Thanks for sharing. I've included an excerpt regarding the treaty below this paragraph. A treaty of this nature tells me that gov'ts are behaving responsibly. Naturally, I realize that there are those who believe that this is merely a facade for people like me. It reminds me somewhat of the cloning issue. Ethical scientists understand the serious ramifications if cloning isn't regulated, but that doesn't keep unethical scientists from continuing to experiment. The same could be true with environmental modification techniques. I don't know how successful experiments have been. Some of these techniques, unlike cloning, I would think are hard to hide from public view. If I had a science background or had done more reading on this subject, I could offer more to the discussion. But logic tells me that EMT have not come that far. For one thing, if they had, then why not use them for good; why not bring rain to regions of the US that suffer droughts or decrease flooding or something of that nature? I know that cloud seeding is no guarantee for rain. It's very technical. I'm still dubious that our gov't or any other has advanced far enough in this experimentation to create a Tsunami in the Indian Ocean. China and Russia certainly don't act as if they are greatly intimidated by our gov't.

From Government web site:
The Convention defines environmental modification techniques as changing -- through the deliberate manipulation of natural processes -- the dynamics, composition or structure of the earth, including its biota, lithosphere, hydro-sphere, and atmosphere, or of outer space. Changes in weather or climate patterns, in ocean currents, or in the state of the ozone layer or ionosphere, or an upset in the ecological balance of a region are some of the effects which might result from the use of environmental modification techniques.

Intensive negotiations held in the CCD during the spring and summer of 1976 resulted in a modified text and, in addition, to understandings regarding four of the Treaty articles. These were transmitted to the U.N. General Assembly for consideration during the fall session.

Article I sets forth the basic commitment: "Each State Party to this Convention undertakes not to engage in military or any other hostile use of environmental modification techniques having widespread, long-lasting or severe effects as the means of destruction, damage or injury to any other State Party." An understanding defines the terms "widespread, long-lasting or severe." "Widespread" is defined as "encompassing an area on the scale of several hundred square kilometers"; "long-lasting" is defined as "lasting for a period of months, or approximately a season"; and "severe" is defined as "involving serious or significant disruption or harm to human life, natural and economic resources or other assets."

> There are international treaties, now 3
> decades old concerning weather warfare.

> "During the summit meeting in Moscow in
> July 1974, President Nixon and General
> Secretary Brezhnev formally agreed to hold
> bilateral discussions on how to bring about
> 'the most effective measures possible to
> overcome the dangers of the use of
> environmental modification techniques for
> military purposes.'"

> Convention on the Prohibition of Military or
> Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental
> Modification Techniques

> Signed in Geneva May 18, 1977
> Entered into force October 5, 1978
> Ratification by U.S. President December 13,
> 1979
> U.S. ratification deposited at New York
> January 17, 1980