Invention Guru Urges "Try Out Cloudbusters To See If They Work"

Date: Tuesday, December 27, 2011, 8:15 AM

It looks like Jerry Decker,    , the invention guru who runs the Keelynet mad scientist website dedicated to new inventions and new technology, has really gone over the edge. Previously he had only been urging his readers to build cloudbusters to break the drought in Texas, a presumably laudable goal, even if an ill-considered and irresponsible suggestion, given the almost certain weather chaos if any significant number of his readers had followed it without first learning what to do with their cloudbusters after having built them.   But today, in his most recent posting on the subject, he is suggesting they build cloudbusters and try them out merely to see for themselves if orgone energy exists or not. In other words, to satify idle curiousity. This is a whole order of magnitude more irresponsible than just advising them to break a drought. It is about the same as telling them to try open heart surgery to see if it is successful or not, without first learning anything about anatomy or surgical procedures. And it is also unnecessary. There are plenty of other ways for a hobbyist who is merely curious to verify orgone energy without risking harm to the environment or innocent bystanders. Jerry is well aware of the orgone accumulator, the small-scale medical DOR-buster, Experiment XX, which demonstrates the formation of mass from mass-free orgone energy in water, and many other ways  a curious individual could validate the existence of orgone without the risks to the general public of playing with cloudbusters.  I doubt Jerry or anyone else would suggest someone with no training or experience in building aircraft build an airplane from instructions posted on a website and force unwitting persons to be passengers in a flight in it just to prove airplanes can fly. Why does he think the existence of orgone energy is more in need of proof than the ability of airplanes to fly? And why does he think forcing people to be subjects in an experiment with a home-made cloudbuster without their informed consent is any different from forcing them to be passengers in a home-made aircraft?    At one time I considered Jerry Decker to be a sober, responsible individual, well aware of the dangers of indiscriminate proliferation of cloudbusters. That was several years ago, when he was reluctant to post details on cloudbuster construction for fear it would be misused.    I can only speculate as to why he has undergone such a drastic reversal of his formerly admirable policy of restraint and is now seemingly determined to work mischief. Possibly he has suffered a breakdown or developed a drinking problem, or possibly it is merely a matter of advancing age in a life-long batchelor with no children and a resulting sense of disconnection from any concern for the future of this planet.   Today, Dec. 27, 2011, Jerry Decker wrote:   Orgone - Build a cloudbuster and test it for yourself, I did and it worked.   Please take a moment to send him an e-mail at jdecker@keelynet.com and remind him that people building cloudbusters just to satisfy their curiosity about if orgone is real or not is a really stupid idea that could end up killing some innocent victims, as has frequently happened before when untrained people fooled around with cloudbusters without knowing how to use them.   Please send me a copy of your e-mail to him at joelcarlinsky@yahoo.com.   And please forward this message to any person or group who you think might be interested.   Thank you. Joel Carlinsky ( Former orgone biophysics student of Dr. Eva Reich )

ARE CLOUDBUSTERS CONTRIBUTING TO THE DROUGHT IN TEXAS?

