ChrLzs Posted October 24, 2017 #51 Share Posted October 24, 2017 (edited) Stop the walls of videos - this is a discussion forum, not your personal advertising agency. Edited October 24, 2017 by ChrLzs 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papageorge1 Posted October 24, 2017 #52 Share Posted October 24, 2017 20 minutes ago, Morgus said: I think you are claiming these orbs respond intelligently to stimulus, in a way that inanimate orbs would not. Are the examples things like responding to camera flashes, other flying creatures or what? Could you please respond with words rather than more videos to my question. I think that verbal background info will enlighten what I am looking for in these videos. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Hammerclaw Posted October 24, 2017 #53 Share Posted October 24, 2017 3 hours ago, Morgus said: thank you for the comments. My films take place outside. Watch this video and then let me know if this is dust it water droplets... thanks Out-of-focus insects illuminated by infrared. I've watched a dozen or so videos other than yours, also and see nothing remarkable. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morgus Posted October 24, 2017 Author #54 Share Posted October 24, 2017 48 minutes ago, papageorge1 said: I think you are claiming these orbs respond intelligently to stimulus, in a way that inanimate orbs would not. Are the examples things like responding to camera flashes, other flying creatures or what? Could you please respond with words rather than more videos to my question. I think that verbal background info will enlighten what I am looking for in these videos. Yes, I am confidently saying what I am filming responds to camera flashes. I am saying what I am filming is not dust, water droplets, plant spores and the like. What I am filming is alive. I am also saying what I am filming is not out of focus bugs, but that the orbs themselves may indeed be a "type" of bug unto themselves. A bug that is an orb/spherical creature and moves through the sky under its own power with purpose and intention, as it interacts with the world around it. I do not believe they are supernatural or paranormal, but natural and normal. I have only seen them through infrared night vision filming and with a flash camera, non infrared, which shows them in color, unlike infra red. I have filmed the same orb in both video and flash picture at the same time in the same place. I film them from distances and close up and as they move close up and far away and they never change shape, as they would if going in and out of focus. I film them moving behind objects, such as trees many feet away. I film them moving horizontally as the rain is falling vertically. I have them on film and in pictures with other creatures such as bugs, bats and birds, showing they are in focus and my equipment can distinguish between the two. I film them in various locations throughout the year. I have hundreds of hours filming and observing them. If my films are viewed these things can be clearly seen. It someone comments without viewing my films their comments are irrelevant. An orb cannot be a water droplet if it is moving horizontal as all the other rain drops move fall vertically. It cannot be something on or near my lens if it clearly moves behind a tree 20 feet away and 25 feet high. It cannot be inanimate if it responds to a camera flash over and over. My videos can be viewed at the following youtube page. My goal is to understand what they are and anyone who can view my videos and then give coherent, independent and unbiased critique is much appreciated but anyone who attempt to provide critique without viewing my videos are not relevant because they are only repeating old and outdated regurgitated spin. Thanks.... https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCZM0jCqfwD7r5wyOOVTVQ3A 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morgus Posted October 24, 2017 Author #55 Share Posted October 24, 2017 33 minutes ago, Hammerclaw said: Out-of-focus insects illuminated by infrared. I've watched a dozen or so videos other than yours, also and see nothing remarkable. Show me any other video that compares to my videos. I bet you cannot produce any.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morgus Posted October 24, 2017 Author #56 Share Posted October 24, 2017 1 hour ago, ChrLzs said: Stop the walls of videos - this is a discussion forum, not your personal advertising agency. The purpose is to provide evidence and information and debate and discuss the issue of orbs. A picture is worth a thousand words and a video a million. