So clouds stay in one spot?

I don't think anyone is suggesting this entire storm system was created by cloud seeding.

I think people are asking why taxpayers are paying for cloud seeding when a tropical low is approaching. An already unstable atmosphere shouldn't have mechanical intervention to make it more unstable.

It's a matter of scale. And conditions. It's just vastly more plausible that the known conditions were already going to lead up to this event as historically it often had in the past. The conspiratorial element is not at all required for the event to have occurred, and for it yo be a significant causal component would have required vast amounts of resources that would not have gone unnoticed.

I find it odd that cloud seeding is done right before multiple historic floods and the seeding companies say that they created rain, but not that much rain. I don't think the science is there to be able to control it so there does need to be some kind of regulation.

It appears I need to do some more studying and it's very possibly I was wrong.

Am I also wrong about Jew lasers?

96AgGrad said:

---

That's your takeaway from her message?

---

You forget about Jewish space lasers?

Your posts seem to suggest that "cloud seeding" to induce rainfall is minimal in scale; bro, PLEASE go look at videos of Dubai!!! Here's one to get you started:

Dubai admitted to using this very process; low & behold, the results looked akin to a Cat 3 or Cat 4 Hurricane making landfall there where the flooding was absolutely catastrophic!!

Further, there are apparently publicly available govt records recently discovered that document cloud seeding operations were indeed conducted in the general area around Kerr County a couple days before July 4th (complete with the plane's registration #, flight paths, "TOT" [time over target], etc.); to date, no one has come forward & established an indisputable nexus between that operation & the resulting July 4th flooding event. Conversely, no one has come forward to disprove that operation didn't worsen an already potentially dangerous storm either!! So, all we have is conjecture at this point, but I submit a healthy dose of skepticism is better than simply burying one's head in the sand, confident in their conclusions that may be built upon totally erroneous foundations at the very onset.

One thing is for sure, in the future you can bet your sweet ass that Insurance Companies are gonna use cloud seeding operations as a justification to deny liability; they'll argue it's an 'intervening factor' that negates the application of insurance coverage resulting from "Acts of God", so that even if you have flood insurance, the insurance companies will argue the floods weren't a typical weather event/ natural disaster. That means you would then have to sue the company responsible for cloud seeding, but establishing causation will be extremely difficult, if not impossible, especially if you have jurors like YOU & Mr. Ghost on the panel (since you both have made statements that are oblivious to available evidentiary proof that disputes your positions)!!

I get it; I too thought & still believe so called "chem trails" are mostly the result of condensation forming behind heated air from an aircraft's engine reacting to freezing temps at high altitude. BUT, I have since seen actual evidence that some aircraft are indeed equipped to release chemicals of all sorts, for a myriad of purposes; while many of the stated reasons behind such operations as offered from insane conspiracy theorists can be easily discounted, the existence of aircraft with these capabilities, alongside active weather modification operations, can no longer be ignored.

MouthBQ98 said:

---

For the love of all things sane…. Yes, you can cloud seed with find particulates at very specific targeted locations. You can get a little localized pop-up cloud.

What you can't do is cause the remnants of a tropical storm to move a massive amount of Pacific Ocean atmospheric moisture over west texas following the predominant weather patterns fro west to east and have it activated into training rain storms with a distinct rotation. Around a massive atmospheric low pressure that drifts across central texas. Do "they" (it's always they) have a gigantic jet stream machine and a fleet of thousands of cloud seeing aircraft we haven't seen? That what it would have taken.


Or maybe this is a pattern that you see in central Texas periodically in the summer when a dying pacific tropical system drifts across Mexico and into Texas at the right time of year in the hot summer sun, it's only happened dozens of times since record keeping started, resulting in occasional extreme rainfalls and flooding events in Texas. Virtually all of which occurs before cloud seeding existed. Or aircraft.

Let's be serious here. What are the odds a naturally occurring periodic random event naturally occurs, versus some titanic conspiracy that has of yet no hard evidence of occurring related to this specific weather event?

Our society is becoming obsessed with conspiracy. I don't mind the thought exercises or conjecture but at some point a level of sanity has to interject itself regarding plausibility. As in, is it technically possible to conduct at the necessary scale and remain completely hidden from direct observation?

---

It would take soooo much energy to do the kind of "geoengineering" that is being talked about. There would have to be a secret power grid or some kind of secret power generation method that noone knows about.

RUH-ROH!!!

https://www.facebook.com/100053937084115/posts/1231087478699143/

CEO of "Rainmaker" admits to cloud seeding the Hill Country 2 days before the flooding event; how many other companies were also conducting operations there? If you look at the map posted on the website of the North American Weather Modification Council, you'll see areas targeted for operations during "warm weather" are the EXACT areas that flooded on July 4th!! (I'll try to post the pic from their website, but I'm technologically handicapped & doubt I do it correctly; any help is appreciated!)

