The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
5 Points

Cloud Seeding Should Be Used

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/5/2015 Category: Science
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,502 times Debate No: 71133
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (1)




Cloud seeding should be used worldwide. This is because, according to both and Weather , cloud seeding is safe and virtually harmless to the environment. It can safely cause rain in drought-ravaged areas and keep farms from failing. We should institute cloud seeding in areas where it is necessary.


I accept your debate.

Often times, cloud seeding does not achieve the desired effect, and produces harmful side effects. These include

-Rain Suppression
-Silver Iodide Toxicity

Silver Iodide is a chemical found in much higher quantities in seeded cloud rain then regular cloud rain. The Office of Environment, Health and Safety, UC Berkeley, rates silver iodide as a Class C, non-soluble, inorganic, hazardous chemical that pollutes water and soil. Your sources were wrong in telling you that it was not harmful to the environment, because it very much is. Seeded clouds have hazardous chemicals that pollute water and the soil. This can be harmful to animals and plants alike. This is an article describing the effects of Silver Iodide on the human body:

"Chronic Exposure/Target Organs: Chronic ingestion of iodides may produce "iodism", which may be manifested by skin rash, running nose, headache and irritation of the mucous membranes. Weakness, anemia, loss of weight and general depression may also occur. Chronic inhalation or ingestion may cause argyria characterized by blue-gray discoloration of the eyes, skin and mucous membranes. Chronic skin contact may cause permanent discoloration of the skin"

In conclusion, cloud seeding should not be used worldwide. This is because it is harmful to the environment and animals, and the rain from the seeded clouds is high in harmful chemicals.

Debate Round No. 1


I see you copy-pasted your argument from Well done for citing it though. Anyway, we could use other methods of seeding such as dry ice, which produces a similar result as silver iodine. And, according to "Sierra Lakes Chemistry Study," silver iodine is not harmful to aquatic or land organisms of a multicellular nature.


I would like to stretch my argument on Silver Iodide before continuing, for you seem to not understand how dangerous this chemical is. As for the Sierra Lake study, I would appreciate it if you left a link to this source because I can't see where it ever gives that information.

According to the Colorado National Park Service, the result of cloud seeding Silver Iodide runoff has had adverse effects on the soil and vegetation. Testing the rainwater has also been a faulty and hazardous experience. According to the PGCD, since they can't control where the seeded clouds dump water, the sampling process is nearly impossible. Many ecosystems may be harmfully affected by the seeded clouds we don't even know about. Since the contaminated water sinks into soil and can runoff into streams and other bodies of water, it doesn't make sense the dangerous chemical wouldn't harm aquatic or land animals. If it has such dangerous effects on humans, the same should happen with any organism. Saying it doesn't harm the organisms would be going against facts I have found on several websites.

As for the dry ice method, unless you can give to me a specific example where this has worked, I have no way of knowing if the dry ice would help anything.
Debate Round No. 2


Well yes, silver iodine may be lethal, but is usually fairly diluted, according to the "Sierra Mountain Watershed Survey." Also, dry ice and other materials could be used.


Since you have failed to give me an example of an instance where another material has been used instead of silver iodide and was successful, i'll have to ignore that argument. You stated yourself it was lethal. It doesn't matter if the chemical is fairly diluted, it is still dangerous and can cause serious harm to ecosystems. The testing of the soil is faulty and unreliable, so it very possible other studies don't have accurate information. In conclusion, cloud seeding should not be used. This is because it is plainly unnatural and has already wreaked havoc on several ecosystems. Silver Iodide is a harmful chemical that should never be used in the first place. Vote Con! Thanks for the good debate.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by bsh1 3 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Con successfully shows the possible harms of cloud seeding. Pro's only response is that dry ice could be used as a safer alternative, but provides not examples, statistics, or any in-round evidence for that claim. Pro is essentially committing an ipse dixit fallacy. Args go Con. Sources to Con for using them.