Rainmaker CEO Augustus Doricko: cloud seeding had nothing to do with the Texas floods

the big seven and who's the maritime power? That's a good question. I think I think Microsoft has carved out a lot of territory that will be harder to hold on to. I'm not exactly sure how that how that maps. I think another question is which tech company is pro internet like free internet, right?

Is there if everybody wants their data walls and closed networks I would probably say Apple continental meta maritime maybe something like that might be right Apple like they don't need to go and invade the the Android ecosystem they need to just really control privacy what happens in their ecosystem 30% Apple tax versus Meta needs to do OOTH and acquire Instagram and and WhatsApp I don't know that that's just off the top of my head.

Apple with the the iOS uh Apple with the the iOS, you know, track that feels like build the wall updates like like you know app track and transparency. Build the wall. Tim Cook. No wonder Tim Cook got so along with 45. Maybe maybe do you have a wildly different take or No. No.

I mean it's just mostly fodder but I I basically agree with that like Apple or Apple and Oracle. I'd say like Continental Google Meta Maritime. Yep. Um, I like that though. But it's a good it's a good thought exercise. So, she clearly taught you something. Uh, well, fantastic.

Uh, thanks so much for hopping on on short notice. Uh, love the piece and, uh, thanks for publishing it. We'll talk to you soon. Well, you guys are killing it. Great being on. See you guys as well. Great to see you. Cheers. Bye. Um, really quickly, let me tell you about figma. com. Think bigger, build faster.

Figma helps design and development teams build great products together. You can get started for free at figma. com. And let me also tell you about Vanta. Automate compliance, manage risk, prove trust continuously.

Vanta's trust management platform takes the manual work out of your security and compliance process and replaces it with continuous automation. Whether you're pursuing your first framework or managing a complex think might be sock 2 time. It's probably sock time. com.

Well, our next guest is here, Augustus Dico, the CEO, founder of Rain Maker. Welcome to the stream, Augustus. How are you doing? Uh, John Jordy, thanks for having me. I am doing well.

Um, I uh am obviously talking to a lot of people about the flooding that's gone on in Texas and appreciate the opportunity to um clarify that rain maker and cloud seeding had nothing to do with the flooding that unfolded.

Um, and uh, even in spite of that, I think that it's a tragedy that it did happen and certainly don't want anybody to use this opportunity um, use this uh, controversy to blame cloud seating for the sake of popular political support.

And you may have seen that Marjgerie Taylor Green uh is proposing running a bill to ban all forms of weather modification based on those that we saw in the Florida state house legislature um earlier this year.

Uh I think it would be both disrespectful to the families involved and baseless uh and without any technical or scientific credibility if that legislation were to go through. So um I'm happy to talk about the course of events, what cloud setting is, what it's not uh here with you today.

Yeah, let's kick it off with um the the high level on what actually happened in Texas, where things stand now, the status of the rescue operations, and kind of the the timeline. Um that's more broad. Yeah, absolutely. So, um this phenomena, this flooding was global in scope.

Um it was referred to as a low probability, high impact event. Um I encourage people to go to Matthew Kapuchi uh on X. He gave a great outline. He's a meteorologist that has a lot of expertise on severe weather forecasting.

Um but but Tropical Storm Barry, the remnants of which blew into Texas, was going to cause inordinate flooding regardless. And uh that area of Texas is also known as flash flood alley because these events do happen.

Now 4 trillion gallons of precipitation occurring over the course of just a couple days is pretty out of distribution. Um but we are seeing an increase in these sorts of severe climatic events uh over time and especially down and around the Gulf.

So just to go over the timeline after having clarified that it was the remnants of tropical storm Barry and the convergence of uh large meoscale phenomena that induced that flooding. Um it was at about 1:00 a. m. on the 4th that the National Weather Service um issued a flash flood warning.

Uh, and then it was at about 4:00 a. m. on the 4th where they said that there was a life-threatening emergency underway.

Um, it was not uh it was over 2 days prior that Rain Maker had suspended all of its cloud seating operations in Texas because one, our forecasters and our meteorologists saw that there was going to be this severe weather event and we needn't operate to produce more water um when there was already the event coming.

