Kids have known how to use a magnifying glass to burn ants for over a hundred year. It's illogical to think that the DS hasn't come up with something similar and perfected it in that time, especially given how addicted people are to the normalcy virus.
DEW is far more likely to be real than fake and, even if it wasn't DEW, it could be a satellite that concentrates energy from the sun or even a concentrated microwave array. But it's not natural fire or regular arson.
I have read that houses with blue roofs burned and roofs and things that were non-blue survived. The blue roof meme is bogus. What may be relevant is that such roofs could have been associated with people who had nicer homes---meaning that they were also situated where the fire wasn't. Hard for something to burn if no fire approached it.
Still fishy as hell though. We don't build roofs with flammable materials here in Texas. They're usually asphalt shingles, tile, or even sheet metal. Why the fuck would he focus on the roofs anyway?
You can have a wood roof, but I don't know that I've ever seen one. Even so the shakes and shingles must be treated to make them flame retardant.
-I won't elaborate on this but I can say with a high degree of confidence that space-based energy weapons are very real.
-Seems odd that President Mashed Potato brains would be read in on this technology. Makes zero sense that they'd share this with him. I would cautiously view this as another example of Patriots being in control of Biden (or whomever this is).
-I have yet to hear any kind of rationale for why the color of the roof would matter in relation to a directed energy weapon. One would expect the materials for the roofs in most areas to be identical, typically asphalt shingles. Different colors have different properties in terms of reflecting certain wavelengths of light of course, but I'm wondering if the roof color/type is more of a marker for whomever is controlling the weapon to avoid. However, that is pure speculation on my part.
Has anyone heard a proper, scientific-based rationale?
I was wondering the same thing. The material would be what blocks the attack not the color. Unless it is a signal to them to miss like you said. I was thinking a metal or ceramic roof might be good but I don't know what building materials are typical in Hawaii.
The roof/umbrella/whatever color reflects the energy since a laser is a single frequency. AFAIK, there are no laser diodes that can change their resonant frequency (except maybe a small tuning) , so they are stuck with a particular frequency once built and deployed. Large laser weapons are made up of many smaller laser diodes that have their beams combined, so this would complicate changing frequency even if possible.
Here's the problem. Suppose that a target surface was 90% reflective at whatever wavelength you care. 10% would still get through and heat up the material. If you are working only at the level of tens of watts, then, yes, the "reflective" panel will survive because the leakage is within its thermal tolerance. Get high enough for weapon effects and the leakage is high enough to degrade the reflectivity and the whole process destroys the target. We studied targets that were mirror-polished metal. At open-fire intensities of a hundred watts/cm2, the leakage was enough to destroy the reflectivity. We dreamed up the possibility of a "cleanly-degrading polymer" coating, and it worked out the same way. The CDP would just evaporate and expose the bare metal again. This was 50 years ago.
But if visible light lasers had been at work, people would have seen the light flashes. No such reports.
If it was an infrared beam (which it would have to be, since that is the focus of all research in that area since the 1970s), neither you nor a camera would "see" any light from a scattered beam.
And if it were a weapon-class laser, the odds would be high that anyone who saw it directly or semi-directly would be blinded by the radiation. Zap yourself in the eye with a laser pointer and find out what 5 milliwatts looks like. Nothing to repeat.
And, having been in the business of designing space-based DEWs, I can say with a high degree of confidence that there are none.
Biden was just free-associating a popular news item with the ruins. "Mr. President, be sure to mention the 'right roof color.' It will excite the crazy types and ruin their credibility."
The color of the roof would not matter at all. Color reflectance only works partially and would not be a barrier to a powerful beam. But in any case, available laser weapon technology is all based on infrared wavelengths, and to IR a blue roof would look black.
Also, laser weapons are clear-weather weapons. They will not penetrate clouds and smoke---and targets cannot be seen through clouds or smoke. The statistics for cloud-free line-of-sight from space to ground are generally poor. (I had occasion to research the subject for a system design.) Use as an incendiary weapon has long been understood, but equally well understood as a frivolous use of a valuable asset better applied to other targets. (Once you burn up your laser fuel or reactants, all you have left is expensive junk.)
