Marjorie Taylor Greene, a controversial figure in American politics, has recently asserted that the weather can be controlled. Following the destruction caused by Hurricane Helene, the Georgia representative tweeted, “Yes they can control the weather. It’s ridiculous for anyone to lie and say it can’t be done.”
While it’s unclear who Greene refers to with “they,” it could imply various entities, from the so-called deep state to more sinister groups, as she has previously claimed that wildfires in California were instigated by energy firms and the Rothschild family through a space laser for infrastructure purposes. Greene has avoided clarifying these claims, often dismissing inquiries, especially regarding her controversial remarks about “Jewish space lasers.”
Moreover, she presented a map highlighting hurricane-affected areas juxtaposed with electoral maps, suggesting a link between hurricane information and electoral outcomes, insinuating that the Democratic party might have manipulated the hurricane to disadvantage Republican voters.
Greene isn’t alone in perpetuating outlandish theories regarding Hurricane Helene and Hurricane Milton. Various conspiracy theories circulating on social media link these hurricanes to major corporations or political entities, showcasing how deeply some individuals believe in these narratives. One individual even suggested that Hurricane Helene was engineered by BlackRock, tying it to their investments in lithium mining.
Debating such theories often proves futile, as many who buy into these beliefs are resistant to reason. Understanding the roots of these ideas is critical; they often stem from feelings of powerlessness or exclusion. More specifically, these theories may arise from misunderstandings surrounding geoengineering and climate modification techniques, which the media has not adequately explained.
Conspiracy theories often stem from a kernel of truth. Although the U.S. government did not engineer Hurricane Helene, it is true that certain weather modifications can occur. For decades, countries have engaged in weather modification practices—known as climate or geoengineering—with varying degrees of ethical considerations. In response to climate challenges, nations like Saudi Arabia have heavily invested in weather modification to address issues like desertification.
Geoengineering, like artificial intelligence, holds the promise of transformative benefits but also poses risks if mismanaged. Its concepts range from the uncontroversial, like the removal of greenhouse gases, to more experimental and risky practices. Many covert experiments in weather modification have historically provided fodder for conspiracy theorists. For instance, an investigation uncovered potential ties between a 1952 flood in Britain and a military operation aimed at rainmaking, although evidence remains unclear. The U.S. has similarly flirted with weather weaponization during the Vietnam War via Operation Popeye, though this initiative ultimately failed.
Despite being illegal, as codified by the 1977 UN Environmental Modification Convention, such historical examples fuel modern conspiracy theories about politically motivated weather manipulation.
The discussion surrounding these theories is delicate, as it risks legitimizing ungrounded beliefs. However, they underscore the need for improved public understanding of geoengineering. More investment in science communication is essential to demystify complex topics for the public.
Furthermore, greater public engagement surrounding environmental modification techniques is crucial. Various geoengineering initiatives are beginning to involve community discussions to address concerns and foster trust. Still, it’s vital that this participation extends beyond isolated events. Regulations must be established to ensure responsible practices in geoengineering, preventing the unchecked actions of entities that might prioritize speed over safety. Otherwise, skepticism and conspiracy theories may overshadow genuine advancements in this important field.