Waching daily May 18 2018

Big Long Outdoor The Olivia is a Perfect Stunning Goosenect TIny House

For more infomation >> Big Long Outdoor The Olivia is a Perfect Stunning Goosenect Tiny House - Duration: 4:46.

-------------------------------------------

Tucker: There's no defending MS-13, but the Left is - Duration: 3:43.

For more infomation >> Tucker: There's no defending MS-13, but the Left is - Duration: 3:43.

-------------------------------------------

Man to Spanish speakers at New York restaurant: 'My next call is to ICE' - Duration: 2:16.

For more infomation >> Man to Spanish speakers at New York restaurant: 'My next call is to ICE' - Duration: 2:16.

-------------------------------------------

Is It Yanny Or Laurel? - Duration: 6:08.

Yanny….no…Laurel….no…Yanny….no…Laurel.

I am one of the few people who has heard it both ways and honestly I am so confused!

Which is it supposed to be.

Hello and welcome back to Life's Biggest Questions, the channel that looks to answer

exactly those.

I am your host, Rebecca Felgate and today I am asking once and for all….Is it Laurel

or Yanny?

There actually is an answer here!

Okay, I am about to take a listen right now and tell you what I hear today.

So….right now it sounds like ** to me.

What do you hear.

On the 16th May 2018 the internet was divided once again.

In this seasons, The Dress, people were confronted with an audio recording and it turns out that

people either hear Laurel or Yanny.

How can this be?

The two words at face value sound so different?

As the original audio recording sky rocketed to over 20 million listens in a day, people

were tweeting out whether they were team Laurel or Team Yanny…but it turns out, the internet

couldn't be divided into just two teams…depending on what time of day it was, the environment

people were listening in, and most importantly at what frequency they heard the recording.

So I have been able to hear it both ways!

I first heard Yanny, then Laurel, then Yanny…then Laurel… and it turns out that it isn't

a simple heads or tales answer.

Whether or not you hear Laurel or Yanny depends on what frequencies your brain is picking

out.

It also has to do with the poor quality recording of the original audio clip and the frequency

ranges of the headphones or speakers you are listening to the clip in.

So, let's talk about the original recording.

As we mentioned, it is a bad recording.

Brad Story, professor of Speech, language, hearing and sciences at the University of

Arizona said: The low quality recording creates enough ambiguity in the acoustic feature that

some listeners may be led toward the 'yanny' perception.

With a high-quality recording, and if all listeners were listening with the same device,

there may not be any confusion.

But why, if we are all listening to the same original low quality recording, do some of

us hear different things?

Well it depends on what frequencies our ears can pick up.

Older people tend to be able to mainly hear lower frequencies, but younger people are

still able to hear high frequencies.

A bit of a generalisation, but older people are more likely to hear Laurel, and younger,

likely to hear Yanny.

But of course, a lot of people of all ages have heard the recording both ways.

It is also a psychological phenomenon – the way we hear things is influenced by your subconscious

brain.

As the original recording is terrible, our brains fill on some of the gaps with what

it thinks it ought to be hearing.

On top of that, the way we hear sound is totally dependent on our recent experiences with it.

If you were just listening to something basey, it can reduce your base sensitivity making

you more sensitive to higher frequencies.

This temporarily shifts the goal posts of your hearing…the same goes for listening

to high pitched sounds, after that, you ears may be more sensitive to lower pitches, which

explains why some people might hear Laurel one minute, then Yanny the next.

I for one am happy there is a scientific explanation, as prior to that I was just going to straight

up say it was some kind of voodoo magic.

Also….quick note – drinking alcohol can also affect the way you hear things, too.

While a lot of people have heard it both ways, some have yet to switch camp.

Interestingly, though….

The New York Times developed a tool that allows for the listener to hear both Laurel and Yanny

by sliding up and down a frequency scale.

Here, theoretically, everyone should be able to hear both, at whatever frequency it takes.

Once again, it all goes back to that terrible audio recording.

If you look at a spectrogram of the original recording, you can see that the recording

contains both high and low frequencies.

The way the New York Times Slider works is by cutting out the low frequencies on one

end, and the high on the other.

Audio analysis across the internet have recorded themselves saying both Laurel and Yanny and

surprisingly, both words have similar primary acoustic features – high, low, high.

At first these two words might not seem similar, but they are.

So…what is it, Laurel or Yanny.

Here comes the answer.

It is Laurel.

