Archives and History Initiative, by Disty Mahmud ‘26 and Yuruo Zhang ‘27
On April 30th, the Archives and History Initiative hosted Professor Joseph Giacomelli, who presented on his research paper, Unnatural Rain: Legitimizing Weather Modification in the Cold War U.S. The talk explored how weather modification, especially cloud seeding, was framed and justified during the mid-20th century in the United States, despite scientific uncertainty and widespread public skepticism. Eleven students and four professors attended the event.
Professor Giacomelli opened with a personal anecdote about his introduction to the world of weather modification when he was a college student. There, he encountered weather practitioners, who piqued his curiosity in the subject. Afterwards, he attended a panel in Wyoming that discussed cloud seeding, which further sparked his interest.
Rather than focusing solely on the technological aspects of weather modification, Giacomelli emphasized the intellectual rationale behind it. He drew extensively from The Journal of Weather Modification. His central research question: how was weather modification legitimized amid unreliable results and public controversy?
Professor Giacomelli explained key strategies for gaining legitimacy, as well as some of the challenges to the credibility of weather modification research. During the Cold War, weather modification was part of a broader “techno-solutionist” ethos. However, it faced significant obstacles. Firstly, there was significant scientific uncertainty. The results of the weather modification were inconsistent. Even more, its effectiveness could not be established due to the absence of “control” weather conditions. Secondly, the public blamed some natural disasters on weather modification, raising ecological and ethical concerns and even lawsuits. Moreover, religious groups also opposed the modification, as a defence for the divinity of God. Resistance was so strong that some practitioners recommended secrecy: “Let sleeping dogs lie,” as one source put it in 1973.
Next, Professor Giacomelli delved deeper into several strategies of legitimization. To gain public and institutional support, cloud-seeding advocates employed several strategies. Practitioners framed weather modification as an extension of nature itself. This view likened environmental intervention to moral or social order. Also, some of the practitioners combined technocratic authority with a wild-west and frontier-style experimentation. Though skeptical of computational modeling, citing the chaotic nature of weather systems, they claimed it was easier to control the weather than predict it. Lastly, Weather modification was portrayed as essential in the geopolitical conflict with the Soviet Union. Advocates used euphemisms to veil militaristic motives, while also promoting free enterprise and private experimentation. This was alongside emphasized capitalist rhetoric, positioning weather modification as an entrepreneurship.
Professor Giacomelli concluded by reflecting on the broader implications of his research. He posed open questions about parallels with contemporary geoengineering and its potential ethical, environmental, and justice-related concerns. Prof. Giacomelli received questions and comments from both students and faculty. One audience member suggested that legitimization often happens at the margins, and that it would be worthwhile to consider the divide between the urban and rural.
The talk offered insights into how Cold War ideologies, environmental ethics, and scientific uncertainty come together in the history of weather modification.
