I HAVE TO ANNOUNCE THAT I MAY HAVE FALLEN INTO A TRAP AND I WANT TO APOLIGIZE TO EVERYBODY FOR HURRYING AND THINKING THAT THIS MAN iS INDEED, WITHOUT A DOUBT, SAYING: "I'M JOHN PODESTA...SING". IT WAS AN HONEST MISTAKE, SO PLEASE FORGIVE MY ERROR IN JUDGEMENT.
I'M NOT SAYING THAT THE CHILD IS FAKING, OR THAT THE ABUSE ISN'T GOING ON, BECAUSE IT IS. IT'S VERY REAL. BUT THE ABUSER STILL MIGHT NOT BE JOHN PODESTA.
I will explain everything so you can then, verify for yourself and maybe come to the same conclusion as I did, which is that this man might not have identified himself as John Podesta at all. Thanks to @plan9 who said this:
If you listen closely, he starts with the lyrics "Growing up is not so tough... that can be HEARD at 0:29 of the 'Caillou' video. Then there is another possible verse he may be uttering INSTEAD of : "I'm John Pode (sta) sing!" ... which you can hear at 0:10 and which go like this "I'm just a kid who's four..." but cuts it off and says "Sing!" There is a strong possibility that the man is mixing up or repeating the verses. He seems erratical, so possible, no?
I just wanted to point this out, because I thought it was extremely possible that it is indeed what the man in the clip is saying. Thanks again to @plan9 for this tip. And I'm really, very sorry for having unwillingly made a small mess here today.
You fell for a incredibly deceptive video. And basically proven the power of the human mind to trick us.
If they were just trying to confirm podestas voice, they would not have included anything else. By including the other things, they are basically priming our mind to fall for bits of non-evidence. What do I mean by non-evidence. If you are trying to confirm a voice match or what is said, you don't need to see the email "Still in the torture chanmber" or anything else. That has zero relevance to what you are trying to prove. Unless you want to begin priming people's confirmation bias to hear something else, to have the brain already thinking one way, when they are looking at ambiguous evidence. It is especially deceptive to put the words they want you to hear on the screen at the same time you hearing the audio. Or a news article about "Skippy." In Fact, if you are trying to decipher ambiguous audio, the best way to do it is to shutdown your other senses and close your eyes to listen as close as you can.
This video has been repeatedly discussed and it's quite clear the boy is not saying John or Skippy. I have a pair of Studio Monitor headphones that are pretty good quality. Studio monitors designed to be neutral "not musical." That is, they are intended to reveal what sound is there, not cover it up to make it sound better. I have heard songs I'm very familiar with and heard new things with these, you can sometimes hear the musician's fingers moving across their guitar strings because they are pretty sensitive. When
The boy clearly says a two-syllable name in this video. Someone heard Darren. I hear Terrence. When he is asked his other name, he definitely doesn't say Skippy. I hear Daddy. I'm less sure about this than the two syllable first answer.
If you look at the lyrics of the song and compare them to the what you believe you heard, you will see how powerful and active our mind is when interpreting something and how much is going on without us being aware of it.
Also people believe this is taking place in a bathtub/shower stall. The distortions in the image are due to the frosted glass common in shower doors.
I isolated the audio without the video and reduced it to a small fragment of "whats my name". "John" is heard crystal clear. There is NO mistaking it. If I made a file of just that and sent it to people who had no clue what it was they would look at me like I am stupid for asking them what word or name is being said. I was shocked. I cleaned it up, but a professional could do better. I only used Nero WaveEditor because its the best audi software I have available.
Im going to work on trying to reduce the noise of the entire 15 sec of him yelling. Once you remove some of the noise, and dont have the video to focus on at all, its like listening to it all over again for the first time. I will figure out somewhere to post it. May be tonight, may be Saturday. Im working on a lot at once and only had a short time to play with it earlier.
Im not an Audiophile. I have the software which performs very well for basic audio editing and sound effects, but I am not someone who plays with this stuff all the time. I'm just a normal IT Security Tech. I'll see what I can get though.
If anyone has a preference of where I should upload it let me know. Also, I am doing it with noise canceling headphones on, so that helps too.
BTW, big surprise, someone else is screaming in the background. There is more than one voice. Shortly after he says whats my name and the kids is screaming back there is what sounds like another kid screaming extremely loud in another room or something. Its hidden in the noise.
view the rest of the comments →
YingYangMom ago
Looks like JA or JP noticed my post. I got a downvoat on each and everyone of my comments.
