Weather Magic

I found this article on a Pagan site and thought it illustrates perfectly some of the same issues involved in cloudbusting. The Pagan community generally has a more life-positive attitude and greater respect for natural processes than the mainstream culture and weatherworking is a tradition of theirs, so despite the vast differences in theory and practice between "weather magic" and cloudbusting, I consider the issues raised to be the same.
Joel Carlinsky

Weather Magic - Witchvox Article

Weather Magic    

Author: Chirotus Infinitum
Posted: January 11th. 2009
Times Viewed: 2,662

Weather Magic - Witchvox Article

Copyright: Copyright 2008 Chirotus Infinitum
No reproduction without permission from the author.

Orgonomic Ecology Message Posted On Discussion Board Of Orgonomic Journal

I recently posted a message on the discussion board of an orgonomic journal, the Journal of Psychiatric Orgone Therapy, in response to a posting there advocating gun control.

Discussion Board | Journal of Psychiatric Orgone Therapy

This message is posted on the discussion board, after being approved by the moderator, an M. D. who is a medical orgonomist and a board-certified psychiatrist. .

Joel Carlinsky says:

April 8, 2011 at 8:43 am

If you are against easy access to guns, what about cheap, easy access to cloudbusters? There are several websites selling cloudbusters or giving exact instructions on how to build one, and several hundred people on every continent have already done so.

I once spoke to Dr. Victor Sobey about this issue. He told me that when Reich invented the cloudbuster, in 1952, Sobey had been the only one to urge him not to publish because of the risk of misuse. Reich published anyway, but when I spoke to him, Sobey still felt he had been right and Reich should have kept his mouth shut.

Now, after many severe storms and floods have been caused by incompetent, irresponsible playing with cloudbusters, including the recent catastrophic floods in Queensland, Australia, it is becoming more and more obvious Sobey was right. We badly need a few people speaking up and demanding transparency and accountability in the use of the cloudbuster.

I was a student of Dr. Eva Reich, the daughter of Dr. Wilhelm Reich, and received tutoring from her in the field of orgone biophysics, including the use of the Reich cloudbuster. I also have long been active in the environmental movement, and it is from that perspective that I am conducting a campaign against atmosphere abusers who are engaging in cloudbuster malpractice.

Under normal conditions, the cloudbuster should only be used rarely, when there is an atmospheric problem such as a prolonged drought, to restore things to normal. Today, thanks mainly to the use of radioactivity in industry and warfare, the atmosphere is increasingly out of order and the cloudbuster is needed more than at any time in history.

Unfortunately, thanks in large part to the internet, many irresponsible people, not knowing much about cloudbusting and the proper use of it to restore natural, self-regulating conditions to a damaged atmosphere, are promoting it as a form of “weather control”, which is a form of malpractice that places the lives of innocent members of the public at risk.

In fact, this misuse of this device is a form of atmosphere abuse, comparable to abuse of children or animals, and causes further damage to the already damaged atmosphere, making restoration of natural self-regulation more difficult.

The indiscriminate proliferation of cloudbusters in the hands of “weather control” hobbyists is shaping up to be a major environmental problem and whole ecosystems are threatened by people playing around with the weather from their backyards.

Many of these people have good intentions, but effecively zero knowledge of orgonomy. Others are motivated by irrational needs for power and a sense of control. The input of people coming from a background in the psychiatric side of orgonomy is sorely needed to help bring some semblence of rationality to the field.

I have a blog, http://www.orgonomicecology.blogspot.com/ on the issue and I urge you to take a good look at some of the articles I have posted there. Then, if you are interested, I have a discussion list, the Orgonomic Ecology list, and you would be welcome to sign up for it
at OrgonomicEcology-subscribe@yahoogroups.co.uk .

Joel Carlinsky
( Former orgone biophysics student of Dr. Eva Reich

Letter From Germany

I am not the only one raising cautions about growing number of people who want to take up cloudbusting. Jurgen Fischer, of Germany, who has long experience in the field, sent me a copy of a letter he recently sent  to a correspondent in Greece who had asked about how to build a cloudbuster to relieve dry weather there.  I am posting it here in a computer-generated translation into English, followed by the original German.
Joel Carlinsky

( ENGLISH TRANSLATION )
Dear Mr. M.,Your request is so understandable, I would strongly advise you, however, by Their plan in sight. I can not write any treatise 
 Reasons in brief:- Irrigation wells, agriculture, etc. but no ecological an economic application.- Cloudbusting is a serious intervention in the ecosystem. The Cloudbusting like Reich has operated it had (with one exception toDemonstration purposes) does not make sense to make the desert to rain orIrrigate but to support self-regulation of the atmosphere and thus to strengthen the soil and the natural flora and fauna.

