chemical recycling facility in
Speaker 2: New Hampshire, could not be reached because it does not
Speaker 2: have a website or a publicly listed phone number. Shocker,
Speaker 2: that sounds like a shell organization if I've ever heard one,
Speaker 2: or just those that really don't want to have a
Speaker 2: conversation about it.
Speaker 3: I get that right.
Speaker 2: To stop greenwashing and prevent chemical recycling from further harming
Speaker 2: low income communities and communities of color, Beyond Plastics and
Speaker 2: IPEN call for Biden to declare a moratory on all
Speaker 2: new chemical recycling plants, a step to environmental groups had
Speaker 2: previously suggested the President can take without congressional approval. They
Speaker 2: also recommended that all existing facilities to be subjected to
Speaker 2: full environmental impact assessments. From the EPA. All federal, state,
Speaker 2: and local subsidies and incentives for chemical recycling should be ended,
Speaker 2: the author said in no projects that turn plastic into
Speaker 2: fuel should be allowed.
Speaker 3: I got to agree with that for the most part,
Speaker 3: because again it's a net negative and it actually adds
Speaker 3: more to the toxicity conversation rather than it adds to
Speaker 3: the reusable plastics conversation.
Speaker 2: The toxicity avocity glove system. On the international stage, countries
Speaker 2: are in the midst of negotiating a historic treaty on plastics.
Speaker 2: There's nothing in the treaty yet about chemical recycling. It's
Speaker 2: still a very rough draft, but beyond plastics and IPEN
Speaker 2: says it's critical that that negotiatesator's fight for language that
Speaker 2: explicitly labels it an illegitimate solution to the plastic pollution crisis,
Speaker 2: potentially by classifying it as waste incineration rather than recycling,
Speaker 2: or by blocking it from counting toward mandatory recycling targets.
Speaker 2: The third round of negotiations is scheduled to begin on
Speaker 2: November thirteenth, with the final treaty due to do by
Speaker 2: the end of next year. We do not want the
Speaker 2: treaty negotiators or legislators or regulators to be distracted by
Speaker 2: the false solution of chemical recycling, and told journalists on Tuesday, Instead,
Speaker 2: she urged them to consider the simpler strategy of significantly
Speaker 2: reducing plastic production.
Speaker 3: There you go. There it is. This is the lady
Speaker 3: that used to work for the EPA. Right now she's
Speaker 3: working for Beyond Plastics, and she's saying that there's a
Speaker 3: different way to go about this and we need to
Speaker 3: just handle it right now. That article brought up the ACC,
Speaker 3: which is the American Chemicals Council. For decades, the ACC
Speaker 3: has led us to believe that recycling is the answer, right,
Speaker 3: that's clearly what we got to do to save the planet.
Speaker 3: But it was all a lie. In the US, plastic
Speaker 3: recycling rates, like I said, have never gone above nine percent,
Speaker 3: and on average they're more like a five percent. And
Speaker 3: that was back when recycling mint outsourcing it to China.
Speaker 3: Right now those rates are even lower, and it's disgusting.
Speaker 3: The ACC has even gone as far as to take
Speaker 3: legal action against those who would have disclosed documents relating
Speaker 3: to the truth about recycling. They have literally sent people
Speaker 3: to court to silence them because they knew from day
Speaker 3: one that recycling was not a scalable concept when it
Speaker 3: came to plastics, and they ran with it. Anyway. To
Speaker 3: further that point, we're talking about recycling and contamination, right,
Speaker 3: because what does and does not constitute a contaminated recycling sample? Right?
Speaker 3: This is an article from Rubicon, And if you don't
Speaker 3: know what Rubicon is, it's a plant that makes plastics.
Speaker 3: It's a contributor. And of course they're trying to educate
Speaker 3: the public by releasing these types of documents. Right.
Speaker 2: So there's in Louisiana, isn't there?
Speaker 3: There is? And it's one of the nastiest fucking plants
Speaker 3: to work at. Ever, I will never step foot on
Speaker 3: that facility again as long as I live. It's gross
Speaker 3: and it's nasty shit that like will kill you if
Speaker 3: there's a leak, it's it's yeah, in your business, I'm sorry.
Speaker 3: If your business recycles, there's a good chance that you're
Speaker 3: familiar with the term recycling contamination. But what is recycling contamination?
Speaker 3: And why does it matter? Hillary Clinton? Why does that matter?
Speaker 3: How does it impact your sustainability efforts? And how can
Speaker 3: we prevent recycling contamination? As it turns out, the problem
Speaker 3: of recycling contamination can easily be reduced. Here is everything
Speaker 3: you need to understand about recycling contamination, including common contaminants
Speaker 3: and how you can move your planet towards a more
Speaker 3: circular environment or economy. Okay, so what is recycling contamination?
Speaker 3: Recycling contamination occurs when materials are sorted in the wrong
Speaker 3: recycling bin placing a glass bottle into a mixed paper
Speaker 3: cycling bin, for example, or when materials are not properly cleaned,
Speaker 3: such as when food residue remains on a plastic yogurt container. Yes,
Speaker 3: because you're supposed to thoroughly rinse out your yogurt cup
Speaker 3: before you recycle it. Otherwise the entire truck gets thrown
Speaker 3: into the lamp fill. But anyway, This is sometimes referred
Speaker 3: to as aspirational recycling, as you're simply throwing something into
Speaker 3: the recycling on the hope that it will find its
Speaker 3: way to where it needs to eventually go. Unfortunately, this
Speaker 3: is rarely the case. For instance, if you're collecting a
Speaker 3: material for recycling, anything other than that specific material could
Speaker 3: be considered a contaminant when disposed of improperly. Example would
Speaker 3: be like in the wrong recycling container. Even recyclable materials
Speaker 3: such as plastic and other paper products, can act as contaminants.
Speaker 3: The changes of recycling after a I'm sorry, the challenges
Speaker 3: of recycling after a natural disaster point to an extreme
Speaker 3: form of contamination. For example, if someone throws plastic into
Speaker 3: an occ or cardboard stream, this would be considered recycling
Speaker 3: contamination because of its incorrect disposal. There's a strong possibility
Speaker 3: it's rejected and sent to the landfill, resulting in a
Speaker 3: wasted recycling effort. Altogether, yes, this is correct. The only
Speaker 3: time it's okay to comingle or mixed recyclables together is
Speaker 3: when you have an agreement to do so with your
Speaker 3: recycling service provider. It's worth noting that recyclables can contain
Speaker 3: residues such as food waste, oil, and grease, and unless
Speaker 3: stated otherwise by your recycling company, are considered contaminants and
Speaker 3: should not be added to your recycling stream. So if
Speaker 3: you already have that agreement with your recycling company, you
Speaker 3: are going to pay through the nose because now the
Speaker 3: recycling group has to hire people to separate it at
Speaker 3: the recycling plant, rather than you setting it apart and
Speaker 3: doing it on your end. So it's just money over
Speaker 3: money for shit that's probably going to the landfill any
Speaker 3: damn way. Now, the type of recycling contamination contain a
Speaker 3: contaminant like plastic bags, plastic bags and I'm made from
Speaker 3: plastic materials such as shrink wrap, bubble wrap, plastic bags,
Speaker 3: newspaper bags, trash bags, et cetera. Are the worst recycling
Speaker 3: contaminator of all. And keep in mind we read earlier
Speaker 3: that these things cannot be recycled. Just throwing this out.
Speaker 2: Can they not be recycled? But they contaminate everything that
Speaker 2: can be recycled exactly exactly.
Speaker 3: It's telling you to keep them out of the bin
Speaker 3: to save sorders at your local recycling facility a huge
Speaker 3: amount of extra removal work while also saving their machines
Speaker 3: the hassle of getting clogged. And also, since we're on
Speaker 3: the plastic bag conversation, I'm just gonna go out on
Speaker 3: a limb here and suggest that the vast majority of
Speaker 3: people that have a trash can in their home has
Speaker 3: a plastic bag inside of it, called a trash bag.