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papageorge1 Posted October 24, 2017 #57 Share Posted October 24, 2017 (edited) 35 minutes ago, Morgus said: Yes, I am confidently saying what I am filming responds to camera flashes. I am saying what I am filming is not dust, water droplets, plant spores and the like. What I am filming is alive. I am also saying what I am filming is not out of focus bugs, but that the orbs themselves may indeed be a "type" of bug unto themselves. A bug that is an orb/spherical creature and moves through the sky under its own power with purpose and intention, as it interacts with the world around it. I do not believe they are supernatural or paranormal, but natural and normal. I have only seen them through infrared night vision filming and with a flash camera, non infrared, which shows them in color, unlike infra red. I have filmed the same orb in both video and flash picture at the same time in the same place. I film them from distances and close up and as they move close up and far away and they never change shape, as they would if going in and out of focus. I film them moving behind objects, such as trees many feet away. I film them moving horizontally as the rain is falling vertically. I have them on film and in pictures with other creatures such as bugs, bats and birds, showing they are in focus and my equipment can distinguish between the two. I film them in various locations throughout the year. I have hundreds of hours filming and observing them. If my films are viewed these things can be clearly seen. It someone comments without viewing my films their comments are irrelevant. An orb cannot be a water droplet if it is moving horizontal as all the other rain drops move fall vertically. It cannot be something on or near my lens if it clearly moves behind a tree 20 feet away and 25 feet high. It cannot be inanimate if it responds to a camera flash over and over. My videos can be viewed at the following youtube page. My goal is to understand what they are and anyone who can view my videos and then give coherent, independent and unbiased critique is much appreciated but anyone who attempt to provide critique without viewing my videos are not relevant because they are only repeating old and outdated regurgitated spin. Thanks.... https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCZM0jCqfwD7r5wyOOVTVQ3A My man! I love the in your face attitude with some confidence. As I asked before, are you familiar with the concept of elemental entities? If the animate orbs you described are physical-based and so numerous they would be something known to physical science. And you also argue they are not known insects. Edited October 24, 2017 by papageorge1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morgus Posted October 24, 2017 Author #58 Share Posted October 24, 2017 That is what perplexes me even more than the orbs I am filming! They should indeed be classified scientifically and I do not understand why they are not. I am confident they are physical because I have specific videos showing them casting shadows. define elemental entities if you don’t mind... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morgus Posted October 24, 2017 Author #59 Share Posted October 24, 2017 5 minutes ago, Morgus said: That is what perplexes me even more than the orbs I am filming! They should indeed be classified scientifically and I do not understand why they are not. I am confident they are physical because I have specific videos showing them casting shadows. define elemental entities if you don’t mind... This orb is definitely animate!!! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papageorge1 Posted October 24, 2017 #60 Share Posted October 24, 2017 (edited) 18 minutes ago, Morgus said: define elemental entities if you don’t mind... Their native plane in Theosophical terminology is the etheric plane which is the closest possible to the physical. They can flit with the physical. In fact things like gnomes, fairies, brownies and many such things of folklore may have their basis in the just beyond the physical. I can see your entities fliting with the physical and sometimes producing shadows. Edited October 24, 2017 by papageorge1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morgus Posted October 24, 2017 Author #61 Share Posted October 24, 2017 2 minutes ago, papageorge1 said: Their native plane in Theosophical terminology is the etheric plane which is the closest possible to the physical. They can flit with the physical. In fact things like gnomes, fairies, brownies and many such things of folklore may have their basis in the just beyond the physical. I can see your entities flirting with the physical and sometimes producing shadows. I have heard that theory. What one believes about such things is dependent upon ones world view. Why is there something rather than nothing? Where do we come from? Why are we here? Where do we go? How do we know these answers? What do we base our answers on? How do we know this is a good basis for our answers? Is truth important? How do we know truth? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papageorge1 Posted October 24, 2017 #62 Share Posted October 24, 2017 10 minutes ago, Morgus said: I have heard that theory. What one believes about such things is dependent upon ones world view. Why is there something rather than nothing? Where do we come from? Why are we here? Where do we go? How do we know these answers? What do we base our answers on? How do we know this is a good basis for our answers? Is truth important? How do we know truth? That’s a lot of questions! My interest is so-called paranormal phenomena which has shown me beyond reasonable doubt of the existence of super-physical planes. With this understanding the paranormal becomes part of the expanded normal. Your orbs may be in there too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morgus