BOMBSHELL: Health Ranger id's distance of 2nd shooter at LV massacre and it’s NOT the MB hotel

originally posted by: punkinworks10
The guy was an accountant for the feds in the '80s, and is a secret super sniper?

Wow, now that's a grade A full on ATS theory, I'm loving it ((start writing the screenplay).

One thing, Super Sniper? I suspect if he was a Super Sniper, or even a Sniper, the bodycount would have been much higher.

I'm sure there were multiple types of ammo used, the guy had several different kinds of guns. It's also possible he was firing multiple weapons at the same time.

My main question is, and I did not watch the video because I think I got the idea from the thread, how are they measuring when the shot originates? Like, to know the distance, you have to know when the round goes off and then measure the time for the sound to reach the listener. I don't know of too many instances where you can see clearly the round being fired. Just curious, because that is a large part of the equation. Oh, and if shots are being fired from two different places, you would need to know when they are being fired from both locations, which would be quite difficult to do with one camera...

originally posted by: djz3ro

originally posted by: neutronflux

originally posted by: djz3ro

originally posted by: neutronflux

An echo of a shot is not noise. It’s the actual sound of the shot bounced off a surface to be heard again after the direction of travel changed. And it can be heard again for a third time if it bounces off the right surface to be heard a third time by the listener.

I'm not 100% sure but, to me, it sounds like you're confusing a ricochet with an echo? A ricochet is when a physical object strikes a surface and it (or a part thereof) changes direction whereas an echo is when a sound bounces off something and changes direction. Sorry if I got it wrong but it sounded that way...

No, I am not. Do you understand acoustics at all? An echo is the sound waves of the originating shot the changes direction after bouncing off solid surfaces. The sound wave will go down range. If it hits an object, the sound wave will change direction. It can be easily confused as a shot coming from a different direction. Why? Because it’s an actual sound wave of a shot bouncing around.

Which is exactly why it's easy, to the trained ear or using software, to differentiate between a gunshot and a ricochet. The soundwave weakens as it travels and can sound different as it distorts depending what it's bouncing off, if I recall correctly...

Your fooling yourself. Take a stage that was designed before microphones. A person on stage might not hear a quite line from another person on stage, but the same line might be clearly heard out in the audience. Is that a false statement?

Type of gun, the load, the bullet weight, if it’s a full metal jacket, if the bullet is hollow with a polymer tip, if a directional microphone is pointed away or towards the originating shot, the acoustic and echo characteristics of the site, and the exact distance from the originating sound all play factors into the calculations.

Again, if you cannot identity the echoes of shots, flag the echoes, and filter out the echoes, then the audio analysis is useless.

You need two devices with synchronized audio acting like a pair of human ears and 3d modeling to determine direction of sound and filter out what is an originating shot vs echo. Sorry.

so if the other shots were fired some 250-275 yards from the concert stage target area (from Mike's acoustic report)... what sort of perch or cover blind was available to the shooter in the landscape?

While the 425-450 yard distant shooters perch in the Mandalay unit 137 on floor 32 is unquestionably the prime sniper location.... some bursts are loud & near sounding while other short bursts seem less loud and distant (I suggest the latter bursts were from the other indoor shooters location at the 2nd window hole but in the same Suite,)

even though there are complaints around the validity of the 'Lab' being a makeshift hobby room at best---
It still beats the validity of any FBI analysis that would seem to be 'spun' to fit the phony Narrative most folks believe is being heaped on the public by the controlled FBI



I'm still befuddled by all the volume of loose & going-nowhere elements...nothing ties in together in any sensible way.... perhaps a deliberate condition intended to cover-up any fingerpointing to any other than Paddock

a reply to: Phage

Here ya go. Just in case you need one lol

Flux Capacitor

a reply to: Granite


Natural News? :rofl:

originally posted by: Granite
Here it is right now:

This is an excellent and precise scientific acoustic analysis (From Mike Adams, surprise!). I use recording software and can vouch for the ability to enhance certain frequencies and tune out unwanted ones as well as being able to stretch out the sound files and accurately time the sound events. No gimmicks, just math and software.

The FBI certainly has all the knowledge Adams provides plus much more. By finding impact points they can then back trace the bullet flight to it's point of origin. For instance, if a bullet lodges in a piece of wood, you simply put a straw in the hole and it will line up directly to where the shot was fired from (minus elevation from bullet drop). Considering there were thousands of rounds fired there should be a mountain of evidence. In addition the FBI has all the footage from the dozens if not hundreds of security cameras near the venue.

Further analysis may uncover more than 2 shooters if it can be determined that 3 or more firearms are being discharged simultaneously.

One logical question people might ask is: couldn't Paddock have used a faster caliber rifle which would shorten the "lag time"" as he calls it? The short answer is no, the .223 is one of the fastest cartridges available and those which are faster are only so by 2 or 300 feet per second (roughly 10%), certainly not enough to account for the time differential between shots and the estimated distance.

We have dozens of eyewitness accounts of multiple shooters plus videos from other hotels who also experienced shooters (Bellagio being one of them).