- Economic Cloudbusting (ie irrigation, etc.) is carried out by the jet stream is deflected. Thus, the global weather is changing.-With this type of Cloudbusting e.g. date for several years Village in the Algerian desert irrigation. The impact of this Project led to the extremely hot summer months in Europe and especially Russia in Asia in 2010 there where much of the harvest, and thousands Hectares of forest were destroyed. The Himalayan glaciers are melting much faster and resulted in the largest flood in Bangladesh 10.000den dead and millions Flüchtilingen.

- Similar effects had a Cloudbustingaktion in Germany 1991,where I was involved. It was then the largest known to date Storm series in Europe, where about 200 people were killed and many Billion in economic losses. The extreme fires and Floods in Australia in the winter 2010/2011 are directly Connection with Coudbusting. All these relationships are not provable,are, however, in areas of high probability.

The disaster in Europe1991 is seen by the Reichian Cloudbustingexperten Sun After all This campaign is denied in all reports, ie hushed and still acted as economic Cloudbusting was technically feasible. I consider this option, "Rain in the Desert" to make, for criminal because it conjures up disasters with which Chernobyl and Fukushima are comparable and are denied by obvious reasons, if they do not fit into the desired image of the omnipotent maker.

- The technical equipment for Cloudbusting is not the problem. The Devices are simple and relatively cheap to produce (by 5000 -?). TheProblem lies in the character structure of the operators. First,comprehensive knowledge of energetic relationships and second, the direct Perception of the effects needed. Third, it is necessary to have one Sense of responsibility for it to enrich themselves personally do not mind (Rain make for their own economic interests, the ego: "I can Make rain, "etc.). Fourth, you have to be trained, of course, with the Cloud Buster work specifically to what a corresponding practical and theoretical knowledge requires. There are but fewPeople who have the necessary technical and ecological knowledge and according to healthy character structure (I guess less than 10worldwide).

- The application of cloudbusters is extremely dangerous to health. WilhelmReich died from it (three heart attacks in direct sequence). His Cloudbusting engineer Robert McCullough of them for life on one side been paralyzed. Eva Reich had about life serious health Problems. I myself have suffered a heart like this damage. The health effects are similar to those used in the Exposure to radioactive emissions are high.
 
I hope I was able to raise your awareness of the problem with these lines.All the best 
 Jürgen Fischer

( THE ORIGINAL GERMAN VERSION FOLLOWS )


Sehr geehrter Herr M.,

so verständlich Ihre Bitte ist, möchte ich Ihnen jedoch dringend raten, von
Ihrem Vorhaben abzusehen. Ich kann hier keine Abhandlung schreiben, die
wichtigsten Gründe in Kürze:

- Bewässerung für Brunnen, Landwirtschaft etc. ist keine ökologische sondern
eine ökonomische Anwendung.

- Cloudbusting ist ein schwerwiegender Eingriff in das Ökosystem. Das
Cloudbusting wie Reich es betrieben hat, hatte (bis auf eine Ausnahme zu
Demonstrationszwecken) nicht den Sinn, Regen zu machen oder die Wüste zu
bewässern, sondern die Selbstregulation der Atmosphäre zu unterstützen und
damit auch den Boden und die natürliche Flora und Fauna zu stärken.

- Ökonomisches Cloudbusting (also Bewässerung etc.) wird durchgeführt, indem
der Jetstream abgelenkt wird. Damit wird das globale Wetter verändert.

-Mit dieser Art des Cloudbusting wird z.B. aktuell seit einigen Jahren ein
Dorf in der algerischen Wüste künstlich bewässert. Die Auswirkungen dieses
Projekts führten zu den extrem heißen Sommermonaten in Europa und vor allem
im asiatischen Russland 2010 wobei dort ein Großteil der Ernte und tausende
Hektar Wald vernichtet wurden. Die Gletscher im Himalaya schmolzen viel
schneller ab und führten zur größten Überschwemmung in Bangladesh mit
10.000den Toten und Millionen Flüchtilingen.

