Tennessee Weather Modification Ban Legislation Moves Forward

Image Credit: capitol.tn.gov

By Danielle Goodrich [Tennessee Stands / Tri-Cities Coalition] –

HB2063 / SB2691 which looks to ban geoengineering and forms of weather modification like (SRM) solar radiation modification, passed the Senate and House committees and is headed to the full House and Senate for a vote.

The legislation reads, “The intentional injection, release, or dispersion, by any means, of chemicals, chemical compounds, substances, or apparatus within the borders of this state into the atmosphere with the express purpose of affecting temperature, weather, or the intensity of the sunlight is prohibited.”

Representative Monty Fritts (R-D32-Kingston) is carrying the legislation in the House and Senator Steve Southerland (R-D9-Morristown) is carrying it in the Senate.

Similar legislation has been entered across the country in seven other states. Neighboring state Kentucky introduced HB506, and SB217, Rhode Island introduced The Clean Air Preservation Act, New Hampshire entered The Clean Atmosphere Preservation Act , Illinois entered a Weather Modification Act, South Dakota entered legislation, Minnesota introduced SF 4630 and HF4687 and Connecticut entered SB302.

The sense of urgency to enter legislation establishing a governance framework for geoengineering and forms of weather modification like SRM (solar radiation modification), SAI (stratospheric aerosol injection) and other aerosol injection practices are in response to a White House document titled Congressionally Mandated Research Plan and Initial Research Governance Framework Related to Solar Radiation Modification. 

The legislation has come under fire in the media with claims that it is based on conspiracy theory. Justin Jones (D-D52-Nashville) in the first hearing said that he had looked into it and thought it was conspiracy theory. Representative Monty Fritts countered telling Jones had he read the White House documents given to the committee he would know it is true, although Fritts admitted some of what was “coming out of the White House these days seems surreal.”

Dr. Denise Sibley, founder of Tennessee Freedom Doctors and board member for Johnson City Freedom, a partner of Tennessee Stands,  testified in support of the legislation. 

Dr. Sibley entered as evidence the June 2023 White House report as well as Tennessee Code which mentions “weather modification.” “Tenn. Code Ann. § 58-2-116 58-2-116. Emergency management At the governor’s direction. state agencies including, but not limited to, those charged with responsibilities in connection with floodplain management, stream encroachment and flow regulation/weather modification”

In addition to weather modification existing in Tennessee state code, and mandated in a Congressional Report, a business owner from El Segundo, CA, Augustus Doricko, who owns a weather modification company called Rainmaker came to testify against the bill, further validating that weather modification, geoengineering and solar radiation modification are real.

Doricko took to Twitter stating “geoengineering is: deliberately affecting the entire Earth’s climate, in an attempt to counteract the effects of global warming” Its effects last years and its consequences are global. Is the same true of cloud seeding? No.”

His tweets went on to say “the common example of geoengineering is “stratospheric aerosol injection” (SAI) SAI is the attempt to cool the planet by depositing aerosols in the atmosphere to reflect the sunlight. The aerosol stays in the atmosphere 1-2 years and spreads over the entire Earth. He then went on to explain cloud seeding and how it is used to augment rain or snowfall over the targeted area, how it was invented in 1946 and how he believes cloud seeding to be “safe and effective.”

In another tweet Doricko stated, “are there outstanding questions about the effects of cloud seeding? Absolutely. It and geoengineering deserve more research. Rainmaker is doing some! But US States and nations around the world know it’s safe and effective enough to pay for it to benefit their constituents.” 

Doricko did not mention that there has been a global moratorium in place on geoengineering – which includes SRM – since 2010, by governments under the Convention on Biological Diversity. The US is not a signatory. 

The US went in the opposite direction with the Congressional Solar Radiation Modification Mandate, mandating research on solar radiation modification and other forms of weather modification.

Doricko acknowledged that his business is partially funded by our federal government, tweeting, “The federal government conducts less cloud seeding research than they used to, but @interior @NOAA @USDA are involved in research funding! Very cool, thanks federal government.”