This whole debate started when Freshman student, Katie Hetzel from Flowery Branch High School

in Georgia looked up the pronunciation of Laurel on Vocabulary.com.

The only thing is, when she played the terrible quality recording, she heard Yanny.

As we know, depending on what frequency our brains are trained to hear at, both can be

heard in the poor quality recording.

This is where it began.

She asked her class mates what they thought and they all reported mixed things.

She then posted it on her Instagram story.

A senior at the school, Fernando Castro republished it on his story and ran a poll….then a friend

of his put it on ready.

And that my friends, is how a viral debate is born!

It was then picked up by Youtuber Cloe Feldman who has over 200 thousand followers on twitter,

and the rest, as they say is history.

I am going to listen one more time and see if it has changed for me over the course of

this video.

Right.

So…is it Laurel or Yanny?

It is Laurel, but nobody can blame you for hearing Yanny, because it is kinda hidden

in the audioclip.

I think the main thing to takeaway here isn't the answer, but the amazing phenomenon that

is psychoacoustics.

Our brains are incredible things, and it goes to show that people don't always hear or

think in the same way, but given a little patience and understanding, it is possible

to hear each other out.

So that is one question answered for you!

What did you hear?

Laurel, yanny or both?

Let me know in the comments section down below.

Also, do hit that thumbs up button if you like our content!

I am your host Rebecca Felgate, I'll catch you in the next video, but for now…stay

curious, stay alert and never ever stop questioning.

For more infomation >> Is It Yanny Or Laurel? - Duration: 6:08.

-------------------------------------------

Is President Donald Trump's North Korea Summit Still Happening? | NBC Nightly News - Duration: 2:14.

For more infomation >> Is President Donald Trump's North Korea Summit Still Happening? | NBC Nightly News - Duration: 2:14.

-------------------------------------------

Trump's DOJ Just Blindsided Hillary, Investigation Is Complete They Found Everything! - Duration: 8:52.

Trump's DOJ Just Blindsided Hillary, Investigation Is Complete They Found Everything!

As the Inspector General at the Department of Justice puts the finishing touches, on

the highly anticipated official report detailing the agency's investigation, into Hillary

Clinton's email server and the subsequent investigation, officials are announcing they

are expecting to receive the full details of the finalized report as early as the end

of this week.

Inspector General Michael Horowitz notified lawmakers in a Wednesday letter, that the

draft report was complete and being made available to the agencies, and individuals examined

in the probe.

According to the Wall Street Journal, the DOJ has now notified multiple subjects mentioned

in the document, that they can privately review it by week's end and will have a "few

days" to craft, any response to criticism contained within the report prior to making

the report available to the public.

The WSJ reports "Those invited to review the report were told, they would have to sign

nondisclosure agreements in order to read it, people familiar with the matter said.

They are expected to have a few days to craft a response to any criticism in the report,

which will then be incorporated in the final version to be released in coming weeks."

A related report was published in April detailing the DOJ's case, against former FBI Deputy

Director Andrew McCabe.

McCabe was found to have lied on four separate occasions to both the DOJ and the FBI, including

twice while under oath.

McCabe was subsequently fired just one day before he was set to receive his full pension,

after it was discovered through the course of the investigation that McCabe, authorized

a self-serving leak to the WSJ with claims, the FBI did not put the brakes on the investigation

into the Clinton Foundation.

All of which took place during a period of time when he was already, under a great deal

of scrutiny and criticism over a $467,500 campaign donation, received by his wife Jill

for her failed Senatorial bid from known Clinton crony, Terry McAuliffe.

There is also to be expected an additional report detailing the FBI's alleged FISA

abuse, high-level collusion against the Trump campaign, or the genesis of the counterintelligence

investigation against then-candidate Donald Trump, as part of a separate investigation.

The OIG's office will release that report at a later date.

This particular report details the investigation into the Clinton email scandal, and detailed

the conduct of FBI "lovebirds" Peter Strzok and Lisa Page.

Strzok led the Clinton email investigation, as well as handling the early portion of the

Trump-Russia investigation.

The OIG report is expected to cover significant edits made, by the FBI's top brass to Hillary

Clinton's exoneration statement effectively decriminalizing, her mishandling of classified

information so that she wouldn't be prosecuted by the DOJ.

Just who is Michael Horowitz?

Horowitz essentially waged a one-man war with the Obama Administration, with the March 5th,

2013 release of a report for Congress titled Open, and Unimplemented IG Recommendations.

This report drew attention to the stonewalling by focusing on the money being wasted.

