[bawolff]

> Words have different meanings in different contexts

Well define it then.

Nobody is complaing that there might be an alternative definition of chemical.

The complaint is that you're not using any widely known definition of "chemical" and not providing your own definition.

You can shut everyone up by just defining how you are using the word. I doubt you will since i think you are lying about there existing some other definition that makes sense in the context you are arguing, and you lack the knowledge/ability to make up your own definition that would fit your argument.

[marshray]

Here you go, here's one plain vanilla dictionary definition, absent context.

Now would you like to discuss which "substances produced by chemical processes" are likely to be the most impactful upon the environment, or would you like to continue quibbling over semantics?

chemical [ kem-i-kuhl ]SHOW IPA

noun

a substance produced by or used in a chemical process.

chemicals, Slang. narcotic or mind-altering drugs or substances.

adjective

of, used in, produced by, or concerned with chemistry or chemicals: a chemical formula; chemical agents.

used in chemical warfare: chemical weapons.

https://www.dictionary.com/browse/chemical

[bawolff]

Well given this is in response to the statement:

> "It’s pretty simple, don’t dump chemicals in water or on land period."

Then i still maintain anyone using that definition of chemical in the context of that statement is an utter idiot.

> Now would you like to discuss which "substances produced by chemical processes" are likely to be the most impactful upon the environment

Why? There is already a government department tasked with that, that can probably do a better job then you or i could.

If you're trying to argue that the status quo is fine and we shouldn't change anything, then you have a weird way of doing so.