The narrative we are being sold is so blatantly false they seem to be past the point of caring whether or not we even believe it. That is extremely worrying to me as it would be the precise attitude they would take if they have foreknowledge of other attacks coming in the near future. Watch your 6 people, I pray it isn't but everything points to this being just a kickoff event with more to follow, probably worsening in damage and loss of life.

I haven't really looked in to it but has there been any talk of the multiple fires in Northern California being the work of arsonists?

I wasn't worried after 9/11, I knew they played their full hand. I think we're just seeing the beginning of something very bad. Keep an eye on what the UN is saying. Libya was destroyed by their "Responsibility to Protect" policy. Are we next? (dead serious question)

a reply to: Asktheanimals

Translation: by electronically altering the audio recordings, I can make you think there is something"fishy" going on. This is just like the UFO "experts" who manipulate images to "prove" the amorphous blob is a spaceship.

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: Asktheanimals

Translation: by electronically altering the audio recordings, I can make you think there is something"fishy" going on. This is just like the UFO "experts" who manipulate images to "prove" the amorphous blob is a spaceship.

This is a twist, usually I'm the guy arguing against science on ethical grounds now I'm having to defend acoustics as being "real science". It is. Are you satisfied with the single shooter fairytale? Have you watched many of the videos or are you fine with whatever the FBI says (even though the story keeps changing)?

a reply to: Asktheanimals

An echo is a bounce sound wave of the originating shot. There is no frequency change the you can rely to filter out the echoes.

Anyone who is familiar with the history of JFK assassination research will find this thread depressingly reminiscent of the Dallas Police Dictabelt saga.

TL;DR: Recording from an open police mic on 22/11/63 is examined for gunshot noises, the experts hired by HSCA (in 1978) make a pig's ear of it (due to faulty microphone placements), the findings are retracted (1980s) and then other experts spend the next three decades arguing about the original findings.

I think something similar is happening here. As in, it's interesting but won't get us toward a conclusion.

a reply to: Granite

When will Natural News be an auto hoax like BIN?

For those interested, absolutely Mass Spectrometer can be used to process audio

forum.orthogonaldevices.com...

a reply to: worsaw

That is an article about putting the output from a mass spectrometer through an audio amplifier for fun. They have example of what Ibuprofen "sounds" like.

A mass spectrometer is not used to analyze audio.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: worsaw

That is an article about putting the output from a mass spectrometer through an audio amplifier for fun. They have example of what Ibuprofen "sounds" like.

A mass spectrometer is not used to analyze audio.

Yea your're right, , my bad

Did the police have guns? Did some fire shots? Did anyone carrying a firearm use it? Why is it done-deal to some of you that there was a 2nd shooter involved with the primary shooter? He may have well had help getting guns to his room.. etc.. but perhaps the help he had did not have details (or even know they were taking guns to the room). There are a lot of leaps of logic, which while amusing to read, are made by amateurs with literally no access to the actual forensic data other than some random video or audio taken from cabs, phones, etc.

As far as the "official story" people keep saying is false.. they don't yet have an "official" conclusion to the investigation - it is ongoing. People are quick to claim investigators are lying.. often within a day of a crime, when they can't possibly have but just started scratching the surface of the case.

Am I missing something? This guy assumes all the shots were 55 grain .223. If he used multiple types of ammunition, then this guy';s analysis goes out the window. And the know it was reported that the guy had at least .223 and .308 ammo and switched guns multiple times, so it stands to reason not all the shots were taken with .223 ammo.

If you work out the math, a bullet with a slower muzzle velocity, in the 2000 feet/second (600 m/s) range accounts for the different arrival times between bullet hits and rifle return. So it's simply likely the guy was switching between the .223 ammo and somr slower round.

originally posted by: RickyD
a reply to: Phage

Honestly it doesn't take much more than some software on a computer and a bit of math. There are plenty enough recordings to get audio from and gunshots are pretty easy to ID as well as the hits on pavement as most of the recordings came from where bullets landed. I wouldnt believe it unless it was corroborated by other experts though.

It takes more that iphone recordings and a computer to accurately do something like that........

He was firing into a virtual man made canyon, with loud music, bustling streets, loud parties, and god knows what else going on.......

Dont believe everything you read on the internet.......

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: Asktheanimals

Translation: by electronically altering the audio recordings, I can make you think there is something"fishy" going on. This is just like the UFO "experts" who manipulate images to "prove" the amorphous blob is a spaceship.

And hes also not taking into account , ricochet, bounce, or any other factors that could possibly have happened.....AND assuming they were all shot with a single type of round......from first hand accounts from friends that were there, there were , to their ears, two dif volleys from two different types of weapons...confirming in my mind he was moving from perch to perch......now they COULD be wrong, but these friends are also combat vets.

This isnt a "Room" where youre getting straight shots 20feet or less.......

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: worsaw

That is an article about putting the output from a mass spectrometer through an audio amplifier for fun. They have example of what Ibuprofen "sounds" like.

A mass spectrometer is not used to analyze audio.

*In case anyone is confused
he never uses a mass spectrometer to analyze
the audio. It's just regular old math and geometry.
And as AsktheAnimals posted a very well done
simple rational analysis. But you have to watch
to know.