To Tell The Truth…

No Comments

An esteemed friend just pointed me to this picture on the web knowingly anticipating my reaction. And I appreciate this perfect example illustrating the need for critical thinking about orbs. Here was my response:

Yes that house is interdimensional obviously

perfect for seances.


It’s a Nikon Coolpix.

in most pics the orbs are biased to the right side–that’s a flash giveaway.

but surely, “emanations of spirit” probably should go in the house listing as a nice feature

instead of “I have a point-and-shoot camera”

Then I realized dropping the pic into Aperture might give me its EXIF data. Please look under the photo where I have arranged the Camera Model column.

Haunted by Coolpix

How did I know? Simply, two years of hard-earned unglamorous experience with a Coolpix S10, after which I concluded these cameras generate faux orbs due to their flash design. A time-lapse series and many examples are ready to post (along with one puzzling and incongruous anecdote). Generally, a Coolpix in the hands of a predisposed believer is a mightily deceptive machine. And how many millions of these cameras are out there?

Please understand: I do not deny anyone’s orb experience. There are many more challenging pictures that do not so easily disintegrate.

But I hate like hell to see an environment created where knowledge of these kinds of obvious failures is buried and discouraged by mutually-indulgent ‘scientists’ in favor of the profit motive; to say nothing of inexcusably screwing with people’s belief systems on questionable if not false evidence.

Raising a theme that may appear again here in many forms: I hold that the pictures are at most secondary. The story, your story, is primary. That’s why you need to take your own pictures.

At least until the point where you know what you know. Not what anyone tells you. Including me.

Bad Intentions: Tiller’s ‘White Paper II’ Undermines Legacy

No Comments

Revised: 20121201

Compare the history illustrated in this column particularly in the range of 2006 April-November with this recent account of Tiller’s, to learn how desperately one can stoop to so rewrite history to fit the persona. Tiller’s retrospection is bogus, made of transparently whole cloth.

The record shows that I called the problems to his attention, I recreated the intended designs, I created a control system that would allow the UED to be wired any way desired; yet for no reason than that the production could not guarantee his Master Intention of what was good, he destroyed the partnership that could have brought them to the public by the end of 2006, six years ago, when 50 in fact were made.

NextGen ScrollGallery thumbnailNextGen ScrollGallery thumbnailNextGen ScrollGallery thumbnailNextGen ScrollGallery thumbnailNextGen ScrollGallery thumbnailNextGen ScrollGallery thumbnailNextGen ScrollGallery thumbnailNextGen ScrollGallery thumbnailNextGen ScrollGallery thumbnail
Page 1
Page 2
Page 3
Page 4
Page 5
Page 6
Page 7
Page 8
Page 9

Followers must remember that Tiller’s experiments used a meditative team with a combined experience approaching 100 years. This is a significant hurdle to replication, one that no other academic team has yet met, and that lay folk are not likely to be able to overcome.

Despite the practical difficulty of anyone besides Tiller’s own team imprinting a UED into an IIED, Tiller dismisses UEDs as noisy and useless. Here again, I have demonstrated exactly the opposite, that meditators are unnecessary to the process. The entire potential under discussion can instead of a maintained fantasy, be exhaustively explored and replicated by the sensitive electronics of our sensing and generating circuitry.

In hindsight it could not have been a clearer warning, that in 2005 October at book signing after his talk Dr. Tiller had no answer to my question whether the 3-EEPROM schematic that he printed wasn’t missing a power line to all of the chips. By 2006 June Tiller’s fear of my work began when I sent him UEDs that easily overpowered all of his experiments in progress. The trajectory was clear; the technology was no longer in his control. That this fundamental mistake is repeated in Tiller’s 2009 re-issued drawing speaks volumes as to his actual care and expertise. Moreover, the diagrams above still do not show the correct schematics for the original devices used in Tiller’s imprinting research. Is this endemic carelessness or intention to  mislead?

Saved from the combination of Randy Zeisenis’s humbug, Clarus’s manufacturing incompetence, Tiller’s simultaneously naive and incomprehensible tomes ignorant of the basic design and performance of his main tools: I forged this amateurish mess into the new independent and objective, patent-pending science to be carried forward.

Blue Taste Theme created by Jabox