Evidence on Cloud Seeding required for questions to be asked

A number of constituents have raised concerns with me about weather manipulation, also referred to as cloud seeding and rain seeding.

Cloud-seeding is a weather-modification practice used to artificially create or promote additional rain/snow from existing clouds. Chemicals are added into a cloud to promote rain formation – usually silver iodide, potassium iodide, or solid carbon dioxide (dry ice), and sometimes liquid propane and table salt. This can be done from the air or the ground.

The success and safety of cloud-seeding remains debated depending on what method is used. Estimates place successful cloud-seeding programs squeezing an extra 3% of precipitation out of an existing cloud bank. Other studies could not determine a net-benefit. In short, the effectiveness of cloud seeding appears to be unclear.

Australia stopped engaging in any kind of consistent cloud-seeding in the 1960s due to environmental concerns. There have been a few trials undertaken, with the last occurring in 2016.

In order to raise questions about these allegations of more recent cloud seeding than 2016 to the government, it is necessary to have solid empirical evidence to interrogate them over.

The evidence needs to be scientific, solid and accurately measured. It needs more: It needs to be in a logical scientific point that proves cause-and-effect. We need to KNOW who loaded specific identified chemicals into a plane, who flew the plane, who gave the orders to release in the air, who measured the chemicals in the air or on the ground, the specific linked effects, …

A picture of an unusual cloud shape is not proof of anything. A storm is not proof of anything. An aircraft vapour trail is not proof of anything. Chasing such claims would bring ridicule and undermine credibility. It needs hard data, solid proof of someone doing a specific action or causing a specific event AND it needs the measured, documented effect of that action or event. There must be a logical scientific framework that scientifically proves cause-and-effect.

Treat it as if you’re going to be giving evidence under oath in a court of law to be used as solid evidence convicting someone guilty.

This evidence must be rock-solid and contained in documents. Examples of evidence that meets this standard include flight paths, flight registrations or tail numbers, government approvals, other permits or evidence of material being loaded onto a plane.

This evidence must be temporally associated (i.e. close in time) to a claimed rain event.

For example, concerns about cloud seeding were raised in relation to the 2022 Lismore and South-East Queensland floods. Satisfactory evidence in relation to this might be a flight path, combined with evidence of a permit or approval, which was timed closely to the rain event.

Evidence that would not be satisfactory to raise with the government include photos of the sky or media releases relating to previous trial operations many years ago.

With satisfactory evidence we can raise issues and ask questions. To date, no one has been able to provide satisfactory evidence that is temporally associated with an Australian rain event.

While I take very seriously my role to serve and protect the people of Queensland and Australia, please understand that every minute my staff team and I devote to claims is a minute lost in prosecuting other important issues such as the climate scammers destroying our energy, manufacturing and agriculture; the Covid mismanagement with untested injections hurting and killing Australians and removal of basic human rights; the recovery of farmers’ rights to use their property and restore food security; the corruption of water irrigation allocations; restoring honest governance including compliance with our constitution; restoring sovereignty that major parties have handed to the UN and World Economic Forum; and holding the government and major parties accountable.

Sometimes I am the only or dominant federal politician challenging the government and major parties on these issues hurting and killing Australians. That makes me a target for the mouthpiece media who try to destroy my credibility as a way of protecting their owners’ globalist agenda. That does not bother me because I get the data first and that enables me to shake off criticism as fake news or media lies protecting the globalist predators who own much of their mouthpiece media internationally. The best defence from these attacks is truth. That requires solid data proving cause-and-effect.

I will go public on issues only once I am well informed with solid scientific evidence linking cause-and-effect.

One of the sadnesses around the climate scam and Covid mismanagement is that both are destroying real science’s credibility.

Proper, objective science has given us our modern way of life and lifestyle including longer life expectancy, safer lives, healthier lives, easier and more secure lives, greater entertainment, remarkably wider options, choices and more comfort. Sadly, the corruption and distortion of science in Covid and climate alarm are destroying science’s credibility. I am working to restore scientific integrity that is essential to human progress. Millions of current and future lives are at stake. This is a matter of live and death.

If you believe you have obtained documentary evidence that fits the criteria outlined above, please immediately send it through our contact form below.

Send your evidence