The "Health Ranger" PROVES a second shooter in las Vegas

youtube.com/watch?v=JxmEFeKy8aI

This is one of the BEST presentations I've seen so far. Watch it now Faggots!

Other urls found in this thread:

webmshare.com/play/0KMqd
youtu.be/gNK3e9r3-9Y
google.com/maps/@36.0835324,-115.1726753,3a,15y,89.67h,90.41t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1siDS5HsAlOpol5Y5GxuxxIw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
youtube.com/watch?v=fEf7HObspB0
youtu.be/AXrF9FR6KVI
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

Don't you have some water filters to sell, Alex?

You need 'em, bitchboy.

fuck off kike

Yes, it's me. Alex Jones. I am the ONLY one on the planet that would post this video online to people.....in can ONLY be me....ALEX JONES. You have foiled my plans....FUCKTARD

There was only one shooter. You hate America by thinking otherwise. Does anyone else like sushi? I dont know why but I have been craving it recently.

Bump. Need another sandyhook and 9/11 loose change-zeitgeist flood of interesting conspiracy to challenge the status quo. Hopefully there is quality information and it's not garbage and weak like so many amateur wannabe conspiracy doc producers on YouTube who take bits of everyone else's footage and add nasally voice overs or text that make taking it seriously impossible .

interesting

I mean...You do kinda seem like him.

I'm an engineer with experience in acoustics analysis. This guy seems pretty legit; however, my only question is where his receiver (microphone form the YouTube videos) is located. That in an of itself is almost like a triangulation problem in and of itself.

This also doesn't address whether the guy had firearms with different muzzle velocities.

bump this is fantastic

TWO SHOOTERS TWO SHOOTERS
>webmshare.com/play/0KMqd
>webmshare.com/play/0KMqd
>webmshare.com/play/0KMqd

Worth the watch.

>webmshare.com/play/0KMqd
Does this address your concerns?

yes yes they loaded up here

youtu.be/gNK3e9r3-9Y

and were most likely firing m249 saw or m240 bravo on the crowds

google.com/maps/@36.0835324,-115.1726753,3a,15y,89.67h,90.41t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1siDS5HsAlOpol5Y5GxuxxIw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

there's the coordinates to the location where they loaded up on the black helicopter.

judging by the uniforms, they seem like private contractors or mercenaries, possibly black water. could be UN?

Given that the second acoustic source is much crisper, I'd suspect the source of that sound is much closer to the microphone. There's less damping in that signal. There may be two shooters, but they're not both in the Mandalay Bay.

So, the FBI has practically become fucking irrelevant to us now in this case.

Think the fbi is mostly used to cover shit up desu

Also noticed this. I've heard that they found multiple weapons where the shooter was located, and I suspect that this more likely than there being multiple shooters,

Sooo... well police didn't know where he was at yet so who else is shooting?

Theyre the criminals

please disregard OP. Give this post a (you) and move on.

Spoken like someone who pays for publix sushi

All calculations are significantly more complicated that the video makes it look, with different manufacturing of the same caliber even producing significantly different muzzle velocities, not to mention all the calculations where with a specific .223 rounds... There were several weapons used, some .223, but also 7.56 NATO, .308, and others. He completely ignores this.

It's just different weapons.

pretty good video.
He knows. shut him down

>as you can see, if we assume he had perfect aim and did not move his gun at all

It is, but it lost a bit of credibility when he went off script and started playing LOTR sounds over the top of the video.

Can you fucking autists keep a video nice and tight please?

THREE MORE MUZZLE FLASHES. GET IN HERE
>webmshare.com/play/0KMqd

I do know what he is saying, but if you have a bump stock, you know that the speed of the firing changes, especially if you have not done it much. The gun does eventually get into a perfect timing after you get the feel. And yes I know that doesn't change the speed of the bullet, but it does change the timing of shots. You know what I mean?

if it doesnt change the speed of a single bullet, then it wont change the time delay of the two sound reports for that bullet.

the rate of fire has absolutely no bearing.

Sauce that shit or you're a CIA nigger.

