EPA head promises ‘total transparency’ on geoengineering and contrails as weather conspiracy theories swirl

Greene added that the representative Tim Buchett, R-Tenn., Is co-parraine. Burchett has spread bizarre similar affirmations on extreme weather conditions.

In a statement, a spokesperson for Greene said that the deputy “has long discussed this issue” and that the bill was not linked to the floods of Texas.

In a follow -up email, Greene said that she had spoken with Zeldin and that she was encouraged by her move, adding that she was impatiently waiting to continue her legislation and is happy that the subjects attract attention.

“This is an uncontrolled experience that is carried out in our sky without consent. It is reckless, it is dangerous and it must stop,” she said in email.

The Burchett office did not immediately respond to a request for comments.

After Milton and Helene, the NOAA published an information sheet in October 2024 to try to demystify the “meteorological modification allegations” which swelled after these two storms decimated communities in Florida and North Carolina. In this document, the agency said that it “does not finance or participate in cloud sowing projects or other meteorological modification projects”.

Zeldin’s wink has more marginal marginal explanations on extreme weather conditions comes when the Trump administration has reduced the financing of climate change research and deleted the website that hosted government climate assessments. President Donald Trump called climate change a hoax, even if scientists have increasingly found solid evidence connecting the growing gravity and frequency of extreme weather conditions to global warming.

Decades of research on meteorological modification have sometimes become fodder for conspiracy theorists.

From 1962 to 1982, the NOAA was involved in a project called Stormfury which sought to determine whether the intensity of the hurricanes could be modified. Research failed to modify the intensity of hurricanes and was interrupted. The NOAA has not tried similar research since, according to the information sheet.

Cloud sowing is currently used meteorological modification technology. The practice has existed since the 1950s and generally involves spraying silver iodide in clouds to pull water from the atmosphere and produce additional snow or rain. Currently, cloud sowing programs are mainly used in Western states to stimulate water supply, and companies are required to submit opinions before implementing them.

“The sowing of the clouds does not make water; it helps the clouds in marginal environments to release 5 to 15% more humidity. But in Texas, there was already 100% humidity, extreme humidity and storms. The clouds did not need help,” said Cappucci.

The spread of these affirmations coincided with an increase in threats intended for meteorologists.

Although geo-engineering is a legitimate scientific enterprise, affirmations of its ability to control the main weather conditions or create serious weather conditions are not anchored in reality. Most geo-engineering options are theoretical and not tested. Federal researchers have taken only a few small measures to study their feasibility, and scientists in the atmosphere say that there is no evidence of large -scale programs.

Last year, in Alameda, California, a small-scale test project of a form of geo-engineering called Marine Cloud Brighentening by the academics of academics was closed after a community outcry, despite the researchers demonstrating that the actions were harmless.

Psychotherapist Jonathan Alpert explained that conspiracy thought generally increases during moments of collective fear and uncertainty, especially during weather events in which people feel helpless.

“Plot theories offer an emotionally satisfactory story: they restore a feeling of control by supervising events as intentional acts by powerful agents rather than random chaotic phenomena,” Alpert told NBC News. “In this sense,” someone does this to us “feels more tolerable than” no one controls “.”

However, while some consider EPA’s decision as an act of transparency, others believe that this is only the last political maneuver to avoid critical environmental problems.

“Some people have” questions “on the question of whether the birds are real – will it be your next project?” Representative Don Beyer D-VA., Said in response to the Thursday morning post of Zeldin on X Teasing the EPA Guidelines. “How much taxpayers will you spend on this?”