Speaker 2: Wow, good point. I'm just trying to think critically, not
Speaker 2: contaminate everything that you throw out.
Speaker 3: Then, well, that's the thing that's a trash bag, right,
Speaker 3: so that's going to the landfill any damn way. But
Speaker 3: by doing that, you're still adding to the pollution conversation.
Speaker 3: So it's already right off the rip, a completely defunct conversation.
Speaker 3: Oh my god.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it's all just a waste.
Speaker 3: Then at that point exactly contaminant number two food waste.
Speaker 3: And this is one of the ones that to your point,
Speaker 3: I feel like they should have educated people about a
Speaker 3: lot more. But I'll also say it depends on area
Speaker 3: to area, right, Like certain areas of the country, recycling
Speaker 3: is like a big thing they do, in fact, teach
Speaker 3: kids in school how to do it properly. Other areas,
Speaker 3: like where we grew up, it's just not a conversation,
Speaker 3: but let's talk about it here. Food waste. Otherwise recyclable
Speaker 3: items quickly become garbage when they carry the remnants of
Speaker 3: the food that they once hailed. Some great examples of
Speaker 3: food waste contamination can be found in paperboard take home
Speaker 3: boxes full of food and recite uh and the recycl
Speaker 3: jar or can that hasn't been emptied or rinsed out.
Speaker 3: It may seem environmentally sound, but paperboard that's used or
Speaker 3: I think they mean to say, cardboard that's used to
Speaker 3: carry food usually heads to the landfill. The same can
Speaker 3: be said for food waste left in recyclable jars and cans,
Speaker 3: one notable exception being a well scraped peanut butter jar.
Speaker 3: Who the fuck's doing that? Who is doing that?
Speaker 2: I mean, listen, you got a dog and you want
Speaker 2: to use it as like one of those cong toys,
Speaker 2: you know what I mean.
Speaker 3: But that's not a thing that anybody's doing. Nobody's rinsing
Speaker 3: out their yogurt cups before they put in the recycling bin.
Speaker 3: And if you are doing that, good cult member, listen,
Speaker 3: good on you. You're actually taking the extra effort to
Speaker 3: try to do recycling the way. But can you tell
Speaker 3: me with one hundred percent certainty that everyone down your
Speaker 3: street or in your neighborhood is doing the same thing,
Speaker 3: Because if there's one contaminant on the truck, the entire
Speaker 3: truck goes to the landfill, whether you did all the
Speaker 3: right things or not. Yeah, now another one contaminant. Number
Speaker 3: three loose shredded paper, which is biodegradable, I might add,
Speaker 3: but yes, the most valuable trait of recyclable paper is
Speaker 3: its long paper fiber This is because long fibers can
Speaker 3: stand up to multiple recycling cycles. While shredded paper is
Speaker 3: not a considered is not considered a contaminant as a whole.
Speaker 3: Loose shredded paper can cause many recycling issues. When shreded
Speaker 3: paper is mixed in with non shredded paper, it is
Speaker 3: difficult to recover for recycling at a material's Recovery Facility
Speaker 3: or MRF. The problem is that the small pieces are
Speaker 3: The problem is with the small pieces. To fix this,
Speaker 3: people who want to recycle their shredded paper can simply
Speaker 3: keep it in a clear plastic bag that can then
Speaker 3: be kept with their other recyclable items. So we're back
Speaker 3: to the fucking plastic bag conversation.
Speaker 2: Seems a bit counterintuitive.
Speaker 3: So if my shredded paper is in a plastic bag,
Speaker 3: why is that not considered contamination? Did I miss something here?
Speaker 2: Yeah, it seems like we're running in circles now.
Speaker 3: Contaminant number four brightly colored paper. Dan Barrel, a recycling
Speaker 3: program manager at the University of Colorado at Boulder, explained
Speaker 3: the problem with brightly colored paper well when he made
Speaker 3: the analogy of the red sock in the white load
Speaker 3: the paints that Paint's a pretty good picture of what
Speaker 3: happens when brightly colored paper manages to spoil a batch
Speaker 3: of good paper recycling. If the thought of not recycling
Speaker 3: your colorful paper items crushes you, there may still be away.
Speaker 3: If you tear the colored paper in question and you
Speaker 3: see white in the center at it is most often
Speaker 3: recyclable curbside. If the color dye goes all the way through,
Speaker 3: then you're unfortunately out of luck. But most colored paper
Speaker 3: is colored and dyed all the way through. That's a
Speaker 3: silly thing.
Speaker 2: But okay, yeah, I don't know if I've ever torn
Speaker 2: a colored piece of paper unless it's like printed on,
Speaker 2: like if it's like a printed situation. But yeah, if
Speaker 2: it comes like like a fully yellow sheet or a
Speaker 2: blue sheet, like, you're not gonna tear it in white
Speaker 2: b in the middle, right.
Speaker 3: And I mean, for the record, for papers, most newspapers
Speaker 3: are printed on recycled paper. It's way cheaper to do
Speaker 3: it that way, like paper like that, and that's why
Speaker 3: it's done that way. But have you noticed that newspapers,
Speaker 3: if you like really get up close to it, you
Speaker 3: see little bits of like red and.
Speaker 2: Blue color colors in it.
Speaker 3: That's why it's recycled and they can buy it for
Speaker 3: pennies on the dollar rather than paying for like expensive
Speaker 3: like printer paper and things like that.
Speaker 2: But does you think it looks cooler with all the
Speaker 2: different colors on there? As a matter of fact, I
Speaker 2: bought it was like a year ago. I bought these
Speaker 2: shoes that were made out of recyclable plastic and paper
Speaker 2: and shit like that. I just thought they looked cool
Speaker 2: because the recycled like the rubber, it was the recycled
Speaker 2: part and the rubber was like all these different colors.
Speaker 2: I was like that shit looks cool to me. But yeah,
Speaker 2: some people like to be uniform.
Speaker 3: Agreed, agree, I think it looks cool too. It's like
Speaker 3: that iconic look of newspaper print. But to that point,
Speaker 3: it's talking about how colored papers may not be recyclable
Speaker 3: because things and you're putting it all on in a
Speaker 3: plastic bag and somehow it's not contaminating it with the plastic,
Speaker 3: but okay, contaminate Number five some beverage cartons. Some municipal
Speaker 3: programs accept beverage cartons as recyclable, while others may not.
Speaker 3: When in doubt, you have two options. One, check with
Speaker 3: your specific municipal recycling programs manager to find out if.
Speaker 2: Cartons are in their yes or no list. And number two,
Speaker 2: add the cartons to your single stream recyclable since they
Speaker 2: are easy to separate out regardless of the route you choose.
Speaker 2: Make sure to keep the tops and lids on the cartons.
Speaker 3: Okay, because otherwise that lid might make it to a
Speaker 3: different pile and contaminate it.
Speaker 2: You know, wait a second, so you're supposed to keep
Speaker 2: the lids on. You've always been told to take them off,
Speaker 2: haven't you? Bro legit? I remember, in like fourth grade,
Speaker 2: there were people that were working at the recycling center
Speaker 2: and they said, look, if you can take all the
Speaker 2: tops off. They because if you don't take the tops off,
Speaker 2: then we got to be the ones to unscrew them
Speaker 2: and separate it. Now it's saying that you're supposed to
Speaker 2: keep it on. I legitmately, dude. Still to this day,
Speaker 2: I don't throw bottles or milk jugs with the top
Speaker 2: on it because of that conversation in fourth grade.
Speaker 3: So the reason why they tell you to take it
Speaker 3: off is because when you compress it, the air gets
Speaker 3: out of the bottle. Right, It's not like you have
Speaker 3: to push against pressurized bottles. And I don't mean like
Speaker 3: pressure like hundreds of psi or whatever, but like a
Speaker 3: two laer coke bottle that has the top screwed on tightly.
