Session 960120: Aura Camera comments

[anart]

The board may have accumulated a static electric charge from rubbing the planchette over it. A photo might show a board with brightness where the most static charge had accumulated.

Just following along here, but if this were true, then the clear pattern in the photo presented would be due to the planchette following a rectangular pattern on the board, correct? I could be misunderstanding you. The pattern shown is so clearly geometric, that I can't really conceive of it being a 'static electric charge' trail from where the planchette has traveled.

Having never seen Laura use the board, I have no way of knowing, but it seems, intuitively, highly unlikely that the planchette would travel in such a 'straight line', clearly geometric, pattern.

I think the static (or even kinetic) electricity concept makes sense, but, again, the pattern on that board is so clearly geometric that I'm struggling a bit to fit your concept to this situation. fwiw.

 

[Laura]

Allow me a conjecture since the camera company is not forthcoming with technical info. The camera might be using a trick that overlays a static electric discharge when the film is exposed causing an overexposure of light on a perfectly good photo. How might one do that could be to put an antenna or array behind the film. Charge the array and a halo of light could be made to appear on every photo. Overcharging the array might overexpose the film with the shape of the array.

I see what you are saying, but based on the fact that we have a whole slew of these photos and it seems that whatever gets "charged" to project the "aura" thing is not that. As I said, each and every photo taken by that camera had exactly the same shape "aura," with exactly the same "dots of light" here and there, in exactly the same patterns. The only thing different from picture to picture was color and brightness which, as we know now, was a function of measuring galvanic skin resistance or static electricity, etc.

The array might easily be rectangular to cover the field of a picture frame.

Sure, the array could have been rectangular. But it doesn't cover the field of the picture frame, it exactly conforms to the board itself and has no relation to the many other aura photos taken that night with that camera. More than that, the very specific highlighting of the hands, etc...

Maybe as the camera literature claims the camera is sensitive to static electricity. Hair would have more static electric charge than say a hand. The board may have accumulated a static electric charge from rubbing the planchette over it. A photo might show a board with brightness where the most static charge had accumulated.

Well, here you have a problem. What is sensitive to static electricity are the plates or sensors that pick up the "bio-feedback" information, NOT the optical lens of the camera. So the camera is not photographing static electricity. And, as noted above, if some sort of array was involved in projecting the bio-feedback information, it is not likely that it would so exactly conform to the object being photographed. See what I mean? You can't have it both ways.

 

[horse]

The camera system is obviously a trick camera and the company doesn’t want us to know the trick. Without knowing the trick or technique the camera uses we don’t know what the camera is measuring or what is being displayed. I only have a limited experience; one person produced a photo of a certain brightness, yet two people produced a photo of double the brightness. You have taken many more photos than I. The geometric picture is most interesting, but what am I seeing? We agree at least it is not an image of an aura but rather some other biometric effect. The company is rather misleading in its advertising as you pointed out in a previous post. My leading theory of how they do it is a charge plate or array behind the film overexposing the film with electrostatic energy. You said previously that the operator made no adjustments to the exposure so that would rule out deception by an operator simply overcharging the array to produce a photo showing the shape of a rectangular array over a square board (camera angle making the square board apparently rectangular). Your channeling the C’s might have overcharged the array and that would make the device a channeling detector. My next best theory was that the camera might image the biometric data; heat, humidity, or electrostatic energy in some other undefined way. Did channeling the C’s cause the film to really heat up? Did the channeling using the board create a strong static charge on the board that imaged so brightly? I only have two photos to go by and no technical information as to what they show me. You have many more photos and more experience with the camera including a very unusual photo with the geometric shape. More rigorous testing might give clues as to what the camera is really showing or measuring. This writing out thoughts is hard work and time consuming for me. I’m just an old man with lots to learn yet. Thanks for taking the time to go over the Coggins camera evidence. I’m certainly not convinced of the company’s claims but I remain open to more evidence. I appreciate the work you, Ark, and the SOTT team are doing to educate and help out the less expert like me.