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.