Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Las Vegas Shooting

1246714

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 2,651 ✭✭✭ShowMeTheCash


    King Mob wrote: »
    Lol, what are you suggesting with this exactly?
    They stated that there was only one shooter, but really they believe there was actually two?
    Why would they do this?

    See how we are back to the silliness you have to resort to?

    No the silly part is that you are trying to take the press statement and pass this off as the entire investigation as if somehow you know exactly what is going on.
    You do not. Even if they had the suspicion he had an accomplice do you think they would release that information?


  • Registered Users Posts: 25,223 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    You think this investigation has been concluded?
    Again you think the in's and out of this investigation will be presented to the public? We do not know all the evidence that has been gather and still is being gathered.
    Yes. They have stated that they believe that the shooter acted alone.
    If you suggesting that they don't actually believe this is the case, then you are suggesting a conspiracy theory.
    If this looks like a reflection then I would say it looks like a reflection, but it looks like it comes from inside the room it also looks very like the origin of the shooting, just so happens it is not.
    You are concluding it comes from inside the room based on very very very shakey personal assumptions and eyeballing it. You are basing these ideas and assumptions on grainy low res video on youtube.

    Is it possible that you might be wrong...?
    Could it be continence? Yes i!
    But I would not completely dismiss it? No.
    By your reasoning no investigation would be done on any case, we found out guy! Let not look at anything more!
    If it is explained by mundane things, then there is no reason to believe there is a second shooter.
    The investigators have concluded that there is no other shooter.
    There is no plausible reason why they would say this if it was not the case.

    The only you can entertain the possibility that there is a second shooter is if you are also positing a conspiracy theory.


  • Registered Users Posts: 25,223 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    No the silly part is that you are trying to take the press statement and pass this off as the entire investigation as if somehow you know exactly what is going on.
    You do not. Even if they had the suspicion he had an accomplice do you think they would release that information?
    Yes! Yes they would! They do exactly that all the time!

    They would state that they found a second sniping position. They would announce they are seeking more suspects. They would release information about said suspects as and when they could.

    I know this because it is what they do all the time when there are multiple suspects they have not yet captured!
    https://www.brantnews.com/news-story/7567316-police-seek-second-suspect-in-six-nations-youth-abduction/
    http://fox43.com/2017/09/12/police-seek-second-suspect-involved-in-upper-allen-township-retail-theft/
    http://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com/video/category/news/3649472-police-seek-second-suspect-in-conway-shooting/
    http://www.ajc.com/news/police-seek-second-suspect-attempted-armed-robbery-nail-salon/oauN8wLmRcb9Z2EJnUQ4KM/

    And these are just the first results I got with a 2 second google search.

    They do not say that they believe there is only one shooter when there are actually more. That does not happen.

    This is just a bizarre claim...


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,593 ✭✭✭DoctaDee


    I lurk around CT from time to time and came across this in relation to the muzzle flash from the 4th floor. It was filmed earlier in the night and I can't say whether it correlates with the taxi driver footage from later in the night, but it gives a certain perspective to the mirroring of light on The Mandalay


  • Registered Users Posts: 73 ✭✭DinkyDinosaur


    King Mob wrote: »
    I kind of am. But you can see for yourself by looking back through this forum.
    For every mass shooting people claim that it's going to be start of martial law etc...

    They are always wrong.

    And given how you've ignored my question and jumped to personal accusations, I think this claim is no different.

    I said the goal was civil war so confiscating guns wouldn't make any sense. That would just slow down the mutual destruction of American's.

    I said the goal was detention of undesirable people. That's not the same thing as martial law. The plan is a long range one. It is the long con. So no-one has been proved wrong and you have not proved yourself to be any kind of authority at all.

