I admit that there are some compelling arguments from the "it's a contrail, stupid" clan, but I'm not 100% convinced. Smearing others who don't automatically buy into your beliefs as a conspiracy nutter is insulting.
>>Since when is an honest questioning of a dubious situation “tin foil”?<<
I can actually answer that.
I’ll use 9/11 truthers as an example. We didn’t know exactly how to wrap our minds around that event at the time or shortly afterwards. There were all sorts of comments made at the time. One CNN reporter even marveled, on the air, at the amazing coincidence of two different planes accidentally hitting the towers on the same day, What are the odds?!
Of couse, as more evidence presents itself, a general consensus is formed. We learn of passenger lists, flight schools, black boxes, etc. A solid picture forms.
At that point, anyone saying a missile hit the pentagon or the event was all an Israeli plot is called a “truther”.
This crossed that point for me a couple hundred posts ago. Don’t get me wrong. Anyone who never pays attention to contrails and hasn’t followed this, and thinks it is a missile is simply coming from a position of ignorance. But I would hope that as they gain knowledge they would realize that the body of evidence overwhelmingly points to an aircraft.
My “scorn” is aimed at the “experts” that not only say it is a missile but say it with gusto - and those here that have had TONS of evidence presented to them and simply ignore it.
At this point, my favorite is the folks who think the contrail is “in shadow” close to the horizon. They have obviously never really studied the phenomenon. I have. I’ve seen the sun darkened by haze (as this contrail is at the “base”). When I present that information to them, they ignore it outright. At that point, I see this as a sort of “lead a horse to water...” thing.