Playing God: Can We Control the Weather? 8/05 discovery ch.

[miamicanes177]

Discovery channel is airing "Can We Control the Weather" on August 5th at 8pm et. The preview on the website says, "In the wake of Hurricane Katrina, some scientists believe that global warming will make super storms even more deadly. Explorer Josh Bernstein investigates whether scientists will ever be able to tame one of Nature's most destructive forces: hurricanes."

Before seeing the show, what does everyone think about hurricane/weather modification? Should we even be considering such a thing?

[Cyclone1]

I'll be watching that. Let me just say, weather modification is a bad, bad, bad idea. Previous mixed results with the trajectory of seeded hurricanes makes me think it'll never be possible to properly weaken a hurricane safely. Don't mess with the weather, it's bad juju. The idea of trying to dissipate hurricanes makes me sick.

[hawkeh]

I'll be watching that. Let me just say, weather modification is a bad, bad, bad idea. Previous mixed results with the trajectory of seeded hurricanes makes me think it'll never be possible to properly weaken a hurricane safely. Don't mess with the weather, it's bad juju. The idea of trying to dissipate hurricanes makes me sick.

I agree completely, theres a reason why powerful hurricanes are sometimes needed. It's too bad people want to play God...

[x-y-no]

Seems like a recipe for unintended consequences to me.

[cpdaman]

i know they can modify some weather, make rain clouds more persistant, but as far an controlling the weather no, modifying it you bet, with hurricane's (why not) . russian woodpecker, and alaskan Haarp are intresting beasts, but do they, who knows, but somethings are NEED TO KNOW, and NICE to know, and the public doesn't need to know, so they will never know 4 sure.

denying may help some sleep better, if they even care.

[Cyclone1]

I can see it now...

"Hooray! Seeding the hurricane weakened it from 155mph to 145! Unfortunatley, now its heading directly towards Miami instead of recurving like it was supposed too. Oh, darn, but the seeding worked!"

Ugh....

[Steve]

Dead set against any weather modification, though I could understand the desire for slight modification. I mean if a Cat 5 was bearing down and they could knock it back to a Cat 2 or something, fine. Go ahead, it would be hard to argue the immediate benefits. But hurricanes, like the rest of the weather, do not exist in a vacuum. Downstream possibilities are endless from altering civilizations to bringing on another ice age or whatever. Mother Nature will always win out over man in the end.

Steve

[jrod]

...if a Cat 5 was bearing down and they could knock it back to a Cat 2 or something, fine. Go ahead, it would be hard to argue the immediate benefits. But hurricanes, like the rest of the weather, do not exist in a vacuum. Downstream possibilities are endless from altering civilizations to bringing on another ice age or whatever. Mother Nature will always win out over man in the end.

Steve

If this were possible I am willing to bet it would make the field of winds much larger, thus causing moderate damage of a huge area and maybe increasing the likely hood of tornadoes.

Don't mess with nature.

[Cyclone1]

...if a Cat 5 was bearing down and they could knock it back to a Cat 2 or something, fine. Go ahead, it would be hard to argue the immediate benefits. But hurricanes, like the rest of the weather, do not exist in a vacuum. Downstream possibilities are endless from altering civilizations to bringing on another ice age or whatever. Mother Nature will always win out over man in the end.

Steve

If this were possible I am willing to bet it would make the field of winds much larger, thus causing moderate damage of a huge area and maybe increasing the likely hood of tornadoes.

Don't mess with nature.

In addition to a larger windfeild, seeding a hurricane near land has the posibillity of causing super crazy flooding.

[Steve]

>>If this were possible I am willing to bet it would make the field of winds much larger, thus causing moderate damage of a huge area and maybe increasing the likely hood of tornadoes.

Allegedly (and that's according to my one kid who saw the previews for the show), they have it computerized. I'm not arguing that they should do it, but look at a system like Hurricane Mitch. You have the choice: 13,000 die or you modify the storm and lose maybe 2,000. The guy making that call has no choice. You do the modification.

The problem with this type of technology is that they are liable to release it into nature like they did with genetically modified crops without mandating a closed environment. And let's face it, the atmosphere ain't exactly a closed environment for experimental purposes.

JMO

Steve

[AnnularCane]

...if a Cat 5 was bearing down and they could knock it back to a Cat 2 or something, fine. Go ahead, it would be hard to argue the immediate benefits. But hurricanes, like the rest of the weather, do not exist in a vacuum. Downstream possibilities are endless from altering civilizations to bringing on another ice age or whatever. Mother Nature will always win out over man in the end.

Steve

If this were possible I am willing to bet it would make the field of winds much larger, thus causing moderate damage of a huge area and maybe increasing the likely hood of tornadoes.

Don't mess with nature.

Not to mention there could still be a large storm surge.

Sometimes humans can be too arrogant for their own good.

[Cyclone1]

>>If this were possible I am willing to bet it would make the field of winds much larger, thus causing moderate damage of a huge area and maybe increasing the likely hood of tornadoes.

Allegedly (and that's according to my one kid who saw the previews for the show), they have it computerized. I'm not arguing that they should do it, but look at a system like Hurricane Mitch. You have the choice: 13,000 die or you modify the storm and lose maybe 2,000. The guy making that call has no choice. You do the modification.

The problem with this type of technology is that they are liable to release it into nature like they did with genetically modified crops without mandating a closed environment. And let's face it, the atmosphere ain't exactly a closed environment for experimental purposes.

