Yes heaps. More so in so many of these weather events. Mainly in the inadequate response. I am pissed at it. Years of the bungling narratives. The climate. Yet there simply isn't a big enough response to them when they occur. It has been getting better in America especially. It has a lot of manpower and resources. But it's specifically that response and then an aftermath that needs to better prepare.

If the response was inadequate it suggests it wasn't lasers. Rather stupidity. Perhaps purposeful. Let it run. Why if they let it run would they need lasers to accelerate it? They let it run. A they were unprepared. B so it scammed.

I am not going over burn forensics especially if I'm not a fire investigator. But I know that fire is its own beast. This burns that doesn't. A lot to do with any wind direction, and how they tackled it. It's always at a line, often from the sides they arrived at from the nearest point to it. These save public/state buildings, wealth, landmarks foremost. Sometimes bigger buildings have their own equipment and fire systems. Hoses.

Orbital platform, kinetic bombardment is still easier, gravity. Not quite a case of simply dropping tungsten rods, rather precisely. The window to hit becomes very hard to achieve the further away. So yea the Syfi lasers, and they need much bigger powersources. As any orbital platform is easily observed and further targeted easier than its payloads.

Unless it's a satellite, these can carry lasers, they do penetrate the ground by lidar. But they're not a weapon. Unless they start manipulating the weather with them. A potential. There is also talk about beaming energy to remote locations. It isn't by DEWs. Perhaps it can be weaponised. The idea isn't.

Where is that beam weapon, power source, enough to cause significant damage from space. Because as the laser weapon enters our atmosphere the beam, blooms, becoming weaker and weaker from its source. Beam weapon, blooms. Weaker from its power source. It needs a bigger power source to extended its power.

Lasers have advanced from a boeing jet shooting down ICBMs. But they're still defensive. They still need larger power sources and charge.

Yes heaps. More so in so many of these weather events. Mainly in the inadequate response. I am pissed at it. Years of the bungling narratives. The climate. Yet there simply isn't a big enough response to them when they occur. It has been getting better in America especially. It has a lot of manpower and resources. But it's specifically that response and then an aftermath that needs to better prepare.

If the response was inadequate it suggests it wasn't lasers. Rather stupidity. Perhaps purposeful. Let it run. Why if they let it run would they need lasers to accelerate it? They let it run. A they were unprepared. B so it scammed.

I am not going over burn forensics especially if I'm not a fire investigator. But I know that fire is its own beast. This burns that doesn't. A lot to do with any wind direction, and how they tackled it. It's always at a line, often from the sides they arrived at from the nearest point to it. These save public/state buildings, wealth, landmarks foremost. Sometimes bigger buildings have their own equipment and fire systems. Hoses.

Orbital platform, kinetic bombardment is still easier, gravity. Not quite a case of simply dropping tungsten rods, rather precisely. The window to hit becomes very hard to achieve the further away. So yea the Syfi lasers, and they need much bigger powersources. As any orbital platform is easily observed and further targeted easier than its payloads.

Unless it's a satellite, these can carry lasers, they do penetrate the ground by lidar. But they're not a weapon. Unless they start manipulating the weather with them. A potential. There is also talk about beaming energy to remote locations. It isn't by DEWs. Perhaps it can be weaponised. The idea isn't.

Where is that beam weapon, power source, enough to cause significant damage from space. Because as the laser enters our atmosphere the beam, blooms, becoming weaker and weaker from its source.

Lasers have advanced from a boeing jet shooting down ICBMs. But they're still defensive. They still need larger power sources and charge.

Yes heaps. More so in so many of these weather events. Mainly in the inadequate response. I am pissed at it. Years of the bungling narratives. The climate. Yet there simply isn't a big enough response to them when they occur. It has been getting better in America especially. It has a lot of manpower and resources. But it's specifically that response and then an aftermath that needs to better prepare.

If the response was inadequate it suggests it wasn't lasers. Rather stupidity. Perhaps purposeful. Let it run. Why if they let it run would they need lasers to accelerate it? They let it run. A they were unprepared. B so it scammed.

I am not going over burn forensics especially if I'm not a fire investigator. But I know that fire is its own beast. This burns that doesn't. A lot to do with any wind direction, and how they tackled it. It's always at a line, often from the sides they arrived at from the nearest point to it. These save public/state buildings, wealth, landmarks foremost. Sometimes bigger buildings have their own equipment and fire systems. Hoses.

Orbital platform, kinetic bombardment is still easier, gravity. Not quite a case of simply dropping tungsten rods, rather precisely. The window to hit becomes very hard to achieve the further away. So yea the Syfi lasers, and they need much bigger powersources. As any orbital platform is easily observed and further targeted easier than its payloads.

Unless it's a satellite, these can carry lasers, they do penetrate the ground by lidar. But they're not a weapon. Unless they start manipulating the weather with them. A potential. There is also talk about beaming energy to remote location. It isn't by DEWs. Perhaps it can be weaponised. The idea isn't.

Where is that beam weapon, power source, enough to cause significant damage from space. Because as the laser enters our atmosphere the beam, blooms, becoming weaker and weaker from its source.

Lasers have advanced from a boeing jet shooting down ICBMs. But they're still defensive. They still need larger power sources and charge.