Present

Arundhati Roy to face trial under anti-terror law

India’s authorities have sanctioned the prosecution of award-winning author-activist Arundhati Roy and former professor at the Central University of Kashmir Showkat Hussain under a stringent

_______________________________________________________

India's authorities have sanctioned the prosecution of award-winning author-activist Arundhati Roy and former professor at the Central University of Kashmir Showkat Hussain under a stringent anti-terror law for allegedly making provocative speeches at an event in New Delhi in 2010.

The sanction to try Roy, the author best known for her novel "The God of Small Things" which won the Booker Prize in 1997, and Hossain under Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act was granted by Delhi's Lt. Governor Vinai Kumar Saxena, officials in his office said.
Last October, Saxena had granted sanction to prosecute Roy and Hossain in the same case under section 196 of CrPC for commission of offences punishable under a milder law of Indian Penal Code: 153A (promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language and doing acts prejudicial to maintenance of harmony), 153B (imputations, assertions prejudicial to national-integration) and 505 (statements conducing to public mischief).

Under Indian Penal Code sections 153A, 153B and 505, a maximum sentence of up to three years is provided, reports our New Delhi correspondent.

However, section 13 of UAPA relates to unlawful activities for advocating, abetting or inciting any unlawful activity and is punishable with imprisonment of up to seven years.

It was alleged in the 2010 FIR that the accused had strongly propagated that Kashmir was never part of India and was forcibly occupied by the Indian armed forces and every possible effort should be made for the independence of the state of Jammu and Kashmir from the State of India.

The FIR was registered on a complaint by social activist Sushil Pandit on October 28, 2010, following the orders of the Court of Metropolitan Magistrate, New Delhi, they added.

It accused Roy and Hussain of delivering the "provocative" speeches at a conference organized under the banner of 'Azadi-The Only Way' on October 21, 2010, at the Little Theatre Group (LTG) Auditorium on Copernicus Marg in central Delhi.

Besides Roy and Hossain, those who delivered speeches at the conference in 2010 included Kashmiri separatist Syed Ali Shah Geelani, S A R Geelani (anchor of the Conference and prime accused in the Parliament attack case), and pro-Maoist cultural activist Varavara Rao.

The Daily Star
Saturday, June 15, 2024

A Wild Plan to Avert Catastrophic Sea-Level Rise
By Ross Andersen
The Atlantic
27 min
June 12, 2024
-----------------------------------------------------------
The edge of Greenland’s ice sheet looked like a big lick of sludgy white frosting spilling over a rise of billion-year-old brown rock. Inside the Twin Otter’s cabin, there were five of us: two pilots, a scientist, an engineer, and me. Farther north, we would have needed another seat for a rifle-armed guard. Here, we were told to just look around for polar-bear tracks on our descent. We had taken off from Greenland’s west coast and soon passed over the ice sheet’s lip. Viewed from directly above, the first 10 miles of ice looked wrinkled, like elephant skin. Its folds and creases appeared to be lit blue from within.

View More
We landed 80 miles into the interior with a swervy skid. Our engineer, a burly Frenchman named Nicolas Bayou, je**ed the door open, and an unearthly cold ripped through the cabin. The ice was smoother here. The May sunlight radiated off it like a pure-white aurora. We knew that there were no large crevasses near the landing site. This was a NASA mission. We had orbital reconnaissance. Still, our safety officer had warned us that we could “pop down” into a hidden crack in the ice if we ventured too far from the plane. Bayou appointed himself our Neil Armstrong. He unfolded the ladder, stepped gingerly down its rungs, and set foot on the surface.

Over the next hour and a half, we drilled 15 feet into the mile-thick ice. We fed a long pole topped by a solar-powered GPS receiver into the hole and stood it straight up. In the ensuing days, we were scheduled to set up four identical sites in a long line, the last one near Greenland’s center. Each will help calibrate a $1.5 billion satellite, known as NISAR, that NASA has been building with the Indian Space Research Organisation. After the satellite launches from the Bay of Bengal, its radar will peer down at Earth’s glaciers—even at night, even in stormy weather. Every 12 days, it will generate an exquisitely detailed image of almost the entirety of the cryosphere—all the planet’s ice.