Speaker 3: It takes more and it takes more space in the
Speaker 3: truck and all those things. So you want to take
Speaker 3: it off so it can crush easier. Make sense to me,
Speaker 3: and to your point. We were always told to take
Speaker 3: them off and separate them by color, right, keep all
Speaker 3: the green lids over here, the red lids over here.
Speaker 3: And that was a whole portion of it. Now they're
Speaker 3: saying keep the lids on. It's important. You see what
Speaker 3: I'm saying. It's all bullshit. It's all bullshit.
Speaker 2: This is like the cholesterol conversation all over again. Yes,
Speaker 2: I just don't know what the fuck to do with it.
Speaker 2: Contaminant number six the wrong plastics. Some recycling programs might
Speaker 2: not accept plastics numbers one through seven, which by the way,
Speaker 2: is all of them, but the final rejection is decided
Speaker 2: at the sorting facility. Rejection of plastics usually comes down
Speaker 2: to the type of plastic being recycled and what it
Speaker 2: wants contained. Food containers are usually okay.
Speaker 3: Wait a minute, didn't they just say that food contaminants
Speaker 3: are the number one thing, But okay, containers that once
Speaker 3: held non food items should be checked to determine the
Speaker 3: type of plastics considered. For instance, the most commonly recycled
Speaker 3: plastics are number one PET and two HDPE. Plastics three
Speaker 3: through seven are sometimes recyclable. That is an extremely misleading sentence,
Speaker 3: good cult members. There is like the mental gymnastics that
Speaker 3: you have to do to find a scenario where plastics
Speaker 3: three through seven can be recycled. I'm not saying it's impossible.
Speaker 3: I am saying there is a greater than zero percent
Speaker 3: chance that it will actually get recycled. The line of
Speaker 3: things that has to perfectly line up for that to
Speaker 3: happen are so minuscule that it is essentially a snowball's
Speaker 3: chance in hell.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 2: Yeah, It's kind of like the old better chance at
Speaker 2: a camel going through the eye of a needle situation.
Speaker 3: Basically, here, contaminat number seven. Hazardous waste containers for paint,
Speaker 3: automotive fluids, or pesticides must be disposed of separately, or
Speaker 3: for some facilities, cleaned out before they can be recycled.
Speaker 3: Cleaned out. How do you safely clean out automotive fluids
Speaker 3: and pesticides from a plastic jug. You rinse them out
Speaker 3: and pour them down your drain to go into our
Speaker 3: water cycle some mountain the hose outside, and that shit
Speaker 3: goes into your yard and into the soil. What the
Speaker 3: fuck we're talking about here, Rubicon, I don't know. I'm
Speaker 3: just asking the questions. I don't know the answers.
Speaker 2: That's another plastic or petroleum company that is shifting blame
Speaker 2: to the people that are their consumers.
Speaker 3: Absolutely, it says they need to be cleaned out before
Speaker 3: they can be recycled. Check with your local recycling and
Speaker 3: or household hazardous waste program manager to determine the methods
Speaker 3: necessary to make sure these items can be recycled. Of course,
Speaker 3: contaminant number eight biohazard waste and diapers. If you're trying
Speaker 3: to recycle something that has any human fluid on it, don't. Syringes, needles, diapers,
Speaker 3: and other sanitary products are not recyclable and can potentially
Speaker 3: be dangerous to handle. Okay, that's fair. I could at
Speaker 3: least appreciate that. That's fair. Okay, human contaminants. Some's got
Speaker 3: blood or piss or shit on it. Or puke. Yeah,
Speaker 3: we don't need to recycle those, Just them away, all right.
Speaker 3: Numbers nine frozen food containers. Again, they already brought up
Speaker 3: food a couple of times, but apparently it's a different
Speaker 3: thing whenever it's frozen. Right though, it is really tempting
Speaker 3: to put that paper board box, cardboard box from the
Speaker 3: freezer in the recycling bind don't do it. The shiny
Speaker 3: exterior coating that those boxes have to prevent freezer burn
Speaker 3: actually prevents the paper from being recyclable. WHOA, So again,
Speaker 3: all the stuff that you're thinking that you get from
Speaker 3: the store, all of the trash that we make, because
Speaker 3: each person creates three hundred pounds of trash a year.
Speaker 3: Even if you're trying to recycle this shit that you
Speaker 3: bought your food from, you probably can't any damn way.
Speaker 2: Yeah, no frozen pizza, no TV dinners, no like ready
Speaker 2: made you know, just warm up kind of food.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 2: Okay, Well that that pretty much cancels almost everything out
Speaker 2: then at.
Speaker 3: That point, right And then number ten unrinsed or metal
Speaker 3: capped glass before you recycle, recycle that wine or beer bottle,
Speaker 3: give it a quick rinse in the excess liquid cannot
Speaker 3: contaminate other papers in the recycling and render them non recyclable.
Speaker 3: Metal caps on glass containers simply need to be put
Speaker 3: in the bin separately from the containers at the top.
Speaker 2: Yeah, let me just go ahead and get shit faced
Speaker 2: and then remind myself that I need to take the
Speaker 2: beer bottles over to the sink, rinse them out, and
Speaker 2: then place them into the recycling bin. Who the fuck's
Speaker 2: gonna do that, right?
Speaker 3: Exactly? And of course they're trying to get out the
Speaker 3: information here it says recycling contamination statistics and prevention. It's
Speaker 3: saying that luckily we're not all doomed to contaminate recyclables.
Speaker 3: The three steps that will put you on the road
Speaker 3: to preventing this is over communicate, keep them separated, and
Speaker 3: keep it clean. Doing these three things will make the
Speaker 3: recycling process more efficient, and you will increase the value
Speaker 3: of what you send your local facility. With your new
Speaker 3: found knowledge of contamination, you can help save the planet. Yeah,
Speaker 3: because we know that that's what recycling centers are doing,
Speaker 3: even though we just learned that that's not the case.
Speaker 3: The next time you make that trip to the recycling bent,
Speaker 3: ask yourself, have you helped prevent contaminants. Again, it's gotta
Speaker 3: be on you, all about you. Never mind the fact
Speaker 3: that Rubicon makes these chemicals in the first place. No, no, no,
Speaker 3: it's on you consumer only you can fix it.
Speaker 2: Oh my god, dude, this is hilarious.
Speaker 3: It's it's pretty crazy. Now it all goes to a
Speaker 3: landfill at the end of the day, especially now now
Speaker 3: that China's not taking the trash anymore. They're trying to
Speaker 3: find ways to make fuel out of it. Again, it's
Speaker 3: not very efficient. It's being done not to scale it's
Speaker 3: doing it's being done more as a show, like a
Speaker 3: science fair project right now. It's not I don't see
Speaker 3: the technology getting there anytime soon because there's way too
Speaker 3: much money in turning crude oil into virgin plastics for
Speaker 3: their single use so that they can be disposed of.
Speaker 3: It's cheaper, So why would we stop that? Right now?
Speaker 3: Let's talk about what green washing is. That's the thing
Speaker 3: we've heard mention a few times here. Greenwashing definition, how
Speaker 3: it works, examples and statistics. So what is greenwashing?
Speaker 2: Greenwashing is the process of conveying a false impression or
Speaker 2: misleading information about how a company's products are environmentally sound.
Speaker 2: Greenwashing involves making an unsubstantiated claim to deceive consumers into
Speaker 2: believing that a company's products are environmentally friendly or have
Speaker 2: a greater positive environmental impact than they actually do. In addition,
Speaker 2: green washing may occur when a company attempts to emphasize
Speaker 2: sustainable aspects of a product to overshadow the company's involvement
Speaker 2: in environmentally damaging practices performed through the use of environmental imagery,
Speaker 2: misleading labels, and hiding trade offs. Greenwashing is a play
Speaker 2: on the term whitewashing, which means using false information to
Speaker 2: intentionally hide wrongdoing, error, or an unpleasant situation in an
Speaker 2: attempt to make it seem less bad than and it
Speaker 2: actually is.
