If legislation has been created to regulate the use of a particular type of technology, it would be fair to assume that that technology exists and is being used.
In Australia we have the Rain Making Control Act 1967 VIC and Cloud Seeding Act 2004 NSW.
If weather modification techniques are employed and lives are lost from the effects, who should be held accountable?
Would this be classified by the ivory tower enablers as collateral damage for the greater good? Legislation such as these are capable of creating cumulative damage - however, because it is written into legislation, there is no culpability for when lives are lost or health affected.
Weather manipulation in the United States as far back as 1915
In the early 1900s, a gentleman named Charles M Hatfield claimed that he could make it rain, and he did! He was employed by Los Angeles farmers to produce much-needed rain. Lake Hemet rose 22 feet when he produced rain. San Diego City contracted him to fill Lake Marino. Watch the video below.
Weather manipulation is engaged, and can be used for beneficial results or as a weapon to create destruction of regions and displacement of people.
Leave a Reply