Critics say it was inspired by unsubstantiated conspiracy theories that planes are spraying poison.
  • frazw@lemmy.worldEnglish
    134·
    3 months ago

    Wow, that’s great!! So I guess all the chemicals coming out of the coal, oil and gas fired power plants will be stopped then.

    CO2, NOx, particulates all are chemicals and are all intentionally released during combustion.

  • bhmnscmm@lemmy.world
    72·
    3 months ago

    The bill forbids “intentional injection, release, or dispersion” of chemicals into the air.

    Instead it broadly prohibits “affecting temperature, weather, or the intensity of the sunlight”.

    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.

    • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
      61·
      3 months ago

      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

    • fishos@lemmy.worldEnglish
      26·
      3 months ago

      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

      • bhmnscmm@lemmy.world
        15·
        3 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.worldEnglish
          11·
          3 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
            9·
            3 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.worldEnglish
              5·
              3 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
                3·
                3 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.worldEnglish
                  4·
                  3 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%”.

  • jeffw@lemmy.worldM
    43·
    3 months ago

    In a joking response, John Ray Clemmons, a Democrat from Nashville, introduced an amendment that would protect fictional beasts. “This amendment would make sure that we are protecting yetis, or Sasquatch or Bigfoot, from whatever this conspiracy is that we’re passing in this legislation,” he said during debate.

  • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
    40·
    3 months ago

    I love how they think that both chemtrails are real and that the evil secret cabal will care about their little law.

    These people don’t have any internal consistency in their mad conspiracy theories.

  • SeaJ@lemm.ee
    39·
    3 months ago

    Instead it broadly prohibits “affecting temperature, weather, or the intensity of the sunlight”.

    Let’s go after companies emitting CO2, CO, SO2, etc. TN is going to have to go green real quick.

    I’m guessing this is targeted at the geoengineering idea of emitting sulfur dioxide alternatives to bring down local temperatures but it is written in a way that prohibits CO2 emission. Good job, Republicans. You just passed the greenest bill in the country.

  • Diotima@ttrpg.network
    26·
    3 months ago

    Hmm. Can we uno reverse this to shut down companies who are egregious polluters? Please say we can.

    • rtxn@lemmy.worldEnglish
      10·
      3 months ago

      RIP to the single most effective form of mosquito population control.

      • ettyblatant@lemmy.world
        5·
        3 months ago

        This is what I thought of immediately. Crop dusters, how about flame retardant? Can you not put fires out from the air in Tennessee?

  • stanleytweedle@lemmy.worldEnglish
    16·
    3 months ago

    Has anyone tried passing a bill to make Tennessee have lunar gravity on weekends and holidays? I might think about vacationing there.

        • snooggums@midwest.socialEnglish
          6·
          3 months ago

          The bill says the act needs to be intentional, so they pick and choose whose pollution is intended to manipulate the weather. They could choose a particular airline and fine them, with jurisdiction depending on whether the airline operates out of an airport in Tennessee.

    • UnfortunateShort@lemmy.world
      2·
      3 months ago

      Distributing toxic indicator solutions that change colour when they come into contact with other chemicals via airplane (Boeing for increased effectiveness)

  • Cosmicomical@lemmy.world
    14·
    3 months ago

    Wait until they find out the air you expel when breathing is made of chemicals and you’re injecting them in the athmosphere.

  • Optional@lemmy.world
    13·
    3 months ago

    Imagine being the poor bastard DA asked to bring this case. FFS may as well make leprechauns illegal. Tennessee, man. Come on.

  • evasive_chimpanzee@lemmy.world
    10·
    3 months ago

    Something is fishy, if you look up the bills that supposedly did this, they don’t say anything about this topic.

    AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 4; Title 5; Title 6; Title 7; Title 8; Title 39; Title 42; Title 43; Title 44; Title 55; Title 58; Title 59; Title 60; Title 65; Title 68 and Title 69, relative to environmental protection. Environmental Preservation - As introduced, decreases, from 180 days to 150 days, the time that the air pollution control board can have more than one vacancy after an appointing authority of the board receives sufficient information to fill the appropriate vacancy before the board is required to report to the government operations committees. - Amends TCA Title 4; Title 5; Title 6; Title 7; Title 8; Title 39; Title 42; Title 43; Title 44; Title 55; Title 58; Title 59; Title 60; Title 65; Title 68 and Title 69.

    Edit: looks like I missed the amendment in the mobile version of the site. What’s funny is by the wording of the amendment, it’s perfectly legal to use airplanes to disperse mind control chemicals, lol. They are only banning efforts to combat climate change.

    AMENDMENT #1 rewrites the bill to prohibit the intentional injection, release, or dispersion, by any means, of chemicals, chemical compounds, substances, or apparatus within the borders of this state into the atmosphere with the express purpose of affecting temperature, weather, or the intensity of the sunlight.