NISAR’s unblinking surveillance is crucial because not even the largest, most immobile-seeming edifices of ice stay in one place. They move, and as the planet warms, their movements are accelerating, and so is their disintegration. Glaciologists have spent decades telling people that ice sheets are hemorrhaging icebergs and meltwater into the ocean at rates without precedent since the advent of scientific records on the subject—and that this is a serious problem, especially for the 40 percent of us who live in low-lying regions near a coastline. The glaciologists have often felt ignored. In recent years, they have begun to bicker, largely behind closed doors, about whether to push a more interventionist approach. Some now think that we should try to control the flow of the planet’s most vulnerable glaciers. They say that with the right technology, we might be able to freeze them in place, stopping their slide into the seas.

The glaciologist Ian Joughin, who leads NISAR’s cryosphere team, invited me to go on the Greenland trip. In March, I visited him at the Polar Science Center at the University of Washington to talk through the mission. It was a rare clear day in Seattle. We could see Mount Rainier, the most glaciated peak in the contiguous United States, floating like a white ghost above the horizon. Joughin explained that nearly all of the Earth’s ice is locked up in the two big sheets near its poles. If by some feat of telekinesis I could have airlifted the glaciers off Rainier’s flanks and mashed them together with every other mountain glacier in the world, the resulting agglomeration would account for less than 1 percent of Earth’s cryosphere. Greenland’s ice sheet accounts for about 13 percent; Antarctica’s accounts for the rest.

Ice may have arrived on Earth only a few hundred million years after the planet formed. At the time, Saturn and Jupiter hadn’t yet settled into their orbits. They were still moving around, jostling icy comets, sending some of them toward the inner solar system. Some scientists believe that thousands of these cosmic snowballs smashed into the Earth. The ice they carried would have vaporized on impact, but later rained down onto the crust, raising the sea levels. At some point, the seas’ polar regions started to freeze, and from these tiny beginnings, the planet’s ice grew. About 2.4 billion years ago, a riot of bacteria began exhaling oxygen en masse, transforming the atmosphere’s methane into molecules that don’t trap much heat. Ice spread outward from the poles, advancing over land and sea without prejudice, possibly all the way to the equator. From space, the Earth would have looked like it was slowly enclosing itself in blue-veined white marble. Since then, ice has retreated and advanced, over and over, largely in accordance with the buildup and dissipation of greenhouse gases in the air.

Karma

ENVIRONMENT
Climate Change, Narcissism, Denial, Apocalypse
We must not turn away!

On October 5, 2012, on the front page of the Huffington Post, appeared a terrifying image of melting arctic ice, accompanied by the chilling headline, “Arctic Ice Melt and Sea Level Rise May Be ‘Decades Ahead Of Schedule'". Why have the majority of Americans and American politicians been largely oblivious to this extreme threat? I believe there are two principal reasons.

The first is unbridled narcissism. Psychoanalytic developmental theorist Erik Erikson famously characterized an essential aim of adulthood as generativity—the caring for the well being of future generations. Climate change most likely will not be a threat for most of us, but it will leave our children, grandchildren, and future descendents with catastrophes of unimaginable proportions. In the deplorable obliviousness and indifference to the problem of climate change, any concern for the well being of future generations is being blatantly trumped by narrow self-interest and greed.

The second is denial. What, precisely, is being denied? More than three decades ago I took my young son to a planetarium show at the New York Museum of Natural History. During that show it was predicted that a billion years from now the sun will become a “red giant” that will engulf and destroy our entire solar system. This prospect filled me with intense horror. Why would a catastrophe predicted to occur in a billion years evoke horror in me? Let me explain.

See & read more at the link to this post below..........

