Myths about weather control and geoengineering: here’s what you should know

Have you ever wondered why we can’t stop a hurricane dead in its tracks, or avoid floods by steering storms away from cities?

Scientists explain that weather is a natural phenomenon that is impossible to ‘control’ in this way with current technology. Yet, some people claim that government agencies and scientific organizations secretly ‘control weather using advanced technology’ or already control the global climate through geoengineering.

Note that ‘geoengineering’ includes theoretical or researched methods of curbing global climate change through things like reflecting sunlight with airborne particles, whereas ‘weather control’ is depicted by misinformation as control over large-scale weather events, like hurricanes. We discuss both below. 

Such claims can spread in many ways – from conspiracy websites and social media pages to everyday people who share these ideas in good faith after being convinced by misleading sources.

With the help of scientists, many people have debunked misleading claims of ‘weather manipulation’ (including Science Feedback’s articles: here, here, and here). Yet, this general narrative that ‘secret groups control the weather’ has persisted for decades with sharp rises in misinformation after natural disasters like hurricanes and floods. So, why does this occur?

Seeking causes or blame for weather events is natural and something that humans have done for thousands of years. Across the world, ancient civilizations have had deities for every imaginable weather type: storms, rain, lightning, sunshine, snow – the list goes on. Today, when natural disasters devastate our communities, people want to find a reason for such tragedies. Unfortunately, this tendency can make people susceptible to believing ‘weather control’ conspiracies. 

Conspiracies are also tempting to believe as they offer an ‘easy’ alternative to taking the time and effort to learn about something more complex, like Earth’s weather. Combine these susceptibilities with cleverly crafted conspiracies that exclude necessary information and it’s clear why people can be convinced. 

Luckily, climate scientists and meteorologists have laid out clear evidence explaining why these claims and conspiracies greatly underestimate how difficult – or, more often, impossible – it is to control Earth’s weather. Importantly, they’ve also clearly shown how the blamed technologies cannot influence the weather in the first place.

Our goal in this article is to summarize those points and equip you with tools to spot misleading conspiracies. 

Why is large-scale ‘weather control’ impossible with current technologies?

Earth’s weather is complex, powerful, and chaotic – trying to control it is extremely difficult or, in most cases, impossible with current technology. Scientists are well aware of this, but many people are not. Scientists have attempted to control the weather – but with large-scale events like hurricanes, their experiments have failed. 

Despite evidence of these failures, misinformation continues to spread. Some sources spread it intentionally, but many people do so in good faith after being misled – but understanding some key points can help you avoid this.

First, it’s helpful to understand what influence humanity does have over the weather. Ironically, our greatest influence on Earth’s weather is one denied by misinformers: human-driven climate change.

Decades of evidence shows that emissions of greenhouse gases – like carbon dioxide (CO₂) – are warming Earth’s climate^[1]. This can worsen extreme weather; for example, climate change has already increased the frequency and intensity of extreme heat events globally since the 1950s^[1]. 

However, there is a big difference between influencing the weather – as described above – and controlling the weather, like creating storms, steering hurricanes, or choosing how global weather patterns will form. Scientists explain that this type of large-scale weather control is currently impossible, and claims to the contrary have been debunked many times over the years. 

On the other hand, although we can’t ‘control’ large-scale weather patterns, we can influence them by emitting large amounts of planet-warming greenhouse gases. In fact, this is what we are doing now, and – unlike conspiracy theories of ‘weather manipulation’ – the evidence is plentiful for the impacts of climate change.

Thousands of climate papers have been assessed by climate experts and summarized into key findings in the link here. And the main driver of this change are things you can witness directly – human activities such as driving cars, flying airplanes, and operating factories all emit greenhouse gases at a global scale on a daily basis.

Instead of using credible evidence, ‘weather manipulation’ conspiracies require you to stretch your imagination to believe in ‘advanced technologies’, secret groups, and capabilities that humans don’t currently possess. 

Below we will explain the tactics people use to make this type of misinformation convincing, and why it’s easy for people to accidentally propagate it. 