Posted October 24, 2017 Author #63 Share Posted October 24, 2017 Questions are the answers to life.... appreciate your perspective Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papageorge1 Posted October 24, 2017 #64 Share Posted October 24, 2017 8 minutes ago, Morgus said: Questions are the answers to life.... appreciate your perspective Questions are the answers??? I want answers to the questions myself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrLzs Posted October 24, 2017 #65 Share Posted October 24, 2017 As many others have already related, the imagery being (over-)posted seems to show nothing other than out-of-focus insects, bugs, dust (rain/snow/etc) that are lit up by an on-camera (or nearby) light source. Here are the facts (and NONE of what follows is in question): 1. Small objects that are out of focus will appear as 'blobs'. The size of the blob depends on the distance away from the current focal distance (aka 'focal plane') - the further it is away, the larger the blob. So if the lens is focused at infinity and the object is very close to the lens, the blob will be large. Conversely, if the lens is focused close and the object is some metres away or at 'infinity' it will again be large. Obviously, objects that are in focus or near to it, will be at their smallest and will be in focus. Blurring always goes outwards, as the light spreads.. 2. The shape of the 'blobs' is often round, but will depend on several factors, including: - lens design - aperture opening shape (on better quality cameras you will often five/six/seven sided blobs, of the same shape of the aperture diaphragm) - closeness to centre of image (lenses distort shapes increasingly towards the outer edges of the image frame) 3. Within these 'blobs', details may appear. The detail is often concentric, which gives a clue that the effect is optically caused and has nothing to with the original bright object. The detail may also includes spots and smears that are reflections of debris or defects in the lens, and it may be seen moving within the blob as it changes relative position in frame - which again proves that the 'detail' is caused by the lens. Is there anyone here who disputes any of that? Or that saw *anything* whatsoever in amongst the plethora of videos, that is not completely and utterly explained by those facts? I'm happy to address any specifics. Later when I have more time, I'll post just a couple more videos and a still image or two *demonstrating* exactly what causes these 'orbs'. In my opinion, brevity is better than spam or Gish Galloping... So to summarise, what are 'orbs'? They are NOT special. They are NOT paranormal. They are not even very perplexing. They are a simple and well known optical effect - indeed ask any serious photographer.They are caused by brightly lit small objects that are out of focus, drifting, or flying (or hovering) in/thru the camera's field of view. 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Hammerclaw Posted October 24, 2017 #66 Share Posted October 24, 2017 1 hour ago, Morgus said: Show me any other video that compares to my videos. I bet you cannot produce any.... That's the key. Your videos are productions, tinkered with, enhanced and dubbed with a soundtrack. Even then, they show nothing inconsistent with the explanations provided. You make extraordinary claims while producing painfully ordinary evidence. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toast Posted October 24, 2017 #67 Share Posted October 24, 2017 8 hours ago, Morgus said: You must be a want to be comedian because you are certainly not a critical thinker... There is no reason for "critical thinking" about "orbs" but if you claim to be a "critical thinker" by yourself you would have understood already what exactly you have filmed. But you dont, so you dont think at all and so we have a kind of comedian here, a bad one, and its not me. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GlitterRose Posted October 24, 2017 #68 Share Posted October 24, 2017 17 hours ago, Morgus said: Seeder, In one of my videos I show an “orb” moving about in the rain... how can that be dust or a water droplet? Please explain what you mean by camera artifact ... thanks Are you really asking how your "orb" could be a water droplet...in the rain? 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morgus Posted October 24, 2017 Author #69 Share Posted October 24, 2017 7 hours ago, Hammerclaw said: That's the key. Your videos are productions, tinkered with, enhanced and dubbed with a soundtrack. Even then, they show nothing inconsistent with the explanations provided. You make extraordinary claims while producing painfully ordinary evidence. Look, I have never used CG or in any other way attemp to deceive or mislead. What I film is what I see. The issue is interpreting what I have filmed. You interpret differently from me. Hard as it may be for you to believe, I just want to know what it is, and not simply accept old information ignoring what I capture on film. If you care to watch, I explain my introduction to orbs in this video. I am baffled that someone would say I am filming water mist or droplets, when I have filmed orbs moving horizontally when the rain is falling vertically. Or when