Atmospheric meteorology describes wind as invisible air currents that travel in continuous motion, inherently untouchable at the macro scale. Firearms operate through projectile acceleration, which requires solid material to transfer kinetic energy. The intersection of these two physics concepts creates a paradox: projectile weapons require solid objects, while wind by definition lacks solidity. To "shoot a breeze" would require either treating atmospheric phenomena as if they possessed tangible substance or fundamentally redefining what gunpowder propulsion can accomplish. Current physics permits neither interpretation.

Carlos Rodriguez, a meteorologist working at the National Weather Service in the Texas panhandle during 1996, received field reports describing wind phenomena that seemed to possess unexpected ballistic characteristics. Recording equipment malfunctioned during alleged events, preventing data collection. He transferred to an administrative role that eliminated field research requirements and has declined to discuss the specific incidents from his previous posting.

Weather enthusiast forums joke about the Weaponized Wind Theory, the idea that certain atmospheric phenomena might possess tangible properties that standard meteorology doesn't adequately explain. Memes feature weather radar imagery with anomalies circled, suggesting that some wind events might respond to weapons in ways that should be impossible.