Misleading tactics to look out for when you see claims about ‘weather control’

Conspiracy theorists and misinformers use a few common tactics to convince you that ‘humans can control the weather with technology’. Here are some things to look out for:

1. Making a bold claim with missing details:
   Those who spread conspiracy theories about ‘weather manipulation’ present claims with key details missing. They might claim, for example, that ‘the government steers hurricanes with technology’, but provide no reasonable explanations of how that would be physically possible. As the famous Carl Sagan said: “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.”
   
2. Presenting false evidence:
   Any alleged ‘evidence’ of these technologies – pictures, patents, etc. The technology may look or sound advanced – and perhaps it is – but that doesn’t mean it can change the weather.
    
   Sometimes, the technology doesn’t even exist outside of patents (see our article on that here, and detailed later in article). But even when it does, experts in these technologies – and experts in Earth’s climate and weather systems – have pointed out why such technology cannot do what conspiracies claim.  
   
   Often, the technologies do something entirely unrelated. For example, in a past review, Science Feedback found that viral posts about ‘radar transmissions steering hurricanes’  actually showed radar signals that were triggered by a massive migration of birds during a hurricane. As we show below, these misunderstandings can lead to groups of scientists being baselessly blamed. 
   
3. Blaming organizations or unnamed  ‘covert groups’ for natural disasters or weather phenomenon: 
   These claims will sometimes name a group explicitly (two atmospheric research groups – NOAA and HAARP – are often targeted, for example) for allegedly using these technologies for ‘weather manipulation’. However, scientists from these groups have transparently and rationally explained what they – and their technologies – actually do, and why viral claims completely mischaracterize them.
   
   Scientists from outside of these organizations – either specializing in said technologies or weather phenomena – have independently explained why such technologies are incapable of controlling the weather. 
   Other times, people will blame ‘the government’ or unnamed ‘covert groups’ for such activities – again, without evidence.
   
   There are some methods of affecting the weather – like a technique called cloud seeding, for example. But cloud seeding’s effects are very limited, as we will explain below. 

What is cloud seeding and what does it actually do?

Above we outlined some of the tactics used by misinformers and conspiracy theorists to convince you about ‘weather manipulation’. Let’s look at a real example of this using one of the few ‘weather influencing’ technologies that does exist: cloud seeding. 

Cloud seeding is an 80-year-old technology that can modestly increase rainfall over small areas by dispersing small particles (usually silver iodide) in existing clouds. Because the technology does help rain fall out of existing clouds – again, only in very limited ways – it’s the perfect target for misinformers who claim this is ‘evidence’ that technology can change the weather. 

But misinformation greatly exaggerates the capabilities of cloud seeding – it can trigger some modest rainfall, but it doesn’t turn clouds into an unlimited faucet that can create torrential downpours. 

Yet, this is what many claimed triggered the storm that brought catastrophic floods to Texas in 2025. But experts were quick to point out the absurdity that such technology could cause such a storm.

After the event, meteorologist Matthew Cappucci tweeted, “Cloud seeding played ZERO role in deadly Texas floods. Rudimentary, basic physics explains that.” Cappucci then pointed out that “You don’t spontaneously make 4 trillion gallons of water appear in Texas.” As Science Feedback explained in a review of these claims, that amount of water could fill 6 million Olympic swimming pools. 

In a past review, Science Feedback learned more about the Texas floods by contacting Dr. Daniel Swain, Climate Scientist at University of California Agriculture and Natural Resources, who studies extreme weather events like floods, extreme precipitation, and storms. Swain explained that rain increases from cloud seeding are modest and very short lived, increasing rainfall by a maximum of 15% – but more typically around only 5%. Swain also explained:

“Cloud seeding is the use of various methods to attempt to modestly augment natural precipitation from existing clouds and storms. It cannot create clouds or storms that do not already exist.”

The lesson here is that scale is key: just because a technology can interact with something – like our atmosphere – doesn’t mean it has unlimited capabilities to affect it (like creating a storm). 

But the more complex a topic is – like cloud seeding – and the less general knowledge people have about it, the easier it is for misinformers to make up believable lies. 

Below, we will provide scientific explanations that show why common ‘weather manipulation’ misinformation is false. 

What are hurricanes and why can’t we modify them with current technology?