- Ähnliche Auswirkungen hatte eine Cloudbustingaktion in Deutschland 1991,
bei der ich beteiligt war. Damals kam es zur größten bis dahin bekannten
Sturmserie in Europa, bei der etwa 200 Menschen getötet wurden und viele
Milliarden Schäden verursacht wurden. Die extremem Brände und
Überschwemmungen in Australien im Winter 2010/2011 stehen in direktem
Zusammenhang mit Coudbusting. All diese Zusammenhänge sind nicht beweisbar,
liegen jedoch im Bereich hoher Wahrscheinlichkeit. Die Katastrophe in Europa
1991 wird auch von den reich'schen Cloudbustingexperten so gesehen. Immerhin
wird diese Aktion in allen Berichten geleugnet, d.h. totgeschwiegen und
weiterhin so getan, als sei ökonomisches Cloudbusting technisch machbar. Ich
halte diese Einstellung, "Regen in der Wüste" zu machen,  für kriminell,
weil sie Katastrophen heraufbeschwört, die mit denen von Tschernobyl und
Fukushima vergleichbar sind und aus durchsichtigen Gründen verleugnet werden, wenn sie nicht ins gewünschte Bild des omnipotenten Machers passen.

- Das technische Equipment für Cloudbusting ist nicht das Problem. Die
Geräte sind einfach und relativ billig herzustellen (um 5000,- ?). Das
Problem liegt in der Charakterstruktur der Betreiber. Erstens ist
umfassendes Wissen über energetische Zusammenhänge und zweitens die direkte
Wahrnehmungsfähigkeit der Wirkungen nötig. Drittens ist es nötig, ein
Bewusstsein dafür zu entwickeln, sich nicht persönlich daran zu bereichern
(Regen für eigene ökonomische Interessen herzustellen, das Ego: "ICH kann
Regen machen," etc.). Viertens muss man natürlich darin geschult sein, mit
dem Cloudbuster gezielt arbeiten zu können, was eine entsprechendes
praktisches und theoretisches Wissen voraussetzt.  Es gibt aber nur wenige
Menschen, die das nötige technisch-ökologische Wissen haben und eine
entsprechend gesunde Charakterstruktur (ich schätze weniger als 10
weltweit).

- Die Anwendung von Cloudbustern ist extrem gesundheitsgefährlich. Wilhelm
Reich ist daran gestorben (drei Herzinfarkte in direkter Folge). Sein
Cloudbusting-Techniker Robert McCullough ist davon lebenslang halbseitig
gelähmt worden. Eva Reich hatte darüber lebenslang schwere gesundheitliche
Probleme. Ich selber habe davon einen Herzschaden erlitten. Die
gesundheitlichen Auswirkungen sind mit denen vergleichbar, die bei der
Exposition mit hohen radioaktiven Emissionen entstehen.

Ich hoffe, ich konnte mit diesen Zeilen Ihr Problembewusstsein wecken.

Alles Gute
Jürgen Fischer

Tornado Record Set

WASHINGTON – Preliminary government estimates say there were more tornadoes in a single day last week than any other day in U.S. history.
Government analysts said Monday there were 362 tornadoes during last week's outbreak, including a record-setting 312 in one 24-hour period.
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration said the largest previous number on record in one event occurred from April 3-4, 1974, with 148 tornadoes.
NOAA says 340 people were killed during the 24-hour-period from 8:00 a.m. Wednesday to Thursday.
It was the deadliest single day for tornadoes since the March 18, 1925, tornado outbreak that had 747 fatalities across 7 states.

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

This exceeds the former record set in 1974 that was triggered by a cloudbuster located in Montague, Massachustts. This new record was caused by the reaction of the atmosphere to the intense oranur excitation from the nuclear meltdown in Japan. The response of the atmosphere to nuclear irritation is to develop a strong circulatory motion and discharge the excess energy as a motor force. Such attempts at self-healing by the wounded atmosphere will probably continue for a long time to come, until the radioactive contamination has been metaboolized by the atmosphere and reduced to managable levels.

But with tornadoes getting so much bad press lately, we can expect some misguided individuals who know how to build a cloudbuster from irresponsible internet postings but do not understand the basic theory behind the cloudbuster, to think they should try to prevent these "destructive" tornadoes.

 If some such well-intentioned but uninformed person, not knowing the vital role of tornadoes in re-mobilizing stagnated energy that has become immobilized by exposure to radioactivity, were to attempt to prevent tornado formation, and were to by some unlikely chance, succeed at it, and if the project were to continue for any significant length of time, the results could be a long-lasting drought, and if the project went on long enough, the permanent desertification of the area involved.

