Lawmakers' Weather Modification Hearing Descends into Conspiracy Theories

The DOGE Subcommittee Hearing on Weather Modification Was a Nest of Conspiracy Theorizing A contentious hearing on weather modification before the House Oversight Committee on Tuesday devolved into a discussion about who controls the skies, with some lawmakers espousing conspiracy theories that have gained traction in American culture. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) convened the hearing, titled "Playing God with the Weather: A Disastrous Forecast," to discuss legislation she introduced this year aimed at regulating weather modification techniques. However, the discussion quickly turned into a debate about the role of government and science in shaping the nation's understanding of the weather. "We have to ask ourselves, do we believe in God and that he has dominion over his perfect creation of planet Earth?" Greene said during the hearing. "Or do you believe in man's claim of authority over the weather, based on scientists who have only been alive for decades and weren't here to witness the climate changes since the beginning of time?" Greene's comments sparked a heated exchange with other lawmakers, who pushed back against her assertion that government control over the weather is a conspiracy theory. "This is not about science; this is about governance," said Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.). "We need to be honest about what we're talking about here." The hearing highlighted the growing influence of conspiracy theories in American culture, particularly those related to government control over the weather. According to a report by the Southern Poverty Law Center, more than two dozen states have introduced legislation aimed at regulating or prohibiting weather modification techniques. "This is a perfect example of how conspiracy theories can take hold and become mainstream," said Mark Potok, senior fellow at the SPLC. "When you have lawmakers like Rep. Greene espousing these views, it sends a signal to their constituents that this is a legitimate topic for discussion." The hearing also drew criticism from experts in the field of meteorology, who expressed concern about the lack of scientific basis behind some of the proposed legislation. "The idea that government can control the weather is not supported by any credible evidence," said Dr. Marshall Shepherd, director of the University of Georgia's Atmospheric Sciences Program. "We need to rely on science and data when making decisions about our environment." The hearing concluded with no clear outcome or next steps, but it marked a significant moment in the ongoing debate over government control of the weather. Background: Weather modification techniques have been around for decades, with some countries using cloud seeding to enhance precipitation. However, the concept has gained traction in recent years as a means of addressing climate change and other environmental issues. Additional Perspectives: "This is not about science; this is about governance," said Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.). "We need to be honest about what we're talking about here." "The idea that government can control the weather is not supported by any credible evidence," said Dr. Marshall Shepherd, director of the University of Georgia's Atmospheric Sciences Program. Current Status and Next Developments: The hearing marked a significant moment in the ongoing debate over government control of the weather. However, it remains to be seen whether the proposed legislation will move forward or if lawmakers will continue to push for further discussion on the topic. *Reporting by Wired.*