In the News

‘TheHealthRanger’ Uses Math and Physics to Explain Las Vegas Shooting

Many people believe that there is more to the story than we are being told about the Las Vegas massacre.

While not suggesting that the FBI or the Sheriff’s Department in Las Vegas should release all of their information to the public, Sheriff Lombardo’s apparent about-face on Monday has left some scratching their heads and wanting clarification.

Lombardo said about the shooter during a recent Wednesday evening news conference that:

“He had to have some help at some point. Maybe he’s a super-guy. … maybe he’s super-yahoo, was working out all this on his own, but it would be hard for me to believe that.”

To be fair, Lombardo didn’t directly speak about whether the shooter’s “assistant” helped the gunman fire upon those down on the ground at the Route 91 Festival. However, he didn’t exclude that possibility either.

Lombardo reversed course on Monday during a press conference and declared unequivocally that there was “no evidence of a second shooter” in the Las Vegas attack.

It’s no wonder that people are confused about the information being put out by Lombardo.

Apparently, the information was also confusing to Mike Adams the Health Ranger, founder and editor of Natural News

In a YouTube video that was published on Monday and viewed by more than 151,749 at the time of this writing, Adams provides what he believes is “Forensic acoustic proof of SECOND shooter in the Las Vegas massacre.”

Whether you’re familiar with Adams, appreciate his talks on natural health or think that he is a conspiracy theorist, numbers don’t lie in math and physics (unless he has based those numbers on inaccurate information).

Take a look at his video.

Calculate the numbers, share the video with math and physics experts and see if your conclusion and those of the experts mirror Adams’ interpretation of what happened that night in Las Vegas.

If you believe Adams and surmise that there was a second shooter than why hasn’t the FBI come up with the same conclusion?

Is the FBI purposely withholding evidence of a second shooter from the public?

If so, then wouldn’t it have been easier for law enforcement to indicate they weren’t going to comment or speculate about an ‘assistant’ or second shooter rather than release information which may prove to be false (assuming that Adams’ calculations are accurate).

Something isn’t adding up.

© 2017, admin. The Logo and Photos (by Susan Knowles) are protected by U.S. Copyright Laws, and are not to be downloaded or reproduced in any way without the written permission of Susan J. Knowles. Copyright 2014 Susan J. Knowles All Rights Reserved.


This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: