Join us for an enlightening conversation with meteorologist Dr. Paul Homan as we dive deep into the intriguing topics of weather modification, geoengineering, and chemtrails. From the physics of cloud seeding to the myth around chemtrails, Dr. Homan, a retired Air Force lieutenant colonel, shares his knowledgeable insights gathered from years of experience in the field of meteorology. We also explore historic floods in Texas and debunk conspiracies surrounding weather disasters allegedly orchestrated by governments. Prepare to engage with science that transcends popular stereotypes and misconceptions.
Chemtrails, are they real? Have they been poisoning me for 40 years from 35,000 feet? Lay it on me.
SPEAKER 04 :
Scholars can’t explain it all away.
SPEAKER 1 :
Get ready to be awed by the handiwork of God. Tune in to Real Science Radio. Turn up the Real Science Radio.
SPEAKER 04 :
Keeping it real.
SPEAKER 01 :
Welcome to the brightest audience in the country. This is Real Science Radio. We’ve had a lot of crazy weather lately, and especially at the end of February, and allegedly one of the worst blizzards ever. Well, we figured it was a good time to welcome back meteorologist Paul Homan. Dr. Paul Homan received his PhD from the Naval Postgraduate School. He’s married to Janae and a father of four. Welcome back to the show, Paul. Oh, thanks. Appreciate it, Fred and Doug.
SPEAKER 02 :
Oh, yes. It’s great to have you back, Dr. Homan. And first, I want to recommend to everybody, check out Dr. Homan’s prior appearances right here on Real Science Radio, where he gave us all the real science about methane and climate change and the Earth’s energy balance. And he even made a prediction about the weather. Being a meteorologist, I suppose that’s not too surprising. But he put it out there and made a prediction, right, Fred?
SPEAKER 01 :
He did. And just another reminder, Dr. Homan is, he’s a retired lieutenant colonel from the Air Force and was the director of meteorology at the Air Force Academy. And he now serves in the officer’s Christian fellowship at the Academy. And Paul, one of the courses they taught at the Air Force Academy was on contrails, right? Contrails or chemtrails? Which one do you mean, Fred? Chemtrails.
SPEAKER 02 :
Well, wait, wait. Okay, so before we get to that, I want to cover three major things today, Dr. Homan. Weather modification, geoengineering. I want to talk about some stories that got my attention. The Texas flood in 4th of July, 2025. The flooding in Dubai, the flash flooding in Dubai. And… Contrails and chemtrails. Are you ready for all of this? I think so. Let’s, let’s give it a shot. Okay. Now to test your credibility though, Fred, what was the prediction Dr. Homan made the last time he was on? I think it was the end of 2023 is December of 23.
SPEAKER 01 :
He predicted that the weather was going to be cooler for the next year. after a really warm period. That’s what I recall.
SPEAKER 02 :
Dr. Homan made a prediction in December of 2023 that based on his understanding and observations of things like the 2022 volcano activity, the Hunga Tonga volcano, the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere, the La Nina, and solar temperatures, he predicted that the summer of 2025… would likely be cooler than 2024. And it turns out, yes, according to the Copernicus Climate Change Service. Did you guys know we had one of those? We have a climate change service available at any time. It’s over at the European Center for Medium Range Weather Forecasts. According to them, the summer of 25 was generally slightly cooler than 2024 globally. Now, they don’t want us to be calm. They reminded us that 2024 was a record shattering summer. It remained one of the hottest on record. 2024 holds the record for the warmest year ever, ever, as far as we know. And 2025, by the way, finished off as the third warmest, so there probably still should be some concern. 2023 and 2024 were very warm. But bottom line, Dr. Holman, you were right. So we want to hear about geoengineering, weather modification, chemtrails. So there’s been a few stories over the past years that have driven a lot of chatter in the comments section on the news about geoengineering and the possibility that the government or some other actors are… Well, they’re either causing or… They’re intensifying the weather or more specifically weather disasters. Dr. Homan, I actually read comments from semi-legitimate alternate news sources, semi-legitimate alternate news sources. that Democrats had targeted Texas over the 4th of July weekend to cause flooding, to hurt Donald Trump. You know, Texas is a red state and all this stuff is how much of that is true and how much of that might be a bit hysterical?
