|
Orbs
Oct 1, 2008 4:55:28 GMT
Post by maat on Oct 1, 2008 4:55:28 GMT
|
|
|
Orbs
Oct 1, 2008 6:54:20 GMT
Post by maat on Oct 1, 2008 6:54:20 GMT
Just looking at my red headed snake painting and saw that it has orbs in it. img87.imageshack.us/my.php?image=mfol002go8.jpgThe artist says of this painting that it came to her in a vision. Is it coincidence that last night when I was battling my way thru the book on Alchemy that Sync posted about, I read that the prime stuff of creation is blue/red/white and citrine.... as the orbs are in the painting. Curiouser and curiouser Maat
|
|
imakegarb
Member
One wee, sleeket, cowran, tim'rous beastie
Posts: 3,573
|
Orbs
Oct 1, 2008 8:53:18 GMT
Post by imakegarb on Oct 1, 2008 8:53:18 GMT
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Orbs
Oct 1, 2008 21:28:58 GMT
Post by Tamrin on Oct 1, 2008 21:28:58 GMT
|
|
imakegarb
Member
One wee, sleeket, cowran, tim'rous beastie
Posts: 3,573
|
Orbs
Oct 1, 2008 21:41:40 GMT
Post by imakegarb on Oct 1, 2008 21:41:40 GMT
(Peers nearsightedly)
Bro. Philip, I think those are fish.
Rather trusting fish at that.
Do you suppose the shark is veggan?
"Fish are not food, they are our friends.”
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Orbs
Oct 1, 2008 22:08:25 GMT
Post by Tamrin on Oct 1, 2008 22:08:25 GMT
I was thinking of the near vertical line of "orbs" above the shark.
|
|
|
Orbs
Oct 1, 2008 22:13:58 GMT
Post by hollandr on Oct 1, 2008 22:13:58 GMT
As far as I recall orbs only became an issue with or at the same time as digital photography.
So:
- do orbs appear on emulsion film?
- do orbs appear more frequently with digital than 5 years ago?
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Orbs
Oct 2, 2008 8:58:13 GMT
Post by Tamrin on Oct 2, 2008 8:58:13 GMT
They have been around since the dawn of photography. Karen's links (already provided) amply described the phenomena (especially the second link). Some causes you could have read there are: - Dust on the lens.
- Dirt in the camera.
- Internal reflections in the lens structure, also known as "lens flare".
- Deliberate multiple exposures.
- Objects very close to lens.
- Poor quality digital cameras.
- Deliberate digital editing of photographs.
- Flash reflections from shiny objects in the room.
- Contamination during processing of conventional film.
- Scanner anomalies.
- Dust on the scanner glass.
- Bad or outdated film.
|
|
|
Orbs
Oct 2, 2008 11:02:12 GMT
Post by lauderdale on Oct 2, 2008 11:02:12 GMT
Much as it grieves me greatly to have to do so, I must agree with Philip that in the case of the shark photo the orbs are more likely to have the mundane explanation of a lens flare or the effects of dust in a multi-element lens than to be of a supernatural origin.
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Orbs
Oct 2, 2008 11:21:42 GMT
Post by Tamrin on Oct 2, 2008 11:21:42 GMT
Much as it grieves me greatly to have to do so, I must agree with Philip that in the case of the shark photo the orbs are more likely to have the mundane explanation of a lens flare or the effects of dust in a multi-element lens than to be of a supernatural origin. ;D
|
|
|
Orbs
Oct 2, 2008 11:44:05 GMT
Post by hollandr on Oct 2, 2008 11:44:05 GMT
>They have been around since the dawn of photography
I am well aware of non-orb manifestations
The thing that is interesting about orbs is that they move on video as Maat pointed out above.
My son went to a graveyard at night with a friend and a video camera looking for orbs.
He showed me some video with an orb appearing in the bottom of the frame moving across to the right, dropping down a couple of times and reappearing a little further to the right each time.
Then the orb moved out (assuming its size was unchanged) some small distance from the camera in a straight path at a constant speed. Then it changed direction very sharply (no momentum) and went away at high speed on an upward angle.
I examined each frame carefully and eventually came to the conclusion that the orb actually came from the friend with camera - out from his solar plexus. So I asked my son about that and he said that the orb appeared moments after he had sneaked up on his friend in the dark cemetery and given him an awful fright
I don't know that specks on the lens is a particularly useful explanation for moving orbs
So to repeat my questions
- do (real) orbs appear on emulsion film?
- do (real) orbs appear more frequently with digital than 5 years ago?