Damn the video just came out and look at that fucking infographic. Damn do you know the ones we make here just have a bunch of squiggly red lines? That's fucking professional ass shit. This shit is being slid hard af

Also nigger if he used a .308 it wouldn't have been fully auto fire. It would have been single shots that you would hear. Another thing .223 and 7.56 rounds are interchangeable. There isn't a fucking difference. Disinfo shill nigger

Does the FBI do anything besides going after people who steal from the rich, going after fat asses jerking off to CP, and sitting around waiting for their pensions to kick in so they can become even more useless to society? Trump, shut these faggots down.

>Damn the video just came out and look at that fucking infographic. Damn do you know the ones we make
I'm bored and I'm drunk. I just cleaned it up and tried to make my sentences less convoluted. If you have anything else you want me to make an infograph of lmk
I think this version is a little more attractive and ez to read / understand

What a bozo

they trick mentally ill people into going along with their ridiculous undercover scams

>listen man I can get the jet plane you drive it into the statue of liberty. This plan is fail proof. After that we can talk about getting you back on the medication

kneejerk ad hominem, nice. mike adams is a standup guy, and isn't associated with conspiracy meme man anymore

Lol

Why not .308 full auto? Also it's .223 and 5.56 that are (somewhat) interchangeable, but that guy obv meant 7.62nato

29 minutes. um. sum it up. fuck you.

If someone analyzed every video's audio and location and time, they could probably figure out the caliber, and target area of EVERY burst. probably to +-10m

I seriously doubt there is anyone that autistic

This, overplayed your hand g-man.

I don't doubt its possible, but I don't understand how you would calculate your distance to the distance of impact. Obviously we can't see the bullet impacts and if you solve the problem of calculating the distance of impact to the camera, you're still left with the problem of direction. If you can say 'this bullet landed 10 yards away' can you say 10 yards towards mandalay? 10 yards further away? and don't forget there is a ton of background noise in many of these videos.

I used the synchronized audio footage to determine roughly how many shots are fired, what the gaps were between shots (reload* times) ... i think thats about the most useful information you can extrapolate from the audio footage. Especially since a lot of the people who recorded video were moving while they did it

lol I used to be a park ranger so I guess that makes me a g-man. I'm unemployed now m8

I appreciate the video but some important shit was left out. I want to know what video or videos he used to source the sound and the timestamps. I am weary that this important detail is missing.

It's because he forgot he was working in meters per second not yards

...

Start triangulating video audios people

I noticed that too, I assumed he didn't explain that he did the conversion, I never checked the math itself to see whether he did or did not. That still doesn't account for the inherent flaws in his logic.

Two shooters confirmed

Have to know the exact location of the camera man. Without that all you can do is measure the gap between bullet crack and muzzle report.

...

If you watched some of the videos, you didn't need an autistic presentation to prove there was a 2nd shoother..

You can get a good idea of where the video was filmed from its surroundings. It's okay to be off just slightly

If you begin to do this you will quickly realize that the math doesn't work out because the bullet impact locations can very by as much as 300 yards, giving you vastly different 'shooter locations' based on where the bullet lands. IMO your best bet would be doing 100 or 200 datapoints from each footage, and then averaging your data points and then calculating your range based on two standard deviations to draw your circle boarder thickness.

Unfortunately , and I would be willing to bet all my savings on this, what you will find is your data is useless. It will fail the statistical variance test.

If you don't believe me I think someone should repost this thread on /sci/ and anyone with a background in data analysis can tell you about variance tests on data sets.. and someone else with a background in math can explain the futility of doing these calculations based on impact sounds, when the bullet impacts are scattered across a 300 yard long plane to locate a shooter who is 388 yards from the center of that plane. This isnt rocket science

The sound of the impact and gunfire are all relative to the camera man. Once you figure out the calibers of the various bursts, and synchronize (frequency data?) then you can start drawing those circles, But it will have to be done to better accuracy than the +-100m of the OP video. And it may not hurt to get some rangefinder data walking around vegas

I even watched the synced video. At no time did I ever hear more than one gun at the same time. I think what is confusing people is how the supersonic crack can vary wildly depending on how close it happened relative to the camera man. For there to have been two shooters they would have had to take turns. Again, never is there more than one gun shooting at the same time.

The recorded shots from the bus shelter are within the closer range circle.

