I wasn't suggesting a change in weather without monitoring the results. That would be stupid.

Meteorology has improved quite a bit since the dark ages of the 50s. We have sensitive satellites that track a wide range of the spectrum, and with real scientists interpreting the data, the results of human weather changes become immediately apparent. New patterns that depart the test area would result in an immediate halt of activity to observe the effect. Continued activity may or may not increase the effect, but we won't know unless we try.

Extreme climate events in the US over the past 20 years has resulted in 40 weather-related disasters with damages/costs in excess of $1 billion; 23 of these disasters occurred in the southeastern states with total damages/costs of about $85 billion (Table 1). Most of the property damages were associated with floods and hurricanes. Low-lying Gulf and South Atlantic coastal counties are particularly vulnerable to storm surge. Most (56%) of the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) policies in force and 74% of total NFIP claim payments occurred in southeastern coastal counties between 1978 and 1998 (Heinz Center 1999). Flooding is not the only problem stemming from unusual surface water flows. The southern heat wave and drought of 1998 resulted in damages in excess of $6 billion and at least 200 deaths.
(Source: Southeastern Regional Climate Assessment<?a>)http://198.122.199.205/regional/assessment_progress.html

Hiding our heads under the blankets and hoping the bad weather misses us is not a very good survival plan. Of course Polynesia would need to be brought on line with any tests attempted in the region, with compensation for any resultant problems, as well as rent for the test area. Interestingly enough, if the test prove positive and it is possible to improve the global weather situation by amplifying or attenuating the El Niño/La Niña events, Polynesia could be looking at an interesting future as the world’s thermostat. I wonder what there rates would be... Dan