What are hurricanes?:
Hurricanes are a type of storm called a ‘tropical cyclone’ (Figure 1) and are one of the deadliest weather extremes on Earth. They form over tropical or subtropical waters, whose warm moist air helps fuel these storms. As hurricanes form and move across the Earth, they rapidly spin due to Earth’s rotation (a result of the Coriolis effect). 

A typical hurricane is roughly 480 kilometers (300 miles) wide and possesses a huge amount of energy. To be considered a hurricane, a storm must reach a maximum sustained wind speed of 74 miles per hour (119 kilometers per hour). Together, a hurricane’s size and motion mean that they possess massive amounts of energy, as the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) explains:

“During just one hurricane, raging winds can churn out about half as much energy as the electrical generating capacity of the entire world.”

Frequent inaccurate hurricane claim: 

‘humans use technology to modify hurricanes (e.g., create them, steer them, stop them, etc.)’

Clarification:
As of this writing, there is no technology humans have which can create, strengthen, destroy, modify, or steer a hurricane in any way. This has been repeatedly confirmed by hurricane experts (see review here). For those who haven’t experienced or seen videos of hurricanes, it might be difficult to appreciate just how powerful they can be. NOAA explains that the heat released by a fully developed hurricane is “equivalent to a 10-megaton nuclear bomb exploding every 20 minutes.”

Given their size and power, scientists do not currently have any feasible way to stop hurricanes. The NOAA Hurricane Research Division explains that there have been a number of suggested ideas of how to potentially modify a hurricane; one method, called cloud seeding, was researched to reduce hurricane intensity but did not work. 

However, summarizing the research efforts done in the mid-1960s to early 1980s, the NOAA Hurricane Research Division explains that “observations showed that hurricanes contain little of the supercooled water necessary for cloud seeding to work”. 

Beyond this, a number of other methods have been considered – from cooling the ocean with icebergs, to ‘blowing them apart’ with large bombs –  but as NOAA’s Hurricane Research Division explains: “As carefully reasoned as some of these suggestions are, they all fall short of the mark because they fail to appreciate the size and power of tropical cyclones”. Moreover, failed experiments are just that – they are not proof of success, nor real-world application, as we covered in a past article. 

Beware of misinformation during hurricane season

During the hurricane season (which runs from June 1 to November 30 in the Atlantic), we usually see a spike in hurricane misinformation – everything from governments ‘creating’ hurricanes, to ‘steering’ them into certain regions, like the southeastern U.S. Science Feedback has debunked both of those claims (see here and here).  

Likewise, some have claimed that the existence of patents for weather modification is proof that storms are being manipulated. But a patent does not prove that a piece of technology is feasible or has scientific backing – only that a novel idea for a technology has been legally documented. A patent gives its creator exclusive commercial rights to an invention, but does not prove that the technology works in the real world.  

The ability to modify and alter the course of hurricanes could save lives and prevent massive amounts of damage; however, there is no scientific evidence suggesting this is currently possible. Likewise, there is no evidence showing that humans can create hurricanes using ‘technology’. Read more about this in our previous article linked here or see NOAA’s extensive review of the many ways humans have tried to stop hurricanes. 

What are the white trails in the sky behind airplanes?

As we’ve explained in many past reviews (here, here, and here), airplanes sometimes leave behind a trail of condensed water – a contrail – as they fly through the sky, depending on factors like altitude and weather conditions. These contrails – sometimes mischaracterized as ‘chemtrails’ – form naturally as the hot exhaust from the aeroplane engines hits the cold air in the upper atmosphere.

In one of our past reviews, Dr. Christiane Voigt, Head of Department for Cloud Physics at the German Aerospace Center Institute of Atmospheric Physics, described the process in more detail: 

“Contrails are ice crystals, small snow particles and mainly contain water ice. The water condenses from the ambient atmosphere. The ice nucleates [starts to grow] on particle emissions from aircraft engines, mainly soot from the burned hydrocarbon compounds in the kerosene, ice nucleates and is persistent in cold and humid conditions. Contrails only form in 5% of the flights which have this cold and humid conditions mainly related to frontal weather systems”.

Despite clear scientific explanations for this phenomenon, misinformation and conspiracies about it continue to spread online. 