But two, we suspended operations in accordance with the Texas Department of Licensing and Regulations uh suspension criteria where if there is a uh severe weather warning from the National Weather Service um or there is too much saturation of the soil, we have to ground operations.

And so we do so both voluntarily and in accordance with existing statutes. Okay. So, uh, the cloud CD operation that happened prior to the storm, uh, who was the client? Like, I mean, who I assume someone was paying you. Sometimes it's the government, sometimes it's an indiv individual or farmer or business.

Um, walk me through, uh, where they were, who they are, what their goal is by procuring your services. Sure. So, it's obvious that at this moment in time um that region of Texas does not need more water.

However, throughout the western United States, farms, uh, conservationists, governments concerned with their aquafer supply of water and also reservoirs for both industrial and residential drinking water, uh, contract with rain maker to produce more water via cloud seating.

And in the case of Texas, the South Texas Weather Modification Association, the West Texas Weather Modification Association, and multiple other uh entities exist as conglomerations of both counties and individual farms that pay for cloud seating services to one, water their crops, two fill up the reservoirs that they irrigate their crops with, and three recharge the aquifers like the Ogalala that has been severely drawn down and then puts all of these farmers at risk of not being able to grow, not being able to do business because of a historic trap.

Okay. So, what um would the proposed ban just because what what I'm getting at is like I'm wondering if uh like if the government is paying for cloud seating operations, like the easier lever might just be to decrease the funding to the government.

But it seems like Marjorie Taylor Green is pushing for some other legislation that wouldn't just be, hey, buy less of this service because we don't need it and instead this service should never be bought at all. So why is there the distinction there?

Like is is is most of the money that's going into one of these associations uh private farmer capital or is it a split? Like h how does that actually break down?

So right now it's largely public municipal money that is going into these weather modification programs to increase water supply when there is drought or in preparation for drought.

Um the bill that has been forecasted that has been proposed by Marjgery Taylor Green uh would wholesale ban all forms of weather modification be it cloud seating, solar radiation management or what they supposed to be chemtrails.

I mean, very transparently, I think that a lot of the concern around weather modification is actually conflating baseless notions of chemtrails with a very practical American technology that can and will and does benefit our farmers, our ecosystems, our industrial water needs, and our residential water needs.

If this legislation were to go through, not only would it deprive all of those interests and all of those Americans from having water from cloud seating, but it would also be against America's interest at a geopolitical level because China recently, I think on the last time I was on TVPN, I talked about how they had a $300 million annual budget for their weather modification program.

That as of 2025, has been up to$1. 4 billion. Um, that is extremely consequential. And I think that if we were to ban who controls uh or banning Americans from uh controlling weather modification technology uh that would put us at a meaningful disadvantage. Now all of this to say um people deserve transparency.

They deserve clear regulatory framework so that they know whether modification operations are safe and being conducted in a responsible manner and with government oversight and accountability if ever there are uh negative consequences to cloud seating. Again, there haven't been any in the case of Texas.

But I think that the reasonable next steps are to more stringently regulate who is allowed to cloud seed, define what the concepts of operation are that are permissible, define the suspension criteria at a federal level rather than leaving it purely to the states so that anybody that wants to know about weather modification can look at the data and scrutinize it and ensure that it's being conducted safely.

And also just to build trust because the weather modification act from 1972 that currently outlines uh the weather modification reporting act of 1972 that outlines how we have to report to the federal government is you know 50 years old.

Um we need more scrutiny on these programs for the sake of public trust and accountability. Um and that seems like a reasonable next step that was also recommended by the government accountability office in their report on cloud seating and weather modification earlier this year. Mhm.

What was the scale of the general water mod uh sort of sorry weather modification activities on July 2nd? It was you guys a bunch was there a bunch of other players operating?

Is there generally a lot of players or is it a pretty is it is it a fairly small number of of um kind of service providers uh that are that are participating in these programs? Yeah, Jordy, you may have seen uh the prolific hustle [ __ ] on X. com posting about this a little while ago.

He said that I was the CEO of the largest and most powerful weather modification company in the world. Um and I saw somebody compare somebody was comparing weather modification tech to being saying it was more dangerous than nuclear arms bombs. That was kind of crazy.