Despite the naysayers claims to the contrary on this topic, the FB article states studies upon the effects upon rainfall totals due to cloud seeding range from 0% to 20%; therefore, if the "science" isn't settled, how can some of you so confidently declare that such activities didn't impact the storm on a level akin to what we saw in Dubai, especially when the number of companies conducting operations in that area just days before isn't known yet with any degree of certainty!?!

I understand the skepticism when MTG makes claims about cloud seeding, but is Ron DeSantis & every other lawmaker in other states dumbasses too?!?! Maybe it IS time to break out the tinfoil hats to prove another conspiracy correct!

URL: www.nawmc.org/targetss.png

Quote:

---

NEW: Weather modification company CEO admits cloud-seeding operations conducted in the Hill Country two days before deadly flood | But, Augustus Doricko, CEO of Rainmaker, claims his release of Silver Iodide into the atmosphere did not cause the deadly floods. Doricko says the two clouds seeded would have dissipated after a few hours and would have had no effect on the floods several days later. Though the technique has been studied for decades, it remains difficult to predict the additional rainfall that cloud seeding operations can generate, with estimates ranging widely from 0% to 20%. So much rain fell that the Guadalupe River at Kerrville, one of the epicenters of the floods, rose some 26 feet (8 meters) in less than an hour overnight on Friday.

---

Rest of that FB post.

Thank you Ma'am for helping out a fellow barrister who is NOT computer savvy. Any chance you can post the image of the map from the link I provided? It's SHOCKING!!!

Ag in Tiger Country said:

---

One thing is for sure, in the future you can bet your sweet ass that Insurance Companies are gonna use cloud seeding operations as a justification to deny liability; they'll argue it's an 'intervening factor' that negates the application of insurance coverage resulting from "Acts of God", so that even if you have flood insurance, the insurance companies will argue the floods weren't a typical weather event/ natural disaster. That means you would then have to sue the company responsible for cloud seeding, but establishing causation will be extremely difficult, if not impossible, especially if you have jurors like YOU & Mr. Ghost on the panel (since you both have made statements that are oblivious to available evidentiary proof that disputes your positions)!!

---

100000%

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

NEW: Weather modification company CEO admits cloud-seeding operations conducted in the Hill Country two days before deadly flood | But, Augustus Doricko, CEO of Rainmaker, claims his release of Silver Iodide into the atmosphere did not cause the deadly floods. Doricko says the two clouds seeded would have dissipated after a few hours and would have had no effect on the floods several days later. Though the technique has been studied for decades, it remains difficult to predict the additional rainfall that cloud seeding operations can generate, with estimates ranging widely from 0% to 20%. So much rain fell that the Guadalupe River at Kerrville, one of the epicenters of the floods, rose some 26 feet (8 meters) in less than an hour overnight on Friday.

---

Rest of that FB post.

---

Possible lawsuits?

Sorry can't get it to embed.

96AgGrad said:

---

I doubt cloud seeding is the concern.

Per Google AI:

Quote:

---

Geoengineering, also known as climate intervention or climate engineering, refers to the deliberate large-scale manipulation of Earth's climate system to counteract climate change. It involves intentional interventions aimed at altering the Earth's energy balance to reduce global warming. These interventions typically fall into two broad categories: carbon dioxide removal (CDR) and solar radiation management (SRM). grifting and flat out lies to continue said grift

---

---

fify

For the avoidance of doubt:

https://t.co/fXdqZ583YZ

— @amuse (@amuse) July 8, 2025

There's zero chance the cloud seeding done by Rainmaker contributed to the flooding.

If anything this makes it LESS likely it will rain there in the near future once that seeding event has taken place and drawn out atmospheric moisture that is there, if it is successful.

Bigger problem is that much of the air that was seeded there is literally hundreds of miles away 48 hours later. The atmosphere moves. A lot. Seeding only causes localized events and the particulates gather condensation and rain out of the atmosphere or are dispersed over time. I really hate how conspiracy focused or gullible we have all become.

Occam's razor, Entropy, ,most things really are as simple as they seem.

Who is paying for this? Is it taxpayers?

MouthBQ98 said:

---

Our society is becoming obsessed with conspiracy. I don't mind the thought exercises or conjecture but at some point a level of sanity has to interject itself regarding plausibility. As in, is it technically possible to conduct at the necessary scale and remain completely hidden from direct observation?

---

They keep coming true, especially since March of 2020.