I keep hearing there is a bad drought in Texas. Could it be a lot of news media hype? Could it be that it is not a shortfall of normal water supply, but over-use by too many consumers? Are underground water tables being drained for irrigation? Are growing populations in the cities using too much water? All of these could be reported in the news as a "drought". It is important to remember that a news report of a drought does not necessarily mean there is really less than normal rainfall. But if there really is a shortage of rainfall, there are several distinct possible causes. There could be an infestation of DOR in the area. That is the classical cause of drought, and the  most frequent reason for a drought. It is caused by collapse of the regional atmospheric orgone energy into a stagnant state, known as DOR because of exposure to radioactivity, such as long-range effects of a nuclear meltdown in a place as distant as Japan, for example. DOR clouds from that incident have gone around the world and can become anchored at a place where they encounter an already-existing DOR concentration, and will then remain and cause a drought, often complicated by a reaction of the remaining healthy energy in the regional atmosphere trying to restore energetic mobility by high winds, tornadoes, and other appropriate, health-giving responses to the stagnation. Or there could be a DOR barrier someplace upstream, possibly a long distance away, blocking ingress of moisture into the area. Given that the drought this year in Texas coincided with the worst wildfires in history in Arizona, and that is the direction weather fronts come from that bring rain to Texas, it seems the drought in Texas and the dryness in Arizona are both caused by a single factor, probably a blockage of moisture from the Pacific across the Southwest due to a DOR barrier over Jacumba, California, at the crest of the mountain range that separates the moister coastal region from the drier country inland. That barrier has existed for several thousand years, waxing and waning from time to time. It was intensified in the  1950s due to the nearby atomic bomb tests, resulting in a series of nation-wide droughts, and was temporarily weakened by cloudbusting during the Reich cloudbusting expedition in Arizona in 1955. It has since returned to it's former intensity, blocking a portion of the summer monsoon rains from reaching Arizon and continuing onward. The recent Japanese meltdown has weakened the flow of atmospheric energy and intensified such barriers all over the world and probably this one has been affected also. Or there could be a poorly designed cloudbuster engaged in a poorly designed operation. One well-known promoter of technology and invention, Jerry Decker, the owner of the popular Keelynet website, has been urging all and sundry to build cloudbusters and end the drought. This is, of course, totally irresponsible since if anyone took him up on the suggestion and did start operating, they would be ignorant of how to use a cloudbuster properly as well as of the possible operations of any number of others in the same area. Problems worse than the present drought would be almost certain to follow. But one question that comes to mind is, WHAT MAKES HIM THINK THAT NOBODY IS TRYING CLOUDBUSTING ALREADY? Incompetent cloudbusting can cause a drought, or prolong an already existing one, and with the large number of websites giving instructions on how a cloudbuster can be built, there is a better than even chance that at least one person in the Soutwest, probably several of them, unknown to each other, of course, are already hard at work trying to end the drought with home-made clousdbusters---and making things worse. A cloudbuster can cause a drought in two ways. One is by setting up a flow of air across the path of aproching wearther fronts, blocking them from moving past it. That is what was unintentionally done once by a group of farmers in Wisconsin, who were drawing from the North to try to bring in cooler air from Canada, and the north-to-south movement of air they had caused was blocking the normal west-to-east motion of fronts from the Pacific toward the East Coast. There was a flood in the Upper Missisippi Valley, caused by the series of storms that got stalled there, while the East was having a drought because the storms were not reaching there. When informed of this unsuspected side-effect of their operations, the immediately stopped operating, and the pile-up of successive storms in the upper Missisippi Valley stopped along with the floods, and the weather systems resumed their normal march to the East Coast, where the drought soon ended. But the other, and by far the most likely type of faulty cloudbuster operation in a cloudbuster-generated drought situation is that the cloudbuster is either connected to a source of electromagnetic current, or else it is not properly grounded. A poorly grounded or electrically excited cloudbuster will impart added excitation to the atmosphere and exacerbate an existing drought tendency. This has happened on several ocassions and is therefore a matter of observation, not theory. Given the large number of websites providing instructions on how to build a cloudbuster, and the neglect by nearly all of them to even mention the detail of how to ground it properly after it is built, there are likely to be a number of cloudbusters operating in Texas in an attempt to end the drought, and it is about equally likely that none of them is grounded properly. There have probably been several individuals in Texas who have tried to break the drought by cloudbusting, using equipment they learned how to construct from searching the internet. In which case, they are virtually certain to do something wrong because none of the numerous websites which describe how to build a cloudbuster tells what to do with it after you have built it. A correspondent who obviously does not understand anything about cloudbusting recently wrote to me that he sees no evidence of any cloudbusting in Texas. By that, he means it is still not raining there. But that means he thinks anyone doing cloudbusting would be successfull. There is no more reason to expect that than to expect successfull surgery the first time from someone with no medical training. In fact, the lack of rain, the continuation of the drought beyond the time when it would probably have ended otherwise, is itself evidence that something is happening to extend it. And that something is more likely to be faulty cloudbusting than anything else.

SELF-REGULATION IN ATMOSPHERE AND ECOSYSTEM

 

It cannot be stressed too much that cloudbusting is not unique. The very same issues that face us in the struggle to preserve an independent atmosphere, regulating itself with a minimum of human intervention, are also the issues faced by conservation biologists working to preserve intact and self-regulating ecosystems from blundering and incompetent interference by anthropocentric and self-centered egotists who think they are better qualified to "manage" the earth than the natural processes that have done so since the beginning of life on this planet.

Some people may think my position that the atmosphere should be left alone to regulate itself, with cloudbusting only engaged in as a last resort when conditions require it, is extreme or unusual. It is not. My policy on "managment" of the atmosphere is well within the mainstream of trained conservation biologists regarding "management" of wildlife or "management" of fires in wilderness areas. And for the same reason: Cloudbusting should not be regarded as a part of the physical sciences, such as physics or meteorology, as many people wrongly believe; it is properly thought of as a part of the BIOLOGICAL sciences, and engaging in cloudbusting is engaging in management of an ecosystem.

For anyone interested in doing cloudbusting, a sound working knowledge of ecology is one of the most essential elements of doing it safely and responsibly. The articles linked below are a good place to start learning this important background.

Guest Columns

Wallow Fire Reporting Misleading

The Wallow Fire is now the largest in recent Arizona history, encompassing more than 500,000 acres. The media discussion of the fire often leads to misinformation and misunderstanding of wildfires, and feeds the political agenda of politicians and industries from developers to the timber industry.

One of the problems of media coverage is that most reporters have little or no training in ecology, much less in-depth understanding of wildfire ecology. Context for large blazes like the Wallow Fire are often missing from reportage. The emphasis on fuels makes for easy reportage, but misses some important nuances that lead to simplistic solutions—the common refrain that if we only logged more of the forest such fires would be prevented.

It also tends to reinforce the idea that thinning is needed in all forest ecosystems, when in fact, many fire regimes in higher elevations and more northern locations are more or less still within historic norms.

Furthermore, there is a tendency to focus on the most unfortunate losses which can exaggerate the perception that such fires have done a lot of “damage” to people, seldom holding people accountable for their own losses because they have chosen to build in a fire-prone landscape. 

[more]

By George Wuerthner, 6-21-11 | comments (40) | email story | print story

Wolf Hunts Morally Corrupt

By George Wuerthner

[read more]

Do ranchers have a right to predator free landscape?

One of the unquestioned and unspoken assumptions heard across the West is that ranchers have a right to a predator free environment. Even environmental groups like Defenders of Wildlife more or less legitimize this perspective by supporting unqualified compensation for livestock losses to bears and wolves.  And many state agency wolf management plans specifically call for compensation to livestock producers—but without any requirements that livestock husbandry practices be in place to reduce or eliminate predation opportunity. 