And then I also saw some people just showing like general flight logs of like commercial airplanes. Like obviously there's a lot of people have every right to be angry and demand answers. It's such a tragic Yeah.

incident but but yeah I'm curious to get into the the scale of you know kind of maybe late June early July what was going on broadly. Yeah absolutely. So there's one other cloud seating operator in Texas called uh seating operations and atmospheric research soar.

They're responsible for operations over the rolling plains uh weather modification association which is significantly farther northwest of Kirk County. Um on July 2nd we conducted one 19minute cloud seating flight where we released about 70 gram of silver iodide and 500 gram of salt table salt.

um that was released at about 1,600 feet above ground level into two clouds that dissipated over the course of two hours after seating them.

The amount of time that those aerosols could have been suspended in the atmosphere is less than the time between when uh we were seating and the onset of rains from uh the remnants of tropical storm Gary.

and the amount of material that we dispersed could not come anywhere close to inducing the precipitation, the 4 trillion gallons of precipitation that did come from that event. So, yeah. And and I'm I'm assuming you guys like have records or you keep records of like the radar showing these different cloud formations.

So you you're you're it's not just hey we looked and we think it dissipated, but it's like you can actually you have like you know basically a map that's live updating. Is is that the right way to think about it?

Not only do we keep records for our own research purposes and operational purposes, but we're required to keep records by the Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation. And those are accessible online as are the reports on our seating activities.

And if anybody is interested in those, then you can ask for them from the TDLR. Um I I'm I'm curious. Um when when the the flooding happened in Dubai, I want to say it was a year or two ago. Um Dubai is known for their cloud seating operations. It's very dry place.

Uh and makes sense why they would want to uh increase precipitation. A lot of people uh maybe the same types of accounts that have been that have been blaming you were quick to blame it on cloud seating.

Throughout history, has there ever been any major kind of flooding event that that people were able to say yes 100% this was caused by weather modification activities or is the tech not even powerful enough yet to to do something like that? So I I think that there's probably three points to touch on.

Um the first of which is that it wasn't until 2017 that attribution had been uh physical attribution of cloud seating's effects had been seen and proven in an academic context.

And so with new advents in radar technology, namely dual polarization radar, we're able to much more clearly monitor what the effect from cloud seating is.

In previous operations, it was extraordinarily difficult to see what your effect was because we could not measure the cloud dynamics and the cloud microfysics that were changing as you were seating. Um, so that's the first point.

The second point is that and again I'm trying to be and will continue to try to be maximally transparent about our operations and historic weather modification.

Um there was something called Operation Popey during the Vietnam War where the deliberate intention of cloud seeding was to cause precipitation that would uh like cause flooding and then impede supply chains on the Ho Chi Min Trail.

Um now the extent to which that was effective because we didn't have good satellite imagery or dual pole radar is outstanding.

Now that said, lastly, third point, we have suspension criteria that are given to us not just by the TDLR in Texas, but every state wherein we operate because if there already is too much saturation of the soil or if there is uh an oncoming severe weather event that the National Weather Service has uh notified us not to seed, then we ought not do that to increase the severity of precipitation.

So there are suspension criteria because there are limits on what we ought to do with this technology um so as not to cause flooding and only reap the rewards from it right for our farms for our ecosystems and for our national security interest as well right like if we don't have access to weather modification technology if we don't regulate this at a federal level and ensure that there's accountability and attribution for these activities then other people other nation states could be conducting weather mod in the vicinity of or on American soil without any accountability.

And so that's why I am advocating for way more regulatory scrutiny from the federal government for cloud seating and weather mod ops. Uh w walk through some of the history of the the Chinese weather modification uh strategies. Um we we heard about the the the flooding in Dubai that was kind of unclear.

Have there been any notable or confirmed negative outcomes from China spending I mean you said $300 million a year, something like that. that that seems like a lot of cloud seating. Seems like if there was a surface area where there could be mistakes made, they would have kind of explored that.

Um I remember the the pre-Olympics they were doing cloud seating or just kind of bringing down like the the dirt in the atmosphere. Um and you know people kind of learn from that. Okay, you get acid rain when you do that uh in in in particular.