Laser weapons from space do not project from all directions, as would be needed in order to melt automobile wheels on both sides of a car.
And that's why they don't. Once you find that the design is impracticable (can't be done, for technical, logistical, or financial reasons), you sigh and roll up the drawings and wait for time to change the circumstances or boundary conditions. Lasers are not magical contrivances; they require lots of heavy, expensive technology and plenty of power supply.
Do you really think that everything that has been designed has been built? There are various levels of design. And there are whole coffee table books about the advanced aircraft designed by the Third Reich which never were built. The U.S. has plenty of abandoned or down-selected designs that either were not built or only made it to the point of a mock-up or prototype.
Who know what they are talking about, and point out that there is no evidence for DEWs. Target selectivity is just as easy for someone with a match. You have more evidence for witchcraft and spells.
Except nothing. The Maui facility, as I stated, conducts research in ground-to-space atmospheric viewing---which is part of directed energy weapon research. But nothing to do with weapon system testing. They are probably exploiting "guidestar" lasers to develop adaptive optical systems for space viewing. There is no test range, and the atmospheric conditions are only favorable at the altitude where the base is located. Propagation at sea level is less desirable. And you cannot shoot a laser beam through an intervening hill or mountain.
That is not the only thing that the Maui facility does, by the way. It has a very large mission in the subject of telescopic observations of satellites.
I'm not impressed with second-hand commentary about this from those who are not in the field. I was in the field. The system-level development and testing is and has been conducted by the Air Force Weapons Laboratory at Kirtland AFB in Albuquerque, New Mexico, from the beginning. They have access to instrumented test ranges and they do take pot shots there. They have also done air-to-air beam experiments over decades. But nobody has been seriously interested in using lasers to promote arson. We have incendiary artillery for that job. A laser weapon is a valuable piece of equipment reserved for special purposes that only it can perform. (The weapons being developed are for anti-aircraft applications. They lock the beam on moving targets and point upwards. There's no way anything like this could depress and engage stationary land targets that are not military systems, and shooting from AMOS is a non-starter.)
From their web page:
DIRECTED ENERGY
Directed Energy (DE) harnesses the power of the electromagnetic spectrum to enable Airmen to effectively and affordably strike critical targets at the speed of light.
Maybe there is a clearing from their mountain top? Maybe used by the airmen mentioned above? I can't say for sure but still within the realms of possibility.
They are talking mostly about airborne targets, particularly air-to-air. I don't think a tank will be much vulnerable, nor will they have a fire control system that can pick targets out of a cluttered background. Air targets will have a sky background, which will be relatively "cool" by contrast.
You don't understand topography, do you? There IS a clearing at the mountain top. That's where the buildings are located. Clearing or not, there is no clear line of sight to Lahaina, because there is an intervening system of mountain ridges on the west lobe of the island and Lahaina is at sea level. That's a line-of-sight drop of 10,000 feet. Eyeballing it, at the ridgelines of the West Maui Forest Reserve, any such beam would be only at 2500 feet altitude. Lahaina is protected by shadowing.
You can be involved in technology research without being a mad scientist and destroying the local population. You are still grasping at straws. And you don't really understand what would be evidence, i.e., physical events or residue that would be possible ONLY from the use of a DEW. Heat is not one of them, in the context of a forest fire, and combustion that can melt metal and glass.
Genuinely curious, have you seen the photos of fence posts where the screws inside the wood reached really high temps, burned a circle around the screws but left the outside of the fence posts intact. Implying the screws were heated within and did not burn the wood. I don't think it's possible with incendiary artillery.
Maybe not, but I don't much believe in that, either. And I certainly don't believe it could happen with a laser. It could be the fact that the fence post wood was more resistant to the fire environment than the more-highly-conductive metal. It is a commonplace that wooden timbers can have more resistance to a dwelling fire than steel structure. Quite surprising, but true.
There are a lot of people with experience of wildfires, and I don't see them coming out en masse as being amazed by this fire. The only people who seem to be obsessively bewildered are those who are not firefighters.