[more]

By George Wuerthner, 11-22-10 | comments (289) | email story | print story

More Guest Columns:

play their ecological role,

regulate

could manage the planet better

Tomgram: Chip Ward, A West Raised by Wolves

DON'T END THE DROUGHT TOO SOON!

Until about 170 years ago, there were 60,000,000 bison roaming the Great Plains of North America. They, along with other herbivores, supported a vast number of predators, including the Lakota, Comanche, and other Indian tribes. When pioneers came from the east, they thought this would make great cattle ranching country, so they sent in the Army to kill off the bison to starve the Indians into submission and place them in concentration camps called reservations.

The easterners then brought in domestic cattle, an invasive species not found naturally on the North American continent, and today there are more than 120,000,000 of these invaders grazing the plains that once fed 60,000,000 bison.

Cattle are intensely destructive of land, even when their numbers are within what the land can support. Bison have a migratory instinct that keeps them moving every few days, so they do not overgraze an area. Cattle lack this instinct, so if you drive them into a meadow in the spring, you can go away and come back in the fall, and they will still be there. But the meadow won't.

When bison come to a stream to drink, they spread out, so the damage to the streambank is minimal. When cattle come to a stream, they bunch up, resulting in erosion, a lot of damage to streambank vegetation and silt in the water that chokes fish.

Bison can protect themselves from American predators such as wolves, bears, and mountain lions, but cattle have to be protected by a government agency called Wildlife Services, that systematically leaves poison all over the west to kill anything that eats meat, including animals like badgers, coyotes, foxes, hawks, owls, and other animals too small to threaten a cow.

Bison are immune to diseases that cattle are not, so the meat you buy is laced with antibiotics, a health hazard the US forces the European Union to import despite their consumer protection laws against it in beef raised in Europe.

Bison can dig down through snow in winter for food, but cattle have to have it dropped to them by helicopter, raising the price of beef considerably.

Every winter, 10,000 elk and antelope are killed by barbed wire fences set up to control cattle blocking their migratory routes.

Bison meat is healthier for the consumer. It has more protein and less fat and cholesterol than beef, and since they are larger animals, 60,000,000 bison would provide as much meat as 120,000,000 cows.

In short, the cattle industry is incredibly destructive. And there is no need for it. In fact, it is not economically self-supporting. The cost of grazing permits on publicly owned rangeland is kept artificially low by political influence and is only around 1% of the cost of grazing on comparable privately owned rangeland, so 99% of the cost of grazing those cattle is a subsidy from the taxpàyer to the cattle ranchers. By every measure, from health, to cost of meat, to protecting wildlife, to protecting the land from over-grazing, to saving public funds, the most productive use of the Great Plains would be to abolish cattle ranching and allow the bison herds to recover, remove the barbed wire fences and allow them to migrate freely, and then issue hunting permits.

It has been suggested to use cloudbusters to end the drought in the American Southwest. That probably should be done at some point, but not until the cattle ranchers have been driven into bankruptcy and forced to abandon their destructive industry for some other means of making a living. I see the drought as an oportunity, not a disaster, a chance to force the cattle ranchers out of business. After that has been done, it would be time to use cloudbusters to end the drought.

The drought is bad, but cattle ranching is worse. Droughts come and go. The cattle industry keeps right on trashing the West, year after year. They are both disasters; to end a drought to save cattle ranchers from going broke and quitting the business and going away and doing something else for a living is counter-productive. The ideal outcome would be to let  the drought to go on long enough to bankrupt the ranchers, and THEN end the drought.
.

http://mikehudak.com   http://biomebooks.com  http://sc.org/grazing-team   http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=106170074385&ref=search   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Hudak   http://www.youtube.com/user/MJHudak1952?feature=mhum

Magical Thinking In The Cloudbusting Field

 The article linked below appeared on the Keelynet website of Jerry Decker, who has recently been touting what he calls "rainmaking" with the Reich cloudbuster as a "solution" to the drought problem in Texas. The irrationality of telling a large number of readers to all go out and build cloudbusters, and not tell them anything about how the orgone energy in the atmosphere functions or what to do with those cloudbusters to help it function better, is obvious. Only unco-ordinated weather chaos can be expected from a large number of people who know nothing at all about orgone energy pointing cloudbusters at the sky without knowing about each other.

Jerry Decker has exposed his reasoning, or, rather, lack of reasoning, quite well in posting this article, however. He could not post an article like this on his website unless he thinks the orgone theory of atmospheric behavior is dead wrong and the conventional, mechanistic theory is the correct one. By citing a study that ignores orgone energy and is based on mechanistic theory, he is is explicitly denying the orgone theory. 

But if he does not think the orgone theory is correct, how can he expect a cloudbuster to do anything at all? A cloudbuster does not work by magic. It attracts orgone energy and alters orgone energy potentials in the sky. These changes in orgone energy charges change the weather. If there were no orgone energy, there would be no effect from pointing a cloudbuster at the sky. So if there IS an effect from a cloudbuster, that is evidence for the theory being correct. 

A cloudbuster does not release anything into the air. It does not emit any particles that could serve as "condensation nuclei. So if a cloudbuster can induce rain to fall, that is strong evidence AGAINST the mechanistic theory that rain is caused by condensation of water droplets around small particles in the air. 

