Proving the Aurora Theater Shooting's official story false

[abaddon]

What material is in those walls that would prevent bullet shrapnel from penetrating through?

Magic material, which has whatever properties du jour that you need it to have for your next trick.

ETA: FE that is not a go at you. On those rare occasions when I perform some magic, I make huge enormous unplausible claims about the properties of walls, ceilings, floors, whatever, but it always works.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

That's the thing about that pesky problem of numerical identity. You see, sometimes there are two different things. I know it's hard to grasp that, but sometimes when we speak of something, and no matter how much something else might resemble it, it's actually a completely different thing altogether. It's crazy, I know.

http://s24.postimg.org/wtq0fjgj8/theater8.jpg

I'm very slightly surprised that you illustrated your point about things sometimes being different with a picture of something which isn't different.

Let's take a look at your picture: The inner wall you arrowed clearly has a handrail on it. That's at hand height, right? The top of the wall is perhaps a handsbreadth above that. Agreed?

So just how high do you think that wall is, again? You implied that a standing adult would be almost hidden behind it. Do you wish to revise that view or are you sticking with that claim?

Also, would you care to imagine that behind the wall on the left is another theatre which is the mirror image of the one shown. Imagine people sitting in that theatre in the seats which are the mirror image of the ones you arrowed. A shooter standing at the point where the photo was taken could fire through one wall and hit any of those seats. In fact it's quite clear that there are many places in the theatre from which a standing shooter could do that. Consider how much more constrained are the places where the shooter would have to stand to shoot through 3 walls to get to one of those seats.

Do you see any problem with your argument now?

 

[Neveos]

Magic material, which has whatever properties du jour that you need it to have for your next trick.

ETA: FE that is not a go at you. On those rare occasions when I perform some magic, I make huge enormous unplausible claims about the properties of walls, ceilings, floors, whatever, but it always works.

3 walls... actually, if they aren't solid, let's just say, that would be 6 "materials" of whatever compound you wish to conjecture the bullet passed through, over considerable distances between them.

 

[Tomtomkent]

3 walls... actually, if they aren't solid, let's just say, that would be 6 "materials" of whatever compound you wish to conjecture the bullet passed through, over considerable distances between them.

So no evidence they would stop a bullet then?

 

[dafydd]

Whoever heard of a bullet traveling considerable distances?

 

[abaddon]

3 walls... actually, if they aren't solid, let's just say, that would be 6 "materials" of whatever compound you wish to conjecture the bullet passed through, over considerable distances between them.

Do not care, actually, unless you provide the proof that you promised in your OP. In the abssence of that, all you have is hot air, and I do not sink to that level.

 

[Neveos]

Oh I see someone is speaking in riddles...

I'm very slightly surprised that you illustrated your point about things sometimes being different with a picture of something which isn't different.

Let's see.... wha?

Went to the movies yesterday and the stair way wall was at my waist as I ascended the stairs, I am just under 6'. Seated the upper 1/4 of my body was easily exposed. There is only one wall that comes into play, the wall between the theatres.

That's the thing about that pesky problem of numerical identity. You see, sometimes there are two different things. I know it's hard to grasp that, but sometimes when we speak of something, and no matter how much something else might resemble it, it's actually a completely different thing altogether. It's crazy, I know.

http://s24.postimg.org/wtq0fjgj8/theater8.jpg

Let's take a look at your picture: The inner wall you arrowed clearly has a handrail on it. That's at hand height, right? The top of the wall is perhaps a handsbreadth above that. Agreed?

So just how high do you think that wall is, again? You implied that a standing adult would be almost hidden behind it. Do you wish to revise that view or are you sticking with that claim?

Sure. It was a light conjecture. It was unclear whether the seating section was somehow lower than the stairs. However, you are incorrect to even mention this as a problem since the subject was seated. The wall is high enough, that even if the subject had his arm resting on his head, it would still have to go through that wall. Point being: the bullet is not going over the wall to strike Gage. But we don't even need to be arguing this anymore since the official story is currently such that it is approaching Hankins from a forward position, whizzing past Ostergaard's neck (which he conveniently seems to have forgotten for the interview, even contradicting himself over it- mentioned earlier.)