SPEAKER 03 :
Yeah, well, there was that real unfortunate flood incident on the Guadalupe River in the hill country of Texas. Yeah. You know, our prayers still go out to all those families. There’s a lot of lost life. And the thing that was controversial about that, that maybe made a little bit of news, which ties into the geoengineering and or weather modification, is there was a private company that was doing cloud seeding a couple of days before in that region. And so maybe just real quick, I could talk about what cloud seeding is and how it relates to weather and weather modification. There are lots of things out there, lots of attempts to do weather modification, but the only one that has ever shown any promise and is very prevalent is cloud seeding. And what happens in cloud seeding, a cloud just doesn’t make itself. You have to have what are called cloud condensation nuclei. So we talked a lot about in our previous climate show about the importance of water vapor. Well, you don’t get precipitation. You don’t get a cloud without water vapor. so that water vapor has to condense onto a surface you see this when you make a nice steamy shower the surface in your bathroom is the mirror and you’ll get water to condense on the mirror the same thing happens in the atmosphere but they’re small microscopic particles called cloud condensation nuclei and they’re primarily salts or dust And so the theory behind cloud seeding is that if we add more cloud condensation nuclei to specifically what we call a cold cloud, a cold cloud is one that has ice nucleation in it, that those more ice crystals can form or grow faster and we can get more precipitation out of it. The primary mechanism and chemical they use, well, there we go, chemical, you ready? It’s called silver iodide. It’s a type of salt. And so there’s various dispersion methods, usually flying over a cloud with an airplane and putting silver iodide. In California, not too far where you’re at, Doug, up on the hills and the mountains, there are smoke dispensers. So when a storm comes in, they will disperse smoke with silver iodide into the clouds. And the idea is that we can produce more rainfall. The jury’s out on this. Meteorologists, you know, we’re so accurate in our predictions. If we think it’s going to rain one inch and it rains one and a half after you cloud seed, did you increase the amount of precipitation from a storm or was your prediction just off? There’s several long-term studies on this. The U.S. government attempted, this is out there, there’s history channel videos about it, Operation Popeye during Vietnam. We didn’t have much success bombing the Ho Chi Minh Trail, but the U.S. government, the U.S. Air Force, we did cloud seeding operations in Laos and Cambodia. And then when the world found out about that, they weren’t very happy with us. But again, the jury is out. But I do want to address, I do not think that the cloud seeding operations in Texas two days before had anything to do with the horrific flooding that happened yesterday. What we had was a tropical storm coming up from the south. And when you cloud seed a cloud and it dissipates, the effect of that is over. So two days before, those clouds were seeded. Whether or not they got more rain two days before, no one can really tell. But those clouds completely dissipated, went away. And I do want to state this officially. I do not think… that those effects had anything to do with that flooding because there was a storm called Tropical Storm Barry that moved up and gave the region a lot or a lot of rain and For our listeners, I’ll describe a graph I put up. This is done by Dr. John Christie at the University of Alabama Huntsville, and I found it on Dr. Roy Spencer’s website. This is the two-day rainfall at the closest sensor that we have measurements to those floods on the Guadalupe River in Kerrville, Texas. And you could see this graph has from 1893 through this event last summer in 2025, the heaviest two-day rainfall. And you could see a couple things here. This was certainly not even a top 10 event, unfortunately. That area is known for its flash floods. And unfortunately, some of the campers in that river basin were not able to get to higher ground fast enough. 1978, they had flooding that was absolutely horrific, a lot worse. But unfortunately, there’s just more people in this region now. So there’s more impact when we get these types of flooding events. So despite CO2 going up, you actually could see the trend on this river. The number of floods are actually going down, not up.
SPEAKER 01 :
Okay. So, yeah. So, on this graph that you’re showing, there’s a lot of two-day rainfall that was a lot worse in the past. I see quite a few other incidents here.
SPEAKER 02 :
Yeah. Wow. Boy, when you see it on a graph, it’s kind of stunning. And it really does… It shows that recency makes things stick out more in our mind because maybe we don’t remember 1978 because we don’t have the latest news report. But wow, to see it on a chart, it’s pretty dramatic.