Jerry seems to think the mechanistic theory of condensation nuclei is correct, but that a cloudbuster can "make rain" too. I have no idea how he thinks a cloudbuster can do that. Certainly, all the many meteorologists and atmospheric physicists I have spoken to about cloudbustinbg are certain that without adding any particulates to the air, a cloudbuster could not possibly affect the amount of rainfall. Jerry must think a cloudbuster works by magic, not by changing orgone energy potentials in the sky. 

By denying the theory upon which the cloudbuster is based, Jerry Decker deprives himself of knowing what causes a drought. In orgonomic theory, a drought is caused by one of two things: DOR, a stagnated dead, or dying form of atmospheric energy that has been damaged by a larger-than.usual exposure to secondary energy, usually radioactivity or electromagnetism, or, in some cases, by depletion of the means used by nature to remove the normal build-up of DOR, such as deforestation, daming large rivers, etc. 

Jerry Decker seems, in common with the mechanistic meteorologists, to think droughts "just happen" without any underlying cause. That error leads him to the natural assumption that "making rain" will solve the problem. It is indeed sometimes possible to "make rain" during a drought, but that does not remove the stagnation that is the cause of the drought, so the drought will return when the induced rain is over. Even if a protracted series of rainstorms is triggered by cloudbusting, they will eventually end and the drought will again prevail unless the DOR infestation that caused it is eliminated. 

Without an understanding of how the orgone energy in the atmosphere functions and what can go wrong with it to cause a drought, it is not possible to restore atmospheric self-regulation and expect the normal weather to take care of itself. The only end result to be expected from "making rain" with a cloudbuster is an atmosphere permanently dependent on successive interventions with a cloudbuster and increasingly unable to function on it's own. 

And the only result to be expected from an unknown number of backyard hobbyists all poiunting cloudbusters at random at the sky without the slightest idea what to do with them, is wild, unco-ordinated, random, and chaotic weather. 

Plus, of course, the possibility that the current drought in Texas was actually CAUSED, or at least is now being prolonged by incompetent cloudbusting. If someone in Texas is already trying to end the drought by cloudbusting, and given the large number of websites telling how to make a cloudbuster, that seems very likely, that might be either the main reason for the drought in the first place, or at least by now a contributing factor in how long it has gone on. 

And adding more cloudbusters to the situation will not be helpful. Especially if they are used under the assumption that there is no specific cause for a drought: that droughts "just happen", and that there is no orgone energy in the atmosphere, that rain is caused by adding particulates that act as "condensation nuclei", and that since a cloudbuster does not add any particles to the atmosphere, a cloudbuster works by magic. 

The mistaken theoretical position of the mechanistic meteorologists that condensation nuclei are the operative factor in raindrop formation misleads them into thinking some source of such particulates must be behind the observed periodicy of rain in this study. This concept is nothing new. It has been reported in the scientific literature since 1971, as the "Laporte Anomoly

The Laporte, Indiana, Precipitation Anomaly

and the same wrong idea of condensation nuclei being the major factor in formation of raindrops has not been updated in the ensuing decades despite the commonplace observation, confirmed by nearly all observers in the field, that a cloudbuster can produce increases in precipitation without adding anything to the atmosphere. 

 The orgonomic explanation of such regular repetition of cyclical events is that orgone energy pulsates at a regular rate, and this alternating expansion and contraction determines the local weather, with clear skies when the orgone field is in the expansion phase of the cycle, and rain when it is in the contraction phase. Regular cycles in the weather can be explained without recourse to any hypothetical "condensation nuclei" from motor vehicles and factory smokestacks. 

From Keelynet.com  12/24/11 - Why serious thunderstorms and tornados less prevalent on Weekends  For much of the last century, people in parts of the United States have come to notice that just as they got the weekends off to relax, so too did it seem, did serious weather. Big booming thunderstorms that produced large hail and/or tornados, seemed to strike at will during the week, but come the weekend, things grew quiet............. Full Article Source

Jerry Decker Pushes "Rainmaking" Again

Today, on his Keelynet website, Jerry Decker again declared the Texas drought unnecessary and told his readers it could be ended by rainmaking operations.

• no need for this, they could make rain at ANY TIME but failed to do it - Millions of trees lost in Texas drought; http://t.co/0SOHhAjn about 4 hours ago

That is true: the drought COULD be ended by rainmaking operations. A well-done, properly conducted cloudbusting project by a well-organized group that understood how the atmosphere normally functions, what the causes of malfunctioning are, and how to restore atmospheric self-regulation, could end the drought. They would need to be on-duty 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, for the several weeks or possibly even several months it would take to do the job and follow up with occasional additional work from time to time as needed, over the next few years.

They would need to be paid a salary to live on. There would need to be some kind of consultation with an ecologist to avoid doing damage to the drought-stressed ecosystem. It would have to be a team effort, not a one-man show, since one of the most important safety precautions in any major cloudbusting operation is to have other people who know what to look for monitor the operator for signs of orgonotic over-charge and possible irrational behavior.

The goal of the operation would not be to "make rain". It would be to reduce the amount of DOR in the area, and to first locate, then work to remove any DOR barrier that is obstructing inflow of fresh, healthy, motile orgone. Once that is done, the natural regular pulsation of the atmosphere will produce all the rain needed, without the operator having to make it.

It is certainly possible to do a "quick fix" and "make rain" within a few days or so. That can be done even in the middle of a desert that has been a desert for many years. But dumping water on a desert does not give a fuctioning ecosystem; it gives you wet sand. If there is no plant life with roots to hold the soil in place, it gives you errosion. If only the most drought-addapted species of plants have survived the drought, they will probably be drowned by the rain, since desert plants are adapted to dry weather, and cannot tolerate large amounts of rain.