JMO

Steve

Mitch is kind of a bad example. It made landfall as a weak category one, so it wasn't strength that caused Mitch's high seath toll.

[Steve]

>>Mitch is kind of a bad example. It made landfall as a weak category one, so it wasn't strength that caused Mitch's high seath toll.

Yeah damn these braincells, I had forgotten that. But it probably retained some of the energy it had (ala Katrina) even though I'm pretty sure it was a smaller system. But it, in the adverse, does make a point regarding remnants and the amount of rainfall they can bring. I don't know though, pick any Cat 3, 4 or 5 bearing down (Katrina would be another bad example because of the water it piled up and accumulated in the middle Gulf) hypothetically in a poorer area. Say a Cat 5 is heading for the Brownsville/Matamoras area. Then assume 2,500 people are going to lose their lives. What price would it take and how many lives before we'd take the risk. There's got to be some number of people or value in dollars of real estate that would prompt them to use the technology. I already mentioned downstream implications (ignoring cause and effect), so it's possible that the strong system has a place when it gets caught up in the westerlies to bring some warmth to somewhere in the northern latitudes. Maybe lives get lost in cold in Northern Europe or Asia as a result too. But if you can save lives immediately, I'd argue that there will be a level where this would get a green light (better or worse of course). That would arguably be a good use of technology.

Steve

[Cookiely]

I have another question. If Andrew had been making landfall in Miami and they could modify it to hit Homestead, would it be justified? The idea of making such a decision makes me ill.

[cpdaman]

oh those gm crops were great, specially how the smoking gun is the knowledge that monsanto study's and other study's determing the toxicity of the bT toxins were based on natural toxins, not the hybrid genetically altered toxins, which in limited studies point to the fact it can tear up the lining of a bee's intestine and kill it's immune system thanks to the exponetnailly higher increase in toxicity. and now we have dead bee's with up to 6 infections within them. gee what a mystery. people are confused, this matches nothing in the literature of bee history.
well BT toxins are new and they are very very deadly to bee's apparently.

sorry for the rant but i had to dig for the monsanto study loopholes about 3 months ago when i looked into things.

as for the weather, there have been a significant number of massive hurricanes that weakened before landfall like katrina, and rita maybe they can do something, all i know is i love the weather and i would rather not know. but what i do know is if there was this technology THE PUBLIC would NEVER EVER KNOW, the second guessing would be endless, especially if they were only in testing mode, or refining there skills, but like i said i dont want to know

[Extremeweatherguy]

A weather experiment gone wrong sounds like a good plot for a hollywood blockbuster movie..but not for real life.

I think it would be smartest if we do not attempt to mess with mother nature's weather patterns. It could very well have disasterous end results.

[Extremeweatherguy]

Here is a possible case of hurricane seeding gone wrong:

On 13 Oct 1947, the U.S. Military (as part of Project Cirrus involving General Electric) dropped 80 kg of dry ice into a hurricane in the Atlantic Ocean, safely off the eastern coast of the USA. (Havens, Jiusto, Vonnegut, 1978, pp. 41-42) The hurricane changed direction and traveled inland, where it did extensive damage to property in Georgia. The U.S. military classified the data from the seeding of this hurricane to frustrate litigation. (Ball 1949, pp. 225-226, p. 233)

Attorneys for General Electric reviewed and censored Langmuir's scientific publications to avoid tort liability for damage by this hurricane. A biography of Langmuir says "For the first time in Langmuir's long career [38 years] at GE, officials occasionally wanted to know in advance what he was going to say in his public reports." (Rosenfeld, p. 205)

Langmuir (1953, p. 212 of Collected Works) believed that there was approximately a 99% probability that this hurricane's change of direction was the result of the cloud seeding. Langmuir's opinion about the effect of the cloud seeding on this hurricane is not mentioned in any of his publications in scientific journals, but is mentioned in the 1953 final report on Project Cirrus, which was classified by the U.S. Military. It is likely that attorneys for General Electric directed Langmuir not to make any public admission that cloud seeding caused the hurricane to change direction, in order to avoid litigation against General Electric by victims of the hurricane.

Subsequent analysis of the data by meteorologists showed that this hurricane had already begun to change its direction when the seeding was done. (Mook, Hoover, and Hoover, 1957) A modern assessment is: "... it seems very unlikely that the 1947 seeding could have had much affect on the hurricane except for the seeded clouds." (Gentry, 1974, p. 506)

I am not sure what to believe. hmm..

BTW, I found this article on the following website: http://www.rbs2.com/w2.htm

[terstorm1012]

Couple things
1. We already do influence weather and climate through our land uses, indirectly. (note I said not one thing about emissions...don't jump on me!) Urban Heat islands are quite real.
2. The Oct. 1947 storm probably didn't change direction due to cloud seeding, and the 1969 experiments with Hurricane Debbie were inconclusive. STORMFURY eventually died because the Atlantic fell into a quiet period, and other things.
3. I think that if we can avoid messing with nature, we should do so whenever possible.

[O Town]

I saw the advertisements for this, I will definitely be watching. Looks interesting, but I don't think no one should mess with Mother Nature. She has a rhyme and reason behind everything she does even if it means total devastation to us.

[JonathanBelles]

Ill defiantly be watching if I can remember. I think it will be very interesting.