Three public shoot downs certainly signals something new.

New, yes, but that doesn't answer my question.

I don't see this as anymore aggressive than yearly war games, and significantly less aggressive than claiming islands and ocean territories that are contested and building military installations on them...

Yes it suggests our military has the right to defend our sovereign airspace and that of our allies as well as the ability and will to do so until these outrageous and arrogant acts of escalation stop.

Be careful how many times you prod the beast.

It suggests that there is something new in the air, deliberately obscuring its source and mission.

Yes. Given that they have allowed free passage of such weather balloons for decades previously.

It wasn't a weather balloon. Weather balloon don't do high precision EM signals collection, so your reasoning here is completely made up.

Evidence etc?

> "It had multiple antennas to include an array likely capable of collecting and geolocating communications," the official added.

https://www.ft.com/content/96992b83-58f7-4cdb-9900-a2bc59677...

It had multiple antennas? Holy cow that's bad. That definitely rules out weather balloons then.

Does it not? Or are you being sincere?

Sorry for the sarcasm, but, honestly, I think it's pretty obvious to most adults that an aerial, or even multiple aerials on a balloon does not rule out it being a weather balloon.

What could rule that out in your mind then? Seems to me that if it had hardware that didn't serve any purpose with regard to weather data collection, calling it a weather balloon is, at the very least, an incomplete description, if not intentionally deceptive branding. Especially when said hardware has very clear use cases for intelligence collection.

I recommend that you expend the tiny bit of effort required to inform yourself, rather than asking others to spoon-feed you.

I tried but couldn't find any evidence. Thanks for your useful advice though.