But uh have there been any case studies from China that uh we should be learning from in America? um case studies from China with adverse weather coming from their cloud seating operations. Yeah. Anything like that like like something where like okay they they've done a lot of business push this to the limit.

They've put they've done this at scale. If there's going to be rough edges or mishaps, I would have I I suspect that we would have seen evidence of that over there. They would have had an accidental flood or something like that happen over there. If they're doing it at scale, you would expect to have seen it from China.

Um, however, you would also probably expect and understand that they're a relatively inscrutable country that does not report on their activities very uh openly and objectively.

Um, now that said, one thing that we do know about the weather mod program that they do have going is that they're planning to buildundund 100,000 ground generators on the Tibetan plateau. So rain maker uh is primarily using drones for our operations.

Uh we also have inherited some ground generators from previous operations. These are essentially um aerosolizing units on the tops of mountains. They can disperse material into clouds uh when the clouds intersect those mountain tops themselves. Is that like a cannon that fires the material into the cloud or No, no.

You you you might recall my my initial inclination to use something like that because it is used in China. Um, but no, it's it's essentially like a uh uh a smoke stack of sorts, a very small smoke stack that releases those airs there.

But in building uh a 100,000 of these ground generators and also using the Wingong 2 and a bunch of their other military drones for aerial cloud seating, um they're turning Tibet into uh a reservoir, a a snowpack reservoir of unprecedented scale that will feed more water into the agricultural basins in southern and eastern China.

And I think that uh you know although again this is something that needs to be transparently reported on and regulated um depriving American farmers in the west especially as a congressperson from Georgia right where there is not as severe uh reliance on cloud seating to produce water would be against America's interest.

Mhm.

Jordy, I guess I'm I'm trying to I mean the the the the my question uh is it feels like it it feels like candidly it will be hard to come it'll be hard to find uh any type of allies uh in Texas on the ground in Texas maybe aside aside from from the farmers but but I'm curious um you know the the the various different groups you know what what what the reaction from them has been in terms of you know if they're you know it's the the reality is is um water scarcity affects all every person in Texas but only a few people truly feel it right it's a much smaller group because everybody goes to their sink they turn on the water they turn on a hose outside they go to a grocery store, there's water, there's produce, it's not something that people necessarily feel.

And so I'm curious where um you know, you obviously are going to defend weather modification um because you you believe in in the many different ways it can have a positive impact, but I'm curious uh who you think uh the other players that will will be on your side as the industry I mean the industry was not in a good spot prior to this.

it's in a much worse spot um now and I know you've been flying all over the country making sure that it doesn't get banned. So um I'm curious what what you think the kind of coalition that will kind of form uh around you. Yeah. Yeah.

Well, so I I actually think I uh just from my own experience over the course of the last few days disagree with the two points that you made, right?

like it it has neither been hard to find allies for cloud seating weather modification in Texas nor do I think the technology and the industry is positioned worse now than it was prior to this weekend.

Um, and regarding the first point, uh, there are some people that I think, um, are probably not in good faith engaging with this because they have some preconceived notions about chemtrails or otherwise, um, and don't themselves want to scrutinize the data to back up how our operations are different and beneficial, uh, whereas chemtrails, as they believe them to be, are, you know, uh, malevolent.

Um, the vast majority of people that I've interacted with online, on the phone, and in person are rightfully curious, skeptical, concerned.

some, you know, uh, more than others obviously, but in scrutinizing the data and having these conversations and learning about what cloud seating is, pretty unilaterally, people are supportive of it, provided that there is a regulatory framework more stringent than the one we have now that ensures that it's safe.

Um this is true both of just individuals um that are not themselves farmers but obviously farmers, water managers, uh government officials too. Um I welcome any questions that people do have both online and via email about what our activities are, what our policy recommendations are.

Um and and I'm I'm grateful that there are a lot of people that understand one our operations did not contribute to the flooding, but two that even if there was a flood now, it doesn't mean that there is always enough water and having access to a technology to produce more water for farms and otherwise uh would be beneficial.

