I mean they applaud. We cannot hear the loud music.
We cannot see footages when he climbs up. Someone else might access that roof, too.
By the way, cats climb this way, humans are not so flexible.
Anyway, someone should demonstrate, reconstruct that climbing.
I found a site drawing by Clay Higgins’ staff, and saved months ago, by me.
Does the South bleacher look ‘longer’ than the North bleacher?
Also, Higgins’ red ‘X’ on AGR6 looks meters West of other Crooks’ locations I’ve seen.
(the white line, drawn months ago by me, with GIMP, was my only drawing on this Higgins picture)
I think they are same, but the middle one was bigger.
#https://youtu.be/7gJjUbYHMmA?list=PLknkbOhjFYOZiNtdQMZeB8yo4PBqXHaP4&t=19
#https://youtu.be/6tReC8aNS0A?list=PLknkbOhjFYOZiNtdQMZeB8yo4PBqXHaP4&t=81
Helicopter arrives at rally after assassination attempt on former President Donald Trump
?
oh. there is the wrong 6:05 timestamp (maybe another time zone)
#https://youtu.be/JQvqVbfhnkk?t=97
Were the FBI involved in Trump’s Assassination Attempt?
alert
I cannot remember I have edited this post.
And I started with this picture, but now it is not there.
What’s going on now?
1 Like
Why is anyone mentioning Thomas Crooks, when the designated shooter was Baldy?
And the ElectricGuacamoleGreen in the muzzle flash was caused by burning copper, left as a residue, because Baldy had been shooting copper jacketed lead bullets:
Good heavens, but of course!
Yes, but have you known, for 9 months, that the bright green in the muzzle flash was caused by burning copper/copper oxide?
And, what is underneath this ‘kneeling’ balding man ‘lone gunman’?
And, do you extract video frames by pressing keyboard keys 30 times(or more) in one second?
The unedited image on Higgins’ Taskforce extra report:
shows a South bleacher 50% wider than the North bleacher, and Higgins’ red ‘X’ on the AGR6 roof is also generously positioned at least 4 meters west of Crooks’ actual location.
This editing of the truth was necessary, because a line from Crooks to Trump was always going West of the South bleacher corner. A shot from Crooks’ location would have gone over the heads of people in the lower rows, with no chance of hitting Copenhaver, Dutch, or the corner.
If you look at the MIT stuff take in Dr Walter Lewin. They did a video series where they recorded his lectures for a Physics course or two. There were something like 40 hours of preparation for each hour lecture so the demonstrations could be filmed. He was a very gifted teacher. He was a bit essentric and and he has had some issues in the past few years since retirement that I believe are likely indications of dementia or senility, however he could really teach some physics.
Another MIT lecturer of note was Dr. Donald Sadoway. He is trying to innovate energy storage with his liquid metal batteries. His company is Ambri.
2 Likes
I know you might shoot the messenger, but I would note that red and green can be seen just above and to the left of the red banner that was inserted by the person who put the two videos side by side.
It’s just possible that the red and the green are an artifact of some stage in the uploading, downloading, merging and reuploading process.
Dayve’s video was subject to sharpening, for one thing.
Take a look at the detail below from a still of Dayve Stewerts video, specifically the fact that the sky is lighter next to a lot of the branches. That’s a sign the video has been subject to sharpening. Any smoothing, sharpening, color adjustments etc, are destructive.
I explained my process for getting the best results possible from a youtube video on the “Audio analysis is most consistent…” thread
I learned a few things from a “chat” with AI (Grok) about the kinds of processes that cheaper and more expensive cell phones will use with videos, and ways to get youtube videos to appear their best, and what kind of problems they might present, like blockiness or further sharpening.
Cheaper cell phones are more likely to apply sharpening at a fixed level, or maybe a level that depends only on the lighting. Better cell phones have better analytics.
Grok indicated that youtube often sharpens the pictures as well.
1 Like
He already answered your question.
Waste of ammo!