"Making rain" in a long-lasting drought would be piling one more disaster on top of the drought, washing away soil, killing the few plants that remain, and ending with the return of the drought when the "rainmaking" operation was finished because the cause of the drought, the DOR blockage that is obstructing movement of fresh, pulsatory orgone energy into the region, has not been removed.

The results of a "rainmaking" operation in a long-lasting drought would be only temporary, and would do little or nothing toward restoring self-regulation to the stagnated atmosphere.

Jerry Decker is urging his Texas readers to do anything but a well-conceived cloudbusting program to restore the atmosphere to normal. He is urging them to build many cloudbusters, how many, he has no way of keeping track of, and to operate them hap-hazardly, whenever they can spare the time from working for a living, being with their families, going to church, or whatever else they may happen to have to do.

These cloudbusters, all operated without any knowledge of the atmospheric orgone energy or how it normally behaves or what has gone wrong with it, and all operated in secret, by people who each thinks he is the only one operating, would be used to "make rain" by people who have no idea how to go about it. They would follow the directions Jerry gives them, which tell quite accurately how to build a cloudbuster, and then, since they would have no idea what to do with it, would just point it at the sky in some randomly-chosen direction and leave it there until rain began. Most likely, no two of them would pick the same direction.

Jerry is advocating for disaster. If any single person followed his advice, that would be bad enough. But if a number of them did so, things would get very much worse in Texas than just a drought.

But on top of all this, another question comes to mind: With all the information ( and mainly misinformation ) on the internet about cloudbusting these days, WHAT MAKES JERRY THINK NOBODY HAS ALREADY BUILT A CLOUDBUSTER IN TEXAS AND ALREADY IS TRYING TO END THE DROUGHT? Does he think anyone who tries cloudbusting is going to automatically be successful?

Operating a cloudbuster is a skill. It requires learning. Nobody is ever 100% sucessful even if they know what they are doing. A beginner, with no instruction, has a less than 50% chance of success in the best of conditions, and in a severe drought, much less than that.

It is quite probable that several people in Texas have already tried cloudbusting. None of them, of course, would have any idea that others were doing the same thing. And none of them, of course, would know what to do with their cloudbuster once they had followed the instructions they found on-line and made it.

And it is quite within the realm of possibility that the drought has already been intensified and prolonged by this incompetent, irresponsible blundering by backyard hobbyists who have been mislead by something they read on-line into thinking all they have to do is construct a cloudbuster and "make rain".

So, please take the time to write an e-mail to Jerry Decker,  jdecker@keelynet.com and ask him to stop encouraging untrained people to try to end the Texas drought by unco-ordinated cloudbusting. Tell him that responsible cloudbusting needs to be done by a knowledgeable team with input from an ecologist, not by anyone who happens across instructions on a website and thinks all he has to do is build a gadget and "make rain".

And please send me a copy of your letter to Jerry.

 Thank you.

Jerry Decker Again Urges Cloudbusting--To Save Hoofed Locusts

Jerry Decker is still urging his readers to commit illegal cloudbusting. This time it is to save the Texas cattle industry.

On his Keelynet website, Jerry wrote:

• totally UNNECESSARY loss, make your own rain - SEVERE DROUGHT LEAVES TEXAS WITH 600K FEWER CATTLE; http://t.co/fG5kmVO6 1 day ago

Apparently we did not get through to him.

So, here we go again:

There is a LAW in Texas that requires a PERMIT to engage in ANY FORM of weather modification. ANY FORM of it, Jerry. That includes cloudbusting. The law does not specify any particular method. It just says, "WEATHER MODIFICATION".

So by urging your readers to "make your own rain", you are urging them to commit a CRIME. It is the same as if you advised someone who needed money to "steal it". Weather modification in Texas without a permit is just as illegal as stealing money.

But I find it equally interesting that this article, which Jerry Decker feels justifies illegal cloudbusting, presents as the justification the reduction in the number of "hoofed locusts", the invasive species of cattle that do not belong on the North American continent and are destroying vast areas of the American West.

These animals, a species imported from Europe by greedy psychopaths who wanted to raise them for money, at the expense of ruining the ecological diversity of North America, are a blight on the landscape in Texas as everywhere else they have been imported to, as all invasive species always are.

There may be many good reasons to use cloudbusters to end the drought in Texas, but saving the cattle industry that has been devastating the land for the last two hundred years is not one of them.

The drought is bad, but cattle ranching is worse. Droughts come and go. The cattle industry keeps right on trashing the West, year after year. They are both disasters; to end a drought to save cattle ranchers from going broke and quitting the business and going away and doing something else for a living is counter-productive. The ideal outcome would be to let  the drought to go on long enough to bankrupt the ranchers, and THEN end the drought.

The following links will give an overview of the incredible destructiveness of the cattle industry Jerry Decker wants to save by illegal cloudbusting, and why Texas, like everywhere else, would be better off without it:


 http://mikehudak.com
  http://biomebooks.com
 http://sc.org/grazing-team
  http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=106170074385&ref=search
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Hudak
  http://www.youtube.com/user/MJHudak1952?feature=mhum


Once again, I ask anyone who reads this to please take a moment to send Jerry Decker an e-mail at jdecker@keelynet.com explaining to him that the cattle ranching industry is so destructive to the earth that instead of doing cloudbusting to rescue the damned cattle ranchers who are destroying the environment from a well-deserved economic collapse, it would be much better to hold off doing any cloudbusting and wait until the damned cattle ranchers have been driven into bankruptcy, and only THEN do cloudbusting to end the drought.

