Search This Blog

Mission Statement

Cloudbuster Attacks On Planet Earth

Cloudbusting is a menace to the environment. Despite some claims to the contrary, cloudbusting is not a solution to environmental problems; it is a problem in itself, a destructive technology requiring a condemnatory response by the environmental movement.

Cloudbusting is not something new; it is already so comonplace as to be intolerable and an environmental movement to control this currently unregulated technology is needed to protect the public.

All over the world people are getting worried about what is happening to the climate. Each year, it seems, there are more and more extreme weather events of increasing severity and frequency. Records are being broken more often than ever before in recorded history. It is clear the climate of the entire world is becoming destabilized, less reliable, more random and chaotic, with droughts, floods, heat waves, and severe cold spells becoming the norm.

While there are several factors involved in this climatic breakdown, one seldom recognized major factor in this climate destabilization is the existence of a technological means to interfere with the natural movement of the atmosphere on a large scale. This device, called a cloudbuster, is simple and cheap enough to construct that in recent years hundreds of individuals all over the world, learning about it from instructions promiscuously posted on irresponsible websites, have taken it up as a backyard hobby.

Many of these individuals tend to be paranoid and delusional, and are using the cloudbuster as a sort of prop in a role-playing game, often imagining themselves to be fighting off hostile UFOs, resisting a secret government plot of some kind, or changing "bad" atmospheric energy into "good".

Many others claim they are "ending droughts", "making rain", or "doing research". They seem oblivious to the fact that the droughts they think they are ending resume as soon as they stop operating because the underlying cause of the drought has not been adressed. They fail to understand that the goal of proper cloudbusting is not to make rain, but to restore normal pulsation of the atmospheric energy so that, among other effects, rain will occur spontaneously as needed.

They ignore the rights of the people affected to be told what is being done to their environment and to have some say in the matter, and that subjecting people to a research program who have not given their informed consent is a human rights violation.

Some think they are "greening deserts", while in reality, they are subjecting the fragile dryland ecosystem to unusual stress from excessive rainfall in areas where all native life-forms are well-adapted to the prevailing conditions.

They usually have no idea of the scientific basis upon which the cloudbuster works, or fantasize, without evidence, that some wildly speculative theory of their own concoction is the better theory. Frequently they have little idea of what a cloudbuster is capable of, many of them, for example, thinking it only affects their local area.

As a result of these incompetent interventions in atmospheric dynamics, countless innocent victims have died and the environment has been seriously disturbed in numerous weather-related catastrophes.

Due to their paranoia they do not often communicate what they are doing to others working in the same field. Many of them, in fact, think they are the only ones doing anything with what they think is a somehow suppressed and secret invention. Many others are so arrogant they think nobody except themselves and their associates is able to conduct cloudbusting operations safely and properly, so they refuse to co-operate with those they deem "unqualified".

While there is certainly nothing secret or suppressed about the cloudbuster, it is regarded as crackpot by many of the scientific community, in large part because of the absurd fictions and folklore with which it has become surrounded. The fantastic legends of its' inventor, Wilhelm Reich, having been the victim of official persecution, or of some alleged conspiratorial plot, or having fought wars with beings from outer space, or having had meetings with Einstein, serve to distract attention from the serious issue of the menace of the cloudbuster he invented.

This large body of folklore functions to hide the reality of the cloudbuster as an effective, science-based tool and disguise it as a crackpot fantasy. It is perfectly right, in fact, the only rational response of anyone with even the slightest scientific education, to dismiss such a device as incapable of having any effect on the weather when it is presented wrapped in such packaging.

The failure to recognize the imput into the total atmospheric picture of this proliferation of crackpots playing around with cloudbusters means the scientists trying to understand the weather are misled into ignoring that a large portion of unusual weather events are being caused by this unsuspected form of technological intervention and instead think the climate changes now underway are being caused by some other factor, such as greenhouse effect from combustion products released into the atmosphere.

Any theory of what is happening with the weather and climate on this planet must take the social phenomena of a mass movement of cloudbuster hobbyists into account. And the environmental movement must mount an effective effort to counter this form of blatant interference with the atmosphere.

If and when cloudbusting is ever recognized by the scientific community as a science-based reality rather than a prop in a fantasy role-playing game, then it can be expected that official agencies will take over the job of protecting the public from improper use of the cloudbuster. But until then, it is up to concerned environmentalists to fill that role. Otherwise, until cloudbusting can be regulated, countless innocent victims will continue to die each year from cloudbuster-murder by crackpot Reichians.

And greenhouse gases from combustion will take the rap. The world is now facing serious economic problems at least partially caused by the mistaken belief that the atmospheric disorder caused by cloudbusting is due to a greenhouse effect instead, and numerous laws are in the process of being passed taxing or restricting fuel-burning activities in an effort to prevent weather disasters that are really being caused by cloudbusting and could only be prevented by restricting the use of cloudbusters.

