No it doesn't have to be peer reviewed, but I would like to think at least being grounded in reality should be a prerequisite for the science tag. :wink:
Hey fair enough. So you are saying that you do not see any merit in the photos I present?
That is absolutely fine! I do not expect you to, however, discounting out of hand someone else's experience, without even a modicum of consideration ... well, that's denial. For instance @justtryme90, reality is subjective. I am showing you my reality where the science fits in is up to you. Scientifically, are these common cloud structures traditional? Not so much.
Not sure what I'm doing wrong with the emoticons, isn't this tag supposed to work? :wink:
Science is not subjective, it is the application of the scientific method to analyse phenomenon. Scientifically those cloud structures are absolutely typical from condensation resultant of the jet propulsion. If I can remember I will look for a video explaining the phenomenon.
I get that you don't think that I understand the scientific method, empirical evidence, etc. I also appreciate the offer of a video, but I understand how valuable one's time can be, so no worries if that doesn't happen. So then, in regards to contrails and cloud formations, I gather from what you're saying that you see the cloud formations in my photos above as regular old altostratus or cirrus clouds?
And if we're still on the tag discussion, are you unsatisfied with the tag being applied to something that calls for science to be brought to bear?
True. Can you please elaborate so that I can better understand the tagging system?
I added science in the 5th position, because debunking usually involves hard science.
Does everything tagged science have to be ... well, peer-reviewed and such? Is this a social network or a repository of higher learning? :wink:
No it doesn't have to be peer reviewed, but I would like to think at least being grounded in reality should be a prerequisite for the science tag. :wink:
Hey fair enough. So you are saying that you do not see any merit in the photos I present?
That is absolutely fine! I do not expect you to, however, discounting out of hand someone else's experience, without even a modicum of consideration ... well, that's denial. For instance @justtryme90, reality is subjective. I am showing you my reality where the science fits in is up to you. Scientifically, are these common cloud structures traditional? Not so much.
Not sure what I'm doing wrong with the emoticons, isn't this tag supposed to work? :wink:
Science is not subjective, it is the application of the scientific method to analyse phenomenon. Scientifically those cloud structures are absolutely typical from condensation resultant of the jet propulsion. If I can remember I will look for a video explaining the phenomenon.
I get that you don't think that I understand the scientific method, empirical evidence, etc. I also appreciate the offer of a video, but I understand how valuable one's time can be, so no worries if that doesn't happen. So then, in regards to contrails and cloud formations, I gather from what you're saying that you see the cloud formations in my photos above as regular old altostratus or cirrus clouds?
And if we're still on the tag discussion, are you unsatisfied with the tag being applied to something that calls for science to be brought to bear?