Did Dutch Hippies Cause The Drought In Germany Last Summer?

By sheer accident, I happened a few days ago to meet a young Dutch hippy who, when I happened to mention cloudbusting, told me he and a group of friends had done a cloudbusting operation last summer. They had thought the summer was too cloudy, and normally would have had more sunny weather at that time of year, so they had done a lot of research on the internet, sent e-mails to several of the most prominent names they found there, and then proceeded to construct five cloudbusters, which they placed in a circle all around the city of Almelo, in the province of Overijssel, in Holland.

Almelo happens to be the site of a uranium refinery which produces enriched uranium for use in nuclear reactors, so I would expect the local sky to be DORish, "bleak", and lacking in energy, and if there were heavy clouds around, they would be DOR clouds and would not produce much, if any, rain. In short, I would expect a more-or-less chronic semi-drought situation, relieved from time to time, in the usually moist European climate, by the movement across the region of storms large enough to pass through before being dismantled by the DOR infesting the area.

My aquaintance told me the operation was a success. They had dry, sunny weather for the two months they kept operating. Those two months were June and July. Curious to see what the weather was like in those two months and in the month following the conclusion of the operation in the region to the east of the operation site, which is where the natural west-to-east motion of the atmosphere would naturally carry the effects, I did a quick search on Google for "drought", "Germany", and "2010".

Here is what I found:

1. Drought and Floods: A Record Summer of Extremes - SPIEGEL ...

   www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,714917,00.htmlSimilar

   You +1'd this publicly. Undo

   31 Aug 2010 – It has been a summer of record-breaking weather in Germany, with extreme heat and drought followed by the wettest August on record, the ...

2. Grain Harvest in Germany May Slump 12% After Drought, Flooding ...

   www.bloomberg.com/.../2010.../grain-harvest-in-germany-may-slum...Cached - Similar

   You +1'd this publicly. Undo

   25 Aug 2010 – Germany , the European Union's second-biggest wheat grower, will likely follow Russia in reporting a slump in grain harvests this year after ...

     3.         extreme heat

There is, of course, no evidence of a cause-and-effect relationship, and a correspondent in Germany says it did not seem so bad to him and suggests the news media reports of the drought may have been exagerated either because of a preoccupation with  economic factors or because stories of catastrophes sell newspapers, but even so, and circumstancial as the  case is, it is enough to justify extreme caution in any future cloudbusting operations. Especially in the vicinity of a major nuclear installation.

I had at the time attributed the heat wave to the desert-greening project underway in Algeria, which has been known in recent past summers to shift the hot, dry air mass that normally hangs over North Africa northward to Europe. But my conclusion might have been premature. I hereby offer an appology to the people concerned with that project in Algeria, since it now looks more like the most important actor in the European drama of the summer of 2010 may have been closer to home.

An ungrounded, or poorly-grounded cloudbuster, conducting a vertical draw in the close vicinity of a nuclear installation might create a condition of "clear" skies" because instead of the draw causing a contraction, as a vertical draw with a properly-grounded unit usually does, it would be over-exciting the already intensly excited atmosphere, causing an expansion of the atmosphere, leading to clear, dry. "oranur weather" conditions, that if continued long enough, would constitute a drought.

There would be effects in all directions, spreading out from the drawsite in a series of concentric circles, just as an oranur effect spreads out in all directions, including against the prevailing wind, but the most dramatic effects would show up to the east of the site of the draw due to the west-to-east movement of the atmospheric energy stream carrying the affected air mass along with it.

Followed by the collapse of the hyper-.expanded oranur-excited system when the drawing operation stopped, resulting in the floods in August.

Is that what actually did happen? I do not know. But the chain of logic is strong enough that if I believed in Karma, I would not want to be one of those hippies.

Cloudbusting And Mental Health

While operating a cloudbuster in Arizona during the expedition of Reich and his crew in 1955, Robert McCullough, at the age of 28, suffered a stroke and was left with a permanent hemiplegia, a paralysis of one side of his body. A number of similiar incidents since then have contributed to the strong impression among almost all persons familar with the field, that being in too close contact with an operating cloudbuster for more than a very short time can be hazardous to one´'s health.

That includes mental health. There have been several incidents of persons getting over-charged and suffering a temporary episode of psychosis. This should not be regarded as a psychosis caused by the equipment, but rather as a forcing into the open of long-suppressed latent psychotic tendencies that might otherwise never have surfaced in the individual's lifetime.

Less dramatic mental manifestations have also been recorded. Anxiety, depression, and well-rationalized and highly-structured paranoid delusional systems of thinking are among the most frequently encountered. Suicidal thoughts are not unknown, though no actual suicides are known to have happened yet. Outbursts of temper have occured, and one woman with several small children reported that every time her husband's cloudbuster was operating, the children became irritable and got into fights.  In general, repressed, latent, and unconscious tendencies are forced up to the surface by the internal pressure of a higher orgonotic charge. Each individual will react according to his own underlying structure and predispositions.