Doctor Denise Sibley mentioned funding in her testimony in response to Jones’ continued assertion weather modification isn’t real. She pointed to page 43 of the White House document saying Congress has directed NOAA to fund SRM research for the last several years. She pointed to page 6 and 12 where they said they were “covertly” and “openly” experimenting. 

Jones asked her about her statement mentioning the UNs One Health. Sibley stated, “the UN reported in February 2023 on One Atmosphere Global Governance for experimentation and deployment of solar geoengineering and SRM. Sibley reminded Jones that there is a Tennessee law which recognizes “weather modification” as do federal reports.  

Rep. Jay Reedy brought up the eruption from Mount St. Helens he recalled in 1980 and asked about the health repercussions caused.

Scientists have stated they modeled Solar Radiation Modification off of volcanic eruptions with the intent to cool the Earth however the process is controversial as blocking out the Sun and raining down chemical compounds comes with harm.

Dr. Sibley discussed the 1991 Mt. Pinatubo eruption which caused a great cloud cover and decreased the temperature 0.5 degrees centigrade. She said the chemicals were ways the stratosphere and troposphere were injected resulting in respiratory issues, COPD, asthma, and can affect the skin, she said “yes” in response to such a situation causing harm and people were told to stay indoors. 

Reedy followed up asking if the same effect was coming from weather modification. Dr. Sibley said yes it is using chemicals to block out the Sun which can contaminate and can also cause health issues. 

Representative Bryan Richey (R-D20-Maryville) asked Augustus Doricko which states were currently using the most cloud seeding. Doricko said, “the western states by far have the most, Idaho has the most, Utah I believe after that then Texas then Wyoming then California if I’m ranking them correctly, Tennessee doesn’t have much in the way of weather modification going on.”

Richey replied, “with the Western states doing the most, that is where most of my concern comes from this, when you look at areas of the United States that have wildfires for drought situations to begin with, I think God created this Earth and set everything up going back to whether it is 4th or 5th grade science I still remember the picture that showed the cloud and another image of the rain falling down and an image of the Sun heating up the ground and that moisture rising back up and being collected back into the clouds, when we change what is naturally happening … and we manipulate it, I think we are seeing adverse effects out West with these wildfires, with these droughts and I don’t want that stuff coming to Tennessee…” 

Justin Jones pointed to the fiscal note on the bill which stated that this (weather modification) was not currently happening as a reason the legislation would not carry a fiscal note.

Dr. Sibley pointed to Congressman Fleischmann’s Appropriation Report on page 119 where it states, “the recommendation provides not less than $39,000,000 to improve the understanding of key cloud, aerosol, precipitation, and radiation processes.” 

Representative Monty Fritts said, “our team that does our fiscal notes are good at what they do but…they don’t have the ever present knowledge of everything that is going on.” He said, “we are trying to protect the water, air, and soil in Tennessee… we are thinking about the entry routes for these chemicals into our body, ingestion, inhalation and absorptions.. Each one of these chemicals poses some risk in these areas.” He went on to give a historical example of why to be cautious with chemicals concluding. “We don’t have room to risk the lives of our constituents by moving too fast on this.”

Dr. Sibley ended her testimony explaining that this is a 9th and 10th amendment issue, and that the Federal government does not have the constitutionally delegated authority or the consent of Tennesseans to experiment on us. She explained this is a first step to governance of this issue. 

Despite the evidence presented, Justin Jones still clung to his belief that this was conspiracy theory, and attempted to redirect the conversation to climate change.

Representative Fritts replied, “because you obviously were not listening to the witness and have not read the document, it is not a secret, it is written in the White House document… that interrupts the premise of your question, but to answer your question about climate change, I think that we have developed industry to control power and to make money over scaring folks like you to death.”

House agriculture agreed there was enough evidence to support Representative Fritts legislation and sent the bill to the House floor for a vote.