SPEAKER 03 :
Yes. And this is I do want to highlight there’s always a limitation in censors. Just because this was a little lower doesn’t mean the flood wasn’t bad. Often what happens in flash flooding, we see this in Colorado as well, is the location that has hit the worst is not where the rainfall was the worst. The rainfall could be upstream. And so when you get these warnings, you could be on a clear, sunny day. I’ve seen this here in Colorado or when I’ve been hiking in places like the Grand Canyon. you know, an event upstream, you know, has to wash down the canyons and the valleys. And just because it’s not raining hard where you are at, if there is ever a warning to evacuate or get out, yeah, please heed those warnings. And I do want to compliment the National Weather Service. They put out all the necessary watches and warnings and got the word out across the weather radios and And it just is an unfortunate incident where there were, that time of year, a lot of campers down along the river enjoying God’s creation, and the water rose very fast.
SPEAKER 02 :
Yes, reports are that the Guadalupe River rose in that area 26 feet in 45 minutes. That’s just terrifying. And it was a tragedy. But the cloud seeding, no, it wasn’t Democrats plotting against a red state. It was just a tragedy.
SPEAKER 03 :
No, it was. And, you know, one of the purported successes of an example of a success of cloud seeding was actually back at the 2008 Olympics in Beijing. If you remember that that crow’s nest or that the beautiful stadium they built for the opening ceremonies of the Olympics there. There was actually a cold front moving through with some storms. And from everything I read, they cloud seeded the heck out of that storms that were approaching the opening ceremony. And again, it can’t necessarily produce rain. more water. There’s only a finite amount of water in these storms. It’s just trying to convert that water more quickly. And they claim they were able to make it rain out sort of upstream in the suburbs on the outskirts of the town. And they were able to keep it from raining at the opening ceremonies that the whole world was watching. So if that’s true, you know, those are the sorts of effects, but it didn’t cause anything catastrophic. And if it rains in one location, now there’s not water to be rained out in a different location downstream. So there certainly are moral and ethical concerns with this. But again, we’re just kind of trimming at the edges. You can’t make the storm. You can’t necessarily steer the storm and you can’t create new storms that don’t exist in the first place.
SPEAKER 02 :
So before we move on, let’s just quickly dispatch with the Dubai flooding from two years ago. There was a similar thing, right? You just can’t produce an effect that can last over a period of days. A cloud seeding effect could last hours maybe. And the flash floods in Dubai were flash floods. They happened.
SPEAKER 03 :
Yeah, the life cycle of a thunderstorm. I used to teach a cloud physics class and I used to say, if you were asking me, well, what are you teaching in that class? I go, how can you go from a blue sky to a raging thunderstorm in an hour? And so, yeah, most thunderstorms and when we’re trying to enhance their effects by getting a little more precipitation out of them by cloud seeding, Again, once that thunderstorm dissipates, the effect does not continue. It happens on the order of hours. Maybe another one that I heard in the news was, I believe it was Hurricane Helene right around the election. I think that’s actually what you’re referring to, Doug, that hit with the really bad flooding in Tennessee and North Carolina. And it was right around the election. And I even received that. Yeah. Yeah. And then the FEMA response and all the politics that went with that. I actually received a phone call from a friend going, tell me how the government steered that hurricane to, depending upon your perspective, a Republican district or a Democrat district. But I did some calculations yesterday.
SPEAKER 02 :
That’s right.
SPEAKER 03 :
And the way I would answer that question is an average hurricane, not even a big one, but an average hurricane produces seven to eight times the amount of global energy consumption per day. In other words, if you were going to steer a hurricane, it would take a lot of energy. And the amount of energy that it would take could not go unnoticed. In other words, a big hurricane like Hurricane Helene is producing 10 times the energy of all the electricity produced on the entire planet. So if there was a government or an organization that was trying to steer or modify a hurricane of that size to impact voter districts, I think we would notice when all of our lights went out, for days at a time, you would not be able to hide that energy. And the other potential energy source that’s out there that I’ve heard people say would be something like nuclear weapons. And even our largest nuclear weapons are smaller than the energy produced in a hurricane. A large hurricane is producing, oh, I did the calculations. I just want to make sure I quote them correctly. A large hurricane is probably the same as about five of our largest nuclear weapons going off in a single day. So would you all notice if, you know, some government, you know, decided to nuke a hurricane and put two, three, four, five nukes into it? And the next day, the hurricane would produce that much energy again and again and again. And so, um, The methods and the energy it would take to modify these very large storms are on scales that we humans just can’t compete with. And so it kind of goes back to my bumper sticker that I always say when we talk about climate, weather, and really who’s in charge is, you know, God big. And as humans, not that we don’t have an impact on the environment, but our impacts, especially on an energy scale, are relatively small.