    In fact there are numerous reports of homeless people going missing and strange goings on during the hurricanes.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 25,223 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    I said the goal was detention of undesirable people. That's not the same thing as martial law. The plan is a long range one. It is the long con. So no-one has been proved wrong and you have not proved yourself to be any kind of authority at all.
    Yes, they have claimed this too. You're not really showing how you are right... or explaining how all those other people got it wrong... or addressing much of anything...

    But I'm sure that the martial law and stuff is just around the corner... and time will tell etc...


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,651 ✭✭✭ShowMeTheCash


    King Mob wrote: »
    Yes. They have stated that they believe that the shooter acted alone.
    If you suggesting that they don't actually believe this is the case, then you are suggesting a conspiracy theory.

    Tell you what, go get a dictionary and look up the word "believe".
    They could "believe" he acted alone and he could still of had an accomplice.
    The reason they use the world "believe" is just in case they are wrong or that evidence suggests otherwise.
    King Mob wrote: »
    You are concluding it comes from inside the room based on very very very shakey personal assumptions and eyeballing it. You are basing these ideas and assumptions on grainy low res video on youtube.

    Is it possible that you might be wrong...?

    You keep misusing words.
    I have not concluded anything, I am saying it looks like the flashing comes from inside the room, if i had to hazard a guess between the source of the light being a reflection or from inside the room my money would be inside the room. Because of the two videos from the two different angles.
    King Mob wrote: »
    If it is explained by mundane things, then there is no reason to believe there is a second shooter.
    The investigators have concluded that there is no other shooter.
    There is no plausible reason why they would say this if it was not the case.

    The only you can entertain the possibility that there is a second shooter is if you are also positing a conspiracy theory.

    Again, the investigators I guarantee have not concluded anything yet, they will have what there evidence currently show them.


  • Registered Users Posts: 73 ✭✭DinkyDinosaur


    King Mob wrote: »
    Yes, they have claimed this too. You're not really showing how you are right... or explaining how all those other people got it wrong... or addressing much of anything...

    But I'm sure that the martial law and stuff is just around the corner... and time will tell etc...

    You are not an authority on the subject. It's arrogant for you to say so. You don't know for a fact that they are wrong.


  • Registered Users Posts: 25,223 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    Tell you what, go get a dictionary and look up the word "believe".
    They could "believe" he acted alone and he could still of had an accomplice.
    The reason they use the world "believe" is just in case they are wrong or that evidence suggests otherwise.

    Again, the investigators I guarantee have not concluded anything yet, they will have what there evidence currently show them.
    And this is just getting pedantic and silly.
    If they believed there was a possibility or more gun men, that's what they would have said by now.
    If there was evidence of more gun men, they would have found it by now.

    When they say that they believe he acted alone, that's what they mean.
    If they didn't believe that, and it wasn't what they were going on, that's not what they would have said.

    You were the one who deemed them the only ones who could say anything authoritive about the investigation.
    But now you are trying to weasel out of that because it shuts down your pet idea.

    The authorities do not think there is another gun man.
    You keep misusing words.
    I have not concluded anything, I am saying it looks like the flashing comes from inside the room, if i had to hazard a guess between the source of the light being a reflection or from inside the room my money would be inside the room. Because of the two videos from the two different angles.
    Cool. Based on armchair investigation of grainy youtube footage.
    Forgive me if I don't take your analysis as fact.

    So it can be a reflection or it can be something mundane inside the room.

    Which is more likely, those explanations, or a second shooter that the authorities have not mentioned?

    We also see footage of a light blinking without gun fire.
    Do you think that might be a clue?


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,651 ✭✭✭ShowMeTheCash


    King Mob wrote: »
    Yes! Yes they would! They do exactly that all the time!

    They would state that they found a second sniping position. They would announce they are seeking more suspects. They would release information about said suspects as and when they could.

