My brother said my chemtrail argument was lazy, and honestly it made me rethink how I debate
So about 6 months ago I got into a long back and forth about chemtrails with my brother, who is a pilot in Denver. He told me my whole argument boiled down to "just look up, do your own research" and that I never once cited a specific flight, altitude, or lab test. I was mad for like a week but then I realized he was right, I was just repeating stuff from videos. Since then I started actually pulling up flight tracking data and weather reports before I argue with anyone about it. Now here is where I want the debate to go, does demanding hard evidence from the other side make you stronger, or does it just play into their game where they control all the official records? People here keep going back and forth on whether you should even bother with sources when the other side won't accept them anyway. What changed your approach, or do you think switching tactics like that is just giving in?