_______________________________

The evidentiary truth of global climate change due to human action based on narcisstic culture of today.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/feeling-relating-existing/201210/climate-change-narcissism-denial-apocalypse?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR3D_ZJ5ti0YlEFwxYAPHniEn9V-9WNRUy2TqBdME6BQSdSi5_GlbiraMg8_aem_AY-UtoYdCCgSIAD9tCx5a2hmpzpkBuDYMoMyambwWaMD4HhYcuEwRn7gOMSqxJNIFkrPOZ7ImXKF3b66XlQGfyHf

Climate Change, Narcissism, Denial, Apocalypse Apocalyptic anxiety anticipates the collapse of human civilization itself and of all meaningfulness. And it is from apocalyptic anxiety that we turn away when we deny the extreme perils of climate change.

In this episode, I talk to Naomi Klein, a professor, author, social activist, and filmmaker known for her criticism of the climate crisis, uber-capitalism and war, and for books like the Shock Doctrine, No Logo and most recently, Doppelganger. Naomi has also been an outspoken critic of the ongoing war in Gaza.
We discuss the intersecting crises of oligarchy, militarism and climate change, how the left can best combat right-wing extremism, and how a Donald Trump presidency would be a disaster for Palestinians.
---------------------------------‐
https://youtu.be/_3-CSRTVwys?si=NQc0r3PIm-w3kGs0
____________________________________

Bernie: The Podcast | Episode 8: Naomi Klein In this episode, I talk to Naomi Klein, a professor, author, social activist, and filmmaker known for her criticism of the climate crisis, uber-capitalism an...

A PROFILE IN COURAGE!
Rusty Bowers
__________________________
A man of honor, integrity and courage,
unlike the cowards of the Republican Party and the
MAGA misogynist Donald Trump who disrespects women and dishonor the war heros by acting like a bully to hide his true insecurity and cowardice.
"Rusty Bowers served as Arizona’s speaker of the House from 2019-23. He testified before the House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the U.S. Capitol and received a John F. Kennedy Profile in Courage award in 2022. The following interview was conducted by Kirk Documentary Group’s Mike Wiser for FRONTLINE on Oct. 20, 2023. It has been edited for clarity and length."
FRONTLINE
To view the full video LINK Below:
_________________________________
https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=410721734863427&id=100077768109222&mibextid=Nif5oz
_______________________________________

Democracy on Trial: Rusty Bowers (interview) | FRONTLINE Rusty Bowers served as Arizona’s speaker of the House from 2019-23. He testified before the House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on t...

DNC: boy with stutter delivers emotional speech after help from Joe Biden Brayden Harrington, 13, spoke about how he met Joe Biden, who stuttered himself as a boy, and how the Democratic presidential nominee gave him confidence. 'H...

On May 25, 2024 - Remember George Floyd
A DICHOTOMY OF MORAL VALUES
The philosophy of Islam and Abrahamic faith (Islam, Christianity and Judaism) are in direct opposition to the sa**sm & inhumanity of narcissism, fascism and racism.
---------------------------------------------------------
This Day in History: May 25 (2020)
George Floyd, an unarmed African American man, was killed during an arrest in Minneapolis, Minnesota, setting off massive protests around the country and generating greater support for the Black Lives Matter movement; police officer Derek Chauvin was later convicted of his murder.
___________________________
On May 25, 2020, George Floyd, a 46-year-old black American man, was murdered in Minneapolis by Derek Chauvin, a 44-year-old white police officer.
https://youtu.be/PVuKVXV1l1A?si=V5ja55pi5zmLxVQP
___________________________________

Floyd Told Officers He Couldn’t Breathe At Least 28 Times, New Bodycam Video Reveals | NBC News In bodycam footage, former officer Derek Chauvin is heard responding to George Floyd’s repeated cries that he can’t breathe: “Takes a heck of a lot of oxygen...