    I know this because it is what they do all the time when there are multiple suspects they have not yet captured!
    https://www.brantnews.com/news-story/7567316-police-seek-second-suspect-in-six-nations-youth-abduction/
    http://fox43.com/2017/09/12/police-seek-second-suspect-involved-in-upper-allen-township-retail-theft/
    http://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com/video/category/news/3649472-police-seek-second-suspect-in-conway-shooting/
    http://www.ajc.com/news/police-seek-second-suspect-attempted-armed-robbery-nail-salon/oauN8wLmRcb9Z2EJnUQ4KM/

    And these are just the first results I got with a 2 second google search.

    They do not say that they believe there is only one shooter when there are actually more. That does not happen.

    This is just a bizarre claim...

    I do not know if you are being deliberately obtuse or too focused on the argument.

    The first link you gave it took nine days for the "Police seek second suspect" from the time it happened.

    This investigation is only a few days old and not over....


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 25,223 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    You are not an authority on the subject. It's arrogant for you to say so. You don't know for a fact that they are wrong.
    I'm confident in my conclusions.

    They have claimed there will be martial law.
    There is none.
    They have claimed that guns will be taken.
    They weren't.
    They claimed that people will be put in camps.
    They weren't

    You claim that they're going to start a civil war.
    Not going to hold my breath.


  • Registered Users Posts: 25,223 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    I do not know if you are being deliberately obtuse or too focused on the argument.

    The first link you gave it took nine days for the "Police seek second suspect" from the time it happened.

    This investigation is only a few days old and not over....
    Sure...:rolleyes:

    So at what point will you accept that the investigators aren't looking for a second shooter? Couple days? Next week? Never?

    After that, will you then accept that there was no second shooter?


  • Registered Users Posts: 73 ✭✭DinkyDinosaur


    King Mob wrote: »
    I'm confident in my conclusions.

    They have claimed there will be martial law.
    There is none.
    They have claimed that guns will be taken.
    They weren't.
    They claimed that people will be put in camps.
    They weren't

    You claim that they're going to start a civil war.
    Not going to hold my breath.

    The story is far from over. Remember the tale of the hare and the tortoise?
    It's unwise to be arrogant.


  • Registered Users Posts: 25,223 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    The story is far from over. Remember the tale of the hare and the tortoise?
    It's unwise to be arrogant.
    But you have seen the truth of the world and know secret truth and we're all fools for not believing you, right?
    Bit arrogant I think... Specially with how you've not really addressed my point.

    The claims you made about this shooting have been made before about other shootings...
    They were wrong.
    Your claims don't look that much different. You're not going to convince many people.


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,705 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    I do not know if you are being deliberately obtuse or too focused on the argument.

    The first link you gave it took nine days for the "Police seek second suspect" from the time it happened.

    This investigation is only a few days old and not over....

    It's the biggest mass shooting in US history

    The investigators have repeatedly stated they aren't looking for more shooters. There is no current substantiated evidence or even suspicion there are more shooters.

    In the most basic form they will have counted all the shots, counted all the spent shells on the floor of the hotel room, all will correlate with that info will the bullet wounds sustained - so on the most basic of levels (without going into further mountains of evidence) they can already be pretty confident of one shooter

    On the other hand, a layman/amateur with extremely limited info who saw some flashing lights in Las Vegas on internet videos and has a suspicion there may be a second shooter based on entirely on that (rather flimsy) and subjective evidence is not compelling information. Likewise, there are other lay-people who believe the casualties and those involved are actors isn't compelling either


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,651 ✭✭✭ShowMeTheCash


    King Mob wrote: »
    And this is just getting pedantic and silly.
    If they believed there was a possibility or more gun men, that's what they would have said by now.
    If there was evidence of more gun men, they would have found it by now.

    You do not know that, guy had what 10 guns in his room?
    Tomorrow they might find evidence someone help him load the guns into his car or unload his guns at the venue.

    They might come out and say they are looks to speak to .....
    King Mob wrote: »
    When they say that they believe he acted alone, that's what they mean.
    If they didn't believe that, and it wasn't what they were going on, that's not what they would have said.

