refutation

I agree that the current education system is down the drain, but discrediting every single piece of knowledge obtained using the scientific method because of one research group being corrupt is inane and utterly ridiculous. Especially since a properly written paper is testifiable and refutable by anyone with the correct apparatus, unlike any and all of the links you've sent me to to date.

You claim that research papers are bribed? I claim that people who don't provide properly and eloquently written papers with the evidence and test results, full methodology and a proper and correct control group have been bribed by the US government to mislead people like you from finding the proper conspiracy. You can't disprove me, but that's why the 'Burden of Proof' was setup. You claim that chemtrails exist, I have yet to find any *proper* evidence to dispute my affirmations that they do not. The burden of proof states that you must provide correct evidence to found a belief in chemtrails, as opposed to me disproving you, I don't have to disprove there being pink fairies that paint the plants green, do I?

In case you were wondering, by 'proper evidence' I mean evidence that has a full description of the methodology used in the tests, the outcomes of the tests, detailed analysis on the samples taken, a full disambiguation on any contaminants that may have had affected the samples, proper and detailed control groups, correct estimations of the margin of error involved, et cetera ad nauseum.

I am sick and tired of discussing this, I hope that next time you shall post links that I can determine the veracity of, not just opinionated articles/videos stating that something exists.

- Finn