Speaker 3: Okay, now, we're not going to read the entire thing,
Speaker 3: but I did definitely wanted to read these key takeaways here.
Speaker 3: Green Washing is an attempt to capitalize on the growing
Speaker 3: demand for environmentally sound products. Green Washing can convey a
Speaker 3: false impression that a company or its products are you know,
Speaker 3: environmentally conscious or friendly. Critics have accused some companies of
Speaker 3: green washing to capitalize on the social responsible on the
Speaker 3: socially responsible or environmental social or governance investigate investing movement
Speaker 3: and genuinely green products or businesses back up their claims
Speaker 3: with facts and details. That's essentially like the overarching key
Speaker 3: takeaways here. But we can do this, how does green
Speaker 3: washing work?
Speaker 2: So, in essence, green washing is just another term for bullshitting.
Speaker 3: Yes, yes, exactly, like whitewashing or telling a white lie,
Speaker 3: whatever you want to say. Greenwashing is when a company
Speaker 3: does that to scale when it comes to the environment.
Speaker 3: All right, Like, how many of these companies that we heard, Oh, well,
Speaker 3: you can't touch us. We just paid all of these
Speaker 3: carbon credits. We're doing our part. So you've done nothing.
Speaker 3: You paid the government extortion fee, and you've done nothing
Speaker 3: to actually help the environment. That's the whole point of
Speaker 3: you getting these fines in the first place.
Speaker 2: Meanwhile, in order to be able to pay for all
Speaker 2: of those carbon tax credits and stuff, all they're doing
Speaker 2: that's not gonna be coming out of their pocket. They're
Speaker 2: gonna raise the price on their products to make the
Speaker 2: consumers essentially pay that carbon tax for them. Absolutely, that's
Speaker 2: why it's all. It's all a fucking scam, it's all
Speaker 2: a joke. It is all just like, look, we're doing
Speaker 2: the right thing, and if something doesn't work, or you know,
Speaker 2: if we cause global warming, which I don't believe that either,
Speaker 2: but let's just say that if there is a global
Speaker 2: warming or a climate change situation, they're gonna put it
Speaker 2: on the people as they already have, and they're never
Speaker 2: gonna take any accountability because it's always everybody else's fault.
Speaker 2: This is what is that called not a nihilist a
Speaker 2: person who always blamed somebody else victim mentality essentially. Yeah, yeah,
Speaker 2: just like.
Speaker 3: Oh uh oh shit, you're talking about a N word.
Speaker 2: Narcissists. Yeah, I couldn't think of the word. This is
Speaker 2: industrial scale narcissism exactly.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 2: So how greenwashing works? Also known as green sheen, green
Speaker 2: washing is an attempt to capitalize on the growing demand
Speaker 2: for environmentally sound products, whether that means they are more natural, healthier,
Speaker 2: free of chemicals, recyclable, or less wasteful of natural resources.
Speaker 2: The term originated in the nineteen sixties, when the hotel
Speaker 2: industry devised one of the most blatant examples of green washing.
Speaker 2: They placed notices in hotel rooms asking guests to reuse
Speaker 2: their towels to save the environment. The hotels enjoyed the
Speaker 2: benefit of lower laundry costs, of course. More recently, some
Speaker 2: of the world's biggest carbon emitters, such as conventional energy companies,
Speaker 2: have attempted to rebrand themselves as champions of the environment.
Speaker 2: Products are green washed through a process of renaming, rebranding,
Speaker 2: or repackaging them. Greenwashed products might convey the idea that
Speaker 2: they're more natural, wholesome, or free of chemicals than competing brands.
Speaker 2: Companies have engaged in greenwashing green washing via press releases
Speaker 2: and commercials touting their clean energy or pollution reduction efforts.
Speaker 2: In reality, the company may not be making a meaningful
Speaker 2: commitment to green initiatives. In short, companies that make unsubstantiated
Speaker 2: claims that their products are environmentally safe or provide some
Speaker 2: green benefit are involved in green washing.
Speaker 3: Absolutely. This art goes from Investipedia, by the way, and
Speaker 3: I'm not going to read the whole thing, but I
Speaker 3: definitely wanted to read that section of it real quick.
Speaker 3: Hold on, there was one more thing that I wanted
Speaker 3: us to touch on.
Speaker 2: Whereas right here, this is where the green washing came in.
Speaker 3: Well, okay, let's see. Let's see green washing groups. Here
Speaker 3: we go. Let's talk about some groups that were big
Speaker 3: into the green washing thing.
Speaker 2: The perception the plastic is easily recyclable and that the
Speaker 2: burden of recycling lies solely with the consumer has been
Speaker 2: shaped by decades of carefully constructed campaigns paid for by
Speaker 2: many of the most prevalent producers of plastic. If you
Speaker 2: are alive in the seventies, chances are you're familiar with
Speaker 2: the Crying Indian ad from the environmental nonprofit organization Keep
Speaker 2: America Beautiful. The ad featured a Native American man crying
Speaker 2: over the destruction of his homeland from visitors reckless littering.
Speaker 2: It was a compelling and effective visual. However, if you
Speaker 2: take a look at the organization's board members, you'll find
Speaker 2: representatives from Dow Chemical Company, PepsiCo, Coca Cola, and Nesley
Speaker 2: companies that all rely on the production of single use plastic.
Speaker 2: If anything, this fact alone should challenge the intention behind
Speaker 2: the organization's altruistic campaign. By shifting all blame of the
Speaker 2: plastic crisis to the consumer, manufacturers are free to keep
Speaker 2: producing plastic. Pri Then there's an organization called the Recycling Partnership,
Speaker 2: which sounds promising. The Recycling Partnership has a nice name,
Speaker 2: but the company is actually funded by Dow, Exon Coke,
Speaker 2: and Amazon. One of this organization's board member or board
Speaker 2: representatives also is a member of the American Chemistry Council,
Speaker 2: an industry group that represents plastic manufacturers. Note also that
Speaker 2: following publication, the Recycling Partnership reached out to me with
Speaker 2: a statement from their CEO about their work as it relates.
Speaker 3: To this article. Interesting.
Speaker 2: A concerning detail about the Recycling Partnership is that it
Speaker 2: supports the EPR policies in New York. In New York
Speaker 2: Government Governor Kathy Hokel's budget, as detailed in my earlier
Speaker 2: conversation with anc or INNC, Hocal's proposal allows for chemical
Speaker 2: recycling and fails to make any packaging reduction requirements, as
Speaker 2: opposed to an alternate bill from Assemblyman Steve Engelbright, which
Speaker 2: reject x chemical recycling and will require a fifty percent
Speaker 2: reduction in plastic units over ten years. But the main
Speaker 2: concern surrounding Hochel's EPR proposal is who will make the
Speaker 2: decisions about what types of materials will be recycled and
Speaker 2: at what rate. A lot of companies want that want
Speaker 2: the legislature to authorize the establishment of a producer Responsibility
Speaker 2: organization or PRO where they have complete control over everything. Unfortunately,
Speaker 2: many pros lack oversight and will ultimately develop the most inexpensive,
Speaker 2: ineffective EPR possible. Of course, and once again, these types
Speaker 2: of environmental actions are simply a band aid over a
Speaker 2: much larger wound. And as they point out, combating the
Speaker 2: plastic problem requires a mindset shift from believing recycling will
Speaker 2: solve the problem to finding legitimate ways to reduce the
Speaker 2: production of plastic, and that means companies need to be
Speaker 2: held accountable for the environmental impacts of their products.