    I understand what the word means.
    King Mob wrote: »
    You were the one who deemed them the only ones who could say anything authoritive about the investigation.
    But now you are trying to weasel out of that because it shuts down your pet idea.

    The authorities do not think there is another gun man.

    Shuts down my idea?
    They maybe believe he acted a lone at this time, do you actually think that means they stop looking at other people?
    The investigation is four days old, they will be looking at everyone he is connected too.
    King Mob wrote: »
    Cool. Based on armchair investigation of grainy youtube footage.
    Forgive me if I don't take your analysis as fact.

    The analysis is fact but I do not think you understand either one.
    King Mob wrote: »
    So it can be a reflection or it can be something mundane inside the room.

    Which is more likely, those explanations, or a second shooter that the authorities have not mentioned?

    The first two at this time are more likely, but I have already stated that.
    You keep bringing this back as if I am trying to make a stronger case for the second shooter, I am not nor have I. I have asked the question around what this flashing light that looks like muzzle fire is.
    King Mob wrote: »
    We also see footage of a light blinking without gun fire.
    Do you think that might be a clue?

    A clue to what the flashing light is.... Could be.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,126 ✭✭✭turbbo


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    It's the biggest mass shooting in US history

    The investigators have repeatedly stated they aren't looking for more shooters. There is no current substantiated evidence or even suspicion there are more shooters.

    In the most basic form they will have counted all the shots, counted all the spent shells on the floor of the hotel room, all will correlate with that info will the bullet wounds sustained - so on the most basic of levels (without going into further mountains of evidence) they can already be pretty confident of one shooter

    On the other hand, a layman/amateur with extremely limited info who saw some flashing lights in Las Vegas on internet videos and has a suspicion there may be a second shooter based on entirely on that (rather flimsy) and subjective evidence is not compelling information. Likewise, there are other lay-people who believe the casualties and those involved are actors isn't compelling either

    If you allow me to condense your comment - "there are people - some of those people are idiots".


  • Registered Users Posts: 73 ✭✭DinkyDinosaur


    King Mob wrote: »
    But you have seen the truth of the world and know secret truth and we're all fools for not believing you, right?
    Bit arrogant I think... Specially with how you've not really addressed my point.

    The claims you made about this shooting have been made before about other shootings...
    They were wrong.
    Your claims don't look that much different. You're not going to convince many people.

    You remind me of a narcissist ex of mine. He used to twist my words around and was so arrogant and dismissove. You're twisting everything around.

    It's blatantly obvious. You're gaslighting.
    And you're doing it to Show me the Cash too.

    People can make up their own minds. I'm sharing my intuition on the whole thing based on pretty in depth research over the years. You can be dismissive and condescending all you like. I know what I know and you can't change that.

    Something strange is going on and to say everything is normal is just ludicrous.

    Now before I give myself an aneurysm conversing with you further I'll bid thee adeu.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,651 ✭✭✭ShowMeTheCash


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    It's the biggest mass shooting in US history

    The investigators have repeatedly stated they aren't looking for more shooters. There is no current substantiated evidence or even suspicion there are more shooters.

    In the most basic form they will have counted all the shots, counted all the spent shells on the floor of the hotel room, all will correlate with that info will the bullet wounds sustained - so on the most basic of levels (without going into further mountains of evidence) they can already be pretty confident of one shooter

    On the other hand, a layman/amateur with extremely limited info who saw some flashing lights in Las Vegas on internet videos and has a suspicion there may be a second shooter based on entirely on that (rather flimsy) and subjective evidence is not compelling information. Likewise, there are other lay-people who believe the casualties and those involved are actors isn't compelling either

    Bit like an amateur who seems to think he knows the investigation process inside out, what ballistics they have carried out, who they have investigated and whether or not they are currently investigating anyone else. I make no assertions I just ask the question around the footage.

