Outstanding work @pk2019. Those correlations lining up and dipping slightly where the pasted shots overlap is exactly what I expected to see for these data sequences.
We could repeat this for one of our other sources (preferably off to the side so we aren’t really with the sonic boom) if we can find a shot to correlate with that doesn’t have a lot of background crowd noise. We can also use like .05 or 0.1 seconds instead of 0.2 to minimize that.
@pk2019 it is unfortunate that we can’t see more resolution. Maybe Dropbox?
What I am interested in is the number of samples offset between the large positive peak and adjacent negative peak, and if there is a regularly spaced decay of peaks near the main one.
Hello @offtheback,
I found online converter.
#https://ffmpeg-online.vercel.app/?inputOptions=-i&output=output.mp4&outputOptions=
Channel 1 and 3:
Somehow I should upload the stereo audio made from these channels…
@pk2019 .15 is great for this sequence
Maybe all I am most interested in is .1 seconds after a few of the correlation peaks, including the first autocorrelation one as a baseline. Maybe just zoom in and do another couple of grabs? One channel is fine
One comparison that might be worth running is this, if you have Audacity.
Here is the relevant portion of source 4.
Select this section of the track and then run Effect>EQ and Filters>Low-Pass Filter, select 800 Hz as a corner frequency and a Roll-off of 24 db/octave, and hit Apply.
Select this section of the track again and then run Effect>EQ and Filters>High-Pass Filter, select 250 Hz as a corner frequency and a Roll-off of 12 db/octave, and hit Apply.
Now the waveform will look like this:
We have tried with these filters to minimize some of the crowd and other noise, because we know that won’t correlate from shot to shot. We may also be throwing away part of the gun report, but in this experiment we are just testing how well the main energy band of the reports correlate with each other. If we did the same thing to the police cruiser audio, we should see even higher correlation, so this is a more than fair comparison.
Now export this track from Audacity into the environment you are running correlations in.
I would suggest using Shot 4 for the snippet you are correlating to, as it is pretty clean and its echoes don’t overlap the next shot:
There are two different correlation tests that might be of interest. First, just the initial impulse packet, from 21.360 seconds to 21.385 seconds, to test the shape of the original report for matches. Second, the impulse packet plus its echoes, so extended out to 21.530 seconds, which will also correlate how the environment responded to each shot.
you are exactly right!
I was taken away the past few days, but am back now and will come back with the ballistic trajectories from the high roof behind crooks and the vents shortly
yes. the only thing that could change my mind about the high roof as being the shooting location is the angle/heading/bearing of the bullet at Trump’s position.
I am adding these angles/headings/bearings to my kml too such that we can determine whether that would match flying along Trump’s head and grazing his ear.
do we know what heading/bearing his head was at at the time the bullet flew by?
Meanwhile I combined 1&3 channels from patroler car into a stereo file.
You all, and as am I, speculating and have numerous variables including the exact nature of the injury, the caliber (.223 or 5.56 is apparent) weight and brand of the bullet, any gusts of wind, the exact trajectory (if there was a 2nd shooter who fired from a different lateral or vertical elevation), etc.
What we do know is that human skin is actually a very tough organ and quite resistant to damage and flexible, and the ear contains cartilage, both of which might be actually more tough than the silicon used in that demonstration dummy head. Take your fingers and try to manipulate the upper portion of your ear, it is very tough and leathery.
What I am saying is that it is quite possible that even a minor grazing wound might have caused the bullet to tumble and veer sufficiently off course to make backward trajectory tracing with specificity, difficult if not futile.
Let’s take a moment to step back and think about all of the things that can and do impact bullet trajectory.
First, I want to repeat that I do believe shots 1-3 came from the vent in AGR building 6. I think the shooter was probably wearing an LEO uniform. I am not confident one way or another whether the body on the roof was Thomas Crooks or someone else.
Now, for my version of the black pill, if I understand what that means. I don’t think anyone of note who is under the jurisdiction of the FBI is going to claim that anyone beside Thomas Matthew Crooks fired 8 shots. Why? Because the FBI has already gone on record as saying that he fired 8 shots. If they weren’t complicit in the shooting, they are certainly complicit in the coverup.
Now think of what the FBI has done recently to people they don’t like, or to whom they wish to make an example of. Jan 6’ers are a prominent example. New York City Democratic mayor Eric Adams is another example. He got in the FBI’s crosshairs for complaining about the cost of housing “migrants”. They RAIDED HIS HOME and are pursuing various fund raising and bribery charges. Those started quite soon after he started complaining.
US Rep. Clay Higgins of the official House Committee has stated that Crooks fired all 8 shots. In the unofficial committee meeting, Erik Prince was invited to state that two shooters would be unlikely because the second shooter would have had a great chance to shoot Trump once he stood up. My take: the second shooter may not have signed on for a suicide mission. Also, his handlers may have wanted to make it look like there was only one shooter. But basically, the UNOFFICIAL committee is going with a single shooter theory.
