Et bien avec nos APNs avec 10 où 13MP même plus ,il y en à des orbes et des brumes et tout ce que nos yeux d'humains ne voient pas.Vou seriez étonnés..J'ai plein et mes amis de recherches sur les orbes aussi...et zoomé ,c'est fabuleux ce que l'on peut voir.
Vive la technologie qui nous révèle autres chose NON visible à l'oeil nu.
that whatever was triggering them was invisible (quit smoking at 3am) & there was a lot of what ever. So for some reason I looked up orbs on the internet & at that time there was very little information about them, that's how I found youtube with maybe 2 videos with no explanations. Since then I'm flabbergasted at the explosion of orb mania & Thank you for the most wonderful videos explaining them. They worked very hard on getting my attention and hundreds, thousands visit me every night?!
I grew up and live in a very small town way out in the boonies. Around 3am I would get up and go smoke a cigarette on the back yard porch until I noticed the motion detector lights going crazy. At first I thought it was a cat but realized that was impossible. The lights are timed and as soon as the timer shut them off, they would immediately turn back on. I checked them for malfunctions and that's when I really got spooked as I knew
why is nothing visible in the background, that background is needed for scale. it is Interesting but without that scale it could be anything. try and get some background in other videos
Sometimes you can see the multicolored wallpaper in the background. I took this footage at about 4 pm inside my home. I was across the room sitting at a desk pointing upwards towards the wall.
At about 50 seconds you can see a filing cabinet for a moment on the bottom right side just below the picture frame.
I hope this helps as I'm just told where to point the camera and that could be anywhere.
could you explain why we have the same orb recorded on two different cameras, also on video and digital camera,are you suggesting all the equipment have marks in the same proportionate place
I was at a party a while ago and just saw the photos that where taken that night. There are Orbs in a lot of the pics. The cant be light shots/reflections from the camera.
I've heard about these things before but seeing them right beside my head in a picture really makes you think...
I watched a couple of vids today and in one the Orb actually enters a guys head. Theres a few videos on youtube where they are seen around crop circles too.
Increased magnetic fields slow these things down, particles and charge attach to the orb thus illuminating them. So in genuine crop circles the localised magnetic field has increased, thus illuminating what is all around us the energy of creation
To me its consciousness and the programme of the creator.
Paul, your work is wonderful, your photos stunning. I have had an interest in orbs for a little while now, and this is my first viewing of this video. Is the research undertaken in France, by any chance? The occurrence of this phenomenon there is very high, very gratifying. It also happens to be a part of the Earth where early civilisations left a rich record of life in cave paintings etc.Love it, will now watch more of your work. Categorisation is interesting: ignore the brain-dead,soul-dead?
Most images are taken in my beloved Wales, but this statement is funny as there is nothing that separates us from the oneness. nation, religion, ego all are an illusion in comparison to the source we are created from
Despite the notion the the creator of these vids may actually beleive in this, I found the series quite relaxing and decent for entertainment purposes.
Yes, focus the camera on something and/or clean your lens. Although from your description of the camera I believe you have a run of the mill autofocus, which you'd have to actually, yknow, fix on a specific object, esp. with a tripod if not using a flash, or if using a delayed one, to get sharp images.
Are you this stupid, or are you trying to con people?
have you see the part shooting with video camera and digital camera, shooting with two cameras from two different postiions,so both cameras have marks in the same position nice idear.
Dark matter is a theory based upon many observed phenomena, which are corroborated by multiple scientists and which are published in peer-reviewed journals. These observations are carefully scrutinized to look for observational errors. When a scientist publishes something, and another has concerns about its veracity, they do a similar experiment in an attempt to verify the effect. I can replicate your results by taking pictures with a dusty lens.
Holy crap! You are an absolute retard if you believe these things are anything supernatural. My wife is a photographer and immediately said "those 'orbs' are nothing more than dust, dirt, and digital artifacts."
Remember Occam's Razor: "The simplest explanation is usually correct."
i will be producing another video to explain that last statement but our concepts of gravity is questionable and why things do not work in theories
i understand you think i am an idiot but have you seen all the videos? its intresting people going to judjment before seening the evidence what i have shown is only a small amount of what i have.
Oh geeze. I agree with Eagleeye. You're a retard. Heck, at 3 minutes in you smack around saying these are ORBS? When the sky is cloudy and there's snow on the floor?
Your there orbs are SNOWFLAKES. Could even just be blown off roofs by small winds! I'm canadian, I take plenty of pictures outside and we get LOTS of these "orbs". Get a life.
why did you post here,how do explain the rock art, the orbs attached to the hands and my images, how do you explain the bars that enter the left wrist and left hip that corrisponds to otsi tatoos,how do you explain dust that reflects its self over 4 meters away in ponds and mirrors how do you explain the fact that two images from different locations can capture the same orbs, stage one thats all i can say. fear is an amazing thing.
If i deleted your comment it was in error, but use language like that and i will delete it deliberately. It comes to something when people resort to anger to get over a point i would call it Neanderthal behaviour but that's an insult to them. Have a look at working with energy video of mine should convince you its not dust.