There is one guy has some good videos, forensic arborist Robert Brane. Anyways he has talked to lots of firefighters and discusses it in his videos. Many experts do seem to think it's not normal.
DEWs? Of course. I saw the target engagement films in the 1970s. I designed and analyzed them and their target effects. Tell me something I don't know.
Styropyro? If he exists, there is no need for space-based DEWs. Probably as dangerous to himself as to any target. He would be the best debunk of this whole nutty space-based idea. Right up there with flamethrowers, phosphorus, and other art of the trade.
Part of how they took down the towers on 9/11. Bluebeam to simulate planes; DEW to create impact illusion; interior bombs for the controlled demolition.
Mockingbird media control to gaslight and shape narrative.
How do y'all think Crop Circles are made? I suspect that Crop Circles are a test example for the Military / Intelligence agents to practice their skills.
Have you ever seen a laser engraver machine working, just scale that up to a few Gigawatts and mounted on a steerable satellite. and a couple of trainees back in the lab inputting their CGI into the beam, perfectly drawn patterns in a field of hay.
It's my educated guess and pure speculation from me, They are not done at ground level, it's frankly impossible to get that level of detail and accuracy by hand/eye and what ground based machine could achieve that accuracy and consistency? so logic leads me to satellites and X/Y plotters driving a beam of some type. input by a CGI program.
I also convened my entire Cabinet as part of a whole-of-government response. And that response is to increase the number and intensity of the extreme weather events and be wary — we’re going to be — use all the resources available to the government to do it. Nobody can deny the impact of climate crisis — at least nobody intelligent can deny the impact of the climate crisis anymore.
What WH claims he meant to say:
I also convened my entire Cabinet as part of a whole-of-government response. And that response is to [the] increase [in] the number and intensity of the extreme weather events and be wary — we’re going to be — use all the resources available to the government to do it. Nobody can deny the impact of climate crisis — at least nobody intelligent can deny the impact of the climate crisis anymore.
What I think he was saying:
I also convened my entire Cabinet as part of a whole-of-government response [to climate change deniers]. And that response is to increase the number and intensity of the extreme weather events and be wary [climate change deniers] — we’re going to be — use all the resources available to the government to do it. Nobody can deny the impact of climate crisis — at least nobody intelligent can deny the impact of the climate crisis anymore.
Because why would people need to be wary the government was going to help them?
Nah. Biden is just throwing a bone to the conspiracy hyenas to get them all excited and barking. Maybe there was an airplane flying around, with a rifle loaded with incendiary tracers, with a targeting rule of "don't shoot at blue roofs." Biden is a notorious blabbermouth and vacant skull.
Oh yes, I know. Been following it and posting the info. The most recent in Chile is the same.
Kids have known how to use a magnifying glass to burn ants for over a hundred year. It's illogical to think that the DS hasn't come up with something similar and perfected it in that time, especially given how addicted people are to the normalcy virus.
DEW is far more likely to be real than fake and, even if it wasn't DEW, it could be a satellite that concentrates energy from the sun or even a concentrated microwave array. But it's not natural fire or regular arson.
DEWs are real.
We know they're real. Israel has Iron Beam on vessels for defensive purposes.
For years I have thought to myself that crop circles ate made by DEW's. Like a label printer.
Have a good laugh with Babylon Bee. This is just too sad. Biden Visits Border To Cut Ribbon For Official Border Grand Opening U.S.
https://babylonbee.com/news/biden-arrives-at-border-to-cut-ribbon-for-official-border-grand-opening
What color were the roofs Mr. pResident? Curious
Weren't they saying blue didn't burn before?
In Maui, yes. The drone pictures had all types of things that didn't burn that were blue.No obvious explanation.
I would imagine a lot of people will start buying blue cars.
Not a terrible idea. Lol
I wonder what the most difficult color would be to get, if there was something to that?