Also, would you care to imagine that behind the wall on the left is another theatre which is the mirror image of the one shown. Imagine people sitting in that theatre in the seats which are the mirror image of the ones you arrowed. A shooter standing at the point where the photo was taken could fire through one wall and hit any of those seats. In fact it's quite clear that there are many places in the theatre from which a standing shooter could do that. Consider how much more constrained are the places where the shooter would have to stand to shoot through 3 walls to get to one of those seats.

Do you see any problem with your argument now?

There is no "problem with the argument". The argument itself is quite a valid concern to be raising. Your argument, however, is very much invalid. You see nothing and yet you say it is clear the shooter had plenty of positions to fire through only one wall. At the very least, he shoots through two unless he is nearly upon the adjoining wall.

Side by side of the 2 theaters made by mirroring their images:

http://postimg.org/image/6gcsbmscl/

The most obvious thing to notice is that the adjoining wall is "V-ing" out heavily. Simply put: you have to imagine folding those theaters together until those walls are parallel. You'll note a rough comparison to my model (walls are lower):

http://s18.postimg.org/iji3z73ew/sbscomp.jpg

looking directly within the wall:

http://s18.postimg.org/ttatu58g9/overhead.png

shoots through 3 walls near entry door (combating a previous poster):

http://s18.postimg.org/trvu3m0ax/overheadwire.png

If he ascends the stairs on the right (consistent with official):

http://s18.postimg.org/68k3i0b2h/ascendright.png

If he ascends stairs on left but crosses through middle:

http://postimg.org/image/4w2eg4dmt/

If he ascends stairs on left but goes in front:

http://s18.postimg.org/d0aikv021/crossesfront.png

That works, but then he is practically firing at the wall for some reason with all of his victims in the auditorium, and if you don't think he is shooting at the wall, we know Golditch was hit soon afterwards, and he was somewhere in the middle of the floor section, so we get something like this:

http://s18.postimg.org/6p5b4fytl/golditchshot.png

Which is honestly me going out of the way and thinking of the most generous seat I can place golditch in since he can be in any one of these:

http://s22.postimg.org/efk7tq9o1/golditchshot2.png

So rather than go with the numerous testimonies and descriptions suggesting explosives "firecrackers, hiss, smoke, bang, boom, pop, flash, heat, shrapnel, set gas bombs as they were leaving, source of smoke, ringing ear, pepper bombs, explosion", you'd rather believe the shooter simply fired at the wall because he intended to. Because, basically, yeah, he isn't just firing at the wall and accidentally hitting these people without either going through multiple walls to do so, or practically neglecting his screaming crowd and firing a couple shots directly into the wall next to him. That's basically what this requires, and thus your apologetic argument loses weight especially in light of the contradictory witness testimony.

Just to display the absurdity of this, this is the most generous shot I can give for Hankins (which totally isn't, as you say, "many places in the theater"... I mean this is barely a believable shot, all other permutations are retarded): http://s2.postimg.org/uo1yoije1/shotgage.png

And then you have the proceeding shot fired (necessarily straight in order to hit a turned Golditch in the front left side of his neck who sitting in the middle of the theater):
http://s11.postimg.org/95054raeb/golditchshotwire.png

So.... pwnage

 

[dafydd]

Oh I see someone is speaking in riddles...
Let's see.... wha?




Sure. It was a light conjecture. It was unclear whether the seating section was somehow lower than the stairs. However, you are incorrect to even mention this as a problem since the subject was seated. The wall is high enough, that even if the subject had his arm resting on his head, it would still have to go through that wall. Point being: the bullet is not going over the wall to strike Gage. But we don't even need to be arguing this anymore since the official story is currently such that it is approaching Hankins from a forward position, whizzing past Ostergaard's neck (which he conveniently seems to have forgotten for the interview, even contradicting himself over it- mentioned earlier.)

There is no "problem with the argument". The argument itself is quite a valid concern to be raising. Your argument, however, is very much invalid. You see nothing and yet you say it is clear the shooter had plenty of positions to fire through only one wall. At the very least, he shoots through two unless he is nearly upon the adjoining wall.