With good measurements of the time gap using audio software, it won't vary 300 yards. 50 maybe, which is okay. It's worth a shot. Let's get some data going

Did you notice the sundance helicopters billboard?

Except a 30 second difference between a muffle sound and one being shot close by is in no way possible.. I'll try and find the video, but there's no way the echo can be heard before the shot above the hotel (it's the dude in the cab, I think). in the middle of the video, there's a section where you here shooting above, then several seconds later you here distant shots. That's not a fucking echo.

is there a version of this video that is a little more stable?

Found it, fast forward to 46 seconds. Explain that shit.
youtube.com/watch?v=fEf7HObspB0

someone make a google spreadsheet that they can track you down with

They are very similar but not the same, just like the 308. They are usually interchangeable, but the ammunition would make a difference in his calculations as the compression is different

I think the muffled shots were shooting from inside the hotel instead of out the window.

mclain u sob!

You are going to have to look at the forensic acoustic analysis to hear the two different guns. I mean it takes someone with a very high IQ to recognize the suddle differences in the frequency range. Most normies listen to it and it goes way over their heads. Thehealthranger tries to explain it. Just don’t feel bad if you can’t grasp the complex concepts of forensic acoustic analysis. I would recommend everyone listen to it, it is just that very few will be able to appreciate its full genius.

No, I'm talking about fast forward to 44-46 seconds, and explain to me the shots from far away several seconds after the first shots rang out.

holy fuck, this!

First shots were at :04 seconds in the video, you here the initial echo immediately after. Then 40-few seconds later you hear a second set of shots, completely different rhythm than the first set of shots.

Couldn't he also tell by hearing the slight difference in time depending on where a video was taken? For example, one video could be a split second sooner than another, allowing some semblance of direction? Maybe it's too quick to tell.

I see where you're making your mistake. try to bear with me for a moment
>Sound-distance of the 'report' as OP describes is constant to the cameraman
I agree with this statement.
>Sound-distance of the 'impact' is constant to the cameraman
This is false. The impact sound will happen whenever the bullet hits the ground real time and then the sound has to travel to the cameraman. Who as I already described, assuming hes filming from inside the venue, can be 0 yards from the shot, or could be 300 yards from the impact. So the sound travels to the camera at 345 m/s to the cameraman and we're dealing with lag times on a hundreth of a second to locate the shooter. So if the bullet lands 300 yards away, you will hear the impact almost a second late. That difference is NOT negligible. Where the bullet lands affects your calculation and needs to be accounted for. Yes, I'm using the extreme example of the bullet being at the far end of the venue but unless you know precisely where the bullets are EACH landing, the results of this math are useless and thats easy to prove.

I would ask you to take an audio clip and do the first 100 calculations in excel. Just set up the table so you just punch in the numbers, right? .. after you do the first 100, which is simply one magazine, do a variance test to show if the data is statistically relevant.


Adams never gave us any information about home many datapoints he took, nor did he give us a std deviation or variance test result. Obviously this dude has no experience working with numbers and knowing how to test his own work for precision or accuracy and I'd be willing to bet he only did 4 or 5 points, saw his range was beginning to very by 300 yards, he said 'ok, obviously this means there are two shooters' and he clumped his data into two groups that STILL had a 50 yard range in the data points, but it was better than trying to explain one shooter with a 150 yard range in the data

>to be this bluepilled

I don't think those were far. I think that was him shooting inside, into his door or something further from the window. It would seem very muffled compared to him shooting out the window.

Not only that, even more to add to this, 5 seconds later you here even more gunfire that isn't right nex tot the hotel at :50 seconds
How is this not being talk about right now? I rarely see any Sup Forumstards talking about this video and it's connection to a 2nd shooter.. why is this sliding so hard?

i hear you man, i had not seen that video. You can't explain that with one gunman unless cops say they were using autos. Even if the guy is in the room 20 feet where he cant aim it wouldnt be that faint. And there are faint shots like 30 seconds after the loud ones. That isn't an echo lol

>attack the messenger
Don't know if you're a shill but you might as well be one opening up with that bullshit.

>suddle

K FBI

>it takes someone with a very high IQ to recognize the suddle

Do you mean subtle, genius?