‘Sorry sir, supply chain issues on Blue Paint from Cambodia. Can’t mine the pigment blah blah’. Kek
I have read that houses with blue roofs burned and roofs and things that were non-blue survived. The blue roof meme is bogus. What may be relevant is that such roofs could have been associated with people who had nicer homes---meaning that they were also situated where the fire wasn't. Hard for something to burn if no fire approached it.
He did not tell.
Full interview with link so you can hear the full context of his statement.
https://youtu.be/USK501C9ejY?t=2583
Still fishy as hell though. We don't build roofs with flammable materials here in Texas. They're usually asphalt shingles, tile, or even sheet metal. Why the fuck would he focus on the roofs anyway?
You can have a wood roof, but I don't know that I've ever seen one. Even so the shakes and shingles must be treated to make them flame retardant.
https://up.codes/viewer/texas/irc-2015/chapter/9/roof-assemblies#9
Bonus video from Lahaina you may have never seen before.
"6 hours, 6 hours ... 6 hours"
https://youtu.be/Qx_3zZE0oa4?t=666
These SICK fucks.
Symbolism will be their downfall.
And it's at timestamp 666 seconds?
Ha, yeah.
Reminder to grab blue paint after work tonight... for one of my honey-DEWS this wkend ;)
the spec is, funnily enough, NATO Blue, cuts down incidents of Friendly Fire.
It's been a thing since at least 2008 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r-dEXaSJWME
I am sure it is a lot further back then that. They just let you know about it on 2008. Now they are using it against the people.
A few things here:
-I won't elaborate on this but I can say with a high degree of confidence that space-based energy weapons are very real.
-Seems odd that President Mashed Potato brains would be read in on this technology. Makes zero sense that they'd share this with him. I would cautiously view this as another example of Patriots being in control of Biden (or whomever this is).
-I have yet to hear any kind of rationale for why the color of the roof would matter in relation to a directed energy weapon. One would expect the materials for the roofs in most areas to be identical, typically asphalt shingles. Different colors have different properties in terms of reflecting certain wavelengths of light of course, but I'm wondering if the roof color/type is more of a marker for whomever is controlling the weapon to avoid. However, that is pure speculation on my part.
Has anyone heard a proper, scientific-based rationale?
I was wondering the same thing. The material would be what blocks the attack not the color. Unless it is a signal to them to miss like you said. I was thinking a metal or ceramic roof might be good but I don't know what building materials are typical in Hawaii.
The roof/umbrella/whatever color reflects the energy since a laser is a single frequency. AFAIK, there are no laser diodes that can change their resonant frequency (except maybe a small tuning) , so they are stuck with a particular frequency once built and deployed. Large laser weapons are made up of many smaller laser diodes that have their beams combined, so this would complicate changing frequency even if possible.
Here's the problem. Suppose that a target surface was 90% reflective at whatever wavelength you care. 10% would still get through and heat up the material. If you are working only at the level of tens of watts, then, yes, the "reflective" panel will survive because the leakage is within its thermal tolerance. Get high enough for weapon effects and the leakage is high enough to degrade the reflectivity and the whole process destroys the target. We studied targets that were mirror-polished metal. At open-fire intensities of a hundred watts/cm2, the leakage was enough to destroy the reflectivity. We dreamed up the possibility of a "cleanly-degrading polymer" coating, and it worked out the same way. The CDP would just evaporate and expose the bare metal again. This was 50 years ago.
But if visible light lasers had been at work, people would have seen the light flashes. No such reports.
It's hard to see a laser beam during the day. You can see where it ends bur you usually can't see it's trajectory.
Also CNN would be all over this if anyone reported it. 🙄🤪
If it was an infrared beam (which it would have to be, since that is the focus of all research in that area since the 1970s), neither you nor a camera would "see" any light from a scattered beam.
And if it were a weapon-class laser, the odds would be high that anyone who saw it directly or semi-directly would be blinded by the radiation. Zap yourself in the eye with a laser pointer and find out what 5 milliwatts looks like. Nothing to repeat.
And, having been in the business of designing space-based DEWs, I can say with a high degree of confidence that there are none.