someone would say there is something on my lens when clearly I have filmed orbs moving behind trees 29 feet away and 20 feet high. Or that the orbs I am filming are not living when I clearly show them reacting to camera flashes over and over. Or that they are out of focus bugs, when I have orbs coming and going and never changing form as something out of focus would, and showing the same orb being filmed and in a flash picture that shows its true form and in color. People acts as if my videos carry no weight and only want to hold tightly to old theories without seriously reviewing what I have documented. No point in debating further. I am confident and have come to my confidence through skeptical study. I am certain I will be proven correct. I have always welcome serious helpful critique but haven’t time for those who cannot think beyond the old party line...thanks for the input... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morgus Posted October 24, 2017 Author #70 Share Posted October 24, 2017 3 hours ago, toast said: There is no reason for "critical thinking" about "orbs" but if you claim to be a "critical thinker" by yourself you would have understood already what exactly you have filmed. But you dont, so you dont think at all and so we have a kind of comedian here, a bad one, and its not me. Enjoy living in your world... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morgus Posted October 24, 2017 Author #71 Share Posted October 24, 2017 2 hours ago, ChaosRose said: Are you really asking how your "orb" could be a water droplet...in the rain? No, I know it is not a water droplet. Watch my video and tell me otherwise... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toast Posted October 24, 2017 #72 Share Posted October 24, 2017 1 hour ago, Morgus said: Enjoy living in your world... I do, thanks. BTW, do you plan to launch a 2nd KickStarter project on the subject as the first one failed? To collect money from gullible people to fill up your pockets? Quote I need advanced equipment such as infrared night vision camera and recorder, continuous flash camera, strobe lights, microscope, etc... Link 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morgus Posted October 24, 2017 Author #73 Share Posted October 24, 2017 2 hours ago, toast said: I do, thanks. BTW, do you plan to launch a 2nd KickStarter project on the subject as the first one failed? To collect money from gullible people to fill up your pockets? I’m sure you can do much better than that if you just apply yourself... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toast Posted October 24, 2017 #74 Share Posted October 24, 2017 47 minutes ago, Morgus said: I’m sure you can do much better than that if you just apply yourself... I applied myself to the discussion for the reason to make clear that "orbs" are not what you suppose and claim they are and for the reason to avoid to get people get more stupid by your pseudo-scientific approach. You named your YT channel "Orbservations - Orb Education Video Library" but there is no education at all, its only a library of shaky and out of focus vids, out of thousands on YT in the same fashion and with the very same results. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papageorge1 Posted October 24, 2017 #75 Share Posted October 24, 2017 (edited) 4 hours ago, Morgus said: People acts as if my videos carry no weight and only want to hold tightly to old theories without seriously reviewing what I have documented. No point in debating further. I am confident and have come to my confidence through skeptical study. I am certain I will be proven correct. I have always welcome serious helpful critique but haven’t time for those who cannot think beyond the old party line...thanks for the input... I am more experienced than you on this forum and you are correct in observing that the critics here are just one-note haters. No matter what quality of evidence you give them, you will just get their one-note back. I suggest as you concluded, to not spend much time debating them. As for me, I am the only one still interested apparently. As you point out we are at perplexing point. Let's assume, for the moment, your claim that these entities are animate and respond to stimulus in a way non-animate objects would not. Then what could it be becomes to me the interesting question here to me. Some possibilities. 1. A type of known insect. (you claim to have ruled this one out too) 2. A physical life form unknown to science. (but if you can find them so easily, how can they be 'unknown to science'?) 3. Elemental entities of the etheric plane (closest to the physical). (science does not accept the existence of any non-physical entities from ghosts to elemental entities because they can't be physically proven. I believe in their existence myself not from science but from wisdom traditions that address issues beyond the reach of physical science) However it seems to me that you may not be as interested as me in speculating on what these orbs could be. Your focus seems to be on establishing the fact that they exist through video evidence and are something unknown to science at this time. Is this correct? Edited October 24, 2017 by papageorge1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts