The lecturer maintains that cloud seeding is not good becuase of laboratory settings and air polluction. This counters the reading passage's claim that seeding clouds are a solution in many things.
First, the lecturer insists that since the laboratory settings are tightly controlled, they are different from the natural environments which are dunamic. Also, the lecturer adds that the cloud seeding can't really be anticipated when the results come out. Adding silver iodid may prevent precipitation by breaking large water droplets into ones too small to fall from clouds and could give farming a disaster. This cast doubt on the reading passage's claim that could seeding has been proven effective in lab experiments. Experiments tell that injecting silver iodide to clouds will freeze water quickly, so large water droplets that farming couldn't possibly be bothered.
In addition, the lecturer states that similar results as the results frim Shanghai and Beijing couldn't be expected in large areas of farmland in US. This is because Shanghai and Beiijing are big cities with high levels of air pollution unlike such places in the US like American Midwest, where there is little air pollution. This strongly disputes the reading passage's claim that cloud seeding has been implemented successfully in China to control weather.
Finally, the lecturer points out that the reduction in hail reported by kansas weather program was not unique to parts of US. States all over the nation reported less hail last year, so 30% drop in hail in US could've been just a normal weather phenomenon. This refutes the reading passage's claim that 30% of hail had dropped thanks to the utilization of cloud seeding in parts of US.