Weather Machines: WTF? (or, The Anti-Weather Machine Movement and the Fundamental Failure to Employ Basic Critical Thinking Skills)

by Kevin Reed

“First, they said we were crazy for saying they are controlling the weather and spraying chemicals in our skies. Now, they are admitting that they are controlling the weather and spraying chemicals in our skies, BUT that it’s not causing any harm. Call me crazy, I don’t care. But I’ll go ahead and say it. Weather modification and geoengineering is deadly and dangerous. And guess what, they can’t prove it’s not…Yes they can control the weather … It’s ridiculous for anyone to lie and say it can’t be done.” Marjorie Taylor Greene, U.S. representative for Georgia's 14th congressional district [two separate statements].

 I think it’s interesting to unpack this statement. The quote covers a lot of ground, and it lines up with similar claims, such as Alex Jones claiming there are machines that “control tornadoes,” or others saying that “chemtrails” are altering human behavior or causing disease.

To some, these are “chemtrails” that are chemicals sprayed on us by “them” to alter our behavior or cause disease. In real life, they are condensation trails from jet aircraft.

 “First, they said we were crazy for saying they are controlling the weather and spraying chemicals in our skies.”

 Well, this is for a reason, because nobody is “controlling the weather” or spraying chemicals in our skies besides crop dusters, localized cloud seeding, and fire suppressants from low-flying aircraft. Nor is there any evidence to support the decades-old conspiracy theory about “chemtrails” being sprayed from planes to control behavior or cause skin disease.

Also, who’s “they”? We never hear who “they” are. “They” must be damned crafty to avoid detection all this time. “They” are obviously not the US government at this point, since the GOP is simultaneously dismantling science, universities, and institutions while 8 states pursue anti-weather machine legislation. Seeding occurs globally as well, so even less likely the US government would be doing it. So that leaves private companies or individuals. There’s no evidence to point to anyone. What would “they” get out of it? We hear “they” unleash the weather on red states, but in the days after the Texas floods, North Carolina (more purple) and New York and New Jersey experienced devastating flash flooding as well. Maybe “they” do that to throw us all off? “They’re onto us! Let’s hammer NYC with a storm to throw them off!!”

 As with most conspiracy hysterics, there is a foundation of truth (cloud seeding), surrounded by layers of things that have no evidence whatsoever (weather machines caused the Texas floods because “they” control the weather). You’ll notice that people making claims of deadly weather machines or machines that control tornadoes or hurricanes never offer a scrap of evidence to back their claims. That’s a critical detail when you’re making an extreme claim – you need some extreme evidence to back up your extreme claim, otherwise you’re just burping up drama. Zero evidence don’t cut it.

 “Now, they are admitting that they are controlling the weather and spraying chemicals in our skies, BUT that it’s not causing any harm.”

 Cloud seeding having negative effects has been a long-standing conspiracy drama that goes back, unsurprisingly, to the creation of cloud-seeding, back in the 1940s. Any human being can research the history of cloud seeding. I can summarize it here.

 In 1946, Vincent Schaefer, a self-taught chemist, was working with a home-built cold cloud chamber as he attempted the first cloud-seeding experiment.

 He chilled the air in the chamber to below freezing, then breathed into the chamber to introduce moisture (water vapor) into the very cold air inside. Then he dropped a piece of dry ice (solid CO₂) into the chamber. This rapidly cooled the chamber even more — below –40°F (–40°C). The moisture in the air instantly condensed and froze, forming a flurry of tiny ice crystals—an artificial snowstorm inside the chamber.

The moisture from his breath was necessary to simulate a real cloud, specifically a supercooled cloud, which is a type of cloud that contains water droplets below the freezing point of 0°C (32°F). The dry ice acted as a nucleation catalyst, dramatically increasing the number of ice crystals by giving them a structure to form around. A nucleation catalyst is something that helps things start to form, like how dust helps raindrops or snowflakes begin inside a cloud. It's a tiny "starter" that gives water something to stick to so it can turn into a drop or a crystal, in this case, it helped the supercooled water vapor in the air turn instantly into ice crystals.

 On November 13, 1946, Schaefer moved the experiment skyward for the first real-world cloud seeding flight over Mt. Greylo. He took off in a rented single-engine plane with pilot Curt Talbot. Flying above Mount Greylock, they released about six pounds of crushed dry ice into a supercooled cloud at around 14,000 ft, and a small amount of snow fell below, for about 3,000 feet before dissipating into the dry air.