Then why did the particular thunderstorm system that dumped all that rain rotate so slowly as if it was stationary over Kerr County, in a counter-clockwise manner like a hurricane, instead of being dispersed hundreds of miles like you claim? Also, those storms were remnants of TS Berry, which has a rotational system akin to a hurricane anyway & not your typical thunderstorm that develops ahead of a cold front & quickly passes through an area.

FTR, I'm NOT claiming cloud seeding was the sole cause of the flooding, but I am alarmed at your dismissive attitude & false bravado of your convictions that are based upon the clearly unsettled science & effects of cloud seeding. That is all I'm saying; it's giving off 'goal tending' vibes akin to Covid & a pangolin, which we later learned was utter bull*****

agracer said:

---

MouthBQ98 said:

---

Our society is becoming obsessed with conspiracy. I don't mind the thought exercises or conjecture but at some point a level of sanity has to interject itself regarding plausibility. As in, is it technically possible to conduct at the necessary scale and remain completely hidden from direct observation?

---

They keep coming true, especially since March of 2020.

---

Not really.

Most of what the left labeled a "conspiracy" in 2020 was done so by the media and Democrats to simply shut people up.

Saying the virus came from a lab was one of two possibilities, not a conspiracy.

Saying the virus would give everyone AIDS and we'd all need to be on anti-HIV drugs for life, was a conspiracy some where pushing early on.

Saying China was incinerating tens of thousands of bodies per day was a conspiracy theory that flooded Twitter.

Much of the whackiest stuff in early 2020 was likely coming straight from Beijing as part of their massive psyops campaign.

Saying the shots might have dangerous side effects, not a conspiracy theory. A possibility that is true to some degree, how much is still up in the air. However, some people went way out there with actual conspiracies like saying the shots contained an "aluminum carbon lifeform" or were 99.99% graphene oxide.

Saying masks don't work, lockdowns and 6ft apart were junk was not a conspiracy theory. It was obvious that nothing done to slow or stop the virus worked, because once a respiratory virus gets going, it is impossible to stop.

Saying HCQ can help with the virus wasn't a conspiracy theory. A paper published by none other than Anthony Fauci said it was very effective on SARS-1, and the viruses were virtually identical.

Saying Ivermectin was dangerous and would kill you was the media and Covidians trying to silence any dissent from the approved narrative. We saw the same thing on F84.

Saying the election was likely stolen is not a conspiracy theory. (It was stolen by old school ballot fraud and ballot harvesting via mass mail in ballots.)
Saying it was stolen by Dominion, Smartmatic, and The Kraken (don't forget spec-ops raids on German server farms) was a conspiracy that cost a lot of people hundreds of millions of dollars.

The actual conspiracy theories, such as the endless heaping pile from Q, were trash from the word go. Made one guy go shoot up a restaurant looking for abducted children.

The left has been broken since 2000.

2020 broke the brains of many on the political right.

Ag in Tiger Country said:

---

Then why did the particular thunderstorm system that dumped all that rain rotate so slowly as if it was stationary over Kerr County, in a counter-clockwise manner like a hurricane, instead of being dispersed hundreds of miles like you claim? Also, those storms were remnants of TS Berry, which has a rotational system akin to a hurricane anyway & not your typical thunderstorm that develops ahead of a cold front & quickly passes through an area.

FTR, I'm NOT claiming cloud seeding was the sole cause of the flooding, but I am alarmed at your dismissive attitude & false bravado of your convictions that are based upon the clearly unsettled science & effects of cloud seeding. That is all I'm saying; it's giving off 'goal tending' vibes akin to Covid & a pangolin, which we later learned was utter bull*****

---

Hurricanes, or their remains can stall out and camp in one locations for days on end. They do not need human intervention, and cloud seeding would not make it just stop. We humans do not have that kind of power.

Remember Harvey?

I'm a big fan of Occam's razor: it is in no way necessary for cloud seeding to be causal when you already had all the necessary conditions for extremely heavy rainfall in place by natural means. And on the scale of the event, it would have been like pissing in the ocean and claiming that caused the tides that day.

I know how it has to excite the mind that people believe they are on to something controversial or conspiratorial and it creates this feeling of being an insider with special knowledge and awareness but maybe I am just a natural skeptic, and I don't see the actual evidence that that technology was employed in a manner that had any measurable effect on this weather event, especially at the scale and duration that it occurred.

I've been in texas my whole life and have seen plenty of similar weather events from tropical systems that stalked out, and plenty of massive hill country flash floods. I don't see the need to attribute this one event to something different than the conditions already converging naturally at the time.

For this to have some plausibility, we need permit numbers, flight numbers, flight plans, proposed seeding areas, altitudes, seed material employed, volume of that material released, and then the subsequent wind and weather patterns and data on the average dispersal and dissipation rates for the release conditions, the subsequent observed effects, the subsequent wind and weather patterns for the next 48 hours at in the area, at vetting altitudes, etc.