Speaker 3: Absolutely right, yep. So this is all kind of how
Speaker 3: this goes down. It's all lobbying, it's all. It's all
Speaker 3: bullshit to virtue signal you into feeling like you're the problem.
Speaker 3: But you can help by recycling, even though again through
Speaker 3: contamination or the fact that even though there's a recycling
Speaker 3: logo on the plastic, the vast majority of them are
Speaker 3: not recyclable, Like, there's no way that this is actually
Speaker 3: even if you do it all the right way and
Speaker 3: you rinse them out and do whatever, most of them
Speaker 3: are going to a landfill any fucking way. That's just
Speaker 3: the way this goes down. So there are ways or
Speaker 3: there is a type of recycling that actually does work. Okay,
Speaker 3: and it's not plastics. Metal recycling. We're not going to
Speaker 3: read this whole article, but essentially, metal recycling is the
Speaker 3: process of recovering scrap or waste metal and repurposing it
Speaker 3: for new products. Metal recycling can be done with a
Speaker 3: variety of metals, including aluminum, copper, iron, steel, and brass.
Speaker 3: The recycling process helps to preserve our now resources and
Speaker 3: save energy that would otherwise be needed to produce new
Speaker 3: metal products from scratch. So think about when World War
Speaker 3: two broke out, everybody was rationing their shit. There was
Speaker 3: a copper ration, there was a steel ration. Make sure
Speaker 3: you turn into your illuminum cans for the war effort,
Speaker 3: all these things, because these things are recyclable at scale,
Speaker 3: Like the infrastructure's already there, the can production place Campbell's
Speaker 3: chicken soup. Campbell's right, they already have the manufacturing facility
Speaker 3: for the cans. I didn't even do anything on my
Speaker 3: fingers to make those balloons happen out for.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and what was it over like in England where
Speaker 2: they were taken down all the church bells for bullet
Speaker 2: casings and stuff like that.
Speaker 3: My point is they already have the manufacturing facility to
Speaker 3: do this. It's not some new technology. It's literally what
Speaker 3: they already used to make the can. They can either
Speaker 3: a wash the can out and reuse it, or b
Speaker 3: remelt the can and then reform it into a new can.
Speaker 3: It's not a one hundred percent, but you will get
Speaker 3: out damn near one hundred percent of the material you
Speaker 3: put into that machine when a new can is produced.
Speaker 3: Metal recycling is worthwhile and should be done preserve the resources.
Speaker 3: I'm with that. Another version of this is glass is
Speaker 3: all glass recyclable? Unpacking the myths and facts. These are
Speaker 3: from two separate articles. The overview who overview of it is.
Speaker 3: While glass is widely regarded as a recyclable material, not
Speaker 3: all glass products are created equal. Various types of glass
Speaker 3: from beverage containers, who decorative items have different recycling potentials
Speaker 3: based on their composition and local recycling capabilities. Understanding these
Speaker 3: distinctions is crucial for consumers who wish to make informed
Speaker 3: decisions about their waste disposal and contribute positively to recycling efforts. Moreover,
Speaker 3: the recycling process itself plays a significant role in determining
Speaker 3: whether glass can be effectively reused. Factors such as contamination, color,
Speaker 3: and the presence of additives can hinder the recycling journey,
Speaker 3: making it essential to know what can and cannot be recycled.
Speaker 3: As we navigate the intricacies of glass recyclability, we uncover
Speaker 3: the importance of proper disposal practices and the impact they
Speaker 3: have on have on I guess recycling was the thing
Speaker 3: of that. Now types of glass and their recyclability okay,
Speaker 3: container glass, flat glass, fiberglass, and ceramic and pyrex Now
Speaker 3: container glass. This includes bottles and jars that are commonly
Speaker 3: recycled most curb cyber recycling programs except these flat glass windows, mirrors,
Speaker 3: and glass doors. They fall into this category, and although recyclable,
Speaker 3: flat glass often requires special processing which not available in
Speaker 3: all recycling facilities, So sometimes you can recycle it, sometimes
Speaker 3: you can. Fiberglass use an insulation and boat construction. Fiberglass
Speaker 3: is challenging to recycle due to its composite nature and
Speaker 3: is typically sent to landfills. And then they're ceramic and pyrecs.
Speaker 3: These materials are not recyclable with standard glass and can
Speaker 3: contaminate recycling streams if mixed with recyclable glass, and they
Speaker 3: have a process where basically it's a five step solution
Speaker 3: with recycling glass collection, sorting, cleaning, crushing, and melting. That's
Speaker 3: why some glass isn't recyclable, like they said color like,
Speaker 3: you can't take a bunch of green glass and crush
Speaker 3: up and melt it with a bunch of clear glass
Speaker 3: and get the same thing. But typically if you separate
Speaker 3: it out and do things the right way, most glass
Speaker 3: that we deal with on a day to day basis
Speaker 3: is recyclable. So here's a list of the ones that
Speaker 3: are and are not recyclable. Clear, green and brown glass
Speaker 3: bottles i e. Beer Bottles are commonly accepted at recycling centers.
Speaker 3: Food and beverage containers such as jars and bottles that
Speaker 3: hailed food and drinks are usually recyclable. And again, window
Speaker 3: glass is generally recyclable, but may require specific specific processing.
Speaker 3: Non recyclable glass ceramics and porcelain. These materials cannot be
Speaker 3: recycled due to the different melting points. Crystal glass often
Speaker 3: contains lead, complicating the recycling. Light bulbs require special disposal
Speaker 3: methods and are not typically accepted in curb cyber recycling
Speaker 3: timber glass. It's used in safety applications and cannot be
Speaker 3: recycled with regular glass. So as far as this goes
Speaker 3: with the education of all the good cult members, I
Speaker 3: felt like it was our job to do our due
Speaker 3: diligence on that plastics y'all, only type one and two
Speaker 3: might be recyclable. And then again, are you rinsing out
Speaker 3: every single coat bottle after you're done with it, before
Speaker 3: you put it in the recycling bin? God, I'm sure
Speaker 3: if even if you are, is every person down your
Speaker 3: street doing that? Highly unlikely.
Speaker 2: Here's what I suggest, And this could take care of
Speaker 2: the paper industry. It could take care of even the
Speaker 2: plastic industry. What if instead of using paper and instead
Speaker 2: of using plastic, make everything hemp. It's already biodegradable.
Speaker 3: They could and it's super cheap.
Speaker 2: I mean, honestly, pete, dude, fucking you eat It is
Speaker 2: so easy to grow, Like it's one of the easiest
Speaker 2: things that you can grow. You you get a massive
Speaker 2: fucking field of it. I mean forget having you know,
Speaker 2: a massive like cornfield or something like that. If you
Speaker 2: can just grow the hemp, and I'm not even I mean,
Speaker 2: fuck it. If you want to sell the bud and
Speaker 2: make a little extra off the top. That way, just
Speaker 2: use the actual hemp itself, dude. It's very sturdy, it's
Speaker 2: it's not going to rip. It's like one of the
Speaker 2: strongest fibrous materials that that money can buy.
Speaker 3: It's fireproof, it's insect proof, it is extremely sustainable. One
Speaker 3: acre of it, that per yield goes like you're gonna
Speaker 3: get so much hemp crete out of it. But there
Speaker 3: are certain applications where that doesn't doesn't make sense, right.
Speaker 3: There are certain things where like, Okay, you can't use
Speaker 3: hemp to replace glass, Okay, fine, she got me there,
Speaker 3: but you can use it to replace a lot of plastics,
Speaker 3: like a lot of plastics.
Speaker 2: I mean, I would, I mean even just for I
Speaker 2: don't even think that we need like like glass bottles,
Speaker 2: for example, Like you can turn in bud light and
Speaker 2: cores light and all of them were doing it. Like
Speaker 2: with the aluminum cans.
Speaker 3: Just fucking make them all illuminum cans.
