It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
it WAS an energy weapon and not a wild fire. What would be the difference?
originally posted by: scraedtosleep
a reply to: purplemer
A living tree is not like a log that you throw on a fire.
It actually takes a lot to get a living tree to burn.
Remember living trees are full of water.
It is very easy for an entire house to burn down yet leave the trees next to it untouched. Especially if the wind happens to be blowing the flames away from that tree while the house burns.
originally posted by: wylekat
a reply to: face23785
I'm surprised this hasn't made it's way to ATS yet.
They're too busy cheerleading that lump running the country to give a rat's bollox about much else. The rest have gone on a "I'm a MAN", and the rest of you suck!" rampage.
An energy weapon would leave a smoldering initial circle of destruction somewhere. Go look up Hiroshima for an example of a bunch of energy dumped all at once in one spot.
Were California and Greece Attacked By Directed Energy Weapons (DEWs)?