It should be relatively easy to calculate the maximum amount of particles of condensation that could be triggered and the duration with which the necessary density of seed particles would remain and where it would drift with time, and if the particle density would remain statistically significantly higher than the background atmospheric particle densities typical of the area, season, and conditions.

But, all that being said, I don't want to discourage curiosity and investigation. Do some research into the technology, how it works, how and where and when it is used, what it can and can't do. I don't mean AI summaries and some google search news stories, but published research and the information from those who have developed and tested it. If it is a drought relief technology, our government is sure to have heavily reseearched it. There is a better way to look into this and really discover if there is a reason for deeper concern. A simple coincidence or even correlation isn't enough to establish causation, but it can be a start.

Rapier108 said:

---

agracer said:

---

MouthBQ98 said:

---

Our society is becoming obsessed with conspiracy. I don't mind the thought exercises or conjecture but at some point a level of sanity has to interject itself regarding plausibility. As in, is it technically possible to conduct at the necessary scale and remain completely hidden from direct observation?

---

They keep coming true, especially since March of 2020.

---

Not really.

Most of what the left labeled a "conspiracy" in 2020 was done so by the media and Democrats to simply shut people up.

Saying the virus came from a lab was one of two possibilities, not a conspiracy.

Saying the virus would give everyone AIDS and we'd all need to be on anti-HIV drugs for life, was a conspiracy some where pushing early on.

Saying China was incinerating tens of thousands of bodies per day was a conspiracy theory that flooded Twitter.

Much of the whackiest stuff in early 2020 was likely coming straight from Beijing as part of their massive psyops campaign.

Saying the shots might have dangerous side effects, not a conspiracy theory. A possibility that is true to some degree, how much is still up in the air. However, some people went way out there with actual conspiracies like saying the shots contained an "aluminum carbon lifeform" or were 99.99% graphene oxide.

Saying masks don't work, lockdowns and 6ft apart were junk was not a conspiracy theory. It was obvious that nothing done to slow or stop the virus worked, because once a respiratory virus gets going, it is impossible to stop.

Saying HCQ can help with the virus wasn't a conspiracy theory. A paper published by none other than Anthony Fauci said it was very effective on SARS-1, and the viruses were virtually identical.

Saying Ivermectin was dangerous and would kill you was the media and Covidians trying to silence any dissent from the approved narrative. We saw the same thing on F84.

Saying the election was likely stolen is not a conspiracy theory. (It was stolen by old school ballot fraud and ballot harvesting via mass mail in ballots.)
Saying it was stolen by Dominion, Smartmatic, and The Kraken (don't forget spec-ops raids on German server farms) was a conspiracy that cost a lot of people hundreds of millions of dollars.

The actual conspiracy theories, such as the endless heaping pile from Q, were trash from the word go. Made one guy go shoot up a restaurant looking for abducted children.

The left has been broken since 2000.

2020 broke the brains of many on the political right.

---

I mean, that was my point.

2020 didn't break people on the right. We just suddenly saw the man behind the curtain was in fact FOS and certainly didn't have our (really anyone's) best interests at heart.

Quote:

---

We are not a serious nation

---

Name a "serious nation".

IndividualFreedom said:

---

Quote:

---

We are not a serious nation

---

Name a "serious nation".

---

China.

ETA: Not being flippant here. The goals of the CCP are clear and being consistently pursued, and they feel that in the long term their authoritarian system will give them an advantage over the US, in which policy can oscillate substantially due to the results of an election.

You don't get to be in a position of authority in the CCP by going on an infotainment channel and "owning" whichever segment of the population your constituents don't like (e.g., MTG, AOC, etc.).

Not even close. So much of what they do is completely fake.

AtticusMatlock said:

---

Not even close. So much of what they do is completely fake.

---

China is a duplicitous country, but their duplicity is intentional, not due to incompetence.

The flaw of democracy is that we get the leaders that we deserve. If the populace decides to elect someone who is observably stupid, suffering from dementia, or both, the leader, then they get to be the leader.

Not trying to endorse authoritarian rule of the US, just pointing out that it is wise to recognize that your adversary may hold certain advantages. In this case, not having to put up with idiots at high levels of the government structure.

Quote:

---

The goals of the CCP are clear and being consistently pursued, and they feel that in the long term their authoritarian system will give them an advantage over the US, in which policy can oscillate substantially due to the results of an election.

---

Do you, "Feel that in the long term their authoritarian system will give them an advantage over the US, in which policy can oscillate substantially due to the results of an election"?