Speaker 2: At that point, that's always recyclable.
Speaker 3: And I get this, and I'm not disagreeing. I'm saying
Speaker 3: that coke from a glass bottle tastes better than coke
Speaker 3: from a plastic bottle. Well, that's just me.
Speaker 2: I mean, sure, there's gonna have to be some things
Speaker 2: that you kind of dial back.
Speaker 3: On, but that's fair. But I mean, honestly, how often
Speaker 3: are people drinking coke from a glass bottle? That's like
Speaker 3: a rarity in our day and age. Yeah, I mean
Speaker 3: it's not very common now. As far as turning plastic
Speaker 3: into a fuel source. I got a quick clip that
Speaker 3: I found that it does a pretty good job. This
Speaker 3: guy he's doing it basically in his backyard, shouts out
Speaker 3: to nature.
Speaker 2: Jab, Oh, i've seen this guy.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 2: Yeah, there's a lot of people on TikTok talking about him.
Speaker 3: Now you're gonna understand what I mean by this. So
Speaker 3: he basically turned plastics into his own homemade gas station.
Speaker 3: But the amount of heat that's used to make this
Speaker 3: versus the amount that he's getting out, it's more of
Speaker 3: a project and it's really cool. It is really cool,
Speaker 3: but it's expensive to do at scale. But let's watch
Speaker 3: this again. Good cult members, if you're not seeing this
Speaker 3: and you're just hearing it, come check us out on
Speaker 3: Patreon is the only place to see what we're talking about.
Speaker 3: That's the only place we have video, So anyway, let's
Speaker 3: watch it.
Speaker 4: So I've created my own gas station that makes fuel
Speaker 4: from plastic waste. Let's go.
Speaker 2: For those who are just listening, he's tough, stuffing all
Speaker 2: this trash into like this long aluminum tube of sorts,
Speaker 2: and he looks like he's about to turn up the
Speaker 2: gas in order to burn all of it, and then
Speaker 2: showing how much fuel it it's creating. He's pouring it
Speaker 2: into a cylinder. Looks a little bit murky.
Speaker 3: So basically, yeah, for those that are just watching or
Speaker 3: just listening, here, he just shoved a bunch of different
Speaker 3: plastic bags and bottles and tied detergent containers and all
Speaker 3: this stuff into this processing unit and he heats it
Speaker 3: up and he pressurizes it, and he's right now, this
Speaker 3: sludge is essentially quick made crude oil, right all right,
Speaker 3: And so it looks like it looks like mud essentially.
Speaker 3: But then you take this and you can put it
Speaker 3: into a distillation unit and you can pull off the
Speaker 3: components of octane and ethane and propane and all these
Speaker 3: things from it and get diesel from it as well.
Speaker 3: So all right, real quick, let's keep watching.
Speaker 2: So this is plastic crude oil, and as you can see,
Speaker 2: we have quite a bit of this plastic crude oil. Well,
Speaker 2: it can be fueled, but we need to refine it
Speaker 2: and clean.
Speaker 3: It up so real quick. You saw the size of
Speaker 3: the unit that he shoved all that into, right, uh yeah,
Speaker 3: to get out three cups of plastic crude oil. And
Speaker 3: then you're not gonna get three cups of diesel off
Speaker 3: of that. You're not gonna get three cups of gasoline
Speaker 3: off of that. It's like literally a little bit here,
Speaker 3: a little bit here, a little bit here, a little
Speaker 3: bit here. And then at the end of it, what
Speaker 3: do you do with the plastic asphalt, the plastic sludge
Speaker 3: at the bottom of it, Because at that point you
Speaker 3: would consider that toxic waste, wouldn't you.
Speaker 2: Ah yeah, I would think that. I mean, you're probably
Speaker 2: only getting about two miles down the road with that amount.
Speaker 3: Oh not even, not even. But the thing is, yes,
Speaker 3: it can be done, and we have the technology, but
Speaker 3: it's not scalable and cost effective at this time. And
Speaker 3: I am hoping that with more technological advances, perhaps we
Speaker 3: could find a way to make that cost effective and
Speaker 3: we could start filling our cars with literally recycled plastics
Speaker 3: like they did in Back to the Future.
Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, this is you know, it's all a hope
Speaker 2: in a dream. But I don't think it's ever going
Speaker 2: to happen. If you think about it. The corporation stand
Speaker 2: to lose too much, and if they stand to lose
Speaker 2: too much, well they're just going to go to other countries,
Speaker 2: right like, that's what they would do, and then America
Speaker 2: would just be buying plastics and gasoline and everything that's
Speaker 2: made from petroleum from other countries. And so that's why
Speaker 2: it's never going to happen.
Speaker 3: So let me now now that we have given the
Speaker 3: whole gambit here, and we know the recycling as the
Speaker 3: overarching theme that has been sold to us for decades
Speaker 3: now is complete bullshit, complete bullshit. Aside from glass and metals,
Speaker 3: and in some cases that's not even effective because of contamination.
Speaker 3: It all goes to landfill plastics themselves, even if it
Speaker 3: has the recycling logo, the majority of the time those
Speaker 3: are going to a landfill as well, and up until
Speaker 3: twenty eighteen, they were going to China and then essentially
Speaker 3: just getting burned or put into the ocean anyway. So
Speaker 3: whether we did it or China did it, we feel
Speaker 3: virtuous even though it's it had the same effect regardless, right.
Speaker 2: Yeah, So now all of that to be said.
Speaker 3: Here is my own conspiracy on this bro aside from
Speaker 3: recycling in and of itself, and I talked about this
Speaker 3: a little bit on the Live. But the facts are
Speaker 3: the facts here. Crude oil is a known carcinogen. It
Speaker 3: gives you cancer. There's no two ways about this. It
Speaker 3: doesn't matter what your genetics are, it doesn't matter how
Speaker 3: often it gives you cancer. To deal with it, to
Speaker 3: handle it. Okay. Plastics are pretty much all hydrocarbon and
Speaker 3: fossil fuel based. This is the facts. And yes, you
Speaker 3: have to add in other chemical components to turn them
Speaker 3: into different types of plastic and stuff like that. And
Speaker 3: I understand this, I do. But the fact that we
Speaker 3: just watched Homeboy take these plastics and turn them into
Speaker 3: crude oil, Okay, that tells you that they are hydrocarbon based.
Speaker 3: They are known carcinogens. I am currently of the belief
Speaker 3: that plastics are going to be our generation. And when
Speaker 3: I say our generation, I don't mean millennials, I mean
Speaker 3: our generation in the grand scheme of human existence. I
Speaker 3: believe that plastic is about to be our generations lead.
Speaker 3: Let me break this down for you. They knew that
Speaker 3: lead was toxic in ancient Rome. Ancient Rome used to
Speaker 3: use it on all kinds of things, a lot of
Speaker 3: their aqueducts, a lot of their water. They had cups
Speaker 3: made of lead, and all these things. And there was
Speaker 3: a direct correlation between the time when they were using
Speaker 3: lead for like eating and drinking tools, to when people
Speaker 3: started losing their minds and emperors started going crazy and
Speaker 3: murdering their people, and all of these things they knew
Speaker 3: that so understood and documented. Yet somehow America late eighteen
Speaker 3: hundreds early nineteen hundreds were using lead pipes in homes
Speaker 3: and in buildings for water. There's also a very very
Speaker 3: direct correlation between lead being used in water and the
Speaker 3: crazy stream of murderers and sex offenders that came to
Speaker 3: light in the seventies and eighties. There's actually more than
Speaker 3: a few conspiracy theories to say that these people started
Speaker 3: losing their minds and going agro and doing all this
Speaker 3: bad shit because of the lead that they were exposed
Speaker 3: to as children. Not one hundred percent across the board,
Speaker 3: but in those specific cases, you could see like you
Speaker 3: ever hear the old thing. Oh you ate a bunch
Speaker 3: of paint chips as a kid, didn't you. Right, that's
Speaker 3: not a baseless statement to make now. To our generation,
Speaker 3: that means nothing. To the millennials, that means nothing. We
Speaker 3: never dealt with lead paint, by and large, unless you
Speaker 3: were like helping your dad tear down an old building
Speaker 3: or something like that. Growing up, more often than not,
Speaker 3: we didn't experience this. But our parents' generation and their
Speaker 3: parents' generation absolutely did. And lead is this thing where
Speaker 3: your body recognizes it as calcium. There's no two ways
Speaker 3: about it. As soon as you're exposed to lead it
Speaker 3: it goes straight to your bones. That's how it happens,
Speaker 3: and it causes you to go agro and it's never good.
