United States News
See other United States News Articles
Title: Video claims shooter dressed as police
Source:
[None]
URL Source: https://duckduckgo.com/?q=LAS+VEGAS ... a=videos&iax=1&iai=qMxn7hpXmk4
Published: Oct 8, 2017
Author: Planet X Investigations
Post Date: 2017-10-08 15:41:01 by A K A Stone
Keywords: None
Views: 57379
Comments: 186
Video claims shooter dressed as police Poster Comment: Video claims shooter dressed as police
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-34) not displayed.
.
.
.
#35. To: A K A Stone, VxH (#22)
Show me where you checked the information. How did you find out where the taxi driver was? This video I posted to the other thread gives a very good idea of where the taxi was and when. He identifies specific Mandalay Bay landmarks in the taxi driver video. https://libertysflame.com/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=53000&Disp=42#C42
Yeah I see/acknowledge what you're talking about regarding generation loss now -- Compression artifacts introduced by rendering from a compressed source.
Going out to all Klingons.
Yep. Same idea. I just looked for the covered carport with the curved road.
It's useful to discuss videos that may be fakes amid a stream of other contradictory videos? I don't think so.
There isn't any discernible echo. Probably because this is the aiming point and not the origination point. Here's what I see between the last bullet sound and the last report: Where T1 is the last bullet sound and T2 is the last report sound. 1.07 seconds between T1 and T2 = 1208 ft. 1208 ft from the Mandalay Bay, per Google earth, puts us right about where the video is being taken. What do you mean by the last bullet? It that the time of the sound as recorded on that video, or what is it? Is T1 a gunshot and T2 an echo. What do you mean by report, if not an echo? And just how did you calculate such a remarkable result for distance? Don't tell me. 1,125 feet per second (the speed of sound) x 1.07 = 1,203.75 and you rounded it off to 1,208 feet. Forget the rounding. Why does that measure the distance from the video taker to the shooter? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_of_sound
It's useful to discuss videos that may be fakes amid a stream of other contradictory videos? It [Youtube] may be useful for discussion and consideration to determine whether some content about something or other is worth considering and researching. In the same way, reddit and 4chan cannot be taken at face value. In a thread full of unreliable videos, it may be useful to point out that contrary videos can be produced from Youtube. However, the one video I posted appears useful to get the geography and locate where the taxi driver was relative to the 32nd floor windows and in trying to figure out what area of the hotel is depicted in certain portions of her video. Whether one chooses to believe the flashes are muzzle shots or something else, they are not coming from the 32nd floor. There is a certain usefulness to that video. Youtube may be useful or entertaining. As proof of things, it is unreliable.
>>What do you mean by report, if not an echo? As any Boy Scout with one of these... ...should know: https://duckduckgo.com/? q=An+explosive+noise%3A+the+report+of+a+rifle >>And just how did you calculate such a remarkable result for distance? { blah blah blah wikispew} I used the same speed I used in my other analysis (appended below) - based upon an air temperature of 72 degrees Then I calculated the difference in time between the last bullet sound (T1) and the corresponding last report sound (T2). T2-T1 = time the report traveled = 1.07 1.07 * FPS of 1130.8 = 1208.8 ========================== Conclusion: Burst B is NOT two weapons being fired simultaneously. It is one weapon being fired at a more distant target. The longer distance, observable in the period between Burst B's T1 and T2, manifests a corresponding longer period of reverb. It is the reverb that is being incorrectly interpreted as a second weapon (and second shooter) firing at the same time. Research resources:
Unless it is fake. How do you know that that is the original video? I haven't found an original source of it.
At some point fairly early in the attack, he must have shot at the aviation fuel tanks. I haven't heard any reporting on that other than that a couple of bullets hit one tank and one bullet did penetrate the tank but caused no explosion (which happens mostly in movies). That is a nice set of links you've curated. I'm not sure if anyone will examine them. So much easier to go click up another kook video off YouTube than to do any serious science reading.
Hmmm. Actually that's not quite the correct calculation required here. I'm making an error by treating the T1 as the firing time. Need to update that to incorporate the muzzle velocity....
There is a video (somewhere in the haystack now) that has audio of what sounds like several single hp rifle cracks at the start of the shooting - presumably at the fuel tanks.
lol.
Laugh all you want. If we have tons of contradictory YouTube videos based on this taxi driver video (and none of them prepared from the original video), then most of them must be wrong or scammers trying to draw clicks. The best you can say is that the ones you are posting are somehow better than the others. And you can't offer any evidence that they were not faked or that they were prepared using authentic undoctored footage. You're reaching into the YouTube jar and trying to draw out a winner almost at random, mostly based on how clickbaitish their titles are. Maybe there are no winners in the YouTube raffle; maybe all it has are the consolation prizes for dummies.
If we have tons of contradictory YouTube videos The taxi video was there right from the start. You think she was in on it?
