205
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 03 Apr 2024
205 points (97.7% liked)
News
36366 readers
816 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
This bill is obviously based in ignorance, but from an envirinmental/pollution standpoint this seems like a good thing. It's not their intention, but it sounds like it would protect the atmosphere from potential real polluters.
Edit: based in ignorance in the sense that some people supported the bill to ban "chem trails" (an ignorant position). Not in the sense that weather manipulation isn't real.
Suddenly every wood burning residential fireplace is illegal.
Wood smoke can obscure intensity of sunlight temporarily, increases temperature as a consequence of combustion, and small particulate matter like smoke particles are what makes rain possible, which would be weather effects
Hell, breathing is illegal.
"Here's a ticket for breathing out in violation of Tennessee law"
"What?!"
"Oh so you're a repeat offender are you? Here's a second ticket. You wanna try for three?"
Oh we got a smart-ass over here trying to hold her breath? Well missy you should have thought about that before getting pregnant. Now we've got you for attempted murder!
Um, no it's not. There are legit weather manipulating programs. Not the conspiracy chem trails bs, but legit "weather manipulation isn't illegal, so private companies have started getting into it for creating snow on mountains or clearing the sky before a concert" things. It made the news awhile back when a, I believe, California company, started doing it.
Beijing did it before the Olympics. It wasn't a secret by any means.
As it stands now, there is very little regulation in that area if the things you are spraying aren't already considered toxic substances. But should just anyone be able to manipulate the weather? Won't that cause more widespread issues? Maybe, maybe not. But should we leave that decision in the hands of corporations?
ETA: If you want to know more, start by looking up "cloud seeding". You'll see we've been openly testing it for decades. Source: Google
Just because people/corporations can use those legitimate weather manipulation tools, should they be allowed to?
I don't think they should. That's why I'm saying this bill seems like an unintentionally good thing.
I'm confused by your comment. I think we agree there should be regulation on the manipulation you described?
You say it's based in ignorance. It's not. Weather manipulation is real. This isn't just "let's not spray pollutants". It's very specifically targeting weather manipulation. You're seeming to say "well they're doing it because of a conspiracy, but at least it helps the environment anyways". No, we're doing it because of real tech that has been used since the 60's and is completely unregulated. This is intentionally a good thing, specifically targeting an issue.
Gotcha, that comment makes more sense now.
I suppose I was being a bit cynical. However, I think many people supported the bill to ban "Chem trails," and were ignorant to actual weather manipulation techniques it was prohibiting.
Bottom line is that this bill is a good thing. It doesn't really matter what reasons people had for supporting it.
I get your point, but we also need to change this behaviour of treating all conspiracy theories as being full of crazy people. Is every plane spreading chem trails? Absolutely not. But some absolutely are and the people who try to bring attention to it get lumped in with the Flat Earthers. It's very hard to talk about the legit programs going on without being dismissed as crazy or "ignorant". It's long been a tactic to paint the other side as dumb or crazy and thus stifle actual discussion. We as a society need to rise above this.
I hear ya, there's definitely nuance. There are certainly crazy people that supported this for crazy reasons, and there are rational people who supported this for rational reasons. I'm not trying to dismiss the whole thing as a crazy conspiracy theory.
Bruh, you're still doing it in your edit to your OP. Chem trails are real. They release the chemicals via rockets or planes.
Are all trails chem trails, NO. Are chem trails how they get the chemicals up there? Well yeah.
Seriously, go look up the history of cloud seeding.
You keep trying to say "well the people who support this are ignorant because it's not 100% the crazy conspiracy theory, only 95%".
We're clearly talking past each other here. When I say "chem trails" I'm referring to the stereotypical 1990s conspiracy of the government covertly and nefariously spraying mystery chemicals across the country to experiment/harm citizens: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemtrail_conspiracy_theory?wprov=sfla1
I'm not talking about real weather manipulation, cloud seeding, etc. Which are real, but not covertly and nefariously done by the government and corporations.
If you read the article, it's not really about cloud seeding, it's about solar geo-engineering, which us also a real thing
Um, cloud seeding is solar geo-enginerring. What do you think clouds are doing? You realize they change the abeido, right? You're trying to be pedantic, but it's just wrong.
Cloud seeding is a form of solar geoengineering, but it's not the only type of solar geoengineering. The type that seems most likely, and most likely targeted by this legislation, does not involve clouds.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stratospheric_aerosol_injection
The article states that this bill bans cloud seeding