SPEAKER 02 :
Well, on that note, I need to take a sip of this Door County coffee, Fred, because it’s just so fantastic and keeps me going too.
SPEAKER 01 :
Yeah. It’s the best coffee I’ve ever had. We order it all the time. We just ran out back. So we had to order some more. My wife got onto me for that.
SPEAKER 02 :
So Fred, we used to order bags this big. Now we order bags that are this big. So if you can get them this big or this big Door County coffee. Okay, Dr. Homan, now I want to move on from this and get to chemtrails because everybody wants to know about chemtrails. But really quickly, the HAARP. So you’re saying HAARP, H-A-A-R-P, stands for, let’s see, I wrote it down, high altitude aerial… reconnaissance program out of Alaska. People involved with the HAARP program who’ve worked for the government over the years have said that the point was the U.S. Air Force wants to own the weather. They want to be able to direct the weather. And so this program went on for decades. It allegedly ended some years ago. But are you saying that the HAARP program probably can’t produce enough energy to actually direct a hurricane toward whomever?
SPEAKER 03 :
Oh, certainly not. And the HART program was a program done to monitor the upper parts of our atmosphere, what we call the ionosphere. We are very interested in the ionosphere because that is where we bounce a lot of our radio signals off. The ionosphere changes from the night sky to the day side because of the sun. If you’ve ever been dating ourselves, we’re trying to use new technology in all these podcasts, but this is also going out over AM radio. And have you ever listened to AM radio and you might be in Denver and be able to hear a radio show from Chicago or Dallas? Because the ionosphere changes and those changes affect communication signals, our ability to communicate with satellites and things like that. So the Air Force’s interest is not to modify the weather. Plus, weather as we know it doesn’t exist in the ionosphere. Right. It’s down lower in the lower part of the atmosphere where we live called the troposphere. So, no, the HART program was a monitoring program so that we could, you know, keep track of how our signals, what our adversaries were up to. And then, you know, all those early alert systems that are trying to, you know, see if there are missiles coming over the poles from our friends in the other hemisphere.
SPEAKER 02 :
All right. Okay. Now, that’s a likely story that someone in the Air Force would tell. Yeah, well, you know, I got my King’s Reels book right here. Oh, oh, we got to get to that.
SPEAKER 01 :
Okay. Before we get to that, though, and I also want to get back to your prediction and see if you’ve got a prediction on future weather, because you were pretty spot on on your last prediction. But before we do that, we do have to do our interesting fact of the week. Okay.
SPEAKER 02 :
Wait, Fred, we don’t have to get right to it because I want to make the announcement that I want to thank Pete in Houston, Texas for sponsoring this week’s interesting fact of the week. Thank you, Pete. God bless you. We appreciate your help.
SPEAKER 01 :
Yeah. So Doug, I’ve noticed the last couple of shows you kind of stall trying, you know, going into the interesting fact. All right. Okay. So are you ready? I’m ready. Always ready. Okay. So here’s the interesting fact of the week.
SPEAKER 02 :
what shape does a snowflake always take on what’s the basic shape it takes on that’s not fair i heard that they’re all different i want to i want to do a preemptive protest okay so what i’m thinking is there must be a
SPEAKER 01 :
There is a shape.
SPEAKER 02 :
There must be a geometrically defined shape that they all conform to, even though they’re all different, which that kind of blows my mind right there. So how is it that God keeps them all in one shape and then still makes them all different? Just to blow your mind, that’s all. I’m going to guess a doadecahedron. Paul, do you know?
SPEAKER 03 :
Oh, I knew at one point. It’s a hexagonal shape, I believe. Oh! Correct. It has to do with how the crystals form in ice and the bonds between the molecules when you go from liquid to ice. Very cool. Yeah, that’s right.
SPEAKER 02 :
That’s way more scientifically relevant than me. I’ve been waiting to drop the word doadecahedron into a conversation for like five years.