You want me to prove a negative? You can't prove they are fake. Someone on the internet will if they are fake. The taxi video has been there right from the start. The video chan posted lines up with it. They are not fake and you know it.
Right where? Where are you saying she posted the original video? Where is it? Either you can point me to it or you're just making crap up because you want to believe it or you just don't want to admit to being taken in like a rube with inauthentic video footage. Among the earliest postings of it seems to be video distributed by Las Vegas Journal-Review. I think the taxi driver sold it to them but I can't confirm that. However, LVJR did not initially distribute the entire video but offered cut-down versions that were edited. We have no idea whether we have ever seen the original video as she recorded it. We don't even know what brand and model her phone was or what resolution the video was.
I know no such thing. And neither do you. And you're just blustering now because you finally realize you've been had by these YouTube scammers like the Niburu/Planet X cultists.
This was the earliest version I saw: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WNiRr763gJA&t=3s Unfortunately no longer available.
Youtube is just a tool. How reliable or useful it is for discerning the truth is relative to the integrity of the individuals and organizations using it. Certainly not any less reliable than the arrogant, self- serving, propaganda-parrots perched atop their "Newseum"
That video was posted by BlazingPress.com, a generic rightwing/Christian site. They posted it originally on Tuesday, 10/3/17. You can see a better version of the page (not the video) at Archive.org. That is the same page archived on 10/4. Very very unlikely that is the original video. LVNR posted their copy on 10/4 or 10/3, can't recall which. It could be that these all came from a local network news affiliate who bought it off the taxi driver and then everyone just captured it and published it as their own content. Certainly, that is what Blazing Press did. This all underlines my previous point: we don't know which of these videos are the original or if there is an original reliable copy of the taxi driver's video. I'm starting to doubt that there is. Maybe the Klingons and Lutherans have silenced our intrepid taxi driver, threatening to take away her spicy tacos.
Yep. I'm not convinced it was tacos. Burritos are an equally plausible source of flatulent reverberation in Las Vegas.
Cori Langdon October 3 at 8:58pm Here is my video. It has been edited per the request of the passengers to bleep out their names and end the video before their faces are seen. No other editing has been done. Looks as clear as the vids I upload to FB from my phone.
Here is my video. It has been edited per the request of the passengers to bleep out their names and end the video before their faces are seen. No other editing has been done. That doesn't mean that Fakebook didn't recompress it. She didn't offer the original footage at all. When you upload to Fakebook or YouBoob, they create their own versions in various resolutions as I detailed in another post. When YouBoob first started to offer HD videos, they did offer the actual original footage exactly as uploaded. They discontinued that some time back and now re-encode everything. I think Facebook does the same thing. If the media and all the YouBoobers just grabbed her Facebook video, then it is possible, likely even, that no one has had an actual first-gen copy of her video.
Right - but it's probably as close to the "original" source as we're going to get. Yep.
I was hiking in the mountains and I yelled, "Hello". Right after that I heard four other people yell 'hello', one after the other. And here I thought I was alone.
Notice the windows are completely missing. The shooter's windows were jagged.
Enter Screen How was I had when I changed their title which was 100 percent proof to "video says"? You still were unable to disprove the images and you dodged it like a little girly man. I think they were police officers who turned around and pointed their guns. But what was the flash? None of you two pussies dared to refute it. Girlymen.
Shouldn't you be hiding in your bunker so Planet X doesn't hit you in the head?
I'm always in my bunker here on Q'onoS. Chancellor Gowron wouldn't have it any other way.
Regardless of your lame humor. You still haven't told me why those two guys in police uniforms look like they turn around and fire on the crowd. I'm not saying that is what they are doing and never said that. I just wondered if anyone smarter then me (not you TC, don't make me laugh, i'm thinking of others) knew what was going on in that section of the video. It is above your pay grade so don't worry about it. Maybe someone else knows since you don't.
I can't help you. I don't watch kook videos.
I know you can't help me. I'm not looking for someone who likes to remain ignorant and boast about their ignorance. The video was uploaded by a person who was really there, unlike you who weren't.
No, it was uploaded by known kooks who probably manipulated it. And you.
So they were there? You are misinformed. Which usually isn't the case.
