Fact Check: Debunking claim Rainmaker cloud seeding caused Texas floods
Rainmaker Technology Corporation's cloud seeding mission caused deadly flooding in parts of Texas over Fourth of July weekend in 2025.
Rating:
Context:
Rainmaker did carry out a cloud seeding mission over south-central Texas on July 2, 2025, the company's CEO confirmed. But meteorologists said cloud seeding was not responsible for the powerful storms that led to deadly flooding in Texas.
In the aftermath of deadly flash floods that swept through Texas Hill Country in July 2025, some people online suggested the storms may have been manufactured through a weather modification technique called cloud seeding.
The cloud seeding operations were conducted by a company called Rainmaker Technology Corporation, the posts alleged.
On July 5, 2025, one X user shared what appeared to be screenshots of a National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) report on weather modification activities. The alleged report showed Rainmaker participated in "rain enhancement" in Texas.
Similar claims suggesting Rainmaker's cloud seeding caused flooding in Texas circulated elsewhere on X and Instagram. Snopes readers also asked whether cloud seeding caused the Texas floods.
Rainmaker did carry out a cloud seeding mission over the eastern part of south-central Texas on July 2, 2025, Augustus Doricko, the company's CEO, confirmed in a thread shared on X. But meteorologists said cloud seeding was not responsible for the powerful storms that led to deadly flooding in Texas. Therefore, we've rated this claim false.
Doricko added that the company "did not operate in the affected area on the 3rd or 4th or contribute to the floods that occurred over the region."
Cloud seeding is a "decades-old approach to modifying weather that uses a range of supporting technologies for research and operations," the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) explained in a December 2024 report. It is commonly used to increase precipitation or suppress hail, usually by adding tiny particles of silver iodide, the GAO said, citing NOAA.
In an email to Snopes, a spokesperson for NOAA debunked claims that cloud seeding was to blame for the deadly Texas storms and resulting floods:
The amount of precipitation created by cloud seeding is generally marginal and localized.
Meteorologists agree cloud seeding could not generate precipitation of this magnitude or size.
Cloud seeding does not add moisture to the atmosphere. This event could only have occurred if abundant moisture was already present.
Two meteorologists also independently confirmed cloud seeding did not cause the powerful Texas storms and resulting floods.
Travis Herzog, chief meteorologist at ABC13 in Houston, Texas, addressed the claims in a Facebook post on July 6, 2025. He wrote, in part:
Cloud seeding cannot create a storm of this magnitude or size. In fact, cloud seeding cannot even create a single cloud. All it can do is take an existing cloud and enhance the rainfall by up to 20%. Most estimates have the rainfall enhancement in a much lower range.
Herzog said he was not aware of any cloud seeding operations that occurred on July 3, 2025, but added that it is "physically impossible for that to have created this weather system."
Remaining moisture from what was Tropical Storm Barry was "primarily responsible" for the flooding in Texas, Herzog said. "Upper level moisture" from what was once Hurricane Flossie in the Pacific also contributed to the flood event, he added.
Jeremy Baker, a meteorologist at KENS 5 in San Antonio, Texas, agreed with Herzog's assessment. In an email to Snopes, he said:
No, cloud seeding could not create a storm powerful enough to cause the flooding that occurred in the Hill Country. With optimal moisture and an existing cloud structure, cloud seeding would, at best, enhance rainfall by 10%-20%. This flood was caused by a natural atmospheric low that stalled over the area for several hours. The terrain and tributaries feeding into the Guadalupe only made the situation much worse, resulting in the devastating flood.
Heavy flooding isn't uncommon in Texas Hill Country, where the deadly 2025 floods occurred, either. The region is one of the most flood-prone in the nation and has earned the nickname "Flash Flood Alley." The area's "weather and landscape distinctively work together to produce rapid flood events," Leslie Lee with the Texas Water Resources Institute wrote on its website.
