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.
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.