• bhmnscmm@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    8 months ago

    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?

    • fishos@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      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.

      • bhmnscmm@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        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.

        • fishos@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          8 months ago

          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.

          • bhmnscmm@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            8 months ago

            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.

            • fishos@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              8 months ago

              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%”.

              • bhmnscmm@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                6
                ·
                8 months ago

                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.