Climate Change Is Extremely Political And Agenda Serving, Unfortunately It Is Also True

[teddyv]

3 minutes ago, other one said:

It doesn't have the particle to stick to.   The difference in moisture and clouds.  Clouds don't form unless there is an abundance of junk in the air for the moisture to stick to.  And when enough of the moisture comes along gravity takes over and it rains.

Correct. Where and when I grew up, we had times of really thick persistent fogs due to the abundance of lumber mills and other industrial activity. Now that many mills are closed or particulates more stringently monitored and removed, those thick fogs rarely occur anymore.

[Sparks]

16 minutes ago, teddyv said:

It should.

And "liberal scientist" is an ad hominem.

How is "liberal scientist" an ad hominem?  

Liberals, in my experience, only believe other liberals.  I am not a liberal and would have conducted the experiment, and I believe no amount of evidence I collected would convince you.  Liberal is not a dirty word, you know. 

Now if I had said you were ugly, that would have been an ad hominem. 

[Sparks]

12 minutes ago, other one said:

At this point I just have to go........   "Whatever"

Wise.  Or you could realize that you cannot reproduce what you claim given the right environment. 

You could look at the sky around sunset, especially an orange sunset.  Vapor trails are easily visible then, and notice that jets have a small tail of vapor that sort of erases itself a few hundred yards away, where as low altitude chem trails don't.  They linger, they get fatter, and never really disperse, but spread.   That's not the habit of vapor trails.

[Alive]

6 minutes ago, Sparks said:

How is "liberal scientist" an ad hominem?  

Liberals, in my experience, only believe other liberals.  I am not a liberal and would have conducted the experiment, and I believe no amount of evidence I collected would convince you.  Liberal is not a dirty word, you know. 

Now if I had said you were ugly, that would have been an ad hominem. 

My observation has been that when a self-proclaimed conservative uses the term 'liberal or liberal scientist' that there is quite a lot of weight behind it. That weight containing a disdain, at best.

So, it seems reasonable for a 'liberal' to react in calling such 'ad hominem'

Dontcha think?

[teddyv]

8 minutes ago, Sparks said:

How is "liberal scientist" an ad hominem?  

Liberals, in my experience, only believe other liberals.  I am not a liberal and would have conducted the experiment, and I believe no amount of evidence I collected would convince you.  Liberal is not a dirty word, you know. 

Now if I had said you were ugly, that would have been an ad hominem. 

You are attacking one's position based on something irrelevant to that position. 

"directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining."

[Sparks]

25 minutes ago, Alive said:

My observation has been that when a self-proclaimed conservative uses the term 'liberal or liberal scientist' that there is quite a lot of weight behind it. That weight containing a disdain, at best.

So, it seems reasonable for a 'liberal' to react in calling such 'ad hominem'

Dontcha think?

Nope.  I explained myself.

But if you think 'liberal' and 'scientist' cannot be paired without insult, I would conclude that there was a lot of weight behind that statement from you, as you said.

Allegedly our friend @teddyv is a geologist, which one could conclude is a scientist.  He is also a liberal, politically.   We disagree about virtually every topic.  I asked him what would convince him, because I am sure I could not no matter what evidence I present.  Take that as you will, but I suggest since I explained myself you take what I said on the benefit of the doubt.

I am not a conservative, by the way.  I am a libertarian.  We libertarians are about 50% more freedom minded than our conservative or liberal friends, and 100% more freedom minded than socialists or dictators.

[Sparks]

20 minutes ago, teddyv said:

You are attacking one's position based on something irrelevant to that position. 

"directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining."

What conservative scientists or libertarian scientists do you side with? 

If you want to be honest with yourself, liberals and conservatives view the world differently, even in scientific circles.  They tend to disagree with topics like "Global Warming," vaccines, and other subjects, given the same evidence.

If you want to be insulted by the idea, go ahead.  That was not my intent. 

[teddyv]

1 minute ago, Sparks said:

What conservative scientists or libertarian scientists do you side with? 

If you want to be honest with yourself, liberals and conservatives view the world differently, even in scientific circles.  They tend to disagree with topics like "Global Warming," vaccines, and other subjects, given the same evidence.

If you want to be insulted by the idea, go ahead.  That was not my intent. 

I side with scientists that do their work responsibly. It is possible to do this regardless of your political leaning.

I work with another geologist that would agree with many of your stances on vaccines, government, etc. We can work together because we both do our geological work professionally. We sometimes get into a discussions on political or other contentious topics outside of geology but it does not affect how we conduct our work. We have the same responsibilities and ethical duties around our work. I'm not even sure how being conservative or liberal would affect this work.

And I'm not insulted. This just started because you used a logical fallacy (no matter how you try to justify it).

[S33k3r]

3 hours ago, The Barbarian said:

It comes down to evidence.  Some stories are false, no matter how much you want them to be true.    Show us your evidence.

Water vapor is a chemical, yes.

For the same reasons that clouds will form or not form at a particular altitude.   If you were right, we'd always see clouds at any given altitude.    Guess why we don't.

You've just ignored differences in temperature and humidity at altitude.   Contrails sometimes last a long time for the same reason that clouds form and last a long time.   

I would be very silly, naive and inexperienced in this game you play if I were to scramble around posting this evidence and that evidence, desperately trying to convince you of things you will never admit are possible.

I will not play your game.

You have a job to do here and that is to silence any and all Truth that is a threat to the mainstream party line that you and your buddies (or your other screen names) tow here.

I got news for that you're not gonna like too. You are failing. 

You are not silencing anything at all. Those who have the capacity to know, and understand, these things already know them, are learning about them now and are learning more and more about them every day because they possess discernment which is immune to your desperate attempts to silence and diminish the information by myself and so many others.

HAARP

Chemtrails

Government is doing it all and only the most foolish citizens of the world are unaware of it.

Good luck with your attack on CO2. It's changing absolutely nothing.

Edited December 16, 2022 by S33k3r

[Alive]

12 minutes ago, Sparks said:

But if you think 'liberal' and 'scientist' cannot be paired without insult, I would conclude that there was a lot of weight behind that statement from you, as you said.

Hmmmmm? I did not say they cannot be paired without insult. Did not say that at all. It is simply not in what I wrote. I choose my words carefully. I wrote that I have "observed" that they often are and because they often are (clearly), then it is reasonable for that reaction to occur. Specifically, the reaction of 'ad hominem'.

These are the things I wrote and they were quite specific and the scope of intent was a general one.