As far as cloud seeding is concerned, the NOAA spokesperson clarified that the federal agency "does not perform, study, monitor, fund or evaluate" such activities, adding:
NOAA is required by law to track weather modification activities by others, including cloud seeding, but has no authority to regulate those activities
Cloud seeding is typically practiced by private companies to help generate snow in western mountain bases in the winter or to replenish water reservoirs in the desert southwest in the summer, NOAA said on its website.
Any company that intends to take part in weather modification activities within the U.S. is required to provide a report to NOAA at least 10 days beforehand, according to the agency.
The NOAA spokesperson addressed the document that circulated on social media, saying it was a "copy of an initial activity report filed in February, noting a private organization's intention to hire a contractor to conduct cloud seeding between March and November."
Doricko addressed claims that his company's practices contributed to the flooding in Texas.
In an X post shared on July 5, 2025, he said, in part, "Rainmaker did not operate in the affected area on the 3rd or 4th or contribute to the floods that occurred over the region."
Doricko confirmed that Rainmaker did seed clouds in south-central Texas on July 2, but said the company did not conduct any operations that could have impacted the floods.
In his X post, Doricko wrote, in part:
The last seeding mission prior to the July 4th event was during the early afternoon of July 2nd, when a brief cloud seeding mission was flown over the eastern portions of south-central Texas, and two clouds were seeded.
The clouds "persisted for about two hours after seeding before dissipating" between 3 and 4 p.m. CDT, Doricko said. The typical lifespan of natural clouds is 30 minutes to a few hours, and it's rare for "even the most persistent storm systems" to maintain "the same cloud structure" for more than 12 to 18 hours, he added.
Doricko said the clouds that were seeded on July 2, 2025, "dissipated over 24 hours prior to the developing storm complex that would produce the flooding rainfall" in Texas.
He continued:
A senior meteorologist observed an unusually high moisture content prior to the event's arrival, using NWS sounding data. It was at this point that our meteorologists determined that we would suspend future operations indefinitely. As you can see, we suspended operations on July 2nd, a day before the NWS issued any flood warning.
X (Formerly Twitter), 5 July 2025, x.com/ADoricko/status/1941628111524880488. Accessed 8 July 2025.
Facebook.com, 6 July 2025, www.facebook.com/TravisABC13/posts/how-could-this-happen-its-a-question-many-of-us-are-asking-with-broken-hearts-as/1278872920273979/. Accessed 8 July 2025.
Staff, KENS. "Meet the KENS 5 Team: Jeremy Baker." Kens5.com, KENS, 29 Dec. 2017, www.kens5.com/article/about-us/team-bios/jeremy-baker-meet-the-kens-5-team/273-503273039. Accessed 8 July 2025.
Jacobo, Julia, et al. "The History of 'Flash Flood Alley,' the Hilly Region in Texas Prone to Flooding Emergencies." ABC News, 7 July 2025, abcnews.go.com/US/history-flash-flood-alley-hilly-region-texas-prone/story?id=123531672. Accessed 8 July 2025.
Lee, Leslie. "Do You Live in Flash Flood Alley? | TWRI." Twri.tamu.edu, twri.tamu.edu/publications/txh2o/2016/fall-2016/do-you-live-in-flash-flood-alley/. Accessed 8 July 2025.
NOAA. "Fact Check: Debunking Weather Modification Claims." Noaa.gov, 23 Oct. 2024, www.noaa.gov/news/fact-check-debunking-weather-modification-claims. Accessed 8 July 2025.