Side by side of the 2 theaters made by mirroring their images:

http://postimg.org/image/6gcsbmscl/

The most obvious thing to notice is that the adjoining wall is "V-ing" out heavily. Simply put: you have to imagine folding those theaters together until those walls are parallel. You'll note a rough comparison to my model (walls are lower):

http://s18.postimg.org/iji3z73ew/sbscomp.jpg

looking directly within the wall:

http://s18.postimg.org/ttatu58g9/overhead.png

shoots through 3 walls near entry door (combating a previous poster):

http://s18.postimg.org/trvu3m0ax/overheadwire.png

If he ascends the stairs on the right (consistent with official):

http://s18.postimg.org/68k3i0b2h/ascendright.png

If he ascends stairs on left but crosses through middle:

http://postimg.org/image/4w2eg4dmt/

If he ascends stairs on left but goes in front:

http://s18.postimg.org/d0aikv021/crossesfront.png

That works, but then he is practically firing at the wall for some reason with all of his victims in the auditorium, and if you don't think he is shooting at the wall, we know Golditch was hit soon afterwards, and he was somewhere in the middle of the floor section, so we get something like this:

http://s18.postimg.org/6p5b4fytl/golditchshot.png

Which is honestly me going out of the way and thinking of the most generous seat I can place golditch in since he can be in any one of these:

http://s22.postimg.org/efk7tq9o1/golditchshot2.png

So rather than go with the numerous testimonies and descriptions suggesting explosives "firecrackers, hiss, smoke, bang, boom, pop, flash, heat, shrapnel, set gas bombs as they were leaving, source of smoke, ringing ear, pepper bombs, explosion", you'd rather believe the shooter simply fired at the wall because he intended to. Because, basically, yeah, he isn't just firing at the wall and accidentally hitting these people without either going through multiple walls to do so, or practically neglecting his screaming crowd and firing a couple shots directly into the wall next to him. That's basically what this requires, and thus your apologetic argument loses weight especially in light of the contradictory witness testimony.

Just to display the absurdity of this, this is the most generous shot I can give for Hankins (which totally isn't, as you say, "many places in the theater"... I mean this is barely a believable shot, all other permutations are retarded): http://s2.postimg.org/uo1yoije1/shotgage.png

And then you have the proceeding shot fired (necessarily straight in order to hit a turned Golditch in the front left side of his neck who sitting in the middle of the theater):
http://s11.postimg.org/95054raeb/golditchshotwire.png

So.... pwnage

Why the obsession with this nonsense?

 

[BStrong]

Or it could just be that Holmes, in the dark, smoke from the smoke canisters, gas mask on, was just wildly shooting everywhere and put multiple rounds through walls.

 

[Neveos]

Whoever heard of a bullet traveling considerable distances?

Such a straw man fallacy. You want to try to avoid committing fallacies, it usually indicates you are A.) not rational, and B.) arguing a false position. Obviously we are talking about bullets travelling through something (possibly 6 somethings) other than air. You realize bullets only go about 2 or 3 feet through water at high velocity? Did you also know they tend to go a few centimeters through various solid materials?

 

[Neveos]

Why the obsession with this nonsense?

typically, in the presence of a case of conspiracy or high-level corruption, there is usually an indication that certain things could be at risk such as mass homicide, war, and literal threats to the entire human species with these science fiction things called weapons of mass destruction. But, ya know...

 

[Neveos]

Or it could just be that Holmes, in the dark, smoke from the smoke canisters, gas mask on, was just wildly shooting everywhere and put multiple rounds through walls.

sure bro: http://s11.postimg.org/95054raeb/golditchshotwire.png

vs

"we were sitting on the right side of theater 8, we had a wall for the stair way, and a wall for the hall way" 0:25 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xG-Su7ZIFjA

"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"

and just forget about this part

"If I had one wish, and I'm sure I won't be able to see it till after the court case (well now he never will), is what theater 8 looks like right now, because for me, that would really help me figure out what happened, like the walls, like they said, are there really bullet holes through the walls where the gunmen shot? And is part of the stariwell blown off like I thought I saw? Because I saw an explosion! So what really happened, because it was dark in there? If there's one thing I wish I can see, that's what I'd really like... I'm hopin I can one day, because it will happen for me with my process- what happened for me.