Some basic examples of cloud seeding from the ground (left) and from the air (right).

For most seeding applications, planes fly into or just below the base of the target cloud layer and release particles upward or into the cloud mass. This is the typical method for silver iodide or dry ice seeding of cold clouds. Snow seeding can even be from ground-based generators.

 What types of things do they put in clouds to help rain or snow form?

Governments, private companies, and research institutions use cloud seeding to enhance precipitation, suppress hail, or reduce fog—especially in regions where water scarcity, agriculture, or extreme weather is a concern. So, basic stuff where minor alterations create some small measures of human benefit.

Where’s it happening? Mostly in China, the US, United Arab Emirates, Russia, India, South Africa, Australia.

 Who operates seeding? Governments, water conservation boards, private contractors, universities, and agricultural consortiums.

 Cloud seeding is widespread and regulated, especially in regions dependent on snowpack or rainfall. It’s used to increase water security, reduce weather damage, and manage risk, backed by real science, though results can vary based on atmospheric conditions.

 “Call me crazy, I don’t care. But I’ll go ahead and say it. Weather modification and geoengineering is deadly and dangerous. And guess what, they can’t prove it’s not.”

 Where is the evidence that any entity is controlling or weaponizing the weather? Well, there is none. Not a scrap of it.

 Yet claims like this have been made since 1947, when Project Cirrus attempted to modify a hurricane for the first time to try to weaken the storm. Three planes dropped 180 pounds of crushed ice into the storm, which was in the process of veering towards landfall at the time. Naturally people thought the seeding caused the storm to somehow change direction. A typical hurricane is ~300 miles wide. How could 180 pounds of dry ice cause it to shift direction instantaneously? Nobody can explain that, but people still believed it, for decades.

 Look at this image of a hurricane. How are some planes dumping stuff into that thing going to make it any worse? Or make it change direction? Well, there’s no evidence to back that up, because those things are not currently possible.

You have same problem of scale with the recent Texas, NC, and NY/NJ floods. Massive storms. Cloud seeding today is a very small scale.

 So what’s the “deadly and dangerous” part? Answer: There is no deadly and dangerous part. It’s made-up conspiracy drama to further control a gullible support base. If the people in that political support base would use some basic critical thinking, they’d see through it. But they don’t bother.

 “Yes they can control the weather … It’s ridiculous for anyone to lie and say it can’t be done.”

 Again, there is no evidence that anyone can control massive weather systems. People are “denying” it because we don’t have the capability to do it. We can only make small impacts in certain situations. Context. It’s as critical as data. When both are ignored, you can say anything and people will believe anything.

 This week MTG passed a bill that “prohibits the injection, release, or dispersion of chemicals or substances into the atmosphere for the express purpose of altering weather, temperature, climate, or sunlight intensity. It will be a felony offense.”

 A felony for something that doesn’t exist. Good times. So now a ski resort manager or contractor can be hauled off for increasing snowpack. A contractor dissipating fog for safety is committing a felony. A local water authority trying to increase rainfall on a small scale to mitigate drought is breaking the law. Why is this level of stupidity acceptable to the United States of America, or any advanced nation?

 Currently A DOZEN states are pursuing similar legislation, based on zero evidence of harm. Twelve states so far. The idea has gone from fringe to damaging lawmaking.

 MJT on her bill this week: “Finally we can really take the fight in Washington to protect our skies, protect our water, protect our atmosphere and most of all protect our families.”

 While she literally supports active damage to ALL those things as she denies climate change, supports the gutting of US institutions that protect those things, and attacks the data and research needed to counter pollution and climate change (caused by the real weather machines that pump out CO2 on a daily basis).

 We have a large group of people who don’t “believe” in the simple reality of climate change, which has stacks of evidence to back it up. But they go hook line sinker on cloud seeding conspiracies, which have zero evidence to back them up.

 This is a fundamental failure of the USA’s citizens (and other nations’) to employ basic critical thinking skills, and pursue even the most basic understanding of rudimentary science that any regular humanoid can understand if they simply make the smallest effort to understand something before they allow themselves to be controlled by conspiracy peddlers.

 We can do better than this.