Salty Cracker and Wall Street Apes are now insinuating it. The op was a success, they've created a narrative binary where either space lasers did it or climate change (MSM narrative) did it. Meanwhile the much more likely story (strategic arson ahead of high winds + collusion with crooked state and local officials to mishandle the response on purpose) has effectively been shoved under the rug. Now instead of having the entire internet digging into that to possibly find some arsonists or conspiracies to mishandle response, they are instead "laser focused" on space lasers.
Of course, if the DEW theory is correct, this is fine. I just don't think it is.
endrant
It is generally not possible to prove a negative; you should know this, and not use that as an empty challenge. I can't prove that somebody didn't obtain arbalests from the 12th century and used them to fire self-consuming incendiary arrows. (Can you?) Why should the military have any DEW in secret programs when all the ones it has built are in open programs? What could be more impressive than the YAL-1A, conducted totally in the open?
You are correct about the U-2 and the F-117, but not about the SR-71 Blackbird. It's existence was announced 5 months before its first flight. Secrecy is relevant only when it is relevant. The B-21 Raider bomber is classified, but its existence is not secret (public rollout in 2022).
The point is: you can't "assume" the existence of something just because you can't prove its non-existence. That opens the door to fire-breathing dragons, fire-bombs carried by balloon (per Japan in World War II), or secret agents throwing bottles of napalm. Especially when the credible culprits are downed and sparking powerlines (evidence).
I do know that,but you implied that these planes don't exist cause you don't know about them.....
That not a real argument, why did you use it?
I've clearly proven with examples that the military keeps secrets.
As I would expect them to do. The technology of shooting lasers at the ground, from aircraft is not complex. If they wanted this capability, they would have it. And if they wanted it kept secret it would be...
That's the way it works. If no one knows that something exists, then you have to proceed on the basis that it doesn't exist. You can't prove that something exists if you have no evidence for it. I happen to be aware of and involved with developments in the field, and the rest of you are not. I happen to have examined this precise mission for a real laser, and the rest of you have not.
And I have proven that the military is quite open about laser weapons and otherwise classified aircraft.
You don't know a thing about the "technology" of shooting lasers at the ground, so to opine about its complexity is a conceit. You don't even know that a "they" is involved, or that "this capability" was even present. Your own basis of argument is that it cannot be kept a secret---inasmuch as you seem dedicated to exposing it.
Major kek.