there were two shooters
watch the first 15 seconds then skip to 46 seconds for conclusive evidence
youtube.com
they were both cia niggers
There were two shooters
Evan Young
Isaiah Sullivan
feel free explain your reasoning.
The conclusion should be "And that's why there has to have been two shooters."
Christian Rivera
watch the video, ahmed
Brayden Ward
I already have, Tyrone.
Explain your reasoning.
Adrian Ward
is this one of the famous migrant engineers i've heard so much about
Jaxson Jones
In order for there to be a discussion, you need to present an argument.
Caleb Bailey
there are obviously two different sources for the gunshots due to the huge disparity between the sounds of gunfire you dumb nigger
Jonathan Murphy
bump. why haven't i seen this video? it's pretty concrete evidence for 2 shooters
Carson Miller
you are a retard
Logan Cruz
Bump. pol is too busy arguing with obvious shills to discuss real evidence of a false flag
Liam Anderson
there was only one shooter. the alt right is paranoid that a white supremacist finally snapped and shot people
John Peterson
>false flag
obvious shill
Daniel Edwards
Alright, what the shit is this? Is there any explanation for the gunfire heard at 0:46? It's distant shots, which could be echo (like I believe some in the beginning are) but it's before the close, loud gunfire.
Xavier Thompson
The shooting was a textbook group sniper/terror attack that is commonly used in color revolution "Springs" like Arab & Ukraine. It also has similarities with the Dallas Sniper, which was part of a similar operation.
Predictive programming was also used involving Marilyn Manson getting crushed by guns at a concert with a purple(color revolution) background.
If you map out the locations of Yellowstone, Groom Lake & Denver International Airport they form a triangle. Pyramids create triangle shadows, in this case the shadow points to Groom Lake which is near Vegas. In Vegas they have a pyramid, who's shadow casts pointing to/at the kill-zone location. The hotel, pyramid & kill-zone form a triangle.
[KB thread archives(take the time to read all OP's): archive.4plebs.org
Ayden Bell
Frank, stop being a massive faggot. You're the biggest LARP faggot that has ever existed. No one believes your shit. It's not funny, it's not clever, and certainly no one believe it. Choke to death on a cock.
Jonathan Morris
this sounds like those ehloomynahity comfermuhd
Parker Carter
Fuck off you subhuman.
Gavin Sullivan
There we have something substantial, at last.
Your argument seems to be:
>Premise P1: There was a huge disparity between the sounds of gunfire.
>[Hidden Premise HP1: In order for there to be a huge disparity between the sounds of gunfire, there must have been two different sources for the gunshots.]
>Intermediate Conclusion IC: There must have been two different sources for the gunshots. [P1, HP1]
>[Hidden Premise HP2: If there was two different sources for the gunshots, there had to have been two shooters.]
>Final Conclusion FC: There has to have been two shooters. [IC, HP2]
---
The form works. Let's sort through the evidence, then.
>P1
It's true that there was a disparity in terms of gunfire sound. The higher frequencies of the gunfire is heard in the beginning. After ~40 s around 00:45 the sound is muffled, especially in terms of higher frequencies. After +20 seconds you then hear the "closer" high pitched parts of the gunfire again.
>HP1
This hidden premise is flawed. "Two different sources" is vague. I'm assuming you're either referring to rifle type or firing location. Factors affecting gunfire sound include rifle type, modifications, and obviously location and firing direction. Possible modifications used on the rifles include sound suppressors as well as flash suppressors, and both of these will change the sound of the gunfire.
>IC
The conclusion is weak, mostly due to the weak hidden premise.
Leo Torres
>HP2
This hidden premise is flawed. There doesn't have to have been two shooters just because there were two sources (rifles, or locations) of the gunfire. One man could simply have changed rifles (which he likely did, given the amount of guns in there) for higher output, and to avoid using semi-automatic rifles that were overheated due to unusual firing behavior (bump-fire).