Frequent contrail misinformation claim: 

‘The white trails behind airplanes are chemtrails that contain toxic substances; chemtrails are evidence of geoengineering’

Clarification:
As we explained above, there is a clear scientific explanation for the white trails that are left behind airplanes that are flying in the sky. Voigt has closely investigated the formation of contrails for her research, looking at how different compositions of fuel can affect aircraft induced cloud formation from contrails^[2,3]. In a past review, Voigt told Science Feedback:

“Contrails are not toxic as they mainly constitute water.”

There is no evidence to support that airplane condensation trails are ‘chemtrails’ – meaning it is a conspiracy, albeit a common one. In fact, due to the online prevalence of this conspiracy theory, a group of scientists surveyed scientists with expertise in atmospheric composition to understand if there’s any chemical evidence of cloud seeding, or as the researchers defined it, a ‘secret large-scale atmospheric program’ (SLAP). Authors of the 2016 paper explain:

“Results show that 76 of the 77 scientists (98.7%) that took part in this study said they had not encountered evidence of a SLAP, and that the data cited as evidence could be explained through other factors, including well-understood physics and chemistry associated with aircraft contrails and atmospheric aerosols.”

While it is true that scientists are exploring the risks, rewards, and potential impacts of geoengineering technologies like cloud seeding, solar geoengineering and carbon capture to mitigate climate change, none of these technologies involve ‘chemtrails’. Solar geoengineering covers various hypothetical technologies and strategies that are meant to reflect sunlight out of Earth’s atmosphere to limit ongoing human-driven global warming. Ideas proposed for high altitudes – some of which being actively researched but not implemented – include placing a large mirror in orbit, thinning cirrus clouds, or spraying aerosols in the stratosphere (i.e., stratospheric aerosol injection) (Figure 2). 

Solar engineering is indeed a controversial topic, both among politicians and scientists. In fact, these groups have debated solar engineering for over 50 years, and numerous climate scientists have banded together to recommend a global non-use agreement for such technologies. 

Because of this lack of agreement, and a marked public opposition, actual field tests of solar engineering have been virtually non-existent in the past. Most of the ideas remain in laboratories, models, or are just theoretical. 

The United Kingdom did, however, recently fund projects from the Advanced Research + Invention Agency (ARIA), who plan to spend roughly USD$33 million to perform “controlled, small-scale outdoor experiments” to test solar geoengineering. One project, for example, aims to spray seawater over the Great Barrier Reef to brighten clouds in a 10 kilometer (km) x 10 km area (in the hopes to reflect more sunlight). As with past projects proposed by others, it is already facing opposition, including from climate scientists.

Such projects do not prove that such technologies have already been implemented on a global scale – on the contrary, it shows the difficulty and limitations the technology’s proponents have faced. 

NEXRAD and HAARP don’t modify the weather – here’s what they actually do

As we explained earlier, the more complex or less-understood a subject or technology is by the general public, the easier it can be to misinform people about it. Perfect examples of this are the Next Generation Weather Radar (NEXRAD) system and the High-frequency Active Auroral Research Program (HAARP) transmitters – both are advanced technologies and, based on social media comments, seem to be poorly understood by the general public. So, what are they?

What is NEXRAD?

NOAA explains that the Next Generation Weather Radar (NEXRAD) system is a network of Doppler weather radars, which “detects precipitation and wind, and its data can be processed to map precipitation patterns and movement”. The display of NEXRAD signals depends on what is being detected – it can detect flocks of birds, swarms of insects, precipitation patterns, and more (Figure 3). 

One piece of misinformation you might encounter is that the blue and green blobs (shown under the ‘birds’ classification in Figure 3 below) on NEXRAD maps are ‘radar pulses’ used to influence weather (e.g., ‘steer a hurricane’). 

In reality, a past Science Feedback review revealed that the ‘blobs’ are signals that are triggered by bird migrations. Without proper knowledge of NEXRAD technology, people are prone to believing misinformation about it – like the false idea that went viral that the colors indicate some type of ‘pulses’ people are sending out, rather than signals being picked up on radar. 

What is HAARP?

