Texas flood tragedy fuels cloud seeding conspiracy theories
TOI World Desk | TIMESOFINDIA.COM | Jul 12, 2025, 00:53 IST
( Image credit : AP, TOIGLOBAL )
Devastating floods in Texas, claiming over 120 lives, have sparked a national debate fueled by conspiracy theories. Rainmaker Technology Corporation's cloud seeding operation days before the floods has become a focal point, despite scientific explanations dismissing any connection. Critics are calling for investigations and a ban on weather modification programs, while officials emphasize cloud seeding's limited impact.
What began as a devastating weather event in the heart of Texas has quickly evolved into a heated national debate. As floodwaters engulfed towns across the Texas Hill Country, claiming more than 120 lives, a storm of a different kind took shape online. Social media platforms ignited with conspiracy theories, with many users blaming the disaster not on nature—but on science.
At the center of the controversy is Rainmaker Technology Corporation, a private firm that conducted a cloud seeding operation just days before the floods began. The company’s actions have sparked widespread speculation and political backlash, despite clear scientific explanations dismissing any connection.
On July 2, Rainmaker used a single-engine aircraft to disperse roughly 70 grams of silver iodide into two clouds near Runge, Texas—over 100 miles from the flood’s epicenter. According to Rainmaker CEO Augustus Doricko, the operation yielded less than half a centimeter of rain over a dry agricultural area. The activity was immediately halted when signs of a storm system appeared, in strict compliance with Texas weather modification regulations.
Cloud seeding has long been used in agriculture to enhance rainfall during dry periods. Scientists say the process can boost precipitation by a modest 10 to 20 percent, but it is incapable of generating large-scale weather events.
“Cloud seeding can’t trigger floods of this magnitude,” said Dr. Emily Yeh, an atmospheric scientist at the University of Colorado Boulder. “The energy required to cause such devastation is far beyond the capacity of any weather modification technique.”
Meteorologists have identified the true culprits behind the disaster: residual moisture from Tropical Storm Barry, Texas’s notoriously flood-prone terrain, and the unfortunate timing of the storm during a busy holiday weekend. Some areas received more than 15 inches of rain in just 24 hours—more than double the average rainfall for the entire month.
Despite overwhelming evidence, conspiracy theories have gained momentum, particularly among some political figures and online influencers. Critics are calling for state and federal investigations, and a small but vocal group is demanding a ban on all weather modification programs in Texas.
Texas Agriculture Commissioner Sid Miller has responded firmly, labeling the cloud seeding claims as “misinformation.” He emphasized that while cloud seeding can influence existing weather conditions slightly, it cannot produce storms or floods on its own. “You can’t make clouds out of thin air,” Miller said. “And you certainly can’t cause something of this scale.”
The flood’s aftermath has left families grieving and communities rebuilding, but the parallel crisis—one of public distrust and misinformation—continues to spread. As scientists and emergency responders work to bring clarity and recovery, the event serves as a stark reminder of how quickly facts can drown in a sea of speculation.
At the center of the controversy is Rainmaker Technology Corporation, a private firm that conducted a cloud seeding operation just days before the floods began. The company’s actions have sparked widespread speculation and political backlash, despite clear scientific explanations dismissing any connection.
On July 2, Rainmaker used a single-engine aircraft to disperse roughly 70 grams of silver iodide into two clouds near Runge, Texas—over 100 miles from the flood’s epicenter. According to Rainmaker CEO Augustus Doricko, the operation yielded less than half a centimeter of rain over a dry agricultural area. The activity was immediately halted when signs of a storm system appeared, in strict compliance with Texas weather modification regulations.
Cloud seeding has long been used in agriculture to enhance rainfall during dry periods. Scientists say the process can boost precipitation by a modest 10 to 20 percent, but it is incapable of generating large-scale weather events.
“Cloud seeding can’t trigger floods of this magnitude,” said Dr. Emily Yeh, an atmospheric scientist at the University of Colorado Boulder. “The energy required to cause such devastation is far beyond the capacity of any weather modification technique.”
Meteorologists have identified the true culprits behind the disaster: residual moisture from Tropical Storm Barry, Texas’s notoriously flood-prone terrain, and the unfortunate timing of the storm during a busy holiday weekend. Some areas received more than 15 inches of rain in just 24 hours—more than double the average rainfall for the entire month.
Despite overwhelming evidence, conspiracy theories have gained momentum, particularly among some political figures and online influencers. Critics are calling for state and federal investigations, and a small but vocal group is demanding a ban on all weather modification programs in Texas.
Texas Agriculture Commissioner Sid Miller has responded firmly, labeling the cloud seeding claims as “misinformation.” He emphasized that while cloud seeding can influence existing weather conditions slightly, it cannot produce storms or floods on its own. “You can’t make clouds out of thin air,” Miller said. “And you certainly can’t cause something of this scale.”
The flood’s aftermath has left families grieving and communities rebuilding, but the parallel crisis—one of public distrust and misinformation—continues to spread. As scientists and emergency responders work to bring clarity and recovery, the event serves as a stark reminder of how quickly facts can drown in a sea of speculation.