Like people want a more green lush uh country. Um yeah, I'm curious. Uh, I'm sure you've spent plenty of time thinking about this, but is would there be a way to apply the existing technology you have almost in a defensive way in, you know, theoretically uh see a hurricane while it's still offshore, something like that.

uh or the or or you know one of the issues here there was just so much water in the atmosphere that rolled over a heavily you know populated area and then it's got it's it's gravity right it's got to come down um you know is there an application of the technology that could over time strategically prevent you know or or act defensively against the conditions that create flash floods.

It's it's a very worthwhile question for you to ask and for us to ask ourselves collectively. Um right now again rain maker only does precipitation enhancement operations for all those constituencies that I listed before.

However, in the past the United States government funded uh project storm fury which was a series of attempts to reduce the severity of hurricanes over the Atlantic before they broke against the eastern seabboard.

Um again, we didn't have the appropriate understanding of atmospheric science or the radar or the satellite data necessary to appropriately do that. However, uh severe weather is something that is like a geopolitical risk, a national security risk. Um it causes damage and it is fundamentally a physics problem, right?

A physics and chemistry problem. Is there technology now that could mitigate severe weather like this? Um no. And Rain Maker doesn't have it.

Is it possible to someday provided we invest in Noah in the National Weather Service in the appropriate research into cloud seating such that we could reduce the severity of severe weather? Absolutely. And I am entirely in favor of that provided it is done in a responsible manner.

Um, and if we were to ban it wholesale, then not only would we lose access to precipitation enhancement, but we'd lose out on any potential of at the very least better forecasting for these systems and warning people early, but also the even greater and more consequential beneficial potential of reducing severe weather in the future.

And so I think that the United States government and Rain Maker should and and are absolutely interested in mitigating severe weather in a manner similar to Project Storm Fury. That makes sense.

I I I think the PR what you were getting at Jordy like the PR difficulty here is that like when there's not enough water, crop yields are lower, prices go up, but it's very distributed. Everyone feels it a little bit.

Whereas when there's too much water and there's a flash flood and individuals die, you have a very it's a very emotional, very uh it's very concentrated. The pain's very concentrated.

And so that's why this this story I mean normally normally when there's a natural disaster there's you can you can critique the government for their response to it but there's not somebody sitting there that a scapegoat right and so it's easy it's it's you know whe whether it's online accounts that are just engagement farming or it's a politician y uh you know scape you know the the the concern is that uh and your concern is that the industry becomes a scapegoat and uh America loses a capability that our adversaries clearly care a lot about.

Yeah. My my question is like we're we're seeing this bifurcation. It seems like Ted Cruz came out in support of the idea that cloud seating had nothing to do with the Texas floods. Marjorie Taylor Green has taken kind of the other side of that. Um my question is like these are politicians at the end of the day.

They're not independent scientists. Who can we go to? Who can the population go to for like a truly independent review of this situation?

Like is there is there some sort of independent governing body or are there are there respected scientists that kind of don't have a financial or you know political incentive one way or another?

Um h how do you think the uh the the populace should be satis obviously you're telling your side of the story you're going direct you're explaining things you're laying out the data but what uh what what do you expect people to look for in an independent analyst? Yeah. Yeah.

So, for one, um I think that Noah, the National Weather Service, the National Center for Atmospheric Research, um all of those are great third party entities that can review the information, corroborate the information that we've provided. Um pro provided of course that they continue to exist and remain funded. Sure.

Um I think that this probably demonstrates why it is important that we should retain some capability nationally to forecast and research the atmosphere because there's there should be some body that's capable of reviewing this to ensure that it's safe.

Um I'll also say, you know, regarding the uh scapegoat dynamics that that exist right now, um I've thought about this pretty prayerfully and intently over the last few days.

And when there is a calamity of some sort, like I I've been trying to think about why people are uh say coming after rain maker or uh angry at Rain Maker.

And I think that when there is a calamity of this type, um if there was someone responsible, if there was someone or something that could be held to account, then in holding them to account, uh you could supposedly prevent this kind of thing from happening in the future.

Um the trouble with a true natural disaster as this was is that there is nobody to be held accountable. Um and that makes the world a lot more tragic because it means that things like this will persist. Um they they will