The Spirituality of Music
(According to Sufism)

Upholding Judicial Integrity: Ensuring Justice Beyond Supreme Court Rulings
(Updated April 25, 2024).
_______________________________________
On July 20, 2023, (DEMOCRACY DOCKET report) the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee approved the Supreme Court Ethics, Recusal, & Transparency (SCERT) Act, a bill that would implement sweeping ethics reforms for the U.S. Supreme Court.
In recent months since then, the United States has been gripped by the legal proceedings surrounding former President Donald Trump, with pivotal decisions unfolding in both the courtroom and the hallowed halls of the Supreme Court. As the nation eagerly awaits the final verdict, recent developments have ignited concerns regarding judicial fairness and the potential implications for justice.
The integrity of the judicial process stands as the cornerstone of democracy, ensuring that every individual, regardless of status or influence, is subject to the same standards of justice. However, recent revelations regarding Judge Cannon's actions in the Mar-A-Largo classified document case raise troubling questions about the impartiality of the judiciary. The decision to permit Trump to reveal witness identities and issue specific jury instructions threatens to tilt the scales of justice in favor of the defense, casting a shadow over the fairness of the proceedings.
Moreover, looming over the legal landscape is the imminent decision by the Supreme Court on whether former President Trump is immune to prosecution for his alleged role in the January 6 insurrection. This decision carries profound implications for accountability and the rule of law, with the eyes of the nation fixed on the highest court in the land.
However, what recourse exists if the Supreme Court is perceived to be partial towards Donald Trump? Is there any avenue for the American public to counter the Court's rulings and ensure justice prevails? While the authority of the Supreme Court is unquestionable, the principles of checks and balances inherent in the American system provide avenues for accountability and redress.
First and foremost, it is essential to recognize that the Supreme Court operates within the framework of the Constitution, which enshrines principles of fairness, equality, and justice. Should the Court's rulings be perceived as biased or unjust, the American public retains the power to hold its members accountable through democratic means. This includes rigorous scrutiny of judicial nominations, advocacy for judicial reform, and, ultimately, the power of the ballot box to elect leaders who uphold the principles of justice.
Furthermore, the judicial process is not confined solely to the Supreme Court. At its core, the pursuit of justice is a collaborative endeavor involving multiple layers of the legal system. Should the Supreme Court's rulings fall short of delivering justice, avenues for recourse exist within lower courts, appellate processes, and even the possibility of legislative action to address systemic issues within the judiciary.
Importantly, the role of civil society cannot be understated in upholding the integrity of the judicial process. Through advocacy, activism, and public engagement, ordinary citizens have the power to shape the discourse surrounding legal proceedings and demand accountability from those entrusted with interpreting and upholding the law.
In the face of potential judicial bias or partiality, it is incumbent upon all Americans to remain vigilant guardians of justice. This entails holding our judiciary to the highest standards of integrity, challenging injustices wherever they may arise, and reaffirming our commitment to the principles of fairness and equality that lie at the heart of our democracy.
As the legal saga surrounding Donald Trump unfolds, the eyes of the nation are fixed not only on the courtroom drama but also on the broader question of whether justice will prevail. In this pivotal moment, let us stand united in our commitment to upholding the rule of law, ensuring that no individual, regardless of their status or influence, is above accountability. Only through collective action and unwavering dedication to the ideals of justice can we safeguard the integrity of our judicial system and fulfill the promise of a more equitable future for all.
While the Supreme Court holds immense power, it is not infallible. Should its decisions be perceived as unjust, avenues for accountability and redress exist within the democratic framework of the United States. By remaining vigilant, engaged, and committed to the principles of justice, we can ensure that no individual is above the law and that the pursuit of truth and fairness prevails above all else.
Emran Mahmud

OPINION - Donald Trump is ditching the Maga psychos and building a very slick team
Sarah Baxter
May 1, 2024·6 min read The curious case of the puppy killer, which went viral this week, confirms that there is room for only one political “psycho” in Trumpland. The only American who can get away with conduct that would kill off anybody else’s career is sitting in a New York courthouse facing allegations of having paid hush money to p**n star Stormy Daniels. The dog-slayer in question, Kristi Noem, the governor of South Dakota, now known as “Cruella”, must be wondering where she went wrong.

Two years ago CNN released a photo taken by the photographer Anil Prabhakar in the forest in Indonesia. The image shows an orangutan, currently under threat of extinction, while stretching out his hand to help a geologist who fell into a mud pool during his search. When the photographer uploaded the photo, he wrote this as a caption: “In a time when the concept of humanity dies, animals lead us to the principles of humanity.”