HAARP is a research facility that uses transmitters (Figure 4) to study the physical properties and behavior of the upper-most regions of our atmosphere, called the ionosphere. HAARP does this by transmitting high-frequency radio waves that only cause small effects in the ionosphere (high in Earth’s atmosphere) and do not affect weather patterns, which occur lower – in the stratosphere and troposphere – in Earth’s atmosphere (Figure 5), as scientists have explained in our past reviews. 

Science Feedback has reviewed a number of claims about HAARP, like that it can control people’s minds, create floods, modify Earth’s weather, and create auroras seen around the world. None of these claims are correct; in fact, there is no credible evidence to support the broader narrative that ‘HAARP is nefarious’. Instead, it seems that people’s poor understanding about HAARP’s technology has led people to inaccurately speculate about what HAARP does, leading to misinformation. 

Conspiracies about HAARP and NEXRAD are not supported by any credible evidence

Although these technologies are unrelated, both have been targets of misinformation. For example, in 2024, posts went viral on social media claiming that NEXRAD and/or HAARP were used to ‘modify or steer Hurricane Helene’ which devastated the state of Florida. Science Feedback reviewed these claims showed they are incorrect and completely mischaracterize what these technologies do. 

Firstly, if you recall our earlier section on hurricanes, NEXRAD and HAARP technology are not even listed among the hypothetical ways that humans have tried – and failed – to modify hurricanes. Even if someone wanted to try, scientists explain that NEXRAD and HAARP technologies are not even theoretically capable of manipulating the weather. 

In our past review, Science Feedback contacted Shirley Murillo, Deputy Director of NOAA’s Hurricane Research Division, who commented:

“The amount of energy sent out by NEXRAD radars is vanishingly small compared to the amount of energy expended in a hurricane.  The hurricane consists solely of air and water and the beam either just passes through or is partially reflected back by small water drops. It doesn’t have enough energy to move even those tiny drops.

As for HAARP, it’s in Alaska and its antennae are pointing up toward the ionosphere. There’s no way the beams would intercept a hurricane in the Gulf of Mexico. It is not broadcasting enough energy to move water droplets so it couldn’t ‘push’ a storm even if it were aimed at a storm.”

Beware of misinformation on HAARP and NEXRAD during aurora events and natural disasters

Be on the lookout for misleading claims about HAARP and NEXRAD when there are aurora events (which display as wavy colors in the sky) or natural disasters, like floods and hurricanes. In the past, these events have triggered misinformation. However, there are plenty of past articles available from Science Feedback and others that provide helpful context on past misleading claims and narratives on HAARP and NEXRAD. 

Conclusion

When extreme weather events devastate communities, you may hear conspiracy theories about what caused them. So when such events arise, here are a few things to keep in mind to avoid misinformation. 

1. Scientists with expertise in Earth’s weather systems have thoroughly and repeatedly debunked the idea that governments or ‘nefarious’ organizations can ‘control the weather with technology’. In short, scientists explain that controlling Earth’s weather systems (like trying to create or steer hurricanes), would be so complex and require so much energy, that it’s impossible to do so with current technologies. 
2. No credible scientific evidence has shown that humans can ‘control’ Earth’s weather at large scales (creating storms, steering hurricanes, triggering flood-causing torrential downpours etc.). Humans can, however, change Earth’s climate by emitting planet-warming greenhouse gases, which can affect extreme weather patterns in the long term. But this is entirely different from the ‘control’ depicted by conspiracies and viral online claims: one where humanity could somehow ‘manipulate’ or create large-scale weather events at will.  
3. It is a natural human response to seek blame for natural disasters that devastate our communities. Unfortunately, this can make people prone to believing weather control conspiracies. Especially when the alternative can be hard to accept: we are often just at the mercy of nature. 

References

• 1 – IPCC (2023) Climate Change 2023: Synthesis Report. Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. 
• 2 – Moore et al. (2017) Biofuel blending reduces particle emissions from aircraft engines at cruise conditions. Nature. 
• 3 – Voigt et al. (2021) Cleaner burning aviation fuels can reduce contrail cloudiness. Communications Earth and Environment.

Note: These materials were developed in 2025 for the Prebunking at Scale project, with support from the European Fact-Checking Standards Network.