Until effective regulation is in place, however, the few responsible people who are aware of the threat posed by cloudbusters must be ready and willing to take whatever action is needed to stop the use of cloudbusters in their home areas. Direct intervention by concerned citizens is often the only way to prevent serious harm to the earth and to the public, and this is one of those cases.

**************************************************************************************************

In recent years, as the internet has made it possible for anyone with a
computer to spread the word about anything they please, irresponsible
instructions for building cloudbusters have mushroomed and
cloudbusting is now second only to nuclear power as the worst environmental
threat.

Cloudbuster proliferation has become a major environmental problem.

The cloudbuster is a very simple, easy to construct device that can be used to help restore a sick, damaged atmosphere to normal self-regulatory functioning.

This re-establishment of natural self-regulation to the atmosphere when it has become damaged and stagnated is the goal of any properly-done cloudbusting project.

Unfortunately, many people fail to grasp this point. Anyone who uses terms like "weather engineering", "etheric engineering", "weather control", "rainmaking", and the like, does not understand this important factor in cloudbusting.

It is an unfortunate side-effect of cloudbusting that it can be misused to cause rain and can have other direct effects on the weather.


In recent years many environmentalists have expressed concern that the details of how to construct a cloudbuster are too easily available on the internet. There is a growing Orgonomic Ecology Movement that is concerned about unwanted consequences of cloudbuster interference in the weather and seeks to prevent cloudbuster proliferation and combat those individuals guilty of hubris who wish to intervene in the weather by this means.



The Orgonomic Ecology group exists to explore ways and means to stop the proliferation of cloudbusters and expose to public outrage the power-drunkards and control-freaks who are attacking our atmosphere with cloudbusters, however they may rationalize their destructiveness.

We will pull no punches. We will name names and fight back against the propaganda of the atmosphere abusers and their enablers.

We regard Atmosphere Abuse as similar to other, more personal, forms of abuse, such as abuse of children or animals. The psychology of the abuser is the same, and we intend to expose that pathology.

We seek to build an anti-cloudbuster movement that can bring to a halt the rapidly growing hobby of manipulating the weather by control-freaks who are unable to leave the natural world alone.

Please spread the word around about this blog and urge your contacts to read it and to pass it on to their own contacts also.



About Me

I have been very involved in orgonomy since 1967 and have done cloudbusting, oranur work and laboratory experiments with orgone accumulators, medical DOR-busters, and pre-atomic chemistry. I was a student of Dr. Eva Reich, the daughter of Dr. Wilhelm Reich, who invented the cloudbuster, and have a letter from her saying I have learned what she has to teach and she considers me "very knowledgeable in this field".

Total Pageviews

Saturday, April 16, 2011

Weather Rangers Threaten The Great Plains


I have been having a good deal of e-mail correspondence lately with David Wells, the leader of a weather-control advocacy group called the Pow...., er.., sorry, make that the WEATHER Rangers. The Weather Rangers are an internet-based club of backyard hobbyists who want to control the weather.

While we have some major disagreements on scientific theory about how the atmosphere functions, we have an even bigger one on what type of planet we want to live on. These e-mails between us render in stark relief the gulf between the biocentric attitude and the anthropocentric attitude.

These letters are an important record of the vast differences in values and it is important for those who wish to protect the natural world, including the weather, upon which the entire biosphere depends, to know exactly where the problem lies. Too often, environmental activists think the problem is only a few big corporations motivated by profits, and fail to recognize the bigger problem of an anthropocentric culture. The attitudes and values shown by Mr. Wells illustrate perfectly what we are up against and we ignore them at our peril.




Here is a letter from Mr. Wells, followed by my answer.

David Wells wrote:

Joel Carlinsky .

 I think you are wrong about restoring the land to the grass lands of the past , There are too many people now to turn back . I read somewhere that half of all the people that ever lived are alive today . Until the population is somehow prevented from increasing , we will need more and more food . To do this , weather control can help more than any thing else . Weather is more important than fertilizer when it comes to yields .
     A man in town put a stove in his shop that burns waste oil from cars . He doesn't have to pay for his heat . Why doesn't everyone do that ? It is because his one stove uses all of the oil in the whole town . If we turn Iowa back into a prairie and hunt the buffalo , only a few will be able to live here and all the people Iowa feeds will have to starve . We can not go back . We can only try to preserve what is left of the wilderness . The only way to do that is increase production on the existing farm land .
     Production has risen dramatically over the years . I grew up on a farm in north Iowa . Back in the 50's and 60's we only got 75 to 100 bushels of corn per acre . The same land today produces 175 to 250 bushels per acre . Irrigation can boost that number to over 300 bushels per acre . Irrigation water comes from the rivers and it is not good to take too much out of rivers . It would be much better to get the water from the rain . Irrigation is like the guys stove that burns waste oil . Only a few can use it before the river is sucked dry . Even wells are limited . Some farmers tried drilling wells to irrigate the land and all of the surrounding wells dried up . The only unlimited supply of water is in the sky . If production is to increase , the weather will have to be managed .
     The buffalo were not very good live stock  They were too wild and mean . Deer are a much better animal . They don't bother anyone and provide a lot of meat . Cattle and hogs and chickens and sheep are much more productive when it comes to feeding people .
     If you like it the way it was , there are still some undeveloped foreign countries you could go to where the people are starving because they do not farm their land productively .
 May I suggest Ethiopia ? It is geographically quite a bit like here , but they are just starting to farm some of it . They could farm Ethiopia but there is no money there to buy machinery and all the other stuff you need to farm the land .