 

[Neveos]

and, ya know, this part which I haven't quoted yet:
"Eighteen-year old Gage Hankins of Forest in northwest Ohio said in a televised news conference Monday the attack came about 20 minutes into the movie at a scene with gunshots.
Hankins says he and his friends heard a hissing noise, saw smoke, heard a loud bang and then a lot of popping noises."

 

[erwinl]

and, ya know, this part which I haven't quoted yet:
"Eighteen-year old Gage Hankins of Forest in northwest Ohio said in a televised news conference Monday the attack came about 20 minutes into the movie at a scene with gunshots.
Hankins says he and his friends heard a hissing noise, saw smoke, heard a loud bang and then a lot of popping noises."

I read this as a smoke grenade and gunfire. Or shouldn't I?

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Sure. It was a light conjecture.

i.e. It was wrong. Fine.

...you are incorrect to even mention this as a problem since the subject was seated. The wall is high enough, that even if the subject had his arm resting on his head, it would still have to go through that wall. Point being: the bullet is not going over the wall to strike Gage.
<various imagined trajectories snipped>

No. The wall isn't high enough.

In the various trajectories you drew, the bullet would not have to pass through the stair wall since it isn't high enough. Unless you place the shooter as high up in the tiered seating as his victim, the bullet would pass over the wall at a point further forward than the victim's row, where the wall is lower.

Consider your picture:
http://s18.postimg.org/trvu3m0ax/overheadwire.png
The bullet is fired at perhaps 5 feet above the floor level and passes over the people in the first few rows. Since it's above their head height, it will also pass over the bottom of the bannister of the stairs in their theatre. Then it goes through the wall, possibly deflected in the process, and continues over the second stair wall before striking the victim. Note that the bullet passes the stair wall a full row in front of the victim's row, so the top of the wall is lower down there.

In order to pass through all 3 walls, the shooter would need to move forward to be be partway up the stairs, crouch down and require a miracle not to have his shot blocked by several other people.

Face it, your version just doesn't work. A standing shooter didn't shoot under two bannister rails to hit someone above his eyeline.

 

[BStrong]

Such a straw man fallacy. You want to try to avoid committing fallacies, it usually indicates you are A.) not rational, and B.) arguing a false position. Obviously we are talking about bullets travelling through something (possibly 6 somethings) other than air. You realize bullets only go about 2 or 3 feet through water at high velocity? Did you also know they tend to go a few centimeters through various solid materials?

Depends on the projectile construction and velocity the projectile is moving.

Could be that Holmes was using commonly available M855 5.56 ammo using the issue 62 grain steel core projectile.

Common sheetrock construction doesn't slow those up as much as say the Mk318 62 grain HP, or the Mk262 77 grain HP.

.40 caliber S & W penetrates wall board very well too.

Water can't be compared to the open air for obvious reasons.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Can we at least agree that the walls probably weren't full of water?

 

[R.A.F.]

and, ya know, this part which I haven't quoted yet:
"Eighteen-year old Gage Hankins of Forest in northwest Ohio said in a televised news conference Monday the attack came about 20 minutes into the movie at a scene with gunshots.
Hankins says he and his friends heard a hissing noise, saw smoke, heard a loud bang and then a lot of popping noises."

So?


Since this is certainly not evidence that the "official story" is a conspiracy...obviously you can not "deliver" on your OP promise.

Take that into account if you ever start another thread....don't lie in the title, cause others will notice.

 

[dafydd]

typically, in the presence of a case of conspiracy or high-level corruption, there is usually an indication that certain things could be at risk such as mass homicide, war, and literal threats to the entire human species with these science fiction things called weapons of mass destruction. But, ya know...

You have yet to present one shred of evidence that there was a conspiracy.

 

[dafydd]

Such a straw man fallacy. You want to try to avoid committing fallacies, it usually indicates you are A.) not rational, and B.) arguing a false position. Obviously we are talking about bullets travelling through something (possibly 6 somethings) other than air. You realize bullets only go about 2 or 3 feet through water at high velocity? Did you also know they tend to go a few centimeters through various solid materials?

Walls are made of water?