For this reason, I consider it important to keep presenting the facts about the need for tornadoes in maintaining the functioning of the atmosphere, especially in these times when it is under attack by nuclear power. There was a time when forest fires were regarded as a problem to be stamped out at every turn, but today the need for forest fires in keeping an ecosystem in balance is well-known.
 Oregon Wild's Fire Policy Statement

Likewise, for a long time, sharks were considered something the oceans would be a better place without, but today, active shark-protection groups are advocating that these top-of-the-food-chain predators be protected because they are vital to the health of oceanic ecosystems. Shark Angels

The protection of the natural functions of the atmosphere is equally important and there is a need for strong advocacy in favor of allowing the atmosphere to regulate itself and not be interfered with by well-meant, but ecologically unsophisticated cloudbusting ventures designed to prevent tornadoes.
Joel Carlinsky

What NOT to do

                                                              What NOT To Do
                                                               by Joel Carlinsky


 The most important thing to learn about cloudbusting is not how to do cloudbusting; it is how NOT to do cloudbusting. The first thing a student should learn is all the common errors, mistakes, and dangers and how to avoid them. It is like learning to fly a plane: Most of the instruction time is spent, not on how to fly, but on how to avoid doing something dangerous. The private pilot license is known as "a license to teach yourself to fly". Once the student has learned what NOT to do, the instructors job is over and the student is ready to teach himself to fly.



The late Jerome Eden was one of the very few who were seriously concerned about the issue of DOR and oranurization of the earth by the advent of nuclear technology. He was also one of the best of the people who took an active interest in cloudbusting, and was very concerned about the misuse of the cloudbuster, which in his lifetime was known only to a small group of insiders.

Eden wrote a book, The C.OR.E. Manual, about cloudbusting, with the main emphasis on the errors and misconceptions to avoid. It is the best book on cloudbusting ever written, but unfortunately, is now out of print and almost impossible to obtain.

Eden also offered a course in cloudbusting, the only such course ever offered to the public, and several people were trained by him in cloudbusting. 


 In his great book on cloudbusting, the C.OR.E. Manual, Jerome Eden devoted only 22 pages to the actual techniques of cloudbusting and the rest of the 126-page book to the mistakes Trevor Constable and Dr. Richard Blasband had made and the psychological reasons for them. It is much more important to know what NOT to do than to just mechanically pick up techniques without understanding them.

It is not possible to learn cloudbusting from a book any more than it is possible to learn to fly a plane from a book. Cloudbusting is a PHYSICAL skill, like sex or riding a bicycle. The things you need to know cannot be said on paper. What it IS possible to learn from a book, though, is what NOT to do.

 Orgone energy is ALIVE. Cloudbusting has much more in common with animal training or child-raising or practicing medicine than with engineering. In fact, anyone who uses the term "weather engineering", which Reich outgrew and abandoned, obviously does not understand the subject. Yet it is as "weather engineering" that cloudbusting is increasingly becoming known to a larger audience of people who learn of it from websites that use that term and promote cloudbusting as a form of "weather engineering" by which they imply that the operator can "control weather" for whatsoever purpose he chooses.

  Cloudbusting is not used to "make rain" unless it is being used improperly. Anyone who wants to "make rain" or "change the weather" or do "engineering" with a cloudbuster is a dangerous fool who fails to understand the basics of cloudbusting. PROPER cloudbusting is done to RESTORE ATMOSPHERIC SELF-REGULATION by removal of DOR.

 In general, removal of DOR is almost always the right thing to do, but it should usually be done with the minimum alteration of immediate weather if that is possible. Usually, weather that differs too much from the regional normal in a non-desert area, is the result of DOR-infestation and DOR-removal will return the weather patterns to normal. It is almost never needed to do an operation that will directly affect the weather. Changes in the weather are a SIDE-EFFECT of cloudbusting, not the goal of an operation in the majority of situations.

 That is the part that is hardest to get across to the power-drunks who want to "control weather" or "make rain". I cannot stress the point too strongly: Beware of anyone who uses the term "weather engineering" to describe cloudbusting. Cloudbusting is NOT a form of "engineering" and anyone using that term is displaying appalling ignorance of the proper use of the cloudbuster.


