Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
What specific geoengineering programs has GeoEngineering Watch alleged exist since 2015?
Executive summary
GeoEngineering Watch (led by Dane Wigington) has, since 2015, repeatedly alleged the existence of active atmospheric aerosol spraying and broader "climate engineering" operations — described on its site as programs that alter weather (including manufacturing “winter weather”), manipulate hurricanes, and deposit atmospheric particulates detectable by aircraft sampling (examples cited from 2015 posts) [1] [2] [3]. Available sources do not provide a formal, enumerated list of named government programs with start dates; GeoEngineering Watch presents recurring claims about ongoing aerosol spraying, radar/ satellite evidence of weather manipulation, particulate sampling flights, and alleged covert agendas [1] [2] [4].
1. GeoEngineering Watch’s core allegation: ongoing aerosol spraying and weather manipulation
From January through July 2015 GeoEngineering Watch’s radio posts and website repeatedly assert that “geoengineering programs” are actively altering every aspect of weather — naming aerosol spraying and the manufacture of “winter weather” as specific tactics and claiming effects on hurricanes and regional precipitation patterns [5] [1] [3]. These posts frame the activities as operational and ongoing rather than hypothetical research proposals [1] [3].
2. Alleged tactics described: aerosol particulate spraying, radar signatures, and aircraft sampling
The organization highlights three concrete types of evidence or activity: visible trail/radar signatures they interpret as spraying that “manufactures” weather patterns, atmospheric particulate sampling conducted by GeoEngineering Watch using aircraft up to 40,000 feet, and video/satellite/radar animations the group says demonstrate manipulation [1] [2] [3]. The site also references “nanoparticulate rain” and “graphene rain” as outcomes they investigate [1] [3].
3. Claims about targets and impacts: hurricanes, winter weather, ecological harm
GeoEngineering Watch’s 2015 posts specifically allege manipulation of hurricanes (e.g., changing course and strength) and the purposeful manufacture of winter weather in selected regions, along with broader ecological harms such as plant die-offs and ozone damage attributed to the programs [1] [3] [6].
4. Messaging on secrecy, whistleblowers, and alleged coercion
Content from June 2015 and similar posts includes claims of whistleblowers, threats to pilots (“You talk, you die!”), and officials covering up operations — framing the alleged programs as covert and tightly guarded by authorities [7]. GeoEngineering Watch thus presents both technical claims and a narrative of institutional secrecy [7].
5. What GeoEngineering Watch does not supply in these 2015 posts: formal program names or official provenance
The items in the provided archive do not offer specific government program names, legal authorizations, budgets, or official agency documents proving an established program since 2015; rather, the site repeatedly characterizes activities as “geoengineering programs” or “climate engineering operations” without listing an explicit program title or institutional sponsor in the cited 2015 material [1] [2] [3]. Available sources do not mention particular program names or formal government program records tied to GeoEngineering Watch’s allegations.
6. Context from academic and monitoring sources (what they show and what they don’t)
Wider academic discussion (cited in a law review excerpt) recognizes solar geoengineering as a field of research — for instance, stratospheric aerosol injection is described as a proposed technology in academic literature — and separately notes that some actors have alleged covert programs, but the academic source distinguishes proposals and research from claims of an ongoing covert deployment [8]. Additionally, monitoring initiatives like Geoengineering Monitor catalog experimental and commercial projects (carbon removal, solar radiation management research) on an international map, but these are framed as documented experiments and projects rather than covert, large-scale atmospheric aerosol spraying programs as alleged by GeoEngineering Watch [9].
7. Competing perspectives and the evidentiary gap
GeoEngineering Watch’s narrative is consistent across many posts in 2015 — asserting aerosol spraying, radar/satellite evidence, aircraft sampling, and ecological harm [1] [2] [3]. However, the provided sources do not include corroborating government documents, peer‑reviewed atmospheric chemistry studies confirming the claimed operations, or independent confirmations that name specific programs and sponsors. Academic sources discuss geoengineering as a researched possibility and note moral/legal concerns, but they do not document an ongoing covert aerosol deployment matching GeoEngineering Watch’s operational claims [8] [9].
8. Bottom line for readers
GeoEngineering Watch has repeatedly alleged, since at least early 2015, that active aerosol spraying and weather‑manipulation programs exist and provided radar/satellite interpretations, aircraft sampling claims, and whistleblower narratives to support that assertion [1] [2] [7]. The materials in the supplied archive do not, however, present named official programs or independent governmental documentation verifying deployment; available sources do not mention formal program titles, authorizations, or mainstream agency confirmations of the alleged covert operations [1] [8].