Does anybody actually know?
|
|
|
Orbs
Oct 2, 2008 11:50:45 GMT
Post by lauderdale on Oct 2, 2008 11:50:45 GMT
Oh ye of little faith! I find the moderen scientific bigots as reprehensible as their medieval equivalents such as those who ran the Inquisition and tortured or even burned those who dared to disagree with their "Truths". Sure the likes of Richard Dawkins does not resort to the rack, thumb-screws or the stake but uses sarcasm and mockery and censure to attack any beliefs which do not comply with "scientific" Dogmas. There was recently the case in the UK of a Professor who was forced to resign from the Royal Society for daring to suggest that Creation be taught in schools alongside Darwin's theory of evolution.
In my case this has backfired with a vengeance! When younger I didn't give a lot of thought to how humanity came to be here . However the strident attacks of the Evolutionists and their exclusive attitudes of "my way or the highway" made me examine such matters and thus I have found what I am prepared to believe in and accept Intelligent Design which puts our Creator God, the Great Architect of the Universe, back where he should be and where the Order in the Universe he created is respected.
Philip, mock as you wish, it obviously satisfies some facet of your persona. You are entitled to your opinions and thankfully I am equally entitled to reject them.
|
|
|
Orbs
Oct 2, 2008 11:56:07 GMT
Post by hollandr on Oct 2, 2008 11:56:07 GMT
>accept Intelligent Design www.lloydpye.com/This is an interesting web site for Intelligent Design - particularly in identifying the several periods in which it occurred on the Earth
|
|
|
Orbs
Oct 2, 2008 14:11:03 GMT
Post by maximus on Oct 2, 2008 14:11:03 GMT
There was recently the case in the UK of a Professor who was forced to resign from the Royal Society for daring to suggest that Creation be taught in schools alongside Darwin's theory of evolution. I'd bet there is more to the story here. Although Creationism should not be taught in the public schools, in my opinion. Religion is not education, and is a personal matter. Regarding "Intellegent Design," that is Creationism dressed in different clothing. Lipstick on a pig, as the saying goes.
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Orbs
Oct 2, 2008 14:46:06 GMT
Post by Tamrin on Oct 2, 2008 14:46:06 GMT
The thing that is interesting about orbs is that they move on video as Maat pointed out above. As do insects, like mites, illuminated close to the lens. So to repeat my questions
- do (real) orbs appear on emulsion film?
- do (real) orbs appear more frequently with digital than 5 years ago?
Does anybody actually know? I thought I was pandering you by spelling out what Karen had already given by links!? Here we go again: Yes so-called "Orbs" appeared on emulsion film (please read the points given). As for their frequency, some causes are peculiar to either type, but most are common to both. So, while I know of no study, I expect there would not be a great difference; although I guess it depends on what YOU mean by "real"!?
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Orbs
Oct 2, 2008 14:54:08 GMT
Post by Tamrin on Oct 2, 2008 14:54:08 GMT
As for "Intelligent Design" I believe the generality of it to be reasonable (perhaps even likely) but I would not like to see it taught as science (OK as theology &/or philosophy). Science has its limits and such speculations are beyond its methods and therefore outside its realm.
Please, please click on the link Russell provided, if only to see the National Enquirer type of presentation!
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Orbs
Oct 2, 2008 15:05:44 GMT
Post by Tamrin on Oct 2, 2008 15:05:44 GMT
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Orbs
Oct 2, 2008 15:35:57 GMT
Post by Tamrin on Oct 2, 2008 15:35:57 GMT
Philip, mock as you wish, it obviously satisfies some facet of your persona. You are entitled to your opinions and thankfully I am equally entitled to reject them.
|
|
|
Orbs
Oct 2, 2008 15:58:38 GMT
Post by billmcelligott on Oct 2, 2008 15:58:38 GMT
What a lot of Orbs
|
|
|
Orbs
Oct 2, 2008 16:15:37 GMT
Post by maximus on Oct 2, 2008 16:15:37 GMT
"Intelligent Design" has many flaws, among which are: *There is no information about the designer(s). *There is no information about the designing process. *Why, if the designer(s) wished to create an intelligent life form, they created a universe so sparsely populated with life (which itself took billions of years to evolve and billions more to gain intelligence). The proponents of ID are assuming design without being able to explain a single step in the process. God is not an explanation because God is a way of stopping the cycle of questions. By citing God, research into a particular phenomenon ends--no more knowledge can be gained. Intelligent Design is simply religious dogma disguised as science--in other words pseudoscience, and a strategy to get religion taught in public schools under cover.
|
|