I (should) try to determine the elevation of the cam. Assuming the location is accurate.
How to do it?
Look at the shadow of the towers. It looks less than a half of the pole height.
We need the shadow angle.
It seems the location is correct. At least the direction is aligned with the shadow.
Altitude 41 deg. (The horizon is 0, while the top of the sky is 90.)
Horizontal distance approx 2.5 km. (Sorry, it is given by Google in km.)
tg 41 deg = 0.87 → 2.1 km
(We would see the airplane’s shadow if it was at that height. But it is below, probably less than half of it. Maybe 900 or 1000 meters.) So the picture was taken at 3000 feet height above the ground level.
@redranamber Perhaps AI can calculate it better.
Anyway, there might have been more pictures, or even footages. From landing airplanes or drones a mile away.
1 Like
Maybe Dayve could answer that question.
Meanwhile, he’s made a video capture that could be on the cover of TIME magazine.
I’ll change subjects to Higgins’ map.
Clay’s TaskforceExtra map shows
- Crooks, 12 feet west of his actual roof spot
- Trump, 4 feet east of his podium spot
- The south bleachers, 50% wider than their actual width,
- & all for a geometrically impossible Crooks shot from DJT’s ear to the South bleachers.
If a shot from Crooks’ real position had hit Trump’s ear, the bullet would have sailed over heads in the Southwest bleacher lower rows, with no hope of hitting the corner, or anywhere east of the corner.
First approach: It assumed we can see the shadow at right angle.
After that I informed AI that the shadow should be projected to the ground.
2nd approach: 4956 m
(But it estimated the sun at 66.9 deg.)
Now I told it 41 deg sun elevation.
More directly, if the image captures the apparent ratio of shadow to pole height as 0.411 (due to both projection and camera viewing angle), and the real ratio is 1.1468, then this compression factor is due to the vertical viewing angle of the camera.
Let’s return to the original triangle formed by the camera and the top and bottom of the pole.
Earlier, we said the sun angle is 41.05°, so shadow/pole = 1.1468
Also, from image, shadow/pole = 0.411 → total compression = 0.411 / 1.1468 = 0.3583 = cos(α)
So finally, if the true shadow is 1.1468 × H, and it’s seen at a 68.9° horizontal offset, then:
Camera height h=2100⋅tan(θ)=2100⋅tan(41.05∘)≈2100⋅0.872≈1831 m\text{Camera height } h = 2100 \cdot \tan(\theta) = 2100 \cdot \tan(41.05^\circ) \approx 2100 \cdot 0.872 \approx 1831 \text{ m}Camera height h=2100⋅tan(θ)=2100⋅tan(41.05∘)≈2100⋅0.872≈1831 m
6003 feet
Author’s Statement:
- 1500 ft AGL (Above Ground Level)
- 3000 ft MSL (Mean Sea Level)
This implies the ground elevation is about 1500 ft at that location.
Conclusion:
There’s a significant discrepancy — our estimate is 4× higher than what the author claims.
Possible Reasons:
- Perspective misinterpretation: We assumed the image geometry (285 px vs 117 px) represented accurate perspective from a distant camera — but if there’s lens distortion or zoom, it might distort the shadow appearance.
- Foreshortening misjudged: If the camera is not actually far away horizontally, or if it’s looking almost straight down, our triangulation becomes invalid.
- Image not to scale: If the image is cropped, tilted, or warped, our pixel ratios don’t translate directly to real-world angles.
4. Shadow not entirely visible: The 117 px might not be the full projected shadow.
Zaliponi claimed that he saw gunsmoke and the shooter “at his 11 o’clock”, but Fox Nation showed Crooks(and even an actor playing the role of Crooks) who obviously was at an angle East of Zaliponi’s “12 o’clock”.
Fox Nation added more lies to their description, but at least they drew a blue spot close to Yearick’s final shooting location.
Higgin’s dishonest map distortions are worse.
(and the red square was colored by me, with GIMP, to show Crooks’ location)
1 Like