    You on the other hand I think have watched too many episodes of CSI.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,651 ✭✭✭ShowMeTheCash


    turbbo wrote: »
    If you allow me to condense your comment - "there are people - some of those people are idiots".

    Boards 101 - Let's make an argument against a position no one has taken.
    It is easy to win an argument you have made up entirely in your own head!


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 727 ✭✭✭murphthesmurf


    I said the goal was civil war so confiscating guns wouldn't make any sense. That would just slow down the mutual destruction of American's.

    I said the goal was detention of undesirable people. That's not the same thing as martial law. The plan is a long range one. It is the long con. So no-one has been proved wrong and you have not proved yourself to be any kind of authority at all.

    In fact there are numerous reports of homeless people going missing and strange goings on during the hurricanes.

    So they orchestrated a mass shooting at a music concert in order to make undesirable homeless people dissappear?
    What are the 'strange goings on' you talk of during the hurricane?

    It is a convenient argument that it is 'a long con'. It can never be disproven until its time is up, which is a very long time, nobody knows how long. I have a plan to win the lotto. You might laugh that I didn't win this week, but its a long plan that will be proven right when I eventually win. You might all die before I win though, but trust me,mit will happen.


  • Registered Users Posts: 25,223 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    You do not know that, guy had what 10 guns in his room?
    Tomorrow they might find evidence someone help him load the guns into his car or unload his guns at the venue.
    You are moving the goalposts. This is not about people helping him load guns.
    This is about a second shooter.
    If there was a second shooter, then they would have found him and his nest the same way they did with the real shooter who actually existed.

    They would know if there was a second shooter or not by now.
    They don't believe there is.
    They maybe believe he acted a lone at this time, do you actually think that means they stop looking at other people?
    The investigation is four days old, they will be looking at everyone he is connected too.
    Yes. That is why they have said that and they are specifically looking for his girlfriend.

    What they are not looking for is another gun man.
    At what point will you accept that they are not looking for one?
    When this point comes, will you accept that there is no second gun man? Yes or no?
    The analysis is fact but I do not think you understand either one.
    You analysis is not fact because 1. you are you sub par evidence, ie, snippets of very low quality footage that is constantly moving. and 2. You are baised towards the possibility that it's a second gun man despite all common sense being against that.
    The first two at this time are more likely, but I have already stated that.
    You keep bringing this back as if I am trying to make a stronger case for the second shooter, I am not nor have I. I have asked the question around what this flashing light that looks like muzzle fire is.
    But it only superficially looks like muzzle fire and you agree that there are other possible, more likely explanations.

    So why entertain the very unlikely, nonsensical idea that it might be muzzle fire?
    Y
    A clue to what the flashing light is.... Could be.
    Well now we know it can't be gunfire because there it is flashing both before and after the actual incident.


  • Registered Users Posts: 81,140 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    It's the biggest mass shooting in US history

    Actually, it's been pointed out that the biggest mass shooting in US history is still Wounded Knee (by deaths anyway).

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wounded_Knee_Massacre

    As for the flash/lighting I think folks are right, it's now abundantly clear the 4th floor windows were never damaged, which is the primary source of a lot of speculation on the matter.

    Additionally I began wondering about the lack of "gruesome" media coverage, but those photos too, are available online (and you're fine to post links them here if you have them handy, just mark it NSFW).

    Every tragic event will have some degree of misinformation and red herring evidence (Eg. the 4th floor situation) but I don't think it's productive to rip people apart for having doubts.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,651 ✭✭✭ShowMeTheCash


    Overheal wrote: »
    Actually, it's been pointed out that the biggest mass shooting in US history is still Wounded Knee (by deaths anyway).

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wounded_Knee_Massacre

    As for the flash/lighting I think folks are right, it's now abundantly clear the 4th floor windows were never damaged, which is the primary source of a lot of speculation on the matter.

    Additionally I began wondering about the lack of "gruesome" media coverage, but those photos too, are available online (and you're fine to post links them here if you have them handy, just mark it NSFW).