Joel Carlinsky

Some Standards Needed

                                                Some Standards Needed
                                                     by Joel Carlinsky

A correspondent writes

From: Sylvain Pafumi <sylvainpafumi@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re : [OrgonomicEcology] Re: Good Severe Weather?
To: OrgonomicEcology@yahoogroups.co.uk
Date: Saturday, April 30, 2011, 3:32 AM

How many persons in the world are trained to do cloudbusting operations
 and have enough  information to do it properly ?
And if there are any, how many are ready to expose themselves to a
possible orgonotic overcharge which could be harmfull for their health, as 
was the case for one of Reich's assistants (since an automatic rotation
of the device by electric remote control could cause additional DOR) ?

My reply

You raise a good question. I have no idea how many people there are who have done cloudbusting, how many of those did it correctly, or how many screwed up and caused a disaster. I also have no idea which of them could become good operators if they kept at it or had some training.

And the question becomes even more complicated if you realize that even the best operators will do something wrong at least some of the time. Nobody can be 100% successful every time. Even the best operators will make mistakes.

One way to add to the body of knowledge in the field and enable all workers in the field to help each other would be for a standard to be set up that all operations must be public, not only the successful ones. As things are now, the individual who wants to try out cloudbusting just does so, and then decides if he will tell anybody or not.

 So of course, nobody ever published a report of a failure. James DeMeo and Trevor Constable both have published reports of many operations over a period of many years, and all you can tell from their reports is that they both are 100% successful. How likely is that?

Then, many who want to get into cloudbusting are paranoid. They fear to become known as doing cloudbusting because of irrational beliefs that some super-secret government spy agency will kill them or kidnap them for it. They forget that nobody INCLUDING REICH has ever had any troubles from any government over cloudbusting. The silly rumors about a conspiracy against Reich have an effect of preventing communication in the field.

Plus, of course, there are perfectly rational fears of being sued for damages if you cause a flood and somebody DOES believe you!

Another problem is, what skills are needed? Many people seem to think meteorologists and physicists are the right professionals to do cloudbusting. I disagree. Ecology is the relevant branch of science here and anyone doing cloudbusting who is not familiar with ecology is simply not competent to do cloudbusting. And as far as I am aware, so far, NOBODY who has even the minimum basic knowledge of ecology has ever done any cloudbusting work.

That is because cloudbusting is usually presented as ''weather control'' instead of as ''ecosystem medicine'' for healing a sick ecosystem. Many of the new crop of ''weather engineers'' come to cloudbusting from a background of having an interest in machines and inventions, and they think of the cloudbuster as a ''new technology''. It is not presented to people with an interest in trhe biological sciences as a new way to help protect the environment from human-caused damage.

So, here are some suggestions. All operations should be done by a group or team, not by a single individual. The team must either include at least one ecologist or must consult with an outside ecologist before starting operations. All proposed operations must be made public in advance, and a means provided to make public any criticisms and suggestions from the public.

Then, afterwards, all results must be published, including the failures and disasters, so the people working in the field can learn from the mistakes of others and will not have to repeat them. And insurance should be purchased to be sure of being able to compensate anyone who is harmed by an operation.

And anyone not abiding by these standards should be regarded as a renegade operator with no concern for the public welfare. Nobody should dare to think he can do what so many do now, announcing, possibly years after the event, that they have done some experimenting with a cloudbuster, placing the public at risk, and never told anyone until they felt like it, and never telling anyone if they failed to get the results they wanted.

From this you can see how far distant we are now from even a bare minumum of responsiblity and accountability in the cloudbusting field. It is a growing backyard hobby for a collection of incompetents with not even a clue as to how real science is done or how to avoid killing innocent members of the public when they play their exciting new game of ''weather engineering''.

Joel Carlinsky

Reply To A Weather Ranger

                                                        Reply To A Weather Ranger
                                                                 by Joel Carlinsky
From: david wells <davidwells3@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Good Severe Weather?
To: "joel carlinsky" <joelcarlinsky@yahoo.com>
Date: Friday, April 29, 2011, 2:24 PM

Joel Carlinsky , We were approaching new moon phase when the storms hit the areas . The moon is as close to the earth as it ever gets now . When new moon occurs , the sun and the moon gravity both combine to increase the waves from Sedona , Arizona . At the times of the tornadoes , alignment to the Sedona vortex and moon occurs . The Mapleton Iowa tornado also lined up .

     If the wave from Sedona to the moon passes through a thunderstorm , a tornado is likely to form .

     We are in for some really wild weather this year because of the close moon .

     Do you still think it is OK for 284 people to die from something that could have been prevented ?

