Posted on 03/22/2018 12:16:45 PM PDT by simpson96
The guy in the video said it was a beam weapon that destroyed the Arby’s. The Arby’s, in fact, burned a day later when workers arrived to prepare food for first responders and some equipment failed. It had nothing to do weapons. I see neighborhoods where everything burned except a home or two, hill sides denuded except for a small pocket valley. It has to do with terrain, wind direction, wind speed, relative humidity, elements preheated by advancing flames and hot dry wind. Watch a few videos, and there are many excellent ones, on how to read fires. This is all perfectly normal and occurs in every major wildfire, things that you wouldn’t think would burn do and things that should don’t. I saw it burn across the ranch I live on where I was able to bump it around some structures and others, no matter what I did, water, dry chem, foam, nothing would stop it.
By the way, this fire followed the same route as the one in 1964 and another in 1923. What weapons were used then? What agenda were they advancing then? The homes and areas that were spared then were very similar to those that were spared this last go around. Terrain, wind direction, wind speed, humidity, fuel load are the determinants nor conspiracy theories.
And it is Mr. Nitwhit to you.
Yes. You only have to look up his famous “Rivers of Sausage Biscuits and Gravy” speech to grasp the full import.
.
You’re apparently deliberately ignoring reality.
I said nothing about Arby’s. There were numerous blocks with all of the trees untouched yet all or most of the houses burned flat.
There is also considerable video of plasma tracks of beam weapons being distorted in the winds, so they were indeed deployed during the high winds.
And the simple obvious fact of the boundary of burn out areas exactly matching the planning maps is way beyond any natural explanation.
Probably. But still, it could be worse:
The guy in the video I linked said that Arby’s was destroyed by a laser/beam weapon. He is spouting the same as you. That is why I refer to it. In nearly every instance you state I can show how the wind direction and speed was the factor that shaped the fire. Perfectly natural. Saddles, draws, ravines, creek beds, valleys have a venturi effect on the winds. Perfectly natural. Happens every fire and it will happen again.
Good golly miss molly. I had a stock trailer burn to nothing and 10 feet away a wooden stock pen that was untouched. I had straight lines burned across the pasture at varying angles and I was standing there as it all happened. No laser beams.
Reality? How do you explain essentially the same fire path in 23, 64, and 17? No beam weapons in the first two, no maps. It is the way the wind tracks under certain conditions, plain and simple. Everything was burned up to my home. It should have caught but did not.
Why would an energy beam distort in wind? Isn’t that one of the benefits of such a weapon, no windage or trajectory adjustment? What videos of plasma tracks?
That's what I thought, because it's nonsense right there with chem-trails. X-rays don't penetrate a building and start a fire on the inside.
.
Yes, they do, and they start fires almost instantly if the hit a steel appliance.
.
.
Highly ionized and superheated air does lots of interesting things. You probably can’t be expected to grasp that.
.
You can do anything, but lay off of my bacon bisc.
.
BTW, NOAA has more or less confessed on “chem trails.”
They just didn’t like the monikker; theirs is strarospheric aerisol injection.
.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
