(Total Views: 177)
Posted On: 05/30/2017 11:10:25 AM
Post# of 65629
Consistent you are, anyway.
Shade, you need to get yourself some a them Occam's razors, or maybe Occam's shears. You're clearly wearing a full beard of conspiracy theories. I think Gillette makes them. LOL!
Quote:
the chemtrail conspiracy theory as a classic example of failure to apply Occam's razor,......
Shade, you need to get yourself some a them Occam's razors, or maybe Occam's shears. You're clearly wearing a full beard of conspiracy theories. I think Gillette makes them. LOL!
Quote:
Patrick Minnis, an atmospheric scientist with NASA's Langley Research Center in Hampton, Virginia, is quoted in USA Today as saying that logic does not dissuade most chemtrail proponents: "If you try to pin these people down and refute things, it's, 'Well, you're just part of the conspiracy'," he said.[2]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemtrail_conspiracy_theory
Analysis of the use of commercial aircraft tracks for climate engineering has shown them to be generally unsuitable.[50]
Astronomer Bob Berman has characterized the chemtrail conspiracy theory as a classic example of failure to apply Occam's razor, writing in 2009 that instead of adopting the long-established "simple solution" that the trails consist of frozen water vapour,
"the conspiracy web sites think the phenomenon started only a decade ago and involves an evil scheme in which 40,000 commercial pilots and air traffic controllers are in on the plot to poison their own children."[ 51 ]
A 2016 study surveying 77 atmospheric scientists concluded that "76 out of 77 (98.7%) of scientists that took part in this study said there was no evidence of a [secret large-scale atmospheric program (SLAP)], and that the data cited as evidence could be explained through other factors, such as typical contrail formation and poor data sampling instructions presented on SLAP websites."[52][53
(1)
(0)