SPEAKER 01 :
But now, let’s… No, go ahead, Fred. I was going to say, let’s get to chemtrails. I know the audience has just been, you know, at the edge of their seats. Chemtrails. Are they real?
SPEAKER 02 :
Have they been poisoning me for 40 years from 35,000 feet? Lay it on me.
SPEAKER 03 :
Yeah. So chemtrails seems to be a nice play on words from the word contrail. And I think everyone knows what a contrail is. A contrail is a condensation cloud. It’s similar to the process we were talking about with cloud seeding, but the exhaust has some particulates in it from an aircraft or even your car. You see it coming out of your car on a cold day. By the way, on a cold day, you make contrails. They come out of your mouth. You ever seen your breath? There’s your chemtrail. Right. So when the gases and exhaust from a airplane comes out the back, it rapidly cools and we introduce water vapor. There it is again. Water vapor into a cold environment and that cold environment, it condenses into a cloud calling a contrail. Interestingly enough, at the Air Force Academy, here’s my copy of the freshman knowledge book called Contrails. And mine’s pretty worn out, but I can open it to the first page here and you see the contrails coming out of the Thunderbirds. And one of the interesting things I stumbled about, I think the Air Force Academy coined the term chemtrails. Because when you take your freshman chemistry class, they play on the words from the awesome professors there in the chemistry department. They label their syllabus. They call it chemtrails. And if your producers want to, you can go out and find videos on YouTube of folks who think they have uncovered the U.S. government conspiracy because we are teaching classes there. As far back as the 80s on chemtrails because the Air Force Academy Chemistry Department has a class on chemtrails. And here’s the contrails.
SPEAKER 02 :
And so it’s quite possible that the origin of the term chemtrails could go back to a relatively witty chemistry professor at the Air Force Academy?
SPEAKER 03 :
That is very possible. I took that chemtrail class. Every, you know, a thousand freshmen a year at the Air Force Academy apparently are taking classes on chemtrails.
SPEAKER 01 :
Oh, okay. Okay, so this internet guy, he didn’t really, he thinks he stumbled onto the conspiracy, right?
SPEAKER 03 :
Yeah, but really he stumbled onto a freshman chemistry syllabus. And it’s interesting to hear him go, they’re learning about ions and chemical reactions and sounds like a good chemistry class to me. you can’t make this up.
SPEAKER 01 :
You can’t make that up. Let’s play a clip from that guy really quick.
SPEAKER 05 :
The reason I wanted to get this document is because it’s, uh, from the U S air force Academy. It’s a chemistry manual from the fall of 1990. And, um, of course the U S air force Academy is located in Colorado Springs where they train the pilots for the U F U F U S air force. Um, The interesting thing about this document is the title of it. That’s the title of it. This is a copy off of the microfiche, the title page.
SPEAKER 02 :
There’s US Air Force Chemtrail Chemistry. Wow. And so it’s possible that the concept of chemtrails and the origin of the conspiracy could just go back to a relatively witty chemistry professor at the Air Force Academy. Yes. And the secret chemtrails class, even though it’s a secret, it’s being given or made available to every freshman at the Air Force Academy. Remember, Doug, it’s only a secret if you don’t know about it.
SPEAKER 01 :
I’ve heard the Naval Academy has a course on bioluminescent trails that ships leave and that they’re leaving chemicals or hiding it in the bioluminescence of the water.
SPEAKER 1 :
Wow.
SPEAKER 03 :
Well, you know, this kind of goes back to our geoengineering. There are some interesting studies that were done. Things like contrails do affect our weather. They do affect our climate. They do affect… the Earth’s energy balance, there’s a couple interesting papers about the effects of the lack of contrails right after 9-11. There was no contrails over the United States for a period of time because all air traffic was shut down. And then also due to less air traffic during the global pandemic. So there have been some attempts to quantify the impact of clouds that humans make called contrails. So we do affect the climate. We do affect the weather.
SPEAKER 01 :
Hey, we’re running out of time in this broadcast, so go to our website to catch the rest of this program, realsignsradio.com.
SPEAKER 04 :
Scholars can’t explain it all away. Get ready to be awed by the handiwork of God.
SPEAKER 1 :
Tune into Real Science Radio. Turn up the Real Science Radio. Keeping it real. That’s what I’m talking about.