 To avoid famine , we have to produce food . Modern science has done a lot to boost production . I can see diminishing returns from chemicals and fertilizers . The only way on up with yields is more water .

David Wells


My response:

David Wells:

I agree the vast excess population is the root of all environmental problems, but that does not mean that nothing can or should be done about protecting the remaining natural areas until the population is "somehow" brought down. It means we have to fight on two fronts: We have to work on protecting what is left of the earth, and we must also work to reduce the overpopulation.

 Those of us who are trying to protect the remaining ecosystems from destructive forms of development like your proposal to manipulate the weather are well aware of the need to reduce population. Most environmental activists do include that goal as something they work for and advocate.

http://www.applythebrakes.com/

is a good example for you to follow if you want to do something about the population problem instead of ruining the weather.

Instead of trying to protect the remaining bits of the natural world, you are trying to destroy the remaining ecosystems by changing their climate to feed the excess people, but what are you doing to reduce the population?

Are you spending time in a lab trying to invent a better form of birth control? Why do the people who like to invent things always go in for free energy devices and weather-destruction machines instead of trying to invent better, cheaper, and easier methods of birth control? That would be an invention that could really help a lot of people, and do some good for the world instead of destroying the climate.

Are you politically active against the religious fundamentalists who try to prevent contraceptive education from being taught in public schools? Do you stand up and speak out publicly against the religious fanatics who try to ban abortions? 

Most developed countries have already brought population under control. Populations in Europe are not growing. Rampant population growth is a third-world problem. The United States is the only exception among first-world countries, and that is largely because of the Christian Right, which agitates against education about contraception, so one way to help bring population under control is to speak up strongly against these Christian cults and their interference in political issues at every chance. I do that. Do you?

You cannot preserve a wilderness while at the same time changing the climate in which all plant and animal species live. If the climate is changed, the species adapted to that climate will die, even if their habitat is protected from other forms of exploitation. So if your proposal to change the weather on a large scale, over a number of years, is ever carried out, the species native to the area you affect will die just as surely as if their land had been turned into farms.

Protecting any significant area of land in a natural state must also include protecting the natural weather to which the species native to that area are adapted.

Draining water from rivers for irrigation ruins the rivers and the ecosystems along their banks. Artificially increasing rainfall ruins the ecosystems and threatens the survival of species in the area which gets the increased rain. Neither is a good solution.

Restoration ecology - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



Regarding your suggestion that I move to Ethiopia, so what if there are some other places left that people like you have not yet ruined? I am not interested in a place where I could go to hide out. I am intererested in protecting the natural climate of the Great Plains from people like you who want to destroy it, not in having a place to myself where you and those like you have not gotten to yet.

 This is not about my having a place for me personally to enjoy living in. It is about my wanting to protect my planet. My moving to Ethiopia would not do anything to protect the climate of the Great Plains from your attacks.

Actually, in most places, including Ethiopia, traditional methods of farming were quite able to feed the population successfully. The reasons for famines have nothing to do with lack of productivity. They have more to do with wars and displacements caused by political issues brought in from outside.

But there have also been some serious famines caused by droughts. Those droughts are not natural. They are caused by the huge increase in DOR due to human intereference in the weather by building nuclear reactors and setting off nuclear bombs. In other words, by humans controlling the weather instead of letting it alone. The people setting off the bombs and building the reactors did not intend to change the weather, and did not know they were doing it, but regardless of their intentions, that is what they did do.

Building nuclear reactors and setting off nuclear bombs is a form of weather control. The production of oranur and DOR changes the weather, regardless of if the people doing it know about DOR or not. So the famines in Ethiopia were caused by humans changing the weather. and if they had left the weather alone instead of changing it by testing nuclear weapons in Africa, as the French did in Southern Algeria in the late 50s and early 60s, which is what caused the current drought cycle in the Sahael, there would not have been a famine.
.
Joel Carlinsky
Posted by at

Blog Archive