Mike Adams analysis has some flaws.
First, He assumes that the shooter, and the supposed “second shooter” always used the same caliber rifle.
We know that isn’t true, because there were mixed brass on the floor of the mass killer’s suite.
That places severe doubt on his claim of a second shooter, because the time differential for .223 and 7.62X39 at distance is much different. Time of flight for a 7.62x39 at 450 yards is .85 seconds. That is about .3 seconds different than for a .223, or about what he sees in his “second shooter”.
Mike mentions that the time differential is different for different calibers. He simply ignores that the mass killer used more than one caliber.
A really good forensic analysis would differentiate weapons by the sound signatures of the shots. The cadences of shots are not as useful because it is doubtful that the bump stock would produce exactly the same cadence, shot to shot.
Mike says the shots of the “two shooters” are intermixed. It should be simple to show where two shooting signatures overlap, showing nearly double rates of fire. Mike does not show that, which indicates only one shooter shooting at a time, which is consistent with a shooter switching firearms.
A clear analysis of all the volleys of fire should clear that up quickly. Nice to see that. Someone should find a complete recording, end to end, of the entire 10 minutes of shooting. It is out there somewhere.
Mike does an interesting analysis, but it needs more work.
Another thing I did not see what the location of the recorder. Recorders at different locations will record different lags.
Acoustic analysis of the shooting may offer some insights. If you have multiple, known locations of sensors, extremely accurate timing of sensors, you can pinpoint shots with some accuracy. Echoes and other false positives are always a problem.
I concur. Mike at least tossed out some numbers, but simplified analysis should focus on
1) cyclic rate of fire to identify the type of weapon being used.
2) Identifying an echo of a previous set of shots, to help discern distance from the shooter,
3) Discern supersonic pings of passing rounds, with later echos of the original shots. Assuming .223 rounds flying at 3000 ft/second, the round will pass about 2000 ft/sec slower than the initial shot. i.e. you would get shot before you hear the shot from the rifle, BUT the round passing over your head would produce a sound wave you would hear, before you hear the original rifle shot. By comparing those shot signatures with the auto fire weapon, it would be fairly easy to come up with a set of distances for the shots.
4) Freq shifts would also provide more accurate info, but I suspect most cell phone microphones distort too much for that info.
As far as different rounds go...
The time in flight on the *recording* is still the same.
Shooter1=0.559s, Shooter2=0.374s (time from impact to report)
Different rounds *would* make a difference in the distance they are away from the *source of the recording* - but not that much.
M193 5.56x45mm 55gr 3250fps: Shooter1=400yds, Shooter2=250yds
M855 5.56x45mm 62gr 3025fps: Shooter1=400yds, Shooter2=250yds
M80 7.62x51mm 149gr 2750fps: Shooter1=410yds, Shooter2=270yds
M2 7.62x51mm 152gr 2740fps: Shooter1=420yds, Shooter2=270yds
M852 7.62x51mm 168gr 2550fps: Shooter1=450yds, Shooter2=290yds
M118 7.62x51mm 173gr 2640fps: Shooter1=420yds, Shooter2=270yds
Mix and match at your leisure.
And it is my understanding that the samples were taken from the same video within seconds of each other. Which means very little time for a single shooter to either switch rooms, switch rifles, or reload.
And the approximate location of the recording device can be estimated using google maps.