The problem is further complicated by idiots who think there is some "information" someplace on the internet about "how to do" cloudbusting. There is no such "information". Learning to do cloudbusting is not a matter of "information"and cannot be taught over the internet. Cloudbusting cannot be reduced to a cookbook recipie of "do this, and this will happen", "do that, and that will happen".
This is apparently not comprehensible to the people who think it is possible to learn "how to do cloudbusting" without bothering to first learn how the normal atmosphere behaves and the reasons for whatever problems may arise in it.
only on the size of the cloudbuster and how it is grounded, but also on weather conditions and the location.
Operator safety can be accomplished best by the operator
knowing what symptoms to watch for. Also, having another
person nearby, but not directly in contact with the
cloudbuster, to watch the operator for any signs of
It is also possible for the operator to take certain
nuitricional suplements which increase resistance to the most
likely sort of medical harm from overcharge. And, of course,
frequent immersion in water while operating is a good idea.
But remote control of the cloudbuster is a very bad idea
because that means separation between the operator and the
energetic system of the cloudbuster, and through that, of
the atmosphere, which deprives him of the most important
information input- the bioenergetic contact with the
apparatus and atmosphere that tells him what is going on.
Carolyn Cooper, while doing cloudbusting in Ireland, was
able to tell when the cloudbuster made energetic contact
with a storm far out at sea by the feel of the energy
passing down the pipes. That is the best way to monitor
cloudbusting operations. Without such direct contact, the
operator cannot know what results he is having until it is
too late to correct any mistakes.
There is no instrumentation that can tell what a
cloudbuster is doing to the atmosphere. There never will be,
despite the bogus claims of such devices as the
"orgonotester" that is sold by DeMeo and others.
The only way to detect atmospheric orgone changes is
biologically, and for that, direct orgonotic contact of
cloudbuster and operator is needed. That is why remote
> neuromuscular activity like swimming or riding a
> bicycle than with intellectual learning.
> It requires paying attention to very slight
> proprioceptive sensations that most people ignore, just as
> riding a bicycle requires subliminal attention to slight
> changes in balance and constant corrections to maintain
> Cloudbusting requires seeing very slight changes in
> color and light intensity in the sky, the feel of the air,
> the direction and force of the wind, changes in wind
> direction and intensity, and constant attention to ones'
> own body sensations of well-being. It also requires
> attention to animal behavior, such as frogs croaking, bees
> buzzing, dogs sleeping or barking, birds flying higher or
> lower, farther or shorter distances between resting, number
> of insects visible at the time of day, and how other people
> look and act.
> If your assistant becomes red in the face, if children
> get into fights near the cloudbuster, if birds come and
> perch on the cloudbuster, all these must be interpeted and
> integrated into what you are doing and how successfull you
> are being at it.
> The action of elevating cloudbuster pipes has effects
> on the expansion or contraction of the atmospheric orgone at
> very long distances. Operations in Bennington, Vermont,
> caused a nearly simultaneous reaction in trees in New Haven,
> Connecticut, almost 300 miles (500 kilometers) away. The
> electrical potentials between electrodes inserted in the
> tree bark changed according to what the cloudbuster was
> doing every time. A graph of the two factors is a perfect
> This shows the biological effects of cloudbusting on
> the entire biosphere, quite independently of the mechanistic
> parameters of the weather. That is why meteorologists have
> virtually no knowledge that is relevant to cloudbusting.
> Cloudbusting has little to do with meteorology. It is a
> biological science, not part of physics. It cannot be
> understood on a basis of physics.
> Cloudbusting can be compared to sexual foreplay
> or stroking a pet. You are stroking a big animal, the
> atmosphere. You are trying to get a specific reaction, and
> you must be alert to how it is reacting and change your
> actions as needed to get the response you want. But try
> explaining that to a meteorologist!
> People like DeMeo, who see cloudbusting in terms of
> how much rain falls, and think that is the criteria of
> success are the very ones LEAST competent to
> understand or practice orgonomic weather work. Look at those
> charts and graphs he has published! All that work to
> illustrate how much rain fell! And no attention at all to
> what the effects of his operations on the biosphere were!
> And yet, as Reich himself said in Contact With Space, Reich
> never tried to bring rain to Arizona, he did not bring rain
> there, and if rain had fallen, it would have prevented the
> growth of the vegetation that he did produce.
> Somehow, some people manage to read a book like
> Contact With Space without noticing that. They are too
> fixated on the idea that cloudbusting is
> "rainmaking" and entirely miss the point that it is working
> on the BIOSPHERE.
> I see contemporary cloudbuster operators as going
> farther and farther astray from the basic principals
> propounded by Reich. They try to use electrical devices to
> measure their effects on the atmosphere, while using remote
> controled cloudbusters to avoid the personal contact with
> the energetic system of the cloudbuster, and through that,
> of the atmosphere, which could tell trhem what effects they
> are having.
> They are so far from paying attention to their own
> bodily sensations that they do not notice that their own
> remote control devices, powered by electricity, are
> counteracting the effects they are trying to produce and
> making the drought worse.
> And they study physics and meteorology and think that somehow
> makes them more qualified to do cloudbusting, even though
> with cloudbusting, while they ignore the biological effects
> of cloudbusting almost entirely.
> And, increasingly, we read in the papers about extreme
> weather events like the recent floods in the U.K. which are
> the end result of mechanistic incompetents like
> DeMeo fooling around with cloudbusters.
> Children are able to learn cloudbusting better than
> adults not only because they are less armored and less
> indoctrinated into a mechanistic world-view, but also
> because they are more attentive to their own bodily
> sensations and to the physical reactions of other people
> around them, including people of other species.
> Also, children are, on average, more responsible and
> considerate than adults, especially scientists, most of whom
> would be willing to risk destroying the world to perform
> some interesting experiment, as the recent fiasco in
> Switzerland demonstrates.
> Cloudbusting is not likely to be
> taught in schools. However, there are other venues for
> learning besides schools. It might be possible to run a
> summer camp dedicated to orgonomy, for example. Kids from 8
> to 16 could come and spend 6 weeks studying orgone
> biophysics, including cloudbusting and go home trained to
> help the atmosphere in their neighborhood if they think it
> needs it.
> That would make much more sense than getting adult
> meteorologists and physicists involved.