But it was much more than that.

There were over 30 Tweets in reference to this situation which can be accessed, by following

the line of conversation from this post.

It laid the Obama Admin bare before Congress illustrating among other things, how the administration

was wasting tens-of-billions of dollars by ignoring the recommendations made by the OIG.

After several attempts by Congress to restore the OIG's investigative powers, Rep. Jason

Chaffetz successfully introduced H.R. 6450 the Inspector General Empowerment Act of 2016,

signed by a defeated lame duck President Obama into law on December 16th, 2016, thus cementing

an alliance between Horowitz and both houses of Congress.

So this report is unlikely to be simply business as usual, while the public will not get to

see classified details of the OIG report, Horowitz is also big on public disclosure.

With Horowitz's concerted and directed efforts to roll back former Attorney General Eric

Holder's restrictions, on the OIG office sealed the working relationship between Congress,

and the Inspector General's office, allowing investigations such as those currently ongoing

to effectively take place, and hold those guilty of unethical and criminal acts to be

held accountable.

Moreover, FBI Director Christopher Wray seems to be on the same page as well.

As far as the final draft of the current OIG report expected by Congress in approximately

one week, on January 12, 2017, Inspector Horowitz announced an OIG investigation based on "requests

from numerous Chairmen, and Ranking Members of Congressional oversight committees, various

organizations and members of the public."

The initial focus of the investigation centered around the FBI's handling of the Clinton

email investigation, and as to whether or not Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe should

have been recused from the investigation, due to a conflict of interest with regards

to the campaign donations, his wife took in total to the tune of about $700,000 from known

Clinton crony and associate, Terry McAuliffe.

The investigation grew to encompass potential collusion within the Clinton campaign, as

well as the timing of various FOIA releases.

Preliminaries of the IOG report reveal that on July 27, 2017 the House Judiciary Committee

called on the DOJ to appoint a Special Counsel, detailing their concerns in 14 questions pertaining

to "actions taken by previously public figures like Attorney General Loretta Lynch, FBI Director

James Comey, and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton."

The questions raised from former Attorney General Loretta Lynch directing Comey to mislead

the American people on the nature of the Clinton investigation, Clinton's mishandling of

classified information while she served as Secretary of State, as well as the subsequent

mishandling of Clinton's email investigation by the FBI, the DOJ's failure to empanel

a grand jury to investigate Clinton, and further questions about the Clinton Foundation, Uranium

One, and whether the FBI relied on the "Trump-Russia" dossier created by Fusion GPS.

The House Judiciary Committee repeated their call to the DOJ demanding a special counsel,

as of September 26, 2017 after discovering disgraced former FBI director James Comey

lied, to Congress when he stated hat he decided not to recommend criminal charges against

Hillary Clinton, until after she was interviewed, when in fact Comey had drafted her exoneration

before said interview.

And now that we have all the pieces, the OIG report can tie all of this together and make

sense of it as it will satisfy all legal requirements, for the DOJ to impartially appoint a Special

Counsel.

below from TrumpSoldier via Twitter details where the report from the OIG's office will

go to both investigative committees of Congress, along with Attorney General Jeff Sessions.

After Congress has thoroughly reviewed the OIG report to their satisfaction, the House

and Senate Judiciary Committees will use it to supplement their investigations, which

should then result in hearings.

The end result will be that of demanding a Special Counsel investigation.

The DOJ can choose to appoint a Special Counsel at any point.

Sessions has declined to do so thus far.

If the demand for a Special Counsel is ignored, Congress has the option to force the issue

via legislation to force the appointment.

Technically, the DOJ could choose to simply act on the evidence presented within the OIG

report, and then choose to investigate and prosecute themselves without an appointment

of a Special Counsel; however, it is highly unlikely that will actually occur.

After the report's completion, the DOJ will weigh in on it.

Their comments are key.

As TrumpSoldier points out in his analysis, the DOJ can take various actions regarding

"Policy, personnel, procedures, and re-opening of investigations.

In short, just about everything.

Meanwhile, recent events appear to correspond with bullet points in both the original OIG

investigation letter and the 7, 27, 2017 letter forwarded to the Inspector General.

With the wheels set in motion last week seemingly align with Congressional requests and the

OIG mandate, and the upcoming OIG report likely to serve as a foundational opinion, the DOJ

will finally be empowered to move forward with an impartially appointed Special Counsel.

What do you think about this?

Please share this news and scroll down to Comment below and don't forget to subscribe

top stories today