    Every tragic event will have some degree of misinformation and red herring evidence (Eg. the 4th floor situation) but I don't think it's productive to rip people apart for having doubts.

    Hey do not make the mistake of even asking a questions around the footage CSI Tweedleone and Tweedletwo apparently work for the Las Vegas police dept.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,325 ✭✭✭iLikeWaffles


    Just to continue my earlier post....
    Clearly there is a reasonable explanation for the flashes coming from the lower half of the building 40 story building(?) ¼ the way up so around the 10th, or there about, floor. I surmised earlier in post #24 which was a reasonable argument, that has been completely ignored, that it might be the effect of the car moving down the street. But it still does not explain why you don't see any "flash" in either the 4th/10th or 32nd floor in the camera angle that views from the concert itself (poor camera quality or not).



    This video shows the flash coming from around the 10th floor they are not in sync with the cracking of gunfire which they should be! Light travels faster than sound this is true but they should still be in sync and being out of sync in this case is also out of time with the rate of fire. As you can clearly see from the above video as it is slowed. Which also blows my theory of the car causing the light to flash because of the person recording being stationary. Again though it does not show flashes from gunfire from the 32nd so lets just assume for a moment that there were no flashes from gunfire seen and there is a reasonable explanation for the flashes in the video I posted and the flash in the car which also is in the same location as the video above not the 4th floor!

    Could it be possible that the hotel uses the flash to attract the gaze of people passing it. Vegas is renowned for attracting the attention of possible customers with the use of flashing lights. It is far more reasonable to assume the light flashing was being used to attract the attention of people. The other video shows the light being purple and flashing. There is no broken window on 10th floor where the flashes were so explain that please if that is where the "muzzle flash" was coming from!

    While that's being explained please also include the explanation why there was no flashes recorded from 32nd floor! Where the two windows are broken. 2 windows being broken does not automatically mean that there was 2 shooters either.



    With the flashing from the 10th floor in the above video the flash starts approximately 2.5 seconds before you hear the sound of gun fire, that's being associated, with the flash from the muzzle of an assault riffle. Now lets just do the maths on that -

    The speed of sound is 331.2 metres per second
    Without knowing what the exact gun being fired was. Lets assume it was a modern high performance AR 1200/ms

    The building height to the roof is 146.31m
    The building has 43 floors

    146/43=3.4m per floor (not taken the roof into account)
    3.4 meters x 4 (4th floor) = 13.6 meters
    3.4m x 10 = 34m
    3.4 x 32 = 108m

    Time = Distance ÷ Speed

    2.5 seconds is what we want to be seeing for either the 10th or 4th floors as the flash was on the lower floors no where near the broken windows then that does not matter!

    xTime = 34m (10th floor) ÷ 1200m/s = 0.02
    xTime = 108m (32nd floor) ÷ 1200m/s = 0.09
    xTime = 13.6 (4th floor) ÷ 1200m/s = 0.0011

    Now either the laws of physics have been broken here or the flash was not from a gun!

    Now just to give you some perspective it would take .44 seconds for any normal sound to travel to the ground from the roof and 0.12 seconds that's 12ms for an AR.

    Science B1tch


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,651 ✭✭✭ShowMeTheCash


    Just to continue my earlier post....



    Could it be possible that the hotel uses the flash to attract the gaze of people passing it. Vegas is renowned for attracting the attention of possible customers with the use of flashing lights. It is far more reasonable to assume the light flashing was being used to attract the attention of people. The other video shows the light being purple and flashing. There is no broken window on 10th floor where the flashes were so explain that please if that is where the "muzzle flash" was coming from!

    While that's being explained please also include the explanation why there was no flashes recorded from 32nd floor! Where the two windows are broken. 2 windows being broken does not automatically mean that there was 2 shooters either.