"NOAA Library: Weather and Climate Collections: Weather Modification Project Reports." Noaa.gov, 2021, library.noaa.gov/friendly.php?s=weather-climate/weather-modification-project-reports. Accessed 8 July 2025.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scientific American
14 minutes ago
- Scientific American
AI Couldn't Forecast the Texas Floods
CLIMATEWIRE | Artificial intelligence is showing promise when it comes to weather forecasting, but it still couldn't predict the Texas floods. The best-performing weather models during the July 4 floods were traditional ones specially designed to produce local forecasts at high resolution. Global-scale models were far less accurate — and so were AI models, weather experts say. 'All those new fancy AI models? They missed it too,' said Daniel Swain, a climate scientist at the California Institute for Water Resources, in a live YouTube talk on July 7. On supporting science journalism If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today. Some meteorologists say that could change. AI weather models are starting to exhibit an ability for deep learning of atmospheric physics, which means they could be capable of forecasting unprecedented weather events based on atmospheric conditions. New AI models are "certainly capable of predicting 'out-of-sample' events — events that they haven't seen before,' said Corey Potvin, a scientist at NOAA's National Severe Storms Laboratory in Norman, Oklahoma. But looming budget cuts at NOAA — along with years of lagging federal investment in AI weather systems — are a major hurdle for the improvement of federal AI weather models, experts say. It's the latest example of how President Donald Trump's efforts to shrink government could hobble the country's weather forecasting capabilities, at a time when extreme weather is on the rise. Kim Doster, NOAA's director of communications, said in an email that budget cuts would not negatively impact the agency's research and forecasting priorities. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, head of the department that houses NOAA, "is committed to integrating advanced technologies like AI to deliver the fastest, most accurate data to Americans," she said. "This administration is working hand-in-hand with meteorologists and scientists to modernize research, cut forecast lead times, improve mapping, and streamline operations across the bureau." Today's most advanced AI weather prediction models largely exist in the private sector. Many of them failed to see the Texas floods coming with the same accuracy as the high-resolution traditional forecasts. One major reason is that many AI models are still focused on forecasting large-scale weather patterns at the global level, according to Russ Schumacher, a meteorologist at Colorado State University and Colorado's state climatologist. 'Forecasting precipitation at the local scale is very challenging, and has not really been the focus of most of the AI models in use now,' he said in an email. That's despite some recent suggestions that the Texas forecasts could have benefited from more investment in AI prediction at the National Weather Service. Tim Gallaudet, who served as acting NOAA administrator during the first Trump administration, suggested in a July 7 op-ed that NWS should 'incorporate more artificial intelligence' into its atmospheric, oceanic and hydrologic modeling systems for more accurate forecasts during incidents like the Texas floods. But some scientists have expressed concerns about AI's ability to forecast record-breaking weather events, like the extreme rainfall that triggered the Texas floods. AI systems are often trained on historical weather data, and extreme events are — by definition — rare. That means there aren't many examples of them for AI systems to learn from. In a 2023 comment published in the scientific journal Nature, weather experts Imme Ebert-Uphoff and Kyle Hilburn warned that AI systems are 'often unpredictable when the program operates under conditions that it has never encountered before,' adding that extreme weather events 'might therefore trigger highly erratic predictions.' Potvin predicted new AI models could forecast rare events, though not quite as accurately as they would if they had lots of examples to train on. And although most AI models are still focused on large-scale weather patterns, high-resolution models are likely on the horizon. NOAA is working on some local weather-modeling projects that include AI components. The National Severe Storms Laboratory's experimental Warn-on Forecast system, or WoFS, is designed to rapidly incorporate radar and satellite observations into a high-resolution model. It can produce updated forecasts about every 15 minutes, increasing meteorologists' ability to accurately warn communities about sudden extreme events, like flash floods. NSSL scientists are also perfecting an AI version of WoFS, known as WoFSCast. By design, it can only perform as well as the original non-AI model — but it can theoretically produce forecasts much faster and with far less computing power, making it a cheaper option for local NWS offices. There's also NOAA's High-Resolution Rapid Refresh model, known for its ability to forecast storms at the local scale. HRRR was one of the models that best predicted the rainfall in Texas — and scientists are developing an AI version as well, a model known as HRRRCast. 