• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Proving the Aurora Theater Shooting's official story false

Neveos said:
Oh, no, I love how this is all playing out. I'm so glad I dropped by. I find this a nice little place to drop by for positive stimulus.
Click to expand...


Good for you. May I remind you, though, that once again you failed to address the wondersome properties of your magic explosion that progressed through the room with the speed of drunken sloth?
 
Last edited:
Safe-Keeper said:
Here, let me try.

:cool: A wild CONSPIRACY THEORIST appears!

CONSPIRACY THEORIST uses YOUTUBE!
It's not very effective . . .
CONSPIRACY THEORIST uses YOUTUBE!
It's not very effective . . .
CONSPIRACY THEORIST uses YOUTUBE!
It's not very effective . . .

:crowded: SKEPTICS use RATIONAL APPROACH!

CONSPIRACY THEORIST uses DODGE!
The RATIONAL APPROACH misses the CONSPIRACY THEORIST:duck:!

CONSPIRACY THEORIST uses REPEAT QUESTIONS!
It's not very effective...:dig:

CONSPIRACY THEORIST uses TROLL!
It's super effective:jaw-dropp!

SKEPTICS use FACEPALM!

CONSPIRACY THEORIST uses LAUGHTER!

And so on for three pages...
Click to expand...
Damn, you missed your saving LOL against that Ravening N00b. :(

Horatius said:
http://s3.amazonaws.com/stripgenerator/strip/59/42/57/00/00/full.png
Click to expand...
picture.php


Brilliant. :D
 
Neveos said:
Now, as for the interior, we have the following image which shows the interior of theater 9, which we know is theater 9 because only theater's 8 and 9 had emergency exits at the top, according to an exployee interviewed after the shooting ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dhUxRD7XNwc ):
http://www.cinematour.com/picview.php?db=us&id=25861
http://www.cinematour.com/picview.php?db=us&id=25860
http://www.cinematour.com/picview.php?db=us&id=25859
Click to expand...



None of those images contradict the basic layout as shown in the diagram I used, and in fact, show that these theaters are laid out almost identically to probably thousands of other such theaters in North America. And as I said, this layout provided an ample range of positions that would potentially allow bullets to pass through only one or two walls to hit people in the other theatre.

So, your insistence that the bullet must have passed through 3 walls is clearly erroneous. If you want to continue claiming that this is what must have happened, it's now on you to do the work of diagramming exactly what you think happened, and showing that any other possibility is impossible.

And while we're at it, I'll just note that you completely ignored the rest of my post, which showed the penetration power of this sort of weapon. So, even if you can show that the bullet must have passed through 3 walls, you still have to show that this level of penetration is impossible for these weapons.


So, to sum up: No, the bullet did not have to pass through 3 walls, and yet, probably could have done so in any case.

So much for your claims. Now the ball is in your court. Simply repeating the same claims again, or any kind of dismissive "ha ha ha" post will be taken as an admission that you cannot support your claims any better.
 
Neveos said:
Wow, hey guys, sounds like I have an ally and he doesn't even know it, yet.

Welcome, conspiracy theorist, it's great to have you show up.
Click to expand...

I asked before but you ignored my question, so here we go again - show me evidence of the detonation of an explosive device - and a reference to "shrapnel" doesn't qualify.

I'll even give you a leg up:

Initially the investigation will establish whether an explosion has actually occurred. Explosions will result in specific damage being caused to surrounding areas, the presence of which may indicate such an incident has taken place. Therefore investigators will search for this characteristic damage.

Textiles will take on specific material when subjected to the heat caused by an explosion, with many melting and once again solidifying, displaying clubbed damage. Surfaces slightly further away, such as rooftops and stationary vehicles, are likely to collect soot deposits from materials burned during the explosion. The pressure and heat of the blast will cause specific damage to nearby surfaces, the kind of damage being specific to the material. Once confirmed, the origin of the explosion will be located.

The presence and depth of specific damage or a crater may indicate the origin, or seat, of the explosion. It must then be established whether the incident was caused by maliciously placed explosives or if it was an accident, such as a gas leak. Investigators will be on the lookout for both signs of potential gas leaks and similar but also for indicators of bomb use.

Let's see your evidence.
 
Neveos said:
Hahaha. So you wish to redesign the crime scene? That diagram is very much out of date...

