Makes me think the space force has a laser..
(www.whitehouse.gov)
Comments (42)
sorted by:
Trump did repeatedly say that we have new weapons technologies beyond nukes.
Maybe not outright -- but heavily implied, as posturing against Iran or China I think.
Oh shit, is this the nuclear engines thing? This is actually one of the most-discussed technologies for getting us to other planets or even star systems in the next century or so. Good stuff.
Oh no, are you one of those astral projection people or something?
Oh, well that's more plausible, then. I hear the Trump family has his diary :)
John G Trump, who is likely the father of Julian Assange
And a time traveller
Trump’s uncle did collect all of Nikola Tesla’s work and allegedly passed on the collected information to him
yeah think California fires. Lots of weird stuff going on there
I was thinking starlink doubles since you could use lasers for comms or as a weapon depending on the amount of energy being supplied.
Like in this paper they talk about it, Global Area Strike System from 1997.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.hsdl.org/%3Fview%26did%3D729248&ved=2ahUKEwjmi7H39pfuAhUPd6wKHeLSBTQQFjAAegQIARAB&usg=AOvVaw2y17dKXRE3mlwfdcEYJc67
" At President Trump’s direction, the Department of Defense will establish and implement a plan to demonstrate the energy flexibility and cost effectiveness of a small modular reactor at a domestic military installation, and will pilot a transportable small modular reactor for a mission other than naval propulsion for the first time in half a century."
A few thoughts...
This would mean that we already have them, and he's going to showcase them "at a domestic military installation".
Trump has postured more than once to our foreign enemies that we have the best weapons, things that have never been seen before. He's about to show that he's not full of crap.
By showing that we have cutting edge weapons, he's telling foreign countries, DON'T GET INVOLVED when I or the military move to REmove the domestic traitors that Biden, Harris, Clinton, Obama, Schiff, etc. etc.
There’s a q post that had an image of strange lighting I can’t remember it but I just saw it today. I’ll update if I find it.
Mostly likely unrelated but still https://qalerts.app/?q=Lightning+
Da everloving fuck?
Particle Beam
Probably have had nuclear powered satellites for many years. Rumors about sending in seals to grab ones that had degrading orbit and crashed back to earth. No I don't have any proof only remember reading about it a while back.
When I saw the ruler straight edges in some burned areas AND one playground where everything was vaporized but the plastic slide was untouched, I figured they were using DEWs, which don't melt plastic. Plus there were reports of beam of lights over some of the fire areas.
There was an Airborne Laser program. It produced an aircraft designated the YAL-1A (Boeing 747 with internal oxygen-iodine laser and nose pointing turret). It shot down a boosting ballistic missile target on 11 Feb 2010. And the Obama administration canceled the program and junked the system, having dispersed the design teams. It will take a long while to revisit that subject. (I edited the winning proposal for the program.)
Most of what you are talking about has been looked at in the '80s and passed over as being impractical. (Particle beams will wander in the Earth's magnetic field. Lasers can't hit the ground through clouds or smoke. Big tungsten rods are just a way to bore deep holes in the Earth. Satellite nuclear power is cool, we used to do it, but everyone got all nasty when some came out of orbit, so we are standing in a corner facing the wall.) Other stuff...we can't discuss.
We flew nuclear reactors on one or two satellites. The Russians flew it as a matter of course to power their radar surveillance satellites, but they had a few problems with on-orbit failures and a nasty de-orbit with junk all across Canada, so the taste for that became outworn.
Most of the energy technology is known, or openly discussed.
I'd have to refresh that reference. But look, anything truly remarkable would be classified, and Q wouldn't mention it, even by implication. "Going forward in order to look back"? You have to be careful for meanings that are not apparent. I once worked on a technical project that I summarized as "trying to see the invisible through the opaque." A clever handle, and entirely technically correct, but try to guess what that was.
We were trying to visualize airplane wake turbulence when our line of sight would be through clouds. Pretty close to an insoluble problem, though we did get some patents from the research.
Look into the Rod of God
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinetic_bombardment
Yes, they do. Many.
DEWs’
Do you have a link to where KC said something about that? Was it youtube or written? I've read a lot of his prophesies but missed this