The rifles could have had completely different exit velocities, and different modifications. It would have made perfect sense for some rifles to be modified with a suppressor to cover up the sound or the flash. As you can tell from the video, the shooter (or the "gunfire sources") pauses for 40 s - then the muffled fire begins - and then another 20 s pause and then the high-pitched gunfire sounds begin again. That could easily be explained by that he reloaded Rifle 1, shot off some rounds with Rifle 2, and then went back to using Rifle 1 as it had cooled off some by then (or just picked up Rifle 3). Shooting in different directions is also a possibility.
As you can tell from the audio, no different rifles were used at the same time. No, the concurrent echoes aren't a second rifle. That makes it highly likely that there was only one shooter, as they obviously would have wanted to shoot at the same time for efficiency.
In terms of location: even if the shooter(s) used the same rifles, but shot from different locations, it still doesn't mean that there was two shooters. 40 and 20 seconds is more then enough time to reload and/or move about in an open suite to shoot from somewhere else. Shooting in another direction relative to the microphone would obviously change the sound characteristics.
>FC
The final conclusion is not supported by the premises.
With the currently available evidence, there is no rational reason to believe that there was two shooters.
Evan Morris
>That makes it highly likely that there was only one shooter, as they obviously would have wanted to shoot at the same time for efficiency.
speaking of weak hidden premises
Parker Hall
sound isn't like a flashlight you dipshit shill
Camden Campbell
Frank we need to talk.
Come upstairs, its yer mum.
Hunter Diaz
1. Spree shooters will take steps to kill as many people as fast as possible.
2. Two spree shooters firing simultaneously will kill more people faster than if they were to fire intermittently.
3. If two spree shooters are firing simultaneously, then simultaneous firing will occur.
4. Simultaneous firing did not occur
Since simultaneous firing did not occur, two spree shooters didn't fire simultaneously, and since they didn't fire simultaneously even though it was rational of them to do so - they weren't two shooters, just one.
Of course not.
I don't know if you've studied any basic physics, but different sound sources will put out different sound pressure levels at different frequencies in different directions. Sound is directional, as I'm sure you can find out by moving around a speaker or just listening to someone talk in a direction away from you. The transmission of higher frequencies will always of course drop off first.
Charles Moore
this fucking idiot is trying to use speakers, a sound source designed to be directional, to explain a gunshot, an omnidirectional source of sound
>being this retarded
Nolan Smith
bump
Jack Bennett
[childish tantrum expletive] is trying to use speakers to explain a gunshot
No. I was providing speakers or spoken voice as an example of how you could learn about the directional qualities of sound. If you use your eyes you can see this in this part of the text:
>Sound is directional, as I'm sure you can find out by moving around a speaker
>gunshots are an omnidirectional source of sound
The degree of omnidirectionality depends on the rifle. Obviously they are more omnidirectional than loudspeakers, but at various distances from the sound source the SPL is generally highly dependent on the angle.
cervus.de
>Due to the strong directivity, the WEBER radius strongly depends on
the direction relative to the line of fire.
Also, what I said about higher frequencies:
> Figure 2 confirms that the directionality of muzzle blast is frequency dependent.
>It indicates in agreement with measurements that lower frequency components have a stronger directionality than higher frequencies.
That is why you the sound is "muffled" when the rifle is turned another direction.
It doesn't even have to be another rifle.
ffi.no
>Most rifles have a muzzle device connected to the end of the barrel, which is
designed to reduce muzzle flash, sound or recoil. These muzzle devices may drastically
change both the directivity and the perceived noise level of the weapon.
>One of the rifles (FN MAG 7.62 mm) had two different barrels, one with a
flash suppressor, and one with a muzzle that opens up in a conic shape. The measured
pressure was much larger in front of the weapon with the conic muzzle than with the
flash suppressor.
Jackson Nguyen
Echo
Shoting from other window
Hunter Howard
alright but what if it was 2 hella gay n**** just angry at the world?
Wyatt Baker
>frank
Alexander James
You could have just said "he used a suppressor" instead of being a giant fucking autistic faggot
Liam Brown
...
Jordan Jackson
I already did
Gavin Rodriguez
Yes, actually: that is the way gunfire SPL at various frequencies is affected by rifle type, modifications, and direction (as you hopefully can see).