And, just for reference, this woman claims to be a resident of Aurora, and claims she used to be a manager at the theater...

I have to find the interview that mentions when the guns were switched...

Now it's a simple matter of diagramming the shooter's position...

Well, we'll just have to position the shooter, now.
Click to expand...


Given the contradictions and, in some cases, dearth of details, wouldn't it be better to put all the speculation on hold and wait to see what comes out in the trial, after the witnesses have all been systematically interviewed, and the crime scene details are carefully examined and presented? It looks like there is still a good year before everything is ready. If then you still see a cover-up, at least you'll have the official, official story. Why the rush to arm-chair judge it all before then?
 
Neveos said:
Hahahahaha. Well, please don't stop. Please do the best you can to prove the official story correct in light of my last post.
Click to expand...


I don't know why you think this funny...I mean, do you really expect anyone here to take what you say, seriously, when you so completely misunderstand where the burden of proof lies?


Just to be clear....no one here is required to prove "the official story" correct. If you believe it a conspiracy, then you must provide the evidence to demonstrate that.

I know this has been said before, but you don't seem to be listening...why is that?
 
Neveos said:
Hahaha. So you wish to redesign the crime scene? That diagram is very much out of date (up to date, now, however, because the theater was redesigned and now somewhat resembles the diagram). Also, that is not an exact layout, and the original website that hosted that image even said so. Here's another diagram that looks more like the actual layout, but you shouldn't accept this one either: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j1_QwrYGbvc

Before I show you images you will tell me are out of date, one must also note the blatant problem with the diagram you show simply because the theater was large enough to hold well over 400 people. It is also being said, now in recent hearings, that only one canister was recovered from inside the theater (they appear to want to claim the canister bounced off a railing, causing a smoke trail to appear to come from the "middle light" as was reported, and Seeger and Dates only saw him throw one, and that a second canister was recovered from inside the car).

Now, as for the interior, we have the following image which shows the interior of theater 9, which we know is theater 9 because only theater's 8 and 9 had emergency exits at the top, according to an exployee interviewed after the shooting ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dhUxRD7XNwc ):
http://www.cinematour.com/picview.php?db=us&id=25861
http://www.cinematour.com/picview.php?db=us&id=25860
http://www.cinematour.com/picview.php?db=us&id=25859

And, just for reference, this woman claims to be a resident of Aurora, and claims she used to be a manager at the theater, and posted this image saying it is theater 9, and "shows the shooter's vantage point":
http://amandakrause.fsimbs.com/century-16-shooting-another-colorado-tragedy/

From the images, you can clearly see the stairwell walls greatly cover the seated section adjacent to them. A person of standard height standing up out of the chair might barely clear the top of the wall.

However, congratulations. You successfully attempted what I referred to as the way to explain this trajectory. The shooter had to shoot the wall from the ground level. Now you simply have trajectory issues, not to mention the shooter exhausted a shotgun before he switched to the AR, and probably did so after he got on the stairs (I have to find the interview that mentions when the guns were switched).

Hankins was seated four seats in and obviously behind people. His forearm was hit, and it was hit near the elbow, with the bottom half described as "where the shrapnel ended up", lol. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0DieJN9ZUD8

oh just found this cover up attempt. Never could find these articles before, and boom. Brings back memories...:

"“At first we thought it was special effects. We saw the floor smoking ... then something flew past my neck,” he said.

It turned out to be a bullet."

http://www.dailyherald.com/article/20120720/news/707219924/print/

"But quickly, Ostergaard realized he was mistaken — when debris began to whizz by his head. It was too dark to see, but what Ostergaard thought was the sound of firecrackers was actually bullets coming through a partition wall into the theater."

http://lakeforest.suntimes.com/news...-man-describes-scene-at-colorado-tragedy.html

Which is in direct contradiction to his interview, and this article:

"Ostergaard was unsure of where the shrapnel came from that struck the teen in his group. He couldn't say whether it was from stray bullets in the neighboring movie theater or if it was from what he described as an "explosion" in a nearby stairwell."

http://www.zoominfo.com/p/Steven-Ostergaard/1824075834

I rather enjoy the position that is occurring at this point. Ok, good. So now the official is that the shooter fired from ground level, and the bullet whizzed by Ostergaard's head... Now it's a simple matter of diagramming the shooter's position...