In the eary 1970s, Dr. Richard Blasband, then director of the research program of the American College of Orgonomy, and who had once himself suffered a few hours of schitzophrenia from an overcharge aquired by holding onto an operating medical DOR-buster ( which is a miniaturized version of the cloudbuster ) attempted to solve the problem by use of a mechanized cloudbuster that could be turned and elevated by remote control, using small elecrical servo-motors powered by 12 volt D.C. batteries. This allowed the operator to stand at a distance of up to 100 meters, presumeably outside the field of the cloudbuster, and operate it without having to come close enough to be harmed.

But there was a serious drawback to this inovation. Physical contact, or at least close proximity to the cloudbuster is an important part of the operation. It is by feeling and learning how to interpet his own bodily sensations that the operator learns how to detect what the atmosphere is "feeling" and how it is being affected by the stimulus applied by the cloudbuster.

Without this bioenergetic contact between the equipment and the operator, one is working in the dark, unable to know how the atmosphere is responding to the imputs being applied until actual visible changes in the weather are already happening, when it is often too late to halt an operation in time to avoid a catastrophic flood or other unwanted outcome.

In an attempt to overcome this handicap, a variety of instruments were developed to try to detect and measure the changes in atmospheric orgone charge. These efforts were not very successfull. Orgone energy is not easily measured by the usual electromagnetic instruments and so far, none of these devices has proven usefull enough to be universally adopted.

The operators who obtain the best results, most consistantly, are those who retain the original method of close bioenergetic contact, coupled with close attention to their own physical sensations and emotional state. This method requires a considerable amount of "hands-on" personal instruction and a great deal of effort in learning to be able to detect and interpet proprioceptive sensations acurately, and, of course, it comes with a certain factor of risk, but the long-term results are much better than to depend on artificial instruments to know what is going on.

BAD WATER

A correspondent has brought up the issue of the quality and safety of the water that has been used for grounding a cloudbuster. That is a good question. The water absorbs the energy drawn through the cloudbuster, so the answer would depènd on the quality of the atmospheric energy being drawn from. If there is a good, healthy sky, then there would be no problem using the water afterwards.

But there is seldom a good healthy sky nowadays, and if the atmosphere is in good condition, there is seldom a good reason to be doing cloudbusting anyway. So in most cases, the water used for grounding a cloudbuster will be absorbing DOR. That means some care is needed in disposing of or reusing that water afterwards.

In his book, A New Method of Weather Control, published in 1961 by the Interscience Research Institute, Dr. Charles Kelley, a student of Wilhelm Reich, described how he used a swampy area of water-staturated land near his home to ground a cloudbuster. He included photos of the trees around the spot, which began dying from the tops down, and from the outside inward, just as Reich had described trees dying from DOR-sickness.

He also told how his house, located too close to the wetland used to ground the cloudbuster, became contaminated by DOR as a result. The central heating system, consisting of hollow metal pipes coated with insulation, forming a sort of orgone accumulating network throughout the house, attracted the DOR and whenever the thermostat started the furnace going, the energy trapped in the heating pipes became so intensely excited the house became unbearable and intolerable to live in.

By aiming a small medical DOR-buster at the furnace he was able to drain off enough of the excitation to make the house liveable, but the rock wall of the basement directly behind the DOR-buster became discolored and started to crumble, just as Reich had described the rocks at Orgonon doing after the disasterous Oranur Experiment. Kelley eventually gave up and sold the house. It proved impossible to permanently decontaminate it.

Several experiments have been done using water that has been used to ground a cloudbuster or medical DOR-buster, which is a miniature version of the cloudbuster, and the effects of such charging on the water are fairly well known. There are several types of instruments that can detect and measure these effects, as well as noticeable changes in plant growth compared to controls watered with water direct from the tap.

On the basis of these experiments, I consider the Desert Greening Project in Algeria, at an oasis in the desert, where about 800 people live, to be reckless of their lives and health, since there is no water available to ground a cloudbuster there except a well, and the same underground aquifer is the only possible source of drinking water for the population there. This project has been going on for several years now, and the long term health effects on the people living in that village must be obvious by now, but so far, the perpetrators of the project show no signs of discontinuing it.

In another form of evidence that the grounding water aquires the energetic characteristics of the energy field it is drawing from, experiments have been done by Buryl Payne, of California, that indicate a change in the taste of water depending on the energetic characteristics of the point of aim of the cloudbuster can be detected by most people. I recall from a visit to him, how strong the taste of turpentine was when I tasted water that had been used to ground a cloudbuster pointed at a pine forest.

Another type of unintended side effect from grounding a cloudbuster into a deep well is the big earthquake that was experienced by the San Fernando Valley in California in 1994. The report of the cloudbusting operation conducted by a group called the C.OR.E. Network, headed by Dr. James DeMeo, gives the dates of the operation. It says there were several mobile cloudbusters involved, and the farthest south they were located was in the San Fernando Valley. There is no mention of where or how the cloudbuster there was grounded, but since there is no surface water in the San Fernando Valley, no rivers, lakes, streams, or ponds of any kind, the cloudbuster must have been grounded into a well.

The underground aquifer there consists of brittle pourous rock, permeated wiith water under high pressure. The drawing of added orgone energy into the waterlogged rock would cause the water to expand and crack the billions of tiny cells in the pourous rock, and the vibrations, right on top of an earthquake faultline, would be enough to trigger an earthquake, which happend at 4 A.M. after an all night draw with the cloudbuster, as described in Dr. DeMeo's report.

So, in answer to my correspondent, I suggest extreme catution in grounding a cloudbuster, and also in disposing of any possibly contaminated water afterwards.