Speaker 3: There's no upside to it. There's no way to fight it.
Speaker 3: Once it enters your body. It's in that bitch. That's
Speaker 3: how it goes. So again, that's a known thing. And
Speaker 3: they still used it in water pipes, which led to
Speaker 3: all this bad shit.
Speaker 2: Oh dude, they were using it in fucking like fillings
Speaker 2: for your teeth. Yes, yes, exactly.
Speaker 3: Now, with that same mentality and knowing all of the
Speaker 3: lobbyist groups that we just talked about. They're trying to
Speaker 3: make it seem like plastics are the way of the future.
Speaker 3: It's on you because you're not doing your part right.
Speaker 3: It's not our fault from making trillions of tons of
Speaker 3: plastic trash. That's not the case. Don't worry about the
Speaker 3: microplastics in your balls? How did they get there? You
Speaker 3: might ask, how much plastic have you eaten, Jonathan in
Speaker 3: your life? How many times have you just taken a
Speaker 3: big old bite out of a coke bottle?
Speaker 1: Uh?
Speaker 3: Never? Actually interesting, But I guarantee if you go to
Speaker 3: the doctor and have him do a scan, your testicles
Speaker 3: currently are full of microplastics. How did this happen if
Speaker 3: we didn't ingest the microplastics?
Speaker 2: Well? Are there micro micro plastics?
Speaker 3: I mean they break down to basically like a molecular
Speaker 3: level of a plastic, but you can't get rid of
Speaker 3: it like PVC. Yeah, it can detegrate into a microscopic
Speaker 3: PVC particle, but you can't get rid of that. It
Speaker 3: doesn't work.
Speaker 2: It's so like the same situation with like girls on
Speaker 2: birth control and they pee into the toilet and then
Speaker 2: eventually that stays within the water supply because the filtration
Speaker 2: process can't filter the birth control.
Speaker 3: Out kind of. But in this case, I think that
Speaker 3: we did it to ourselves because we've been drinking from
Speaker 3: plastic containers our entire life, plastics that are known to
Speaker 3: be from a carcinogenic source. We know for a fact,
Speaker 3: there's no two ways about it. Anything crude, oil based
Speaker 3: derivative thereof whatever is going to give you cancer. We
Speaker 3: know this for a fact. And like we said earlier,
Speaker 3: that bottle of Desanni, even though you were the first
Speaker 3: person to crack it open and drink it, the chemicals
Speaker 3: leaching into it, the particular microplastics, if you will, have
Speaker 3: already leached into them by the time you get to
Speaker 3: it and open it up and drink it. It's already
Speaker 3: in the water. There's a way to filter that out.
Speaker 3: It's in there. So we know that plastic is bad
Speaker 3: for us, we know there's no way to get rid
Speaker 3: of it, and we know that it's going to give
Speaker 3: us cancer. Yet how much of our lives right now?
Speaker 3: Right now, I have a mic stand. It's made of plastic.
Speaker 3: The microphone components are made of plastic, This mixer is
Speaker 3: made of plastic. All of this is made from cancer,
Speaker 3: giving chemicals not causing giving chemicals, and we use them
Speaker 3: without fail, NonStop because we have no other options for
Speaker 3: a lot of our components for our modern life. And
Speaker 3: I am currently of the belief that they knew this
Speaker 3: and they're doing it anyway. We are going to have
Speaker 3: so many health issues come through to fruition. How much
Speaker 3: cancer is there now than there was fifty years ago? Yeah?
Speaker 2: Well, I mean that's the thing is that a healthy
Speaker 2: person is not a repeat customer. And especially whenever you
Speaker 2: and think about it, even like this, dude, a lot
Speaker 2: of even the medicine that like, they come in the
Speaker 2: fucking petroleum capsules, right, So literally your medicine is causing
Speaker 2: a fucking can sir.
Speaker 3: Yes, yes, that's that's borderline what I'm saying right here,
Speaker 3: that there's no two ways about this, but we use
Speaker 3: it because that's what we have, right. I'm not blaming
Speaker 3: any of y'all good cult members for using plastics in
Speaker 3: your life. We all do.
Speaker 2: I do.
Speaker 3: It's the way it is. I drank from a plastic
Speaker 3: bottle today. As a matter of fact, we all do
Speaker 3: it probably on a daily basis. You have a plastic cup,
Speaker 3: you have it, you know, one of those tupperware, plastic cup.
Speaker 3: You go to McDonald's and you get an extra large
Speaker 3: it's in a plastic cup. It's what's available. It's everywhere,
Speaker 3: and it's killing us. Not just us, it's, according to
Speaker 3: these people, killing the earth and there's no way about it,
Speaker 3: and it's all going to these trash islands in the
Speaker 3: middle of the ocean.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean at that point, what do you do.
Speaker 2: You blame it on capitalism, you know, Like, but.
Speaker 3: That's the thing, right, they're saying, we could buy less things,
Speaker 3: create less trash. Okay, easier said than done for a
Speaker 3: lot of people. Yeah, if you're living on a self
Speaker 3: sustaining farm somewhere, you might have a better shot at
Speaker 3: using less plastics than the rest of us. But even still,
Speaker 3: your mail, your mail, the paper that it comes in
Speaker 3: has a little plastic loop where you can read to
Speaker 3: so and so there's no way to get around it realistically.
Speaker 3: So yeah, basically good cult members in overarching theme on
Speaker 3: this one, recycling is a scam and it also doubles
Speaker 3: as a psyop that they have been using against us
Speaker 3: since nineteen seventy one. It's pretty incredible. So whenever I
Speaker 3: found these things out, I simply had to share the
Speaker 3: news good cult members. I'm sorry to be the one
Speaker 3: to tell you the bad news on this one, but
Speaker 3: I simply couldn't hold this to myself.
Speaker 2: Yeah. Well, I mean, what you're gonna do? You know,
Speaker 2: there's as just the world we live in, and uh,
Speaker 2: there's no way about it. I mean, the best thing
Speaker 2: that you can do is try and limit it as
Speaker 2: much as you can. You know, maybe drink from glass.
Speaker 2: I mean, glass is usually the best way to drink anything.
Speaker 2: You know, they say that, you know, even if you're
Speaker 2: going to keep something stored like leftovers or anything, put
Speaker 2: it in glass as opposed to the plastic containers. If
Speaker 2: you're going to drink water, maybe try and find the
Speaker 2: if you're gonna go to the gas station and get like,
Speaker 2: they have glass water bottles, like like Perier and Loss
Speaker 2: I think still does the glass bottles. Yo, everybody's got
Speaker 2: I'm not just the Simple Life or the Stanley Cup
Speaker 2: or whatever these things are. There are mugs that you
Speaker 2: can buy that are metal, that are reusable.
Speaker 3: There's glass you could buy that is reusable, And I'm
Speaker 3: saying limit the amount of plastic you are, like, minimalize
Speaker 3: it at an as needed basis only right. And if
Speaker 3: you are going to recycle, recycle the glasses and the metals, Okay,
Speaker 3: these are good and they are absolutely transferable in that way.