Biden was just free-associating a popular news item with the ruins. "Mr. President, be sure to mention the 'right roof color.' It will excite the crazy types and ruin their credibility."
The color of the roof would not matter at all. Color reflectance only works partially and would not be a barrier to a powerful beam. But in any case, available laser weapon technology is all based on infrared wavelengths, and to IR a blue roof would look black.
Also, laser weapons are clear-weather weapons. They will not penetrate clouds and smoke---and targets cannot be seen through clouds or smoke. The statistics for cloud-free line-of-sight from space to ground are generally poor. (I had occasion to research the subject for a system design.) Use as an incendiary weapon has long been understood, but equally well understood as a frivolous use of a valuable asset better applied to other targets. (Once you burn up your laser fuel or reactants, all you have left is expensive junk.)
Laser weapons from space do not project from all directions, as would be needed in order to melt automobile wheels on both sides of a car.
"I designed space based DEWs, but I can assure you they don't exist"
Kekkkkkkkk
And that's why they don't. Once you find that the design is impracticable (can't be done, for technical, logistical, or financial reasons), you sigh and roll up the drawings and wait for time to change the circumstances or boundary conditions. Lasers are not magical contrivances; they require lots of heavy, expensive technology and plenty of power supply.
Do you really think that everything that has been designed has been built? There are various levels of design. And there are whole coffee table books about the advanced aircraft designed by the Third Reich which never were built. The U.S. has plenty of abandoned or down-selected designs that either were not built or only made it to the point of a mock-up or prototype.
wasted career then.
he doesn't say blue roof he says "the right" roof. That can be taken several ways....
That's why I didn't say anything. I know.
Wait, what? He admitted the roof theory. That's wild. Wasn't colored roofs protecting homes a verboten subject on this site?
Yes, but only because the "dews don't exist" shills hanging around
Who know what they are talking about, and point out that there is no evidence for DEWs. Target selectivity is just as easy for someone with a match. You have more evidence for witchcraft and spells.
Except that one of two dew bases in the country happens to be in Maui and is in operation by their own admission.
https://greatawakening.win/p/16c2WCNozS/not-conspiracy-there-is-a-direct/c/
It's to give our "war fighters an upper hand." https://afresearchlab.com/technology/directed-energy/
Media Inquiries: [email protected]
Except nothing. The Maui facility, as I stated, conducts research in ground-to-space atmospheric viewing---which is part of directed energy weapon research. But nothing to do with weapon system testing. They are probably exploiting "guidestar" lasers to develop adaptive optical systems for space viewing. There is no test range, and the atmospheric conditions are only favorable at the altitude where the base is located. Propagation at sea level is less desirable. And you cannot shoot a laser beam through an intervening hill or mountain.
That is not the only thing that the Maui facility does, by the way. It has a very large mission in the subject of telescopic observations of satellites.
I'm not impressed with second-hand commentary about this from those who are not in the field. I was in the field. The system-level development and testing is and has been conducted by the Air Force Weapons Laboratory at Kirtland AFB in Albuquerque, New Mexico, from the beginning. They have access to instrumented test ranges and they do take pot shots there. They have also done air-to-air beam experiments over decades. But nobody has been seriously interested in using lasers to promote arson. We have incendiary artillery for that job. A laser weapon is a valuable piece of equipment reserved for special purposes that only it can perform. (The weapons being developed are for anti-aircraft applications. They lock the beam on moving targets and point upwards. There's no way anything like this could depress and engage stationary land targets that are not military systems, and shooting from AMOS is a non-starter.)
From their web page: DIRECTED ENERGY Directed Energy (DE) harnesses the power of the electromagnetic spectrum to enable Airmen to effectively and affordably strike critical targets at the speed of light.
Maybe there is a clearing from their mountain top? Maybe used by the airmen mentioned above? I can't say for sure but still within the realms of possibility.
They are talking mostly about airborne targets, particularly air-to-air. I don't think a tank will be much vulnerable, nor will they have a fire control system that can pick targets out of a cluttered background. Air targets will have a sky background, which will be relatively "cool" by contrast.