A LETTER FROM PETROS EVDOKAS TO JERRY DECKER

From:

"Petros Evdokas" <petros@cyprus-org.net>

To:

"Cyprus IndyMedia" <imc-cyprus@lists.indymedia.org>, OrgonomicEcology@yahoogroups.co.uk

Responsible Orgonomy
http://etaireia.org/responsible-orgonomy.html


Hi,

I'd like to share with you a page that contains the following:

o- Exchanges with Jerry Decker, of KeelyNet.com on the need for Regulating Orgonomy and about the Environmental responsibilities that come with "cloudbusting".

o- Legal dimensions and other concerns in relation to Freedom of Speech, and a Letter-Writing Campaign conducted by Joel Carlinsky, a student of Eva Reich.

Please read the rest here:
Responsible Orgonomy
http://etaireia.org/responsible-orgonomy.html

Please feel free to reproduce and disseminate wherever you may think appropriate.

Thank you,
Petros
http://petros-evdokas.cyprus-org.net/another-sort-of-introduction.html
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

DID CLOUDBUSTING HELP CAUSE RECORD DISASTERS THIS YEAR?

This has been an unusual year as far as weather-related disasters go. The official mainstream scientific community, however, hasn't a clue about what is the real cause of these events. The meltdown of a nuclear reactor in Japan triggered a rash of strong and chaotic weather patterns all over the Northern Hemisphere, and these are still working themselves out and we will continue to see the results of that nuclear catastrophe on the weather for some time to come.

But the ongoing irritation of the atmosphere by the nearly-universal use of nuclear technology had already set the stage for a catastrophic deterioration of climatic stability, and any individual event only adds to an already immense problem that would grow worse every year even without any single nuclear facility experiencing trouble of a sort the operators of that facility would notice, since their normal operation is a problem.

Layered on top of the constant oranur assault on the integrity of the orgone envelope of the earth by nuclear reactors and their derivatives, including the existence of stockpiled nuclear weapons, even if never used, is the massive proliferation of cloudbusters in the hands of independent free-lance operators who have little or no understanding of the principles of orgone biophysics upon which atmospheric behavior depends.

 These people often have not even bothered to read up on the science behind cloudbusting, but simply spin their own "theories" about everything without any evidence, and proceed to act on them without any regard for the public welfare.

That most of them rationalize their vandalism of the atmosphere by claiming they are trying to "save lives", or "prevent floods" or "end droughts" is no excuse. Such grandioise and self-agradizing claims are only too plainly a cover for authoritarian personalities to persue their goals of personal satisfaction and relieve the fellings of helplessness and inability to take control of one's own destiny that are the product of living in a modern mass civilization.

The drought in Texas is a case in point. Whatever the initial cause of the drought, and there is some room for speculation on that, given the amount of publicity cloudbusting has received over the internet in recent years, there is a distinct possibility that at least several, and probably many residents of Texas have already tried to end it with cloudbusters. Since the drought still goes on, anyone who has tried to end it with a cloudbuster obviously does not know how to use one.

But that plain observation does not prevent Jerry Decker, well-known invention and technology advocate, from posting details of how to build a cloudbuster on his website and urging everyone in Texas who reads his messages to build a cloudbuster and dash out and end the drought.

He is inciting them to break laws, since Texas has a law against weather modification without a permit, but Jerry seems oblivious to that detail, since it is other people, not himself, who would be held liable if anything went wrong with such a venture as he advocates. But the real issue, which he also seems determined to ignore, is, what makes him think nobody has already tried it?

And what makes him think none of the people who might have tried it has not made things worse? If an unknown number of people, none of them knowing of each other, and none of them knowing how to use a cloudbuster, all start pointing pipes at the sky in directions chosen at random, at randomly-chosen elevations, for random lengths of time, and probably many, maybe even most, of these Jerry-built cloudbusters not being grounded properly, the total product is not likely to be any better than the current drought. Indeed, it is almost sure to be worse.

A certain amount of DOR is natural, a normal product of the annual atmospheric metabolism. This year, there was more than usual because of the Japanese meltdown, but still probably within the limits of what the atmospheric processes could take care of. The atmosphere can usually metabolize the normal amount of DOR that builds up in a season.  The annual hurricane season sweeps the accumulated DOR of late summer away, setting the satagnated energetic field back into motion.

 If some power-happy vandal, armed with a cloudbuster and an invincible supply of ignorance were to convince himself he was "saving lives" by interfering with the normal Gulf hurricane season, that could be a major contrributing factor in the length of the drought which would otherwise have been terminated months ago by a hurricane, or possibly a series of them.

And if someone with a cloudbuster in the Southwest were to have followed the advice of Jerry Decker and did try to end the drought and did not know even so basic a technique as what direction to aim his cloudbuster, he might very well have triggered off the recent spate of high winds that swept out of the drought-stricken area with such drastic consequences, as reported in the article linked below.

So there is a distinct possibility that the unwelcome weather of the past year was at least partly due to cloudbusting by people who thought they were helping the situation, but through their ignorance made things worse.

It is way past time to call these people on their hubris. However they choose to present themselves, they simply have no right to do as they please with the atmosphere of the earth, and the lives of everyone around them.

Billion-dollar weather disasters smash US record - Yahoo! News http://news.yahoo.com/billion-dollar-weather-disasters-smash-us-record-171523725.html America smashed the record for billion-dollar weather disasters this year with a deadly dozen, and counting. Read the full story