'As far as I know, WoFSCastand HRRRCast are the only [AI] models currently being developed for higher resolution prediction,' Potvin said. Lag in investment NOAA still lags far behind the private sector when it comes to investment in AI weather prediction. That's a big concern for NWS forecasts, some experts say. AI is swiftly becoming a new frontier in weather modeling, and it could easily become an asset to NWS meteorologists — if NOAA had more resources to invest. 'The private sector is well ahead of where NOAA is now, to the point that even if we were in normal budget cycles, I'm not sure they could catch up,' Mary Glackin, former president of the American Meteorological Society, said at an AMS-hosted panel last week. Meanwhile, the White House has proposed around $2.2 billion in cuts to NOAA in its budget request for fiscal year 2026. Chief among these is the elimination of NOAA's entire research arm. That includes the agency's large network of cooperative research institutes and laboratories, like the NSSL, where researchers are still improving forecasting systems like WoFS and its AI counterpart. Scientists have warned that these cuts would damage NOAA's weather forecasting capabilities, putting communities at risk when extreme weather events strike. The private sector alone can't make up for lagging federal investments in weather forecasting technology, scientists and meteorologists have warned. Agencies like NWS are invested in public service and free forecasts, with the aim of ensuring that all U.S. communities — even those with limited resources — have access to high-quality, life-saving weather warnings. More public-private partnerships could help NOAA get a jump on AI weather system development, Glackin suggested. Such an arrangement 'meets the needs of the private sector, who are looking for a profit and a competitive edge, but remains true to the public service concept and not leaving the least behind,' she said. But such partnerships require the continued existence of research infrastructure at NOAA — which might not survive if Congress follows through with Trump's proposed cuts. Meanwhile, AI isn't the only frontier in weather forecasting. Traditional weather models also improve year over year as scientists collect and incorporate more data. That's how hurricane forecasts become so advanced over the last few decades. "As big a fan as I am of AI, it would be a mistake to put all of our investment into AI and then neglect the traditional side of weather modeling,' Potvin said. 'Because that in the end, would be undercutting future AI development.' Meteorologists have warned that traditional weather forecasts will plateau — or even degrade — if Trump's proposed cuts go into effect and hamstring NOAA's research capabilities. 'I worry about the loss of investments in science,' Brad Colman, another former AMS president, said at the July 10 panel. 'That's our seed corn, and the impact of that will be long-lasting. So I really hope that a greater wisdom will prevail, and that we will maintain that capacity.'
Associated Press
28 minutes ago
- Associated Press
Warming rivers prompt fishing restrictions in western Montana
Nearly a dozen rivers in western Montana and a handful of rivers inside the borders of Yellowstone National Park are under restrictions or closures as biologists seek to reduce angling-related sources of fish mortality. On July 9, Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks announced that portions of Upper Rock Creek, the Clark Fork River, the Bitterroot River and the entirety of Silver Bow Creek are closed to angling after 2 p.m. to protect fish during the hottest hours of the day. The previous day, hoot owl restrictions were announced for sections of the Ruby, Big Hole, Beaverhead and Smith rivers and for the entirety of the Jefferson River. The Sun River and the Madison River, perhaps the state's most popular angling destination, were placed under hoot owl closures particularly early this year — July 2 for the Sun River and June 19 for the Madison River above Hebgen Lake. FWP initiates hoot owl closures when river temperatures reach 73 degrees for three consecutive days and uses angler pressure and flow-based criteria when considering full closures. Trout are particularly susceptible to disease spread and other sources of mortality from late July through late August, when meager flows, rising temperatures and low dissolved oxygen levels converge. Water temperatures above 77 degrees can be lethal to trout. On July 11, Yellowstone National Park initiated full fishing closures to protect aquatic ecosystems inside its boundaries. The Madison, Firehole and Gibbon rivers and their tributaries are closed to all fishing. Park officials consider closing rivers inside its border to fishing when water temperatures hit the 68-degree mark and will revisit the closures when those temperatures cool and flows return to 'more typical summer conditions.' Additional closures may be coming, park officials noted. The announcements come about a month after FWP hosted a virtual town hall to alert the angling public to rapidly declining streamflows across much of the state. Biologists attribute diminishing streamflows to the loss of much of the state's near-average wintertime snowpack in May. 