So we have STRONG signs that the committees are not going to be looking in the direction of two shooters. You can bet there will be no one trying to see if someone can reproduce both kinds of sounds with a rifle like Crook’s from the roof of AGR building 6. You can also bet that IF the podium and bleachers are set up for a congressional investigation, they will be set up in such a way that Trump’s ear height is higher than the bleacher railing, and the backtracing leads to Crooks’ position. It won’t matter that pictures of the re-creation (if they are allowed) don’t match those from the rally.
I wish it wasn’t that way. At this point the best that’s going to happen is that the Secret Service is going to have significant reforms, and anywhere from 5 to about 20 people will lose their jobs. I think even that is kind of a stretch, though.
Assume there was a 2nd shooter and didn’t want suicidal mission. Acceptable for us. But the supposed handlers might think differently. The 2nd shooter didn’t do well the job. I’m sure I don’t want to wear those shues. In other words, due to the failed mission, it would be not suicidal but homicidal at the end.
Note: carefully I did not specify if the 2ns shooter was a he or a she.
I currently agree with you there was a 2nd more professional assassin based on logic, opportunity, DS operations would not have relied on 1 shooter to take this opportunity, and the audio tracks being audibly different sets of shots.
I think the vent is a viable location, with some benefits and evidence to support it, but presents it’s own significant known problems. The main benefits include similar trajectory, and we have GN floating around that AGR door inexplicably and the counter snipers supposed to be in AGR 2nd story are inexplicably not there during this shooting.
The vent issues include no evidence on the vents being opened, the extreme added difficulty in shooting thru vents at a distant target, the staging and setup of a snipers nest in that location, the lack of any situational awareness of that person, and possible issues with trajectories with possibly grandstand in the way (that’s unclear right now).
I have not seen any evidence nor heard any theory it was not Crooks. If he were still alive and not responsible, he and his parents would be protesting loudly. If he is dead elsewhere but was not the shooter, then what is the theory on why they pinned it on Crooks but sacrificed a lookalike on the rooftop? Was someone else a more capable shooter but they didn’t want that person ID’d so they framed Crooks and got rid of him elsewhere? It all just makes no sense and is quite complex, and complex plans add layers of failure points.
We know Crooks went to the range every week for almost a year, it was his dads gun, presumably his car, we have photos that are pretty good of Crooks on the retaining wall and walking down the street in same clothing the dead person on the roof was wearing, and the pictures do match Crooks pretty well… Seems a lot of trouble to find a lookalike, off Crooks elsewhere, and set up some unknown other lookalike…
No dispute the FEDS are totally corrupt in all respects but I do think they would have tried to keep this plan as straight forward and simple as possible.
Crooks is the disposable patsy MKUltra type asset being groomed for a couple years. They gave him the basic plan and a pathway to the rooftop. Feds also installed a few loyalists to enable Crooks to get into position. But they also put their own triggerman nearby to ensure the job was done correctly and leave Crooks holding the bag so Crooks could be killed and it all blamed on him.
I’m not sure those vents just “hanging” on the wall.
Maybe they have connected to collecting air tubes above the ceilling.
If it is professional architecture, and not just put them on the wall with “as it is” style.
Taskforce at the venue again:
Good recent video of the vents from one of the members on this forum.
An interior layout would answer a lot of questions as to what these vent, whether they are fixed inasmuch as a shooter there would be impractical or impossible or plausible, etc.
But it does seem it would have been obvious to people there and on video if a vent were opened briefly sufficient for a assassin to obtain his target and take 3 shots.
Hi BigTim,
Yes, I agree with you, there are many unknown factors that we don’t know for sure. The goal of this “back trace” bullet project is to take into consideration all data and all points of influence possible, estimate with reasonable common sense. The more people that give reasonable feedback the more accurately we can find out the real trajectory. Is it 100% according to reality, certainly not, can we conclude some information from this data, yes:
Looking at the data in the drawing we can exclude that shots have been fired from the water tower or from the 2nd floor building. I would even go further and say the shot is coming from somewhere from the building 6 wall. As you can see, we are excluding a lot of possibilities, and we can stop analyzing them and save time for other topics.
Next, we can be optimistic and believe that our simulation is very close to reality within a reasonable error rate, which would be the first shot coming from Vent 3 or Vent 2. Taking this information, we can try to debunk the two possibilities that we calculated.
So, we have all been trying to do that, but frankly speaking, all videos that have been released seem to have photo shop paint over the vents. So, why would somebody cover up the vents if there was nothing to hide? Actually, it confirms even more that we have calculated correctly, because it is very suspicious behavior to cover up these two vents on all videos.
Simply saying that the bullet hit Trumps ear and completely lost its trajectory and therefore give up this project is not an option.
I think everybody in this forum should think with an open mind and seriously try to find out what really happened that day, because a LOT does not add up.
We have a lot of smart people working on this, and maybe some trying to misdirect the rest. Some times the back and forth seems like this.
It’s certainly possible that a concealed shooter would know they would die if they failed, but it’s possible they wouldn’t. I’m just stating a possible reason why a second shooter would not shoot after the Secret Service got Trump standing again.
I know a second shooter could have been female, but I’m old, I remember when it was acceptable to say “he” for a person of unknown sex, and I’m also conservative politically, and female in real life. I would estimate that around 90% of professional assassins are male.
