Title: Forensic acoustic proof of SECOND shooter in the Las Vegas massacre Source:
[None] URL Source:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JxmEFeKy8aI Published:Oct 11, 2017 Author:Mike Adams TheHealthRanger Post Date:2017-10-11 00:40:47 by A K A Stone Keywords:None Views:39619 Comments:148
I've listened to the first 20 mins of it, which seems to be a complete presentation of his case. I like that he's knowledgeable, or at least seems to be, in this field.
But I think there's a flaw in his analysis, and that is that all the math is based on the premise that the second shooter was firing .223 rounds just as Paddock was. Adams even admits early in the video that the distance & shot report tables is different for different types of rounds.
But it's already known that Paddock has 1-2 dozen different firearms in the room. Some were .223, but I think others were of differing calibers. So perhaps Paddock fired .223 rounds some of the time, but also switched to different rifles of higher or lower caliber which would have differing acoustic lag times at the same distance. Has Adams accounted for that possibility?
There is also the speculative nature of matching bullet impact sounds with shot report acoustics. I.e you might hear on a recording 6 shot reports but only 5 bullet impacts, in which case determining which bullet impact sounds match which reports could be speculative, and if you get that wrong then you'll be wrong about the distance of the shooter.
Paddock switching rifles might also account for the differing shot acoustic recordings from the taxi at the base of tho hotel.
And yep - we don't know yet which weapons / ammunition were fired in association with the audio events.
I think the guesswork that the initial shots were the incendiary rounds fired at the fuel tanks is pretty good.
Then he changed to his main shooting window and used the bump-fire stock guns to open up on the crowd.
He wanted a big fire, possibly to panic (or just distract) the crowd or to draw off first responders. When that didn't work, he moved quickly into massacre mode.
He's presented no "proof".
I'm trying to decide if Stone has upgraded by switching from the Niburu/Planet X kooks to this Natural News kook. I think he has. This is a somewhat higher grade of kookery IMO.
No, he clearly has not proved anything, and the vid should not have been labeled as such. But he has made an argument that there was a second shooter. Proving or disproving that argument would require more work.