    With the flashing from the 10th floor in the above video the flash starts approximately 2.5 seconds before you hear the sound of gun fire, that's being associated, with the flash from the muzzle of an assault riffle. Now lets just do the maths on that -

    The speed of sound is 331.2 metres per second
    Without knowing what the exact gun being fired was. Lets assume it was a modern high performance AR 1200/ms

    The building height to the roof is 146.31m
    The building has 43 floors

    146/43=3.4m per floor (not taken the roof into account)
    3.4 meters x 4 (4th floor) = 13.6 meters
    3.4m x 10 = 34m
    3.4 x 32 = 108m

    Time = Distance ÷ Speed

    2.5 seconds is what we want to be seeing for either the 10th or 4th floors as the flash was on the lower floors no where near the broken windows then that does not matter!

    xTime = 34m (10th floor) ÷ 1200m/s = 0.02
    xTime = 108m (32nd floor) ÷ 1200m/s = 0.09
    xTime = 13.6 (4th floor) ÷ 1200m/s = 0.0011

    Now either the laws of physics have been broken here or the flash was not from a gun!

    Now just to give you some perspective it would take .44 seconds for any normal sound to travel to the ground from the roof and 0.12 seconds that's 12ms for an AR.

    Science B1tch

    The biggest issue with any of this is the device it is being recorded on.
    The Audio to video sync can be unreliable but it does appear like the blinking started a good 1 to 2 seconds before we hear the noise.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,325 ✭✭✭iLikeWaffles


    The biggest issue with any of this is the device it is being recorded on.
    The Audio to video sync can be unreliable but it does appear like the blinking started a good 1 to 2 seconds before we hear the noise.

    Well it's a mobile upload. So it most likely got uploaded to youtube from the mobile so from the source. There is multiple examples in the video that the audio and video are in sync.

    3.58 the car goes over a bump which can be seen and heard in sync!
    4.28 the window goes down the sound is in sync as is the timing of the taxi drivers dialogue with people standing outside the hotel
    4.56 the taxi driver pans the camera towards the building and notices the flash and says "oh ****" that dialogue is boxy sounding meaning that the space between the window and the mic on the phone has a shorter distance to travel so is having what they call in acoustics proximity effect. Also in sync Most importantly!
    5.18 Just after the taxi driver sh1tes herself the car goes over another bump. Both audible and in sync!
    Troughout the engine acceleration noises. In sync! Car door being shut by taxi driver 18.18

    Video is perfectly in sync.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,651 ✭✭✭ShowMeTheCash


    Well it's a mobile upload. So it most likely got uploaded to youtube from the mobile so from the source. There is multiple examples in the video that the audio and video are in sync.

    3.58 the car goes over a bump which can be seen and heard in sync!
    4.28 the window goes down the sound is in sync as is the timing of the taxi drivers dialogue with people standing outside the hotel
    4.56 the taxi driver pans the camera towards the building and notices the flash and says "oh ****" that dialogue is boxy sounding meaning that the space between the window and the mic on the phone has a shorter distance to travel so is having what they call in acoustics proximity effect. Also in sync Most importantly!
    5.18 Just after the taxi driver sh1ts herself the car goes over another bump. Both audible and in sync!
    Troughout the engine acceleration noises. In sync! Car door being shut by taxi driver 18.18

    Video is perfectly in sync.

    I have viewed the video it is a little hard to make out as there seems to be palm trees but I see the first flash as 4:57 and I do not hear the first pop until 4:59 so the OP does make a point.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 4,325 ✭✭✭iLikeWaffles


    I have viewed the video it is a little hard to make out as there seems to be palm trees but I see the first flash as 4:57 and I do not hear the first pop until 4:59 so the OP does make a point.

    Right but does that address the issue of the audio and video being in sync? Throughout the video. Do you believe that the time it takes for the first pop to be heard and then displayed in the video would correspond with the video being in sync based on the observations I made for you claim that they could be unreliable.

    Edit: short clip of the extended version taken down off youtube.


Advertisement