Then I calculated the difference in time between the last bullet sound (T1) and the corresponding last report sound (T2). Your arithmetic is fine, your logic is a FAIL. You failed to answer the question: "Why does that measure the distance from the video taker to the shooter?" You have still not identified what sounds you refer to. What is the first sound of a bullet? The initial sound wave as heard at the recording location? What is the last sound of the bullet? An echo? Another bullet? In this case, the video taker was 400 yards away from the shooter. The sound wave originated at position a and traveled 400 yards to get to the videotaker at position b. That took ~1.07 seconds for the sound to travel. If you measure the first sound of the bullet as when it traveled faster than sound, and then struck something or whizzed past making a sound, your ~1.07 second measurement is impossible as the elapsed time difference would be the time it took the sound wave to travel (~1.07s) minus the time it took the bullet to travel. Your calculation as the bullet traveling at aproximately the speed of light. The bullet and the sound both travel the same path at the same time, at different velocities. As the sound takes ~1.07 seconds, the difference in their arrival times cannot be ~1.07s. Two cars travel an 80 mile strip. One travels 80 mph and crosses the finish line in 1 hour. The other travels 40 miles an hour and crosses the finish line in 2 hours. If the slow car went half the speed of the faster car, and the time difference was 1 hour, the distance can be calculated as the velocity of the faster vehicle (80 mph) divided by the velocity of the slower vehicle (40 mph) time the time difference (1 hour). Your calculation is good arithmetic but gibberish logic. ~1.07 seconds is simply the time for sound to travel from Mandalay Bay to the target recording location. An echo of a sound originating at position a results from the sound wave traveling the distance originating point a to recording position b, proceeding an unidentified distance to the reflective surface c, and returning to position b. The sound must arrive/leave recording position b at ~1.07 seconds, travel to a reflective surface, and return. The elapsed time must exceed 1.07s. In measuring the distance of a lightning bolt, you can use the sighting of the lightning bolt, the light traveling at the speed of light, as the originating time of the initiating event. You can count until the slower moving sound wave arrives, and calculate distance to the lightning. This is because the velocity of light is so great, its travel time over relatively short distances is negligible. Unfortunately, even with a Boy Scout merit badge, an audio recording from 400 yards away does not identify distance of the originating event. Bullets do not travel at the speed of light, or anywhere near it. The way you know the distance from the Mandalay Bay to the event location is by measuring it.
How do you know that that is the original video? I haven't found an original source of it. The Mandalay Bay is a public location that is clearly documented by, among others, Google. For the geography of the location, it does not appear necessary to present a half-dozen sources to verify that the building is situated as it is, where it is. There is nothing controversial about the layout of the land. I have yet to see any depiction of Mandalay Bay without an entrance and a taxi stand, but if you know of one, please present it.
Need to update that to incorporate the muzzle velocity.... Ok, so I was on the right track. I found this research paper: [Using Sound of Target Impact for Acoustic Reconstructions of Shooting Events] http://www.btgresearch.org /impactsound.pdf "For example, if the microphone is adjacent to the victim (such as a 911 recording might be), the equation for determining the distance becomes: t=tb - ts= d/Vb-d/Vs If the muzzle blast duration obscures the sound of the bullet hitting the target, simple inspection of the sound waveform is insufficient. " I took their formula, built a spreadsheet, and plugged in 223 balistic data generated via shooterscalculator.com: Important to note: * Presently we don't have information regarding specificaly which weapons and amunition were used. So the ballistic data was generated with a guestimate 223 configuration. * My DAW (Sonar) doesn't appear to have the capability of capturing a sound spectrogram like the ones the authors of the study produced; but after reading their commentary on the blast noise obscuring impact noise, I filtered the crowd noise, and filtered/looked alternately for the report and then the high energy impact sounds - and I revised T1 and T2 accordingly. More accurate results could possibly be obtained if the corresponding burst sequence on the Taxi-Driver video is identified and aligned, as the taxi-driver's audio contains only the muzzle blast and echo. It doesn't have the crowd and impact noise to obscure the muzzle events.
You didn't read this... https://libertysflame.com/cgi-bin/readart.cgi? ArtNum=53025&Disp=46#C46 ...before that screed did you. :-p
Comments (75 - 186) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestWhere were was the taxi driver specifically at the first five burst fired.
#36. To: nolu chan (#34)
nor a bit for bit copy of the original.
#37. To: VxH, Klingon Ambassador, Kahless the Unforgettable (#32)
#38. To: nolu chan (#35)
#39. To: nolu chan (#33)
It may be useful for discussion and consideration.
#40. To: VxH, A K A Stone, Tooconservative (#32)
T1 T2 Elapsed Time Total Distance 17.69 18.76 1.07 1208.80ft In dry air at 0 °C (32 °F), the speed of sound is 331.2 metres per second (1,087 ft/s; 1,192 km/h; 741 mph; 644 kn). At 20 °C (68 °F), the speed of sound is 343 metres per second (1,125 ft/s; 1,235 km/h; 767 mph; 667 kn), or a kilometre in 2.91 s or a mile in 4.69 s.
#41. To: Tooconservative (#39)
It may be useful for discussion and consideration.
