Back to the original post and actual topic of the thread here:
originally posted by: Uncinus
Chemtrail believers claim that persistent contrails are a new thing, and they call the persistent trails "chemtrails". They also claims [sic] that
contrails don't last a long time, and they certainly don't spread out and cause cirrus clouds and overcast skies. They also claim the chemtrails
started in the late 1990s.
And yet, here's an issue of Popular Science, from 1969, 43 years ago...
So if contrails did this 43 years ago...Why the mantra of "contrails fade away, chemtrails persist and spread"? Clearly contrails quite frequently
persist and spread, at least according to the science of 43 years ago.
Yet ANOTHER non sequitur
argument in an attempt to "debunk" so-called chemtrail conspiracy theory. Here's the argument in short hand:
Claim A: It has been known for 43 years that jet exhaust at altitudes of 30, 000 and 40, 000 feet can form expanding cirrus clouds.
Evidence: Popular Science article, May 1969
Conclusions: The contrails we see today that persist and spread are nothing new
Why does the initial premise not follow logically within the context of the attempt to "debunk" so-called chemtrail conspiracy theory:
1. The fact that persistent contrails were noticed 43 years ago says nothing about the chemical constituents of the jet exhaust then or now.
2. The fact that Popular Science indicates why persistent contrails could be observed in 1969 does not mean what you see in the sky similarly
spreading out is the same exact phenomenon.
3. The fact that persistent contrails could be observed and explained in 1969 does nothing to "debunk" that there can be additional chemicals being
sprayed along with the jet exhaust 43 years later.
4. The fact that persistent contrails were noticed as early as 1969 does not mean the sheer amount of persistent contrails observed today do not pose
a serious hazard.
5. The fact that persistent contrails were phenomenon that scientists were aware of even as early as 1969 is no evidence whatsoever that scientists,
corporations, or the government and military would never think of experimenting and using this method to disperse either a)many more persistent
contrails, or b) contrails that have an altered chemical composition, for whatever purposes they deem fit, including geoengineering, even to the
extent that there is a negative impact on the public's health.
Why are people resorting to arguments that amount to logical fallacies in a viscous effort to "debunk" chemtrail conspiracy theory? -- A RHETORICAL
question. DO NOT REPLY.
edit on -06:00America/Chicago28Wed, 11 Feb 2015 15:58:12 -0600201512312 by Petros312 because: correction