You don't understand topography, do you? There IS a clearing at the mountain top. That's where the buildings are located. Clearing or not, there is no clear line of sight to Lahaina, because there is an intervening system of mountain ridges on the west lobe of the island and Lahaina is at sea level. That's a line-of-sight drop of 10,000 feet. Eyeballing it, at the ridgelines of the West Maui Forest Reserve, any such beam would be only at 2500 feet altitude. Lahaina is protected by shadowing.
You can be involved in technology research without being a mad scientist and destroying the local population. You are still grasping at straws. And you don't really understand what would be evidence, i.e., physical events or residue that would be possible ONLY from the use of a DEW. Heat is not one of them, in the context of a forest fire, and combustion that can melt metal and glass.
Genuinely curious, have you seen the photos of fence posts where the screws inside the wood reached really high temps, burned a circle around the screws but left the outside of the fence posts intact. Implying the screws were heated within and did not burn the wood. I don't think it's possible with incendiary artillery.
Maybe not, but I don't much believe in that, either. And I certainly don't believe it could happen with a laser. It could be the fact that the fence post wood was more resistant to the fire environment than the more-highly-conductive metal. It is a commonplace that wooden timbers can have more resistance to a dwelling fire than steel structure. Quite surprising, but true.
There are a lot of people with experience of wildfires, and I don't see them coming out en masse as being amazed by this fire. The only people who seem to be obsessively bewildered are those who are not firefighters.
There is one guy has some good videos, forensic arborist Robert Brane. Anyways he has talked to lots of firefighters and discusses it in his videos. Many experts do seem to think it's not normal.
I haven't seen this one but wanted to add a link https://www.bitchute.com/video/MoY6QxlseUvk/
But anyways, I'll leave it at that. I appreciate your input. You definitely add contrarian views for me to consider.
Go watch styropyro. They indeed exist
DEWs? Of course. I saw the target engagement films in the 1970s. I designed and analyzed them and their target effects. Tell me something I don't know.
Styropyro? If he exists, there is no need for space-based DEWs. Probably as dangerous to himself as to any target. He would be the best debunk of this whole nutty space-based idea. Right up there with flamethrowers, phosphorus, and other art of the trade.
The only DEW I’ve seen vid of is amazingly beautifully horrifying. Would explain why no countries would send ships to our shores
No ships, just bunch of people crossing.
https://rumble.com/v4grjpi-directed-energy-weapons-caused-the-maui-and-texas-fires..html
Includes a short clip showing a blue target not being burned.
Yes. There were other videos I have seen also.
Part of how they took down the towers on 9/11. Bluebeam to simulate planes; DEW to create impact illusion; interior bombs for the controlled demolition.
Mockingbird media control to gaslight and shape narrative.
the best explanation for me so far.
How do y'all think Crop Circles are made? I suspect that Crop Circles are a test example for the Military / Intelligence agents to practice their skills.
Have you ever seen a laser engraver machine working, just scale that up to a few Gigawatts and mounted on a steerable satellite. and a couple of trainees back in the lab inputting their CGI into the beam, perfectly drawn patterns in a field of hay.
That's a very interesting theory. You think that's how it's done.
It's my educated guess and pure speculation from me, They are not done at ground level, it's frankly impossible to get that level of detail and accuracy by hand/eye and what ground based machine could achieve that accuracy and consistency? so logic leads me to satellites and X/Y plotters driving a beam of some type. input by a CGI program.
Hey, good educational guess from an anon is always a lot more valuable than what 100 of MSM said all day long.
What Biden said:
What WH claims he meant to say:
What I think he was saying:
Because why would people need to be wary the government was going to help them?
Amen.
Hiding in plain sight.
Those have eyes can see and ears can hear.
Yes, I have a blue umbrella in my yard just in case!
Nah. Biden is just throwing a bone to the conspiracy hyenas to get them all excited and barking. Maybe there was an airplane flying around, with a rifle loaded with incendiary tracers, with a targeting rule of "don't shoot at blue roofs." Biden is a notorious blabbermouth and vacant skull.
It could be true.