A century-old legacy of making rain—and controversy—echoes in a modern innovator’s journey.

Reignite Research introduced the hypothesis that Augustus Doricko, a 21st-century drone cloud-seeding entrepreneur, is the reincarnation of Charles Hatfield, the famed 1916 rainmaker. Both men share a rare profession—making rain during droughts—and both faced public scrutiny after catastrophic floods struck soon after their atmospheric interventions.

Legacy & Adaptation Note

This feature builds on Dr. Walter Semkiw’s archived methodology and applies it to a new case: the proposed reincarnation link between early 20th-century rainmaker Charles Hatfield and 21st-century cloud-seeding entrepreneur Augustus Doricko.

We have carefully retained Walter’s core analytical principles—especially the 10-Point Validation Matrix—while expanding the review with contemporary context, ethical framing, cross-forum intersections, and 2025 research standards. This piece aims to honor Semkiw’s disciplined approach while adapting it for a modern, data-rich environment.

---

Introduction: When Patterns Repeat Across a Century

Reincarnation research depends on the convergence of patterns—behaviors, talents, geographic tendencies, relationships, and life challenges that re-emerge across lifetimes. In most cases, these patterns appear in children recalling past-life memories, or in well-documented regressions. But occasionally, the evidence arises from adult behavioral trajectories: two individuals separated by time yet united by an extremely rare vocation, a mirrored sequence of life events, or even a shared crisis that seems karmically choreographed.

The proposed Charles Hatfield → Augustus Doricko case is exactly this type of challenge. It is not driven by childhood statements or spontaneous recall. Instead, it emerges from an improbable alignment: two men, born 110 years apart, who independently attempted to engineer rainfall, attracted public fascination, and were held responsible for catastrophic floods—each in the American West, each triggering intense political, financial, and moral controversy.

The uploaded research dossier (Reincarnation Hypothesis Analysis: Charles Hatfield and Augustus Doricko, 2025) provides a systematic evaluation using Semkiw’s 10-Point Validation Framework. The findings are striking: unique shared vocation, converging personality traits, overlapping geography, and an eerie repetition of flood-related blame. Other indicators—birthmarks, childhood phobias, relationship reconnection—are neutral or absent, as expected in a non-violent-death case. The Bayesian synthesis in the document assigns an approximate 70–90% likelihood of past-life continuity .

This Reignite feature builds on that analysis, contextualizes it for contemporary readers, and frames the case within best-practice ethics, research caution, and cross-ecosystem discussion pathways.

---

Summary of the Original Research (Credited to Source)

The uploaded analysis evaluates the reincarnation hypothesis across ten dimensions—physical resemblance, birthmarks, innate talents, personality, communication, relationships, geographic overlap, phobias, religious/ethnic shifts, and death-to-birth proximity—then synthesizes them into a probabilistic conclusion .

Physical Resemblance (Compatible)

Hatfield was thin, angular-faced, with a long narrow nose. Doricko has a long face and pronounced features. The resemblance is described as “mild,” not strong enough to carry the case but not inconsistent with it. Scored ~2/4.

Birthmarks / Scars (Unknown-Neutral)

Because Hatfield died naturally, no reincarnation-matched birthmark would be expected. No relevant marks are documented for either man. Scored 0/4.

Innate Talents & Behaviors (Exceptionally Strong)

This is the cornerstone of the case.

• Hatfield: a pioneering pluviculturist who claimed the ability to make rain using secret chemical towers.
• Doricko: a drone-cloud-seeding founder modernizing the same mission with aerospace engineering.

Both pursued weather modification obsessively. Both contracted with governments. Both were blamed for severe floods after successful operations—San Diego’s 1916 disaster for Hatfield, and the 2025 Texas Hill Country flood for Doricko.

This parallel is described as “statistically extraordinary,” scoring 4/4 and contributing the highest likelihood ratio in the Bayesian synthesis.

Personality & Values (Strong)

Both are goal-oriented, confident, spiritually themed innovators attempting to relieve drought. Both are resilient amid criticism. Hatfield displayed quiet determination; Doricko blends hard-tech bravado with explicit Christian motivation. Scored 3/4.

Communication Style (Era-Distorted, Weak)

Hatfield’s terse early-1900s formal tone cannot be meaningfully compared to Doricko’s Gen-Z tech-founder voice. Misalignment reflects era, not identity. Scored 1/4.

Re-encountered Relationships (Absent)

No apparent reincarnation of Hatfield’s brother, wife, adversaries, or municipal collaborators in Doricko’s circle. Scored 0/4.

Geographic Overlap (Strong and Specific)

Hatfield lived and died in Los Angeles County.
Doricko’s HQ and life are centered in El Segundo—only ~25 miles from Hatfield’s burial site. This aligns with the “50-mile rule” often seen in reincarnation research. Scored 3/4.

Phobias (Not Applicable)

Hatfield had a peaceful death; no phobia transfer is expected. Doricko shows none. Scored 0/4.

Religion / Ethnicity (Neutral Continuity)

Both are culturally Christian white Americans. Not a confirmatory nor contradictory factor. Scored 1/4.