    David Wells

From: "joel carlinsky" <joelcarlinsky@yahoo.com>

To: "david wells" <davidwells3@gmail.com>

Subject Good Severe Weather?

I have never denied that astronomical factors are involved in weather. They certainly are. In fact, the hurricanes you want to sabotage are formed by the vast streams of orgone energy that flow in from space and impinge upon the earth. These streams superimpose and merge, and in the process, create hurricanes.

These hurricanes will happen regardless of there is DOR or not, but in going through their life-cycle, they remove large amounts of DOR in the process.  They are the most important of the several mechanisms by which the earth cleans out the DOR accumulation from the atmosphere each year, and without them the earth would soon become uninhabitable.

 But in addition to these astronomical influences, there are a number of more localized influences, and one of the most important of those is the nuclear technology that has developed on this planet over the past several decades. The orgone field of the earth is being constantly excited by the presence of nuclear reactors and nuclear bombs and other anthropogenic sources of secondary radiation, including any high-voltage alternating current devices.

The atmospheric orgone energy reacts to this irritation by a strong storm, with high winds, lightning discharges, and circulating motion, in other words, a thunderstorm / tornado. This motion restores the field to life. If there is no such reaction, or if it is not strong enough, the local portion of the field "dies" and lapses into DOR, a stagnant state in which it is toxic to life and unable to perform it's natural function of pulsation which is what produces rain in the contraction phase of the cycle. So if there is too much DOR around, there will be a drought.

So to avoid a drought, which if it lasts long enough, becomes desertification, either there must be storms and tornadoes to re-mobilize the stuck atmospheric energy, or cloudbusting operations to remove DOR must be done.

When the build-up of DOR becomes too great, there will be tornadoes as a reaction and they will reduce the amount of DOR to below the threshold required to trigger a tornado. If they do not, there will soon be more tornadoes. If there are not enough tornadoes, the drought will go on until the region becomes a permanent desert.

Cloudbusting operations can be a good thing to do if the operations are done to reduce DOR, thus restoring motility to the atmospheric energy field. In that case, rain will eventually fall as the atmosphere resumes normal pulsation. Or cloudbusting could be a bad thing to do, if it drains off just enough of the excess excitation to prevent tornado formation, but not enough to allow normal pulsation to recover. In that case, there will be a drought that may go on until the area has become a desert.

So the answer to your question, " Do you still think it is OK for 284 people to die from something that could have been prevented ? ", is, I think obstructing tornado formation which is needed for DOR-removal is vandalizing the atmosphere and increasing the tendency to droughts and possibly long-term desertification. A tornado may be more dramatic, but actually does far less damage than a long, possibly permanent, drought would do.

There is another factor to consider here too. DOR does not only affect the atmosphere. It is toxic to biological processes. DOR-sickness is another effect of high concentrations of DOR in an area. All biological processes are affected negatively by high levels of DOR.

So the answer to your question should also take into account how many thousands would die from cancer, heart attacks, flu epidemics and other infections brought on by reduced immune function caused by DOR, accidents due to DOR-induced misjudgements, suicide from depression intensified by DOR, homicide by people driven into a rage by DOR, and countless other symptoms of DOR-sickness.

And the question then is: How many cases of DOR-sickness, many of them fatal, are you willing to cause by sabotage of vitally-needed tornadoes that we need to clean out DOR from the atmosphere and keep the earth healthy and habitable?

The orgone theory is not a explanation thought up Post Facto to "explain how the cloudbuster works". It is a very robust theory that was worked out step by step, in great detail, over many years before the cloudbuster was invented. It was tested and proven at every step of the way.

And the cloudbuster was not "stumbled upon" by accident, and then an "explanation" of how it worked needed to explain it. It was the result of consistant following up on one fact after another, each new finding proving the vailidity of the previous findings and leading logically on to the next. The value of a scientific theory is it's ability to predict, and the orgone theory PREDICTS the cloudbuster-effect.

Instead of citing pseudo-scientific, pseudo-orgonomic ideas of Trevor Constable, who is NOT an authority in orgonomy, as you did in one of your previous e-mails to me, I suggest you familiarize yourself with the rather large body of orgonomic literature.

Two good references to start with are:
( 1 ) The Emotional Desert: The Medical DOR-buster: Part One. Included in Selected Writings, by Wilhelm Reich.
( 2 ) DOR Sickness: A Review of Reich's Findings, by Chester Raphael.
Both these sources are available from the Wilhelm Reich Museum and can be ordered via their website.

Joel Carlinsky