YingYangMom ago
I HAVE TO ANNOUNCE THAT I MAY HAVE FALLEN INTO A TRAP AND I WANT TO APOLIGIZE TO EVERYBODY FOR HURRYING AND THINKING THAT THIS MAN iS INDEED, WITHOUT A DOUBT, SAYING: "I'M JOHN PODESTA...SING". IT WAS AN HONEST MISTAKE, SO PLEASE FORGIVE MY ERROR IN JUDGEMENT.
I'M NOT SAYING THAT THE CHILD IS FAKING, OR THAT THE ABUSE ISN'T GOING ON, BECAUSE IT IS. IT'S VERY REAL. BUT THE ABUSER STILL MIGHT NOT BE JOHN PODESTA.
I will explain everything so you can then, verify for yourself and maybe come to the same conclusion as I did, which is that this man might not have identified himself as John Podesta at all. Thanks to @plan9 who said this:
If you listen closely, he starts with the lyrics "Growing up is not so tough... that can be HEARD at 0:29 of the 'Caillou' video. Then there is another possible verse he may be uttering INSTEAD of : "I'm John Pode (sta) sing!" ... which you can hear at 0:10 and which go like this "I'm just a kid who's four..." but cuts it off and says "Sing!" There is a strong possibility that the man is mixing up or repeating the verses. He seems erratical, so possible, no?
I just wanted to point this out, because I thought it was extremely possible that it is indeed what the man in the clip is saying. Thanks again to @plan9 for this tip. And I'm really, very sorry for having unwillingly made a small mess here today.
Peace.
AreWeSure ago
You fell for a incredibly deceptive video. And basically proven the power of the human mind to trick us. If they were just trying to confirm podestas voice, they would not have included anything else. By including the other things, they are basically priming our mind to fall for bits of non-evidence. What do I mean by non-evidence. If you are trying to confirm a voice match or what is said, you don't need to see the email "Still in the torture chanmber" or anything else. That has zero relevance to what you are trying to prove. Unless you want to begin priming people's confirmation bias to hear something else, to have the brain already thinking one way, when they are looking at ambiguous evidence. It is especially deceptive to put the words they want you to hear on the screen at the same time you hearing the audio. Or a news article about "Skippy." In Fact, if you are trying to decipher ambiguous audio, the best way to do it is to shutdown your other senses and close your eyes to listen as close as you can.
This video has been repeatedly discussed and it's quite clear the boy is not saying John or Skippy. I have a pair of Studio Monitor headphones that are pretty good quality. Studio monitors designed to be neutral "not musical." That is, they are intended to reveal what sound is there, not cover it up to make it sound better. I have heard songs I'm very familiar with and heard new things with these, you can sometimes hear the musician's fingers moving across their guitar strings because they are pretty sensitive. When
The boy clearly says a two-syllable name in this video. Someone heard Darren. I hear Terrence. When he is asked his other name, he definitely doesn't say Skippy. I hear Daddy. I'm less sure about this than the two syllable first answer.
If you look at the lyrics of the song and compare them to the what you believe you heard, you will see how powerful and active our mind is when interpreting something and how much is going on without us being aware of it.
Also people believe this is taking place in a bathtub/shower stall. The distortions in the image are due to the frosted glass common in shower doors.
TrollMagnet ago
I isolated the audio without the video and reduced it to a small fragment of "whats my name". "John" is heard crystal clear. There is NO mistaking it. If I made a file of just that and sent it to people who had no clue what it was they would look at me like I am stupid for asking them what word or name is being said. I was shocked. I cleaned it up, but a professional could do better. I only used Nero WaveEditor because its the best audi software I have available.
Im going to work on trying to reduce the noise of the entire 15 sec of him yelling. Once you remove some of the noise, and dont have the video to focus on at all, its like listening to it all over again for the first time. I will figure out somewhere to post it. May be tonight, may be Saturday. Im working on a lot at once and only had a short time to play with it earlier.
Im not an Audiophile. I have the software which performs very well for basic audio editing and sound effects, but I am not someone who plays with this stuff all the time. I'm just a normal IT Security Tech. I'll see what I can get though.
If anyone has a preference of where I should upload it let me know. Also, I am doing it with noise canceling headphones on, so that helps too.
BTW, big surprise, someone else is screaming in the background. There is more than one voice. Shortly after he says whats my name and the kids is screaming back there is what sounds like another kid screaming extremely loud in another room or something. Its hidden in the noise.
bopper ago
I heard that also, on voat, that there was more than one voice.