The Two State Solution based on clarification of our narratives.

The Crucial Distinction Between Anti-Semitism and Anti-Zionism: A reflection of our current socio-political contradictions.

-----------------------------------‐----------------

The lines between anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism often blur, contributing to widespread confusion and perpetuating harmful stereotypes. It's imperative to dissect these concepts and highlight their fundamental differences to foster meaningful discourse and combat prejudice effectively.

President Joe Biden's recent speeches, equating Semitism with Zionism, highlight the urgency for clarity on this issue. Understanding and acknowledging this distinction is crucial to combatting prejudice effectively.

Anti-Semitism, with its historical roots entrenched in religious bigotry and ethnic discrimination, targets Jewish individuals based solely on their identity. From ancient times to the Holocaust and beyond, anti-Semitism has manifested in various forms, including violent attacks, systemic discrimination, and hateful rhetoric.

Anti-Zionism, on the other hand, critiques the political ideology of Zionism, which advocates for the establishment of a Jewish homeland in Israel. Rooted in political disagreement with Israeli policies, anti-Zionism is not inherently anti-Semitic.

However, it becomes problematic when criticism of Israel veers into demonization of Jews as a collective or relies on anti-Semitic tropes and stereotypes.The confusion arises when individuals conflate anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism, obscuring legitimate criticism of Israeli policies and stifling meaningful dialogue.

It's essential to recognize and confront anti-Semitism unequivocally while also respecting the right to criticize Israeli actions without resorting to prejudice. Understanding the distinction between anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism is vital in navigating complex socio-political issues and fostering inclusive societies. By promoting informed dialogue and combating bigotry in all its forms, we can strive towards a more equitable and harmonious world for all.

Emran Mahmud

President Joe Biden's
Peril or Opportunity
On the Eve of
Columbia University Uprising
(remember 1968 and see the present 2024)

1968 From the pages of history
Initial demonstrations at Columbia University in April 1968 started with the threat of violence between radical students who wanted to end the university's ties to war research during the Vietnam War and terminate a university gymnasium construction project and mostly white athletes who wanted to push forward with it.
AP News

2024 @ present
NEW YORK (AP) — Anti-war demonstrations ceased this week at a small number of U.S. universities after school leaders struck deals with pro-Palestinian protesters, fending off possible disruptions of final exams and graduation ceremonies.
The students are protesting the war's death toll and are calling for universities to separate themselves from any companies that are advancing Israel's military efforts in Gaza.
AP News

Media's failure to uphold the ethical values of civil society in democracy.
______________________________________
In the complex landscape of modern media, MSNBC's current role as a fierce critic of Donald Trump prompts reflection on the broader culpability of the media industry. NBC, (part of a NBCUniversal News Group, that incudes MSNBC), initially provided Trump a significant platform through the airing of "The Apprentice," a reality show that, while entertaining, was arguably a third-class production on business matters. This paradox underscores the media's role in shaping political narratives and raises questions about its responsibility.
The media, including NBC, must engage in self-critique for playing a role in elevating Trump's public profile. By giving him a platform through a reality show, the media inadvertently contributed to the cultivation of Trump's image as a successful business mogul. This media attention, while not inherently negative, laid the groundwork for his later political aspirations. The shift from entertainment to politics marked a transition that demonstrated the influence of media in shaping public perceptions.
The problem extends beyond the mere provision of a platform; it lies in the media's tendency to prioritize sensationalism over objective reporting. Instead of focusing on substantial issues, media outlets, including NBC, often succumb to the allure of ratings and spectacle. The consequence is a distorted representation of reality, where important policy matters are overshadowed by sensational headlines and soundbites. This approach not only fails to serve the public's need for informed decision-making but also inadvertently facilitates the rise of populist figures who thrive on spectacle rather than substance.
The media's failure to uphold the ethical values of democracy further exacerbates the situation. In the case of Trump, the mainstream media, including NBC, became unwitting accomplices in amplifying his divisive rhetoric. By providing a platform for unrealistic visions of America's bygone days, the media allowed a narcissistic figure to disseminate hate, propaganda, and falsehoods. This lack of journalistic integrity not only erodes public trust but also deepens the peril posed by an exploitative narcissist with authoritarian tendencies.
On the other hand, to uphold a balanced journalistic principles that prioritize objectivity and diverse perspectives, an event such as MSNBC's decision not to broadcast Donald Trump's Inaugural speech on his Iowa win, as highlighted by Michael Smerconish of CNN, indicate a concerning trend. Smerconish argues that this extreme reaction may be backfiring, emphasizing the importance of media outlets presenting information in a balanced manner.
The buck stops here!
On the contrary to Mr. Smerconish's views (as stated above), as the media navigates its role in shaping public discourse, a commitment to ethical reporting becomes paramount instead of providing a media platform to an individual such as Trump constantly involved in the deceptive messaging based on dis-information and lies. By fostering an environment of transparency, accountability, and fair representation, media outlets can contribute positively to democratic ideals and help rebuild public trust in the Fourth Estate. It is crucial to recognize that media outlets, including MSNBC, have a responsibility to society.
Hence, MSNBC's decision not to broadcast Donald Trump's Inaugural speech on his Iowa win, was an apt and sound decision based on an ethical media's endeavor for journalistic objectivity and corporate social responsibility.
Emran Mahmud
https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100077768109222