Death-to-Birth Interval (Mixed)

Hatfield died in 1958; Doricko was born around 1999–2000. A 40+ year gap is long but not incompatible. Place continuity boosts the criterion; chronology tempers it. Scored 2/4.

Overall Research Conclusion

The dossier concludes an estimated ~80% probability that the parallels are best explained by a reincarnation match, largely due to the unprecedented talent-level match and karmic flood-repetition pattern .

---

What’s New: Context, Methods, and Ethical Framing

A New Type of Reincarnation Case

Most reincarnation literature focuses on:

• spontaneous child memory cases (Stevenson, Tucker),
• regression cases (Leininger, others), or
• medium/psychic validation.

The Hatfield→Doricko case is unusual. It is a behavioral-pattern case emerging without self-reported past-life memory. This means:

• Verification must rely on external evidence, not introspective statements.
• Parallels must exceed what could arise from personality archetypes or historical inspiration.
• Analysts must take special care to avoid narrative overfitting.

Why This Case Matters

The niche of “rainmaking” has been historically tiny. Hatfield was famous precisely because few others claimed his talent. Modern cloud seeding does exist, but combining:

• early obsession,
• founder-driven innovation,
• drought-targeted contracting,
• and being publicly blamed for deadly floods

makes the Doricko profile extremely rare. When building contemporary reincarnation taxonomy, such low-base-rate alignment deserves scrutiny.

Data Quality and Bayesian Framing

The dossier uses Bayesian synthesis—a strength rarely found in legacy reincarnation literature. This method reduces hype by quantifying how much each criterion shifts probability rather than treating them all as equal. We endorse this approach for modern cases, particularly those involving adults with no spontaneous memories.

Ethical Guardrails

Reignite applies contemporary ethics:

• No declaration of definitive past-life identity.
  We emphasize probabilistic framing only.
• Respect for living individuals, especially minors.
  Doricko is an adult public figure, but private details are omitted.
• Avoidance of political narratives.
  Flood-response politics are not evaluated as moral threads—only as event parallels.
• Clear labeling of evidence types.
  This case falls under Behavioral Inference and Talent Carryover, not Spontaneous Memory.

Future-Ready Research Techniques

To extend validation responsibly:

• facial landmark analysis (AI-supported, ethically reviewed),
• transcript pattern analysis across interviews,
• cluster analysis comparing Doricko’s motivations with known historical innovator archetypes,
• optional past-life regression conducted by a qualified, evidence-aligned practitioner.

None of these were performed in the original dossier. They represent next-step enhancement opportunities for a future Reignite follow-up.

---

Pattern Signals

Talent Carryover (Primary Signal)

Rainmaking is not a field that recruits at scale. The extremely narrow vocational match is the case’s strongest evidential pillar.

Karmic Repetition of Crisis

Both men faced public backlash when rainmaking was followed by deadly floods—an archetypal “unfinished work” scenario.

Geographic Magnetism

The return to Los Angeles County is highly consistent with classic Stevenson/Tucker locality patterns.

Faith-Framed Mission

Continuity of Christian cosmology—expressed differently across centuries—may indicate value-system carryover.

Absence of Trauma Indicators

Because Hatfield died peacefully, the neutral result on phobias strengthens internal consistency.

---

Forum Intersections & Questions for Readers

Although this case is new, ReincarnationForum.com contains several thematic threads that intersect:

• “Occupational carryover cases”
• “Innovation across lifetimes”
• “Karmic repetition of life challenges”
• “Cases without child memory recall”

We recommend linking this case to existing discussions on:
“Exceptional talents persisting across incarnations.”

Questions for community dialogue:

1. Is a rare, highly specific talent more compelling than physical resemblance in adult-onset cases?
2. How should researchers interpret karmic mirroring (e.g., both men linked to floods)?
3. For contemporary cases without spontaneous memory, what research methods should be prioritized?
4. Should behavioral-pattern cases be considered a separate category in reincarnation research taxonomy?

---

Limitations & Verification Status

Partially Verified

This is not a spontaneous memory case and therefore cannot achieve full verification under traditional criteria.

Key Limitations

• No past-life recall from Doricko.
• No relationship recurrences documented.
• No direct facial biometric study.
• Wide death-to-birth interval.
• Possible cultural or historical inspiration (though no evidence suggests Doricko studied Hatfield).

Overall Assessment

Despite these limitations, the behavior-pattern parallels are so unusual that they push the case meaningfully above baseline.

---

Closing Reflection

Cases like Hatfield→Doricko challenge the boundaries of traditional reincarnation research. They force us to look beyond the presence or absence of memories and attend to broader patterns—talent, temperament, geography, and life challenges. In this case, the convergence is dramatic: a rare vocation, a karmic event sequence, and a shared mission to solve drought stress. While not conclusive, the evidence is strong enough to justify ongoing research.

Your gift keeps the research rigorous, sustains the archive, and fuels the outreach that helps more families find answers.

Scan below to share across your devices: