Were California and Greece Attacked By Directed Energy Weapons (DEWs)?

So I came across this wacky "theory" on Facebook the other day. Apparently they're having some bad wildfires in Greece, and of course California gets them every year. Some people seem to think the fires are actually a test of some exotic DEWs. I'm surprised this hasn't made it's way to ATS yet. As proof, memes like these have been floating around:



The implication for this pic is that this is impossible to have been done by a wildfire because the trees aren't burnt at the top. In reality, this isn't proof of anything of the sort. I've seen wildfires before, and they can actually do this. In some areas the fire will stay concentrated close to the ground and never burns the tops of the trees. In fact, firefighters will actually do controlled burns this way in areas prone to wildfires, where they burn up the brush in sections and it doesn't catch the trees on fire or kill them.



This one is particularly funny because it actually debunks the theory it's trying to push. What the people pushing this are trying to say is that wildfires can't burn hot enough to produce all that molten metal. It actually shows that wildfires can burn hot enough to melt aluminum, so there's no mystery there. But what about the steel? Well, what about the steel? All the steel on the cars appears to be intact. You can clearly see the wheel hubs, the frames are obviously intact because the cars are all retaining their shapes, the bodies are intact except for the plastic pieces. I don't think there's any melted steel in those pics.

People are also forgetting that cars have fuel in them, so if the wildfire manages to ignite that, you will get hotter temperatures, but just in that small, confined area right around the car. This may indeed be what happened here because you can see the difference in color on the pavement. Gasoline burns at around 1800*F and ethanol around 1900*F. I'm not sure what the burning temperature of a diesel fire is but as memory serves me it's not as high as gasoline.

Anyway, thoughts?

Disclaimer: For all I know these pics aren't even from the wildfire area. They could be for a riot or something else.

ETA: I forgot to address the windows missing from the cars. That doesn't mean they melted. Fires are notorious for breaking windows, that's pretty common knowledge.

a reply to: face23785

Bet you the top picture was from a protest such as the G20 back in 2017 or some other protest.

Looking back at pictures they do look like they are from Greece...I am incorrect..

a reply to: face23785

Greece was not, unless the government is covering up getting attacked by energy weapons.

Arson Is Suspected in Deadly Fires in Greece, Government Says

Okay, lets play with the idea.

(a) it WAS an energy weapon and not a wild fire. What would be the difference? Could be that some target was there and it had to be hit FAST and RELIABLE, unlike a "random" fire. Are there reports that the heat came incredibly fast and from an unlikely direction (moving against the winds etc.)? Pro: it may have nuked the target. Cons: Never heard about something unusual about these fires.
(a1) it was an energy weapon without a specific target. Why was it activated? Why was this huge amount of energy tossed around? What was gained by using a weapon instead of an ordinary fire? Pro: it worked. Con: it cost a $hitton of energy. Beamed energy is expensive because a lot of it evaporates as unfocused parts of the beam.
(b) it was a wild fire. Usually in Greece, those are used to "free up land" which was forestation before and could be used for illegal buildings. Pro of this idea: it works for unethical investors very well, and Greece's police is wellknown for not very intensive detective works on these cases. Con: where is the mystery??!

I tend to (b). Wild fire. Not enough points for energy weapon usage.

a reply to: face23785

Have you seen the picutres of the burned hosue in Calafornia and not a tree has been touched. WHere did those fires start and why where they started. To answer that would bring me off topic and into a banned subject on ATS

if you check out the amazing Q threads, they state a similar theory, and it was utilized to get ride of pedo(i beleive) info in CA

I saw something that the Greek fire was arson. maybe or maybe not terrorism

a reply to: face23785

Actually this was addressed on ATS.
For fires in california.
The entire plot line is these pics look weird for a forest fire.

Would be a better story with like some evidence of giant lasers or something and an ex General coming out..

Conspiracies are so half assed these days.

Fire does funny things. It's a lifelong favorite of mine. I remember in the late 80s I found out hot metal could light your wrist on fire.. been intrigued ever since. What people call fire and how heat transfers are 2 separate things.

a reply to: ManFromEurope

it WAS an energy weapon and not a wild fire. What would be the difference?

I think if it was a DE then the pavement or the rocks on the ground would also have been melted.

I believe that DE are real. I don't think they are being tested like this though.

Much easier and better ways to test a DE.


As far as that 2ed pic is concerned, yes it is funny how much people don't know about fires.
I camp all the time and it doesn't take long for a simple camp fire to get hot enough to melt glass and aluminum soda cans.

The fire department does controlled burns where I camp and I to have seen the tops of the trees take no damage while the bottoms is burnt to ash.

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.

a reply to: face23785

A DEW was used.

It's called " The Sun "

Those photos are not the aftermath of a wildfire.
Cars do burn intensely if set on fire.

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.

Now that depends on what type of tree it is. Some trees are made to burn. Some are not. Learn the difference.

Or climate change has forced California into a cycle of drought followed by excessive rain, followed by drought. Fuel builds up, trees are stressed, lots of dry underbrush and lighting or human action and off you go.

a reply to: skunkape23

Simple arson most likely.

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.

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.

Way to be the first to introduce Trump to the thread.

Reminds me how the people who complain about racism are always the first ones to bring race into anything.

a reply to: face23785

Directed energy would leave a bunch of radiation I would imagine.

So if people are getting sick from radiation then yeah.

Otherwise no.

originally posted by: grey580
a reply to: face23785

Directed energy would leave a bunch of radiation I would imagine.

So if people are getting sick from radiation then yeah.

Otherwise no.

Not necessarily. It depends on the type of energy they're directing.

Those forests and grassland had been in drought conditions for months so the water had been removed. Trees are made from carbon, cellulose and other hydrocarbon chemicals. So when they dry out and burn, they will give off heat or infra-red radiation. We have a firebox to heat our home and a six inch diameter log will give out 3 kilowatts of heat for several hours- the equivalent of a three bar electric fire. Surround those vehicles with dozens of burning trees and you basically are parked inside an industrial oven giving out hundreds of kilowatts of heat.

That infra-red radiation gets absorbed by everything else, and eventually both objects will reach the same temperature. Above the melting point of every element, that element will melt; car tyres, aluminium, paint, furnishings, dashboards.

Were California and Greece Attacked By Directed Energy Weapons (DEWs)?

Short answer: No.

Long answer: Noo.

That said, I recall similar claims using pictures from wildfires past how "wildfires couldn't do this" from people who have no understanding of the strange nature of wildfires (namely trees standing, one house burned, another untouched, etc).