'As things continue to drop … we'll continue to work with water users on where we can find conservation measures to keep as much water as we can in the river,' Region 3 Fisheries Manager Mike Duncan said at the June 11 meeting. Conditions are shaping up to be very similar to 2021, he added. That year, Montana Gov. Greg Gianforte issued a drought-related disaster declaration on July 1 and more than 15 rivers were subject to some form of angling restriction or closure by mid-August. Other FWP biologists observed that several reservoirs in the state never filled this spring and cautioned anglers and fly-fishing guides to prepare for limited access to reservoir boat ramps at places like the Tiber and Gibson reservoirs. As of July 14, approximately 20 rivers in western Montana were within the 10th percentile for low flows, including blue-ribbon fisheries such as the Big Hole, Blackfoot, Madison and Missouri rivers as well as the Clark Fork and one of its largest tributaries — Rock Creek. The Dearborn River stream gauge near Craig, which has 55 years of records, was sitting at an all-time low, producing just 16 cubic feet per second of flow. Rivers across the state are experiencing near-record-low flows with additional challenges expected. In a follow-up conversation with Montana Free Press on Monday, Duncan noted that water quantity and fish health are closely linked. 'When we have water, almost all of these fisheries respond favorably,' Duncan said, going on to describe suboptimal flows as one of the 'major limiting factors' in overall trout population trends. Duncan added that additional restrictions and closures could be announced as rivers around the state continue to dwindle and heat up. FWP's Current Restrictions and Closures page is the best source of information for most of the rivers in the state. Yellowstone National Park notices angling closures inside its borders on the Plan Your Visit section of its website. About one-third of the state is in moderate or severe drought, according to the U.S. Drought Monitor. On Wednesday, the Governor's Drought and Water Supply Advisory Committee will meet in Helena and virtually to discuss current conditions and drought mitigation measures. ___ This story was originally published by Montana Free Press and distributed through a partnership with The Associated Press.
CBS News
an hour ago
- CBS News
What is a landspout and how did one tear through a Colorado business park?
When we normally think of a tornado, most people go to Twister or picture the Wizard of Oz. They think of the powerful storms spinning down from massive, rotating thunderstorms, triggering tornado warnings, and potentially causing major damage. However, not all tornadoes form the same way, and with recent storms across Colorado, we have seen those in the form of landspouts. A landspout tornado is a less intense tornado. It looks like a skinny rope extending from a cloud to the ground. It can spin quickly and may even pick up dust or debris, but it's usually weaker and shorter-lived than the classic tornadoes we see in severe weather outbreaks. Landspouts typically form on hot, dry days when there's instability and thunderstorms overhead, but the landspouts lack the rotating core of a mesocyclone that drives more dangerous tornadoes. Low pressure at the surface forms rising air that rushes in, filling the low and increasing the circulation, and rising. As a thunderstorm develops overhead, the updraft stretches the landspout up to the cloud. That stretching will tighten the rotation and create the landspout tornado. The storm picks up dust and debris, much like a tornado. Eventually, the landspout picks up cooler air, which kills the circulation. The Franktown landspout on Monday caused damage and came to the area without much warning, as many landspouts do. While the classic tornado forms from mesocyclones, and strong rotations that are easy to detect on radar, landspouts form from non-rotating, ordinary thunderstorms, usually along an outflow or dryline. They happen quickly, near the surface, and don't often present warning signatures on radar. Even though a landspout is usually weaker, it is still considered a tornado and should still be treated as such if you see a funnel forming in your area.
