MTG Introduces Bill to Ban Weather Modification
In a bold legislative move likely to energize both supporters and skeptics alike, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) has announced the introduction of a bill aimed at banning government-sponsored weather modification. The bill, officially titled the “Weather Modification Ban Act of 2025,” seeks to outlaw the funding, development, testing, and deployment of technologies that manipulate atmospheric conditions, including cloud seeding and aerosol spraying, which critics argue have the potential for catastrophic environmental and health consequences.
Greene, a vocal opponent of what she describes as “climate engineering experiments,” stated that Americans deserve transparency and protection from secretive programs that may be altering the skies without public consent. “This is about accountability,” Greene said. “We don’t elect bureaucrats to play God with the weather or tamper with the air we breathe.” She emphasized the importance of defending both constitutional rights and environmental stewardship, values that she said are too often disregarded by federal agencies operating in the shadows.
The bill comes as public concern grows over the potential misuse of geoengineering technologies. While some scientists and defense contractors tout weather modification as a tool for combating droughts or enhancing military readiness, critics argue it poses serious risks. Environmental experts aligned with Greene’s concerns cite the potential for unintended consequences, including ecosystem disruption, atmospheric imbalances, and long-term climatic side effects that are poorly understood.
Weather modification, once confined to science fiction, has moved into a gray zone of real-world experimentation. Projects involving cloud seeding, stratospheric aerosol injection, and ionospheric manipulation have been quietly tested across several states. The U.S. military has explored weather control as a strategic advantage since the 1960s, most notably during the Vietnam War through Operation Popeye, a program that artificially extended monsoon seasons to hamper enemy movement.
Although mainstream media outlets often dismiss citizen concerns about “chemtrails” or weather manipulation as conspiracy theories, declassified documents and patents reveal that atmospheric experimentation is not only plausible but actively pursued. Greene’s bill brings long-simmering suspicions into the public arena, demanding transparency from federal agencies like the Department of Defense, NASA, and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).
According to Newsmax, the legislation would also prohibit “the testing or deployment of high-altitude aerosol sprays, electromagnetic radiation, or other forms of geoengineering by federal agencies or their contractors.” The bill would also require Congress to be notified of any weather-altering proposals from private or international actors operating within U.S. airspace.
Supporters of the bill argue that Greene is taking a stand against what they see as covert experiments that violate constitutional protections and environmental ethics. “Whether it’s to manipulate the weather or to carry out climate agendas under the radar, Americans deserve to know what’s happening in our skies,” said one supporter who attended Greene’s announcement in Georgia. “This is about health, freedom, and the truth.”
Trending: Hypocrisy 101 – Mexicans Furious as Americans Flee to Mexico
While establishment voices continue to mock or marginalize weather modification concerns, conservative Christian communities have expressed alarm about man-made efforts to dominate nature. Many see these technologies as an attempt to usurp the role of the Creator, warning that mankind is venturing into areas of authority that rightly belong to God alone. Biblical stewardship calls for responsible care of the earth—not experimental control over God’s creation.
Greene’s office cited a number of studies and patents to support the bill’s urgency. Among them are public records detailing chemical dispersion tests, ionospheric heaters like the HAARP (High-Frequency Active Auroral Research Program), and international discussions around “solar radiation management”—a euphemism for artificial sunlight blocking. These technologies, the bill warns, may have long-term repercussions that are still unknown but potentially devastating.
Unsurprisingly, the bill has already drawn criticism from the left, with opponents labeling it as fearmongering and based on “pseudoscience.” Yet, Greene counters that blind faith in government-led science is what has led to unregulated mRNA experimentation, failed pandemic policies, and ongoing distrust in public institutions. “This is no longer about fringe speculation,” she said. “We have evidence. We have documents. And now, we need action.”
The legislation is also gaining traction among a growing segment of lawmakers and citizens who are disillusioned with climate alarmism and globalist environmental schemes. Critics of international climate initiatives argue that weather modification technologies could be weaponized—either to create artificial disasters or to coerce political outcomes by tampering with food supplies, rainfall patterns, or crop cycles.
As the bill makes its way through the House, Greene has called on fellow legislators to support the effort, noting that the time for passive observation is over. “We have to draw a line. The American people should not be treated like test subjects in government experiments,” she said. “This is about sovereignty, truth, and the future of our planet.”
The Weather Modification Ban Act of 2025 is poised to become one of the most controversial bills of the year, with significant implications for science policy, environmental regulation, and national security. While the mainstream media remains dismissive, Greene’s push signals a broader shift in public dialogue—one that demands answers and accountability for actions long shrouded in secrecy.
If passed, the bill would make the United States the first major nation to formally outlaw atmospheric manipulation. While the science behind weather modification remains complex and highly debated, the political momentum behind Greene’s proposal suggests that skepticism of unchecked government programs is no longer a fringe issue—it’s a growing movement.
