Texas Floods and Cloud Seeding

[sailorsam]

Now we know that the tragic Texas floods were preceded by cloud seeding

https://www.newsweek.com/rainmaker-ceo-c...ds-2096525


Over the past week, Doricko has appeared on several news broadcasts and podcasts to discuss the technology and explain why it isn't linked to the floods.
"We unequivocally had nothing to do with the flooding that was caused by the remnants of the tropical storm that blew in," he told Steve Bannon on the War Room Podcast.
He continued: "Our biggest cloud-seeding missions to date have only produced 10 million gallons of precipitation approximately, and that tropical storm dumped about 4 trillion over the course of two days.
"The order magnitude difference between what cloud-seeding is even capable and what happened is incomparable."



of course.  just a coincidence.

anyone with knowledge of?

[Ninurta]

I'm no kind of expert, but I can give an opinion. I think these weather patterns are just part of the natural process of the Earth warming up again as we continue to exit the last ice age. I don't think "man made" anything, whether CO2 emissions or cloud seeding, can lead to the sort of things we are seeing - it's just a part of the natural cycle.

I don't think there are enough cloud seeding crystals on Earth to create the kind of storms that come up - remember, to seed a cloud we first have to have the moisture to seed into, enough water to gather around the seeding media. You can throw seeds all day long on dry ground, and they'll just lay there and do nothing. Same for clouds. There has to be something to act on the seeds for it to work at all.

So, we see seasonally warmer oceans, leading to more evaporation, and that evaporation has to go somewhere. It creates humidity in the atmosphere, which is what acts upon the cloud seeds to produce rain drops. This was a two day tropical storm fueled by moisture out of the Gulf of America. There aren't enough cloud seeds available to produce such a storm.

As for the CO2, we've had, at times, at least 4 times the current level of CO2 in the atmosphere, and Earth got along just fine. It was warmer, more humid, and a lot greener during those times, but life still went on, and thrived.

This is just a part of nature's cycles.

Folks who live in flood prone areas KNOW they are prone to flooding, and take appropriate precautions. What this "global warming" mania is really doing is providing a false sense of security to those people, leading them to think "the government can fix this", or something of the like - that SOMEONE else can "fix" it - and so they rely on others to do their thinking for them instead of taking the normal precautions that we took when, for instance, I was a kid living in a flood zone.

In this Texas flood, the area is so well known for flooding that it's actually nicknamed "Flash Flood Alley". While this may be the biggest flood in a while, it's not the biggest ever, nor is it particularly unusual. The ground is hard and thin, so most any rain that falls there runs off instead of soaking in, and that's a known thing. Everyone is looking for a scapegoat, somewhere to point the finger away from themselves, because no one want to admit that they should have seen this coming, and taken it upon themselves to use the proper precautions.

There is no substitute for the man on the ground making decisions for himself instead of relying on government, FEMA, the NWS, or anyone else a thousand miles away from where he is sitting and experiencing it.

It's not the cloud seeding. it's not the NWS cutbacks. It's not anthropogenic global warming, it's not "weather war". Those are just among the scapegoats of the day, the excuses people are giving for not doing their own thinking.

What it IS is just nature taking it's course, as the globe continues to warm it's way out of the latest ice age.

ETA: I live in a flood zone now. We get at least one flood every year, and I've seen up to 3 floods per year, sitting on my front porch. My house is built on a bluff about 25 feet or so above the highest known flood stage. That's how they did it back in the day, to avoid floating downstream. For a flood to get into my house, it would first have to fill several billion cubic yards of volume that is at the moment occupied by just air At this level, it's about 100 yards across the holler to the house on the other bluff, on the other side... which is built at about the same level as mine. The creek, normally about a foot deep and 3 feet or thereabouts wide, would have to collect a lot of water to fill that gap before it can get to me, 8 yards or so above it. 8 yards times 100 yards wide times 3 1/2 miles long... if that volume can be filled, the flood is the least of our worries - we'd have to be looking for Jesus coming back in the clouds, wondering if we had really made the cut.

Outsiders used to come in here back in the 1960's and laugh at the stupid hillbillies, building their houses on the sides of mountains instead of on the nice level bottom lands next to the rivers. All we could really do was blink, ask them how well they could swim, and then laugh at their silly asses.

We build on mountain sides for a reason. Well, a couple of reasons. One is that we don't like waving at folks from our roofs as our houses float past them. Another is that the bottom lands, next to the rivers, are where we used to do our farming. The floods every year washed rich silt off the mountain sides and deposited it in those bottom lands, making them ideal for growing things - which is an activity hampered by plopping a house right there in the middle of the field and taking up valuable arable land to sit it on.

When the floods come every year, the creek gets up into the road at the mouth of the holler, and blocks access both in and out until it recedes. We've learned to handle that by things like making sure we have food available when stores aren't. It's just what passes for common sense around here, since the government saw fit to run the road right through the floodplain instead of up on the hillside.

If you don't learn to work with nature, then you'd best learn to deal with it when you piss it off. I personally think working with it is the better option, but what do I know? I'm just another dumbassed hillbilly!

.

[EndtheMadnessNow]

Well, I gotta agree with Ninurta's opinion. What has happened now has happened before and will happen again with or without mankind. A lot more people these days versus 50-100 years ago live next to or in the path of large bodies of water and known flood zones. Water attracts humans like nothing else. Also, water has no mercy, like the oceans if you're unprepared/naive/lack of common sense or just plain like living dangerously.