#42. To: nolu chan, A K A Stone, Tooconservative, Klingon Ambassador (#40)
(Edited)
An analysis of two sequential burts of gunfire between:
["Taxi Driver Video" the Zapruder Film of the Las Vegas shooting UNCUT / UNEDITED]
https://www.youtube.com/watch ?v=mBbOFwWquAw&feature=youtu.be&t=1m7s
and
https://www.youtube.com/watc h?v=mBbOFwWquAw&feature=youtu.be&t=1m24s
===============
T1: Time from start of video (1minute N seconds) at the time of the last shot in the burst.
T2: Time from the start of the video (1minute N seconds) at the time of the echoed sound event corresponding to T1.
TempF: the air temperature (72 degrees F)
FPS: 1130 ft per second -- The speed of sound at 72 degrees F
Elapsed Time: T2 minus T1, the number of seconds between the last shot, and the echo of the last shot in each burst.
Total Distance: Elapsed Time * FPS = the total distance traveled between T1 and T2.
Echo Distance = The distance the echo traveled from the aiming point back to the point of origin.
===============
https://www.google.co m/search?biw=1544&bih=856&q=Forensic+Acoustics+gunfire
http://www.physic sclassroom.com/mmedia/waves/er.cfm
https://www.timeanddate.com/weather/usa/las- vegas/historic
http://www.csgnetwork.c om/soundspeedcalc.html
#43. To: All (#42)
(Edited)
T1 T2 Elapsed Time Total Distance 17.689655 18.758621 1.068966 1208.80
Here's a snapshot with increased decimal precision and less rounded confusion :-}
#44. To: nolu chan (#41)
However, the one video I posted appears useful to get the geography and locate where the taxi driver was relative to the 32nd floor windows and in trying to figure out what area of the hotel is depicted in certain portions of her video. Whether one chooses to believe the flashes are muzzle shots or something else, they are not coming from the 32nd floor. There is a certain usefulness to that video.
#45. To: VxH (#42)
Conclusion: Burst B is NOT two weapons being fired simultaneously. It is one weapon being fired at a more distant target. The longer distance, observable in the period between Burst B's T1 and T2, manifests a corresponding longer period of reverb. It is the reverb that is being incorrectly interpreted as a second weapon (and second shooter) firing at the same time.
#46. To: All (#43)
(Edited)
17.689655 18.758621 1.068966 1208.80
#47. To: Tooconservative (#45)
(Edited)
At some point fairly early in the attack, he must have shot at the aviation fuel tanks.
#48. To: Tooconservative (#44)
Unless it is fake.
#49. To: A K A Stone (#48)
#50. To: Tooconservative (#49)
Laugh all you want.
#51. To: Tooconservative (#49)
And you can't offer any evidence that they were not faked
#52. To: A K A Stone (#50)
The taxi video was there right from the start.
#53. To: A K A Stone (#51)
(Edited)
They are not fake and you know it.
#54. To: Tooconservative (#52)
We have no idea whether we have ever seen the original video as she recorded it.
#55. To: nolu chan (#41)
Youtube may be useful or entertaining. As proof of things, it is unreliable.
#56. To: VxH (#54)
(Edited)
#57. To: Tooconservative (#56)
Very very unlikely that is the original video.
Maybe the Klingons and Lutherans have silenced our intrepid taxi driver, threatening to take away her spicy tacos.
#58. To: Tooconservative (#56)
(Edited)
#59. To: VxH (#58)
Cori Langdon October 3 at 8:58pm
#60. To: Tooconservative (#59)
That doesn't mean that Fakebook didn't recompress it.
If the media and all the YouBoobers just grabbed her Facebook video, then it is possible, likely even, that no one has had an actual first-gen copy of her video
#61. To: nolu chan (#40)
#62. To: Tooconservative (#30)
That three-missing-windows video is total crap. It could easily be faked.
#63. To: Tooconservative (#53)
And you're just blustering now because you finally realize you've been had by these YouTube scammers like the Niburu/Planet X cultists.
#64. To: A K A Stone (#63)
#65. To: Tooconservative (#64)
#66. To: Tooconservative (#64)
#67. To: A K A Stone (#66)
I'm not saying that is what they are doing and never said that. I just wondered if anyone smarter then me (not you TC, don't make me laugh, i'm thinking of others) knew what was going on in that section of the video.
#68. To: Tooconservative (#67)
(Edited)
I can't help you. I don't watch kook videos.
#69. To: A K A Stone (#68)
The video was uploaded by a person who was really there, unlike you who weren't.
#70. To: Tooconservative (#69)
No, it was uploaded by known kooks who probably manipulated it. And you.
#71. To: VxH (#43)
I used the same speed I used in my other analysis (appended below) - based upon an air temperature of 72 degrees
#72. To: Tooconservative (#44)
Unless it is fake.
#73. To: Tooconservative, nolu chan, aka stone (#46)
(Edited)
I'm making an error by treating the T1 as the firing time.
#74. To: nolu chan (#71)
(Edited)
{ blah blah blah }
.
.
.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]