Anyway, gj. That is how you keep the bullet from passing through 3 walls. Sucks for the official they are actually trying to make it look like Ostergaard experienced a bullet whizzing by his neck despite everything he's already said... That's a big lol. Well, we'll just have to position the shooter, now.
Click to expand...

so....

:crazy:
 
Muc said:
Do you need to lie now to hold your story together? I already told you that the teacher's injury was unrelated.




At no point does he say that he was hurt in the shooting.
Click to expand...

The lie is required to get the story off the ground to begin with.
 
Neveos said:
Nothing quite says it better than:

"To the right of us, right by the stairwell, all 12 of us, heard hissing, and started seeing smoke, saw a/heard a boom and a flash, we heard what we thought were fire crackers, we thought kids were throwing fire crackers"

ETA:

HAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
Click to expand...

Congratulations. You found a quote from someone describing a smoke grenade in a place where a smoke grenade went off.

Amazing work.
 
Neveos said:
Nothing quite says it better than:

"To the right of us, right by the stairwell, all 12 of us, heard hissing, and started seeing smoke, saw a/heard a boom and a flash, we heard what we thought were fire crackers, we thought kids were throwing fire crackers"

ETA:

HAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
Click to expand...

Do mass shooting always elicit this much hilarity?
 
Neveos said:
Wow, hey guys, sounds like I have an ally and he doesn't even know it, yet.

Welcome, conspiracy theorist, it's great to have you show up.
Click to expand...

Word games? That's all you got is word games?
 
Neveos said:
Oh, no, I love how this is all playing out. I'm so glad I dropped by. I find this a nice little place to drop by for positive stimulus.
Click to expand...

Nothing like a little self stimulation to get the old blood flowing, right?
 
NoahFence said:
Congratulations. You found a quote from someone describing a smoke grenade in a place where a smoke grenade went off.





Amazing work.
Click to expand...


I think this guy was in theater 8, not theater 9 where the attack happened. Since we don't have access to the evidence uncovered in the investigation, we do not know for sure, but it appears likely the firecracker sounds were from bullets coming through the wall. Don't know whether smoke and flashes were from vents, confusion or faulty memory.
 
Ladewig said:
If you insist on saying there was a bomb under that seat, is there a reason the bomb could not have been planted by Holmes?
Click to expand...

Neveos said:
Like I said, it would work. Hilarious, like most of this thread, but it would work. Obviously a fall-back position that they've already taken precautions for.
Click to expand...

(1) why is it hilarious? Do you have a specific reason to eliminate the possibility that Holmes planted bomb(s) in theater 8? If you do, then present it. I am not married to the official story and am willing to accept evidence showing that the story is false or incorrect, but I am going to need more that conflicting eyewitness testimony to discount the commonly held viewpoint.

(2a) Do you agree that there is conflicting eyewitness testimony from people in theater 8?
(2b) Do you agree that there is conflicting eyewitness testimony from people in theater 8?

(3) how did you eliminate rifle spalling as the source of what was described as the bomb damage to the wall? The two things look remarkably alike to people who are not combat engineers.

(4) Is it your contention that the majority of mass killings in the past few years were influenced, initiated, controlled or otherwise manipulated by a specific group, organization, or cabal? I.e. the same people were behind Newton and Aurora and the Boston Marathon.
 
Last edited:
Neveos said:
From the images, you can clearly see the stairwell walls greatly cover the seated section adjacent to them. A person of standard height standing up out of the chair might barely clear the top of the wall.
Click to expand...

You do know that the images you posted links to do not support this conclusion right?
 
I am curious about something. Do any of the witnesses you have quoted doubt the "official story" as you like to call it?

(It's just known as reality to the rest of us.)
 
Neveos said:
Oh, no, I love how this is all playing out. I'm so glad I dropped by. I find this a nice little place to drop by for positive stimulus.
Click to expand...
This is why I love CT discussions. We get to shoot down ridiculous claims and learn lots of things from each other in the process, and the CTers and trolls receive their share of adrenaline from... whatever it is they get out of these discussions. Lots and lots of attention they may not get enough of in Real Life, perhaps.

Either way, we're wrestling with pigs, we both get dirty and we both love it:blush:.
#guiltypleasure
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom