What's the problem? I'm discussing it. I gather you don't what to hear or consider what I have to say. It is curious to me that whether a point is substantial (or not) is not as important to you as whether fools have justified talking about it more.
I repeat: the logic is bogus. Just because someone decides to put teeth into a fabulous claim does not make the claim true. Just because an honorable person doesn't know anything about the subject doesn't make his remarks true. Flynn knows nothing about contrails, but at least I have been to Fort Huachuca.
And you will shortly find that the legislation is equivalent to a ban on magic. There will be no indictments, no charges, no findings of guilt, and contrails will continue to cross the sky. Wake me up if this ever goes to court.
What's the problem? I'm discussing it. I gather you don't what to hear or consider what I have to say. It is curious to me that whether a point is substantial (or not) is not as important to you as whether fools have justified talking about it more.
I repeat: the logic is bogus. Just because someone decides to put teeth into a fabulous claim does not make the claim true. Just because an honorable person doesn't know anything about the subject doesn't make his remarks true. Flynn knows nothing about contrails, but at least I have been to Fort Huachuca.
And you will shortly find that the legislation is equivalent to a ban on magic. There will be no indictments, no charges, no findings of guilt, and contrails will continue to cross the sky. Wake me up if this ever goes to court.