I am only stating there are contrails, for which there is plenty of evidence. You are the one making the unsubstantiated and vague claim of the widespread existence of so-called "chemtrails." Cough up your evidence that they exist. Documentation of speculation is not evidence of existence. Accusation of a widespread conspiracy requires material evidence of equipment, planning, and airborne dispersion.
I am citing my basis for expressing an informed view, which consists of specialized education and experience pertinent to the subject. You want degrees? I have three degrees in aeronautics and astronautics, specializing in fluid mechanics and applied physics. I was in my Company's Technical Fellowship. I have 9 patents (go look up no. 8,800,933 B2 to learn my surname).
So---you do the same...if you can. So far, you are a nobody to me. A nobody who is more wrapped up in a dominance challenge than in explaining anything.
" I have three degrees in aeronautics and astronautics, specializing in fluid mechanics and applied physics."
Circular argument. It's deja vu all over again. Extraordinary 'claims' demands extraordinary evidence. You fail at the extraordinary evidence part. BS. Go away.
The only extraordinary claim is for "chemtrails." And the extraordinary evidence bit is pure showmanship. If something is true, all it takes is evidence (but not speculation). By your response, you invite me.
The original thread was then not for you. Everyone who commented there disagree with you. It's never advisable for a devil to stand up in a congregation openly debating God's existence to the congregation's pastor. Leave this place and open your own thread. Let's see how it fares. You're in the wrong place.
Pardon me, but the thread was about "chemtrails," a speculation---not about God. (If you want a simile, you might compare them to the chupacabra.) The rest of the world understands contrails. The question is why you would not also understand about contrails, since there is no evidence for the existence of chemtrails.
All I have heard is confusion and ignorance about contrails, speculation about proposed patented techniques for weather modification, and credulous acceptance of hoax videos and photographs purporting to show "chemtrail-equipped" aircraft. Some people claim to be able to tell a "chemtrail" from a contrail on sight---yet they do not offer any objective means of discrimination, nor any confirmatory evidence. Despite the claimed harm, real instances of chemtrails (rocket exhasut plumes) are completely disregarded, which is a strange inconsistency of concern. (Candidly, I just think it reflects general ignorance of the basic subject.)
You believe in an aberration to known science, so you are the one that needs to provide the so-called "extraordinary evidence." (I'm not that ridiculous. All that truth ever needs is "evidence." But speculation or supposed inference is not evidence.) You may discover, on reflection, that finding evidence is not so easy as you might think.
I am only stating there are contrails, for which there is plenty of evidence. You are the one making the unsubstantiated and vague claim of the widespread existence of so-called "chemtrails." Cough up your evidence that they exist. Documentation of speculation is not evidence of existence. Accusation of a widespread conspiracy requires material evidence of equipment, planning, and airborne dispersion.
I am citing my basis for expressing an informed view, which consists of specialized education and experience pertinent to the subject. You want degrees? I have three degrees in aeronautics and astronautics, specializing in fluid mechanics and applied physics. I was in my Company's Technical Fellowship. I have 9 patents (go look up no. 8,800,933 B2 to learn my surname).
So---you do the same...if you can. So far, you are a nobody to me. A nobody who is more wrapped up in a dominance challenge than in explaining anything.
Circular argument. It's deja vu all over again. Extraordinary 'claims' demands extraordinary evidence. You fail at the extraordinary evidence part. BS. Go away.
The only extraordinary claim is for "chemtrails." And the extraordinary evidence bit is pure showmanship. If something is true, all it takes is evidence (but not speculation). By your response, you invite me.
The original thread was then not for you. Everyone who commented there disagree with you. It's never advisable for a devil to stand up in a congregation openly debating God's existence to the congregation's pastor. Leave this place and open your own thread. Let's see how it fares. You're in the wrong place.
Pardon me, but the thread was about "chemtrails," a speculation---not about God. (If you want a simile, you might compare them to the chupacabra.) The rest of the world understands contrails. The question is why you would not also understand about contrails, since there is no evidence for the existence of chemtrails.
All I have heard is confusion and ignorance about contrails, speculation about proposed patented techniques for weather modification, and credulous acceptance of hoax videos and photographs purporting to show "chemtrail-equipped" aircraft. Some people claim to be able to tell a "chemtrail" from a contrail on sight---yet they do not offer any objective means of discrimination, nor any confirmatory evidence. Despite the claimed harm, real instances of chemtrails (rocket exhasut plumes) are completely disregarded, which is a strange inconsistency of concern. (Candidly, I just think it reflects general ignorance of the basic subject.)
You believe in an aberration to known science, so you are the one that needs to provide the so-called "extraordinary evidence." (I'm not that ridiculous. All that truth ever needs is "evidence." But speculation or supposed inference is not evidence.) You may discover, on reflection, that finding evidence is not so easy as you might think.