My previous post on Orbs generated a lot of response from readers, although it was inconclusive and rather a “what if” piece.
Clearly there is a lot of interest in this subject even though proof or conclusions are not anywhere to be seen.
What prompted me to do a follow-up was the experiences of one of the readers who commented on the original piece.
The first thing that intrigued me was that she claimed she could see Orbs with the naked eye:
“I see orbs all the time , I didn't realize it was so rare to see them…. A particular night a couple of weeks ago it was one of those very still eerie nights and I kept catching them in the sky as I stood in my garden. So I got my camera and started snapping and sure enough the photo's confirmed what I saw.”
In the correspondence that ensued she sent me lots of photos and experiences, which made me rethink the whole matter.
On the first photo is a close-up, level-enhanced orb. It displays the typical characteristics of an optical orb: Purple Fringing and the Cat’s Eye Effect. The logical explanation is the obvious one: Dust particles caught in the flash of the camera, close to the lens. The original photo below displays more Orbs, all consistent with the explanation…
What got me thinking was another thing she said:
“The ones you see in the night sky with no people , well that was the night I said I could feel the air was full of something , and although I didn't see all the ones the camera revealed I saw a fair few of them. Which is why I ran back in to get my camera.
I have always seen them , I never really thought anything of it . I also have the electric thing going on (you might have to Google street light going out or something) lights go out when I pass then come back on ..its mad ha ha and that has been going on all my life as well. I am not good around certain electric appliances and cannot press the buttons on a lift/elevator.”
Now this could be a coincidence, but I know the feeling. Yep, street lights go off (or on) regularly when I pass them, elevators activate before I touch the button and sometimes I recall seeing flicks of light (orbs?) and I have been studying the Paranormal nearly all my life and, for the life of me, I never gave any of it a second thought.
Strange? Not so much. As a “serious” student of the Unknown, you somehow condition yourself to take into account only the Hard Evidence that comes your way, however scarce, and dismiss everything else with the hardest Skeptic way possible. Would this tiny thing hold in a publication or would it seem ridiculous? Well, maybe it is time to rethink that strategy..
The Paranormal is not a Science. We should start from there. It has it’s own set of rules, ones you discover along the way and which may not work for another person, and that is the main difference from science: The same experiment cannot be replicated with the same variables applying. But, there is one problem : WE DON’T HAVE ALL THE VARIABLES! As simple as that.
I am talking about the Invisible Thread connecting the Viewer with the Phenomenon, and Schrödinger's famous theory . It may be a part of Quantum Physics, but it is hardly taken into account by other disciplines of science, and quantum physicists are after all just a bunch of drunks, right?
We feel something is in the air, something electrifying, and then something occurs, an orb, a UFO, a creature that should not exist. Maybe we snap a picture or two. What happens next is typical and lead nowhere: The investigator dissects the phenomenon into it’s components. The feeling, the photo, the viewer’s experience is all examined separately, and examined for their validity as entities.
I think this is getting us nowhere.
I have come to see that the phenomenon should be examined as an experience, as a whole, not leaving the slightest detail out, no matter how subjective. If the hidden variables start with the Invisible Thread, the Viewer himself, then we may really have a chance of setting a unique set of rules for the Unknown and, ultimately, acquiring an understanding.
It would be a shame if a tiny thing like an orb was meant to convey a message, or mean something, or mark a spot, and we dismiss it simply because it is small and insubstantial, and we are on the lookout for huge flying craft and burn marks on the ground.
In the midst of science and rationality, I must constantly remind myself: Absence of Evidence is not Evidence of Absence..
Thanks fudgy for the photos and experiences shared!
86422.....2862
ReplyDeleteI seem to know when the orbs are around. My cats play who can sense the biggest orb sometimes... The let me know when to take the pic. Trigger usually wins but don't tell KitKat. He might get jealous! :)I have a lot of pics if you want to see!
ReplyDeleteIt would be very interesting if you had a pic of a cat playing with an orb! It's not definitive proof of existence, but pretty close..
ReplyDelete