Speaker 3: But plastics, I'm not saying one hundred percent it's not
Speaker 3: worth it. I'm saying ninety eight percent it's not worth Actually,
Speaker 3: according to the statistics, ninety five percent of it is
Speaker 3: just not worth it. Paper, yeah, you can recycle it
Speaker 3: if you want. You probably do better just to go
Speaker 3: start a fire in your backyard, you know, enjoy it.
Speaker 3: Fires are fun, cardboard just burn them. It's okay. Don't
Speaker 3: start a forest fire. Okay, depending on where you live.
Speaker 3: Some people have burn bands and they can't do fires.
Speaker 3: And I get that. If you're in an area where
Speaker 3: you can burn your trash, don't burn the plastics. Burn
Speaker 3: the paper and the cardboards and do that. If nothing else,
Speaker 3: They'll save you some room in your trash can when
Speaker 3: you bring it to the street. I'm just saying, there's
Speaker 3: we got to start thinking more critically. This is in
Speaker 3: some public service announcement, But at the same time, all
Speaker 3: of our good cult members know this, and that's why
Speaker 3: they think critically. They wouldn't be listening to this show
Speaker 3: if they were not doing that.
Speaker 2: And also, don't be gas lit by by companies like this.
Speaker 2: This is the biggest thing. It's like, yeah, everybody can
Speaker 2: do their own little part and and uh not partaking
Speaker 2: in all of this plastic, cancerous kind of shit. But
Speaker 2: you know it's it's inescapable, so just try and try
Speaker 2: and be mindful. But honestly, we need to be we
Speaker 2: need to be looking at the lobbyist. We need to
Speaker 2: be looking at these corporations that are the ones that
Speaker 2: are creating it in the first place. Whenever they're going
Speaker 2: to sit there and fucking gaslight you or you got
Speaker 2: the recycling foundations or whatever that are gaslighting you turn
Speaker 2: the arrow the other way and just be like, how
Speaker 2: about stop making it? How about that? You know, like
Speaker 2: it's so bad, it's so harmful, and we're polluting and
Speaker 2: we're littering, Stop fucking making it like it. It seems
Speaker 2: like a pretty obvious answer, but obviously, you know there's
Speaker 2: gonna be lobbyists that are going to have some clap
Speaker 2: back with that. And we know how it is, money
Speaker 2: always wins, I mean where the money goes. That's if
Speaker 2: you're wondering why we all have plastic in our nutsacks.
Speaker 2: I mean, it's not necessarily your fault. I mean, that's
Speaker 2: just it's I mean, I'm not trying to not place
Speaker 2: blame on the individual, but let's just call it like
Speaker 2: it is. It's it's really their fault.
Speaker 3: I mean, it really is the same one like lead poisoning.
Speaker 3: Most of the people that had lead poisoning in the
Speaker 3: early in the mid nineteen hundreds, they weren't It's not
Speaker 3: their fault. Lead paint was seen as the best paint.
Speaker 3: That's why they used it. Now, we could do a
Speaker 3: whole other episode. Matter of fact, as you're talking about lead,
Speaker 3: we're gonna do it. There's another episode we're gonna do.
Speaker 3: We're basically using lead to the level that they did,
Speaker 3: especially with lead based fuels and things like that. They
Speaker 3: knew that that was gonna kill you, but they sold
Speaker 3: it to you anyway, and they had lobbying groups that
Speaker 3: were right there to sidestep it the whole way through,
Speaker 3: knowing that there were better additives they could have used,
Speaker 3: but fuck them. We're gonna talk about that in another episode.
Speaker 3: But when it comes to the plastics, no, it's not
Speaker 3: your fault. It's none of our faults. That's what we
Speaker 3: have to go by. That's what's available to us. And
Speaker 3: unless you're gonna start your own manufacturing facility just for
Speaker 3: your own personal use, you're kind of left with what
Speaker 3: you got, Okay. But yes, the corporations that are doing
Speaker 3: everything they can to get out of the mandates and
Speaker 3: the EPA regulations and all of that to continue to
Speaker 3: toxify not just our error in our water, in our earth,
Speaker 3: but our physical bodies. They should be held accountable. Will
Speaker 3: they probably not. They got lawyers or on top of
Speaker 3: lawyers for their lawyers, and they'll be able to fight
Speaker 3: the case a lot longer than you will. So we
Speaker 3: just wanted everybody to be aware of it, start making
Speaker 3: some better decisions for yourself, to whatever level that looks
Speaker 3: like for you. I'm not your dad, okay, do you?
Speaker 3: But yeah, this is a part of it, man, This
Speaker 3: is how it all goes. And good cult members, if
Speaker 3: you would like to let us know what you think
Speaker 3: about this. You think recycling is good and we are
Speaker 3: completely off base here. You think that it is all
Speaker 3: Ponzi scheme and it's all fake and possibly gay, and
Speaker 3: you are happy that you found out this information. Listen,
Speaker 3: don't just take our words for it. Do your own research.
Speaker 3: Dig in at your local recycling facility, find out how
Speaker 3: much of it's actually going to a landfill, how much
Speaker 3: of it's actually getting recycled properly and reused correctly. There
Speaker 3: are places that are doing it the right way by
Speaker 3: my research. It's very few and far between. But we
Speaker 3: want to hear what you got to say about it.
Speaker 3: So what you could do at this time not just
Speaker 3: to let us know, but also help us grow this
Speaker 3: show would be too please at this time. Hit the
Speaker 3: five stars, hit the shares of like, subscribes to comments,
Speaker 3: leave a post and review of shares, a defensive family
Speaker 3: shareses if we're here's the deal. The more activity the
Speaker 3: algorithms see across all of our listening platforms, the more
Speaker 3: we get promoted some more potential listeners who.
Speaker 2: Could that become potential cult members like to us to you, final,
Speaker 2: ladies and gentlemen, why are you ready? Go check out
Speaker 2: METAMISTERI Jonathan's other show and give them the same lever
Speaker 2: respect over there with the five star few in the
Speaker 2: positivity of the comments. Come check out the Cage to
Speaker 2: Night and come join each of us for our individual
Speaker 2: lives every Wednesday night, and.
Speaker 3: We thank you. Everybody's already gone it have done so.
Speaker 2: And with that being said, this was another beautiful episode
Speaker 2: of the Cult of Conspiracy.
Speaker 3: My Na's Johnson.
Speaker 2: I'm Jacob and there's one very important, extremely botle piece
Speaker 2: of information we needed to learn just as.
Speaker 3: Soon as humanly possible.
Speaker 2: Hey, members, Jacob here just want to ask who wants
Speaker 2: better sex? The best way to get started is to
Speaker 2: go to Adam and Eve dot com Right now. Adam
Speaker 2: Eve is offering fifty percent off just about any item,
Speaker 2: but that's not all. When you get one item, they
Speaker 2: will also send three bonus sexy items and six free movies.
Speaker 2: They offered a screen shipping as your privacy is a priority.
Speaker 2: Plus free shipping on your entire order. Doesn't matter how
Speaker 2: much you spend or what you buy. All we packaged
Speaker 2: and sent discreetly for free. That's fifty percent off one
Speaker 2: item and ten free gifts to boot bring more pleasure
Speaker 2: and satisfaction into your bedroom. Just go to Adam and
Speaker 2: Eve dot com and select any one item. It could
Speaker 2: be an adventurous new toy or anything you desire. Just
Speaker 2: enter the offer code Cult at checkout and you'll get
Speaker 2: fifty percent off almost any item, plus ten free gifts,
Speaker 2: three bonus items, six free movies, and free shipping. Use
Speaker 2: the offer code CULT that see ult at Adam and
Speaker 2: eve dot com. Now, this is an exclusive offer specific
Speaker 2: to this podcast, so be sure to use this code
Speaker 2: to get you not just the discount and the free goodies,
Speaker 2: but also the one hundred percent free shipping with the
Speaker 2: code cult