You can't mask the sound of a gun like that, even with a suppressor..

this is a suddle troll, take your (you)

I shoot for fun, with my friends sometimes, and some of those times there are other people shooting nearby. Watch GoPro Cowboy's video, the unedited unbroken 15 minutes one, and the very first shots that start at 3:12 are followed by what is very clearly two different people shooting two different guns. There is the 2 or 3 deliberate single cracks of the rifle, spaced out a certain amount, then there's the pop of a handgun, then another rifle crack then pop pop pop of the handgun again. The pops are not echoes because their cadence is different than the rifle's shots. The pops are not a single rifle shooter withdrawing into the window or shooting a different direction because of how closely the crack and pops overlap, regardless of bullet travel time. An untrained person simply can't move fast enough and then have any sort of aim in the time between the reports. However, this gets explained away by having a police officer shooting someone else at the time the rifle was shooting between ~3:15 and ~3:25 in the video. They would have to own up to the multiple shooter scenario in this case though, unless Paco, Jamal or Kevin chose this moment to get caught robbing the 7-11.

OK fuck you guys, I am going to do the statistical analysis myself to PROVE his math is incorrect and I'll post it tomorrow. But you're still not going to believe me because you iddiots don't even know what how to prove if data is statistically significant or not. This is highschool math guys and I shouldn't have to even crunch the numbers for you, I logically explained the fault in OP's method. There's no reason I should have to spoonfeed you assholes.

I don't mind there being a second shooter, but you can't use fake-math to come to the conclusion cuz its easily disproved and makes us look bad

>suddle
yo dawg i herd you put a troll in your troll

Have you ever shot out of a window with the muzzle pointing out of the window? It is shocking just how much if muffled the sound inside the building. I think a similar effect would happen in reverse, it makes sense to me. Shootings happen inside buildings all the time without people close by hearing it. Now you stick the muzzle toward the window whilst in close proximity to the window it's going to be much much louder.

You need to use audio software for the time gap

Yes I have, I'm armyfag and there's not that big a difference between shooting with the barrel outside the window vs inside the window, especially a window few floors up. Guns are fucking loud, really fucking loud. even in a concrete building, you can still clearly hear an m4 going off inside the building and it isn't as muffled as it is in the video. Sure there's a slow decrease in volume if the gun was being shot inside a building, but not that fucking big of a change if the person shooting is floors above you.

0:46 People have explained that as him running from one window to the other. Just listen to the begging of the video instead. You can hear the distant gunshots followed by the closer shots 3 seconds later (too short a time to run from one window to the next).

Listen to this video at 0:09 and tell me you don't hear two distinct separate automatic weapons firing at the same time.

I'm with you. But don't call the cracks "bullet impacts". Those are sonic booms. Guy in OPs video was trying to say those were bullets impacting pavement which is untrue.

Video:
youtu.be/AXrF9FR6KVI

0:09 Two separate guns shooting

But CLEARY a BELT-FED machine gun was used.

What are the BULLET SPEEDS of those bullets?

Maybe it's just TWO guns.

Cheers to this guy

> isn't associated with conspiracy meme man anymore
so, he realized his cut from pilfering the gullible's wallet wasn't big enough and started his on conspiracy meme machine. that seems to happen alot around conspiracy meme man.

When I have shot with the muzzle pointing out of the window it was very noticeable muffled compared to just being outside with the gun. That was my experience. As for hearing gunfire inside buildings you are not occupying, I have one experience. It was very muffled. This was a shotgun blast too. Just saying if he ran up close to his door and started shooting down the hallway to the people outside it should be a lot quieter.

That's my whole point in Point 2 He is entirely incorrect in how hes hearing/analyzing the audio waves. His math is correct assuming the shooter was stationery, and the shooter was shooting at the exact same place on the ground on every single shot and the cameraman was also stationary. That's the only way any of this works. I 100% agree with what you're saying and I don't think I'm even able to discern bullet impacts from the audio, I'm currently coming through my downloaded videos to see if there's any where its clear to me so I can crunch a handful of datapoints and prove the result is insignificant

That's a big difference in sound running a few meters in the other direction though. Massive difference from being loud as shit to being quiet enough to hear in the distance.
No need to convince me of a 2nd shooter, I already believe there was.

Upload spreadsheet. Columns: video geocoordinates, shot time gap

let's triangulate this biiiiitch