Present A current affair, news, opinion and podcasts.

Elon Musk just threw a wrench into President Joe Biden’s electric vehicle plans.

Tesla’s renowned charging network is a backbone of the administration’s effort to get Americans out of gasoline-powered cars and into electric ones. But this week, Musk abruptly laid off almost all of Tesla’s Supercharger team, writes David Ferris.

“It feels like the rug just got pulled out from under a lot of the industry alignment that has been built in the last 12 months,” Matt Teske, CEO of the EV-charging software platform Chargeway, told David.

While past rounds of layoffs were spread among various Tesla divisions, Monday’s bloodbath targeted the jobs of hundreds of people on the EV charging team, including the unit’s top dog, Rebecca Tinucci.

“We need to be absolutely hardcore about headcount and cost reduction,” Musk said in an email to Tesla staff Monday, reported first by The Information. The layoffs come amid the company’s falling profits.

The move potentially undercuts a deal Tesla struck with the White House last year to open the company’s vehicle chargers to other automakers in exchange for accessing federal dollars.

And access Tesla did. The company won almost 13 percent of all EV charging awards from Biden’s 2021 bipartisan infrastructure law, earning more than $17 million in infrastructure grants.

Tesla’s charging technology is now emerging as the industry standard in the U.S., baked into the designs for future EVs from numerous automakers and slated for inclusion in a nationwide network of charging stations.

Musk says Tesla will continue to build Superchargers. In a post on his social media site X, formerly Twitter, he wrote: “Tesla still plans to grow the Supercharger network, just at a slower pace for new locations and more focus on 100% uptime and expansion of existing locations.”

Some analysts David spoke with said the slower pace of expansion, while unexpected, may be a calculated move as other EV charging players expand in the arena.

But others questioned how Tesla will carry out an expansion, even a slower one, if the team in charge is nonexistent. No one David contacted for this story could name a single person in Tesla’s charging sector that still works there.

