Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Freeman69's avatar

Billy, I think your article should have been one of those NYTimes follow-ups (that never happened). You seem to have clearly defined a 'new' facet of the UFO phenomenon i.e. one that is only lightly touched upon elsewhere.

(Obviously, there's an overlap with foreign (Russian) tech, but also strong evidence that some UAP include this 'field'.)

Not sure about those final theories, but the underlying phenomena need addressing. Unfortunately, the apparent effects are another reason why the authorities would classify such incidents.

Expand full comment
David E. Roy  Ph.D.'s avatar

Regarding targeting, what if in some cases the targets were chosen in advance and perhaps marked or made recognizable by some unique biological feature or combinations of features?

On re-reading, I did not see any reference to Russians or other adversaries being attacked by a destructive field. Of course, that's not hard proof, but it is suggestive and worth pursuing.

If computing power roughly doubles every two years (Moore's Law), then 50 years after a weak showing of microwave power could lead to something quite massive in power.

Expand full comment
6 more comments...

No posts