PLAYING GOD WITH THE ATMOSPHERE
Interfering with Earth’s climate systems is becoming more possible—and less predictable—than ever.
The Atlantic Magazine
By Marina Koren.....................................
After a deluge of record-breaking rainfall this week, citizens of the United Arab Emirates and Oman are still trying to return to regular life. The storms forced schools, offices, and businesses to close, transformed the tarmac of Dubai’s international airport into a rippling sea, and killed more than 20 people across both nations. The downpour seemed almost apocalyptic: On Tuesday, the UAE received the amount of rain that usually falls in an entire year.
Early reports of the weather event prompted some speculation that it was worsened by a controversial weather-modification technology. The practice, known as cloud seeding, involves spraying chemical compounds into the air in an effort to wring more rain out of the sky. The United Arab Emirates carries out hundreds of these operations every year in an effort to supplement its water resources in the arid landscape. Exactly how well cloud seeding actually works is an active debate among scientists, but the technique can’t produce rain clouds out of thin air—it can only enhance what’s already there.
The consensus, for now, seems to be that cloud seeding is unlikely to have contributed significantly to this week’s historic inundation. (The UAE’s meteorology agency said no seeding missions were conducted before the storm.) But the event raises anew some fundamental questions about interfering with nature. Cloud seeding is a type of geoengineering, a set of technologies aimed deliberately at influencing or altering Earth’s climate systems. The warmer our planet becomes, the more attractive geoengineering seems as a way to slow or endure the effects of climate change—and the less accurately we can predict its effects. Scientists can’t be sure that playing God with the atmosphere won’t cause human suffering, even if it is intended to alleviate it.
In the case of cloud seeding, humans have been playing God for decades. The technique dates back to the 1940s and has been deployed regularly around the world since to provide relief to regions parched by drought, clear skies ahead of Olympic Games, and give ski resorts an extra inch of snow. Scientists have been studying cloud seeding all along, but they’ve only recently managed to document how the technique might actually work, distinguishing between natural precipitation and precipitation that resulted from human intervention. Experts believe that seeding can squeeze out a small amount of additional precipitation, but it is “notoriously difficult” to determine how well it worked in any particular instance, Janette Lindesay, a climate scientist at Australian National University, told me.
The basics of cloud seeding are straightforward, Lindesay said: If you want rain, you release chemicals that encourage clouds to produce larger water droplets, which are more likely to reach the ground. If you want to suppress rain, you use chemicals that foster the creation of smaller droplets. But the simplicity belies the complicated science and high stakes of manipulating the atmosphere in the 21st century. The 2020s are becoming defined by a warmer atmosphere capable of holding more moisture, conditions that can lead to more extreme and unprecedented weather events, including intense rainfall. Add in geoengineering, and things can get risky. “We are in territory now where we can’t necessarily rely on past experience and past outcomes to inform us,” Lindesay said, of “what is likely to happen when we intervene.”
As geoengineering goes, cloud seeding is a rather limited technique, with small effects confined to small geographical areas. (That’s part of the case against seeding as a significant contributing factor to this week’s flooding in the Middle East; as Amit Katwala pointed out in Wired this week, parts of the UAE where seeding typically does not occur experienced torrential rain too.) But it can still be fraught. Scientists continue to debate whether cloud seeding in one region can have consequences for another. And at a time when droughts are becoming more common, rain is a precious commodity with geopolitical import. In recent years, Iran has accused the UAE and Israel, which has its own seeding experiments, of stealing rain away.
Reports that cloud seeding caused this week’s flooding were likely erroneous, but the reaction they inspired “represents a healthy kind of skepticism about what happens when we interfere with natural systems,” Laura Kuhl, a public-policy professor at Northeastern University who studies climate adaptation, told me. That’s particularly true, she said, when you consider forms of geoengineering premised on producing large-scale effects. Scientists have proposed injecting sulfur dioxide into the stratosphere to reflect some sunlight back into space, preventing it from reaching Earth’s surface. The resulting aerosols could linger in the stratosphere for years, shifting at the whims of the wind. Similar concerns surround another geoengineering technique that involves spraying salt compounds into the air to brighten clouds, which would in turn bounce sunlight back into space. This month, scientists conducted a secretive test of this technology, the first of its kind in the United States. The field is “moving a lot faster than it used to,” Juan Moreno-Cruz, a climate-policy researcher at the University of Waterloo, told me.
After further research, some geoengineering techniques may well turn out to be useful ways to mitigate or adapt to climate change. But they can’t address its root cause: the burning of fossil fuels, and failure to reduce greenhouse emissions. Many climate experts see geoengineering as a last resort. As our changing atmosphere continues to dramatically drench some parts of the planet and leave others parched for too long, that last resort might start to seem like a more appealing option—even as the consequences of getting it wrong become ever more dire.