Look it up, paulcmuir. Wikipedia has articles about Caustic, as in optics and mathematics. Like lense flares, they appear so easily in optical systems. They can really mess up the recording process, especially when out of focus and illuminated by a flash as in your case. There even are CGI SFX to simulate them to make computer animations look more real.
how do you account for orbs that attach to trees through webs? and also the back of my hand, the 50 sequenced photographs that produce flash back but when our hands are placed on them the aurous and the bars firing, seen so many times on video stop, this was repeated twice and the same thing happened this was also recorded on video shown in part two.
You can produce orbs with a spray gun but they are different.
what about the rock art, do not suggest they had digital cameras too, 16th cameras in basel? what optical effect are you talking about. do you mean what is seen by the eye or the lense of the camera? which is more accurate light that travelled millions of light years to hubble or a digital image fifteen feet away which has been recorded throughout History.Choose hubble its easier.
What about the rock art? Detraction from those orbs?
Orbs that attach to trees through webs? Impossibe to tell from a snapshot. Reminds me of the Moon Hoaxers insisting that shadows were wrong, no stars were captured and those crosshairs were partly covered in those photographs.
you have an anticlockwise sprial from your right shoulder, your nose area pulses horizontally,your family dna is surseptable to arthtitus, how are your knees and ankles
He certainly didn't seem impressed by your "diagnosis".
The thing that seperates scientific method from mere faith is the reliance it has on evidence and critical reasoning.
You have provided no evidence for your ability to read auras. You refuse to listen to alternative explanations to your orbs. Therefore, it seems you don't have either trait necessary to science.
I regret wasting my time on your videos. Clearly, you have no desire to actually learn - you are hell-bent on your theory and will listen to nothing else.
after many years of research slowley piecing the evidence together,once partially understood, we then searched for other evidence to prove the theory,this evidence spans time and is from an independent source.
it is what it is, to you my freind its dust infront of the lense.they are just pictures and video,wood cuts from 16th centuray and tons of rock art. thats what it will remain, to you, i respect your right to opionion. but thats all it is.
Ok, just to make this very clear: "Orbs" are the result of you camera's flash bouncing off water drops, snowflakes and other dust-like particles. The rest of your images are the result of very poor photographic technique and equipment. Period. Introductory photo classes are filled with examples of these, and prove only that you are a terrible photographer. Read some basic photography books and this will all be very clear to you.
You dont even need the flash. A passing car, the moon, lights from a near by house or just about anything will give you "orbs". It's funny to those of us who are photographers to see people trying to get the effects that we speand a great deal of time and money on eliminating.
The correct answer is that it's neither and both, of course. It makes it easier for us to model in certain circumstances thinking of it as a wave, and in other circumstances as a particle.
It's a little bit like asking if water is a liquid or a solid.
of course its both and if light behaves like theses waves that carry orbs, alot can be gained by videoing this event, these waves travel over feilds of energy(possibly magnetic) they slow down and these spheres break free. .
so if light behaves in the same way it can only have a constants speed in wave format as a form of magntisum causes its slowing and sepperation, as observed in basel which our research backs up.I suggest pass light through high magnetic feilds.....it should display particle properties, turn it off it should conform back to a wave
iam not intrested in money, but i do not understand, what do you mean? i gave up work for two years, recently my work ended up with two oxford sceintists who i belive between then have published sixty papers on mangntisium they wanted to work with me in their labs, but i am not intrested, i am intrested in hi deffinition video equipment the video camera was a 300 dollar one and does not capture fast moving objects well you will see that in video two.
it takes at least a generation for sceintific acceptance, most never see it and generally other take the credit, there is too much investment in string theory and quantum mechanics to accept it. it will be seen again like in 16th centuray in basel then it may be accepted
None of what you say about science is true. Acceptance of a scientific idea depends on the evidence for it, not any given number of generations following its discovery. Relativity, for example, did not take a generation to be accepted. In any event, there is nothing about your pics or the assertions that you're making about them that constitutes "science".
If by "there", you mean in the videos, you are wrong, since I've seen them. Evidence is not a label that you arbitrarily slap onto any ol' piece of information. TRUE evidence is that which stands up to the scientific method. The poorly written and inscrutable comment that begins your post above is irrelevant.
Actually what he paraphrased there was an Arthur C. Clark quote: "New ideas pass through three periods: It can't be done; It probably can be done, but it's not worth doing; I knew it was a good idea all along", which is, most unfortunately, quite accurate in the WHOLE of human society; yes, even the scientific community.
the whole peer review process lends itself to poor sceince and fudge factor,coupled with that and you have directed sceince by big business, not a good cocktail for the truth. tobacco is not addictive, no global warming,minkey whales need culling,pesticides in the food chain do not cause cancer, all underwritten by sceince, no thank you, just observing something that there.
The peer review process eliminates those things. Any scientific theory with poor reasoning or a flawed experimental approach can be examined and denounced, thus removing poor research techniques and dodgy theories.
Yes, science is often funded by big business, but this is not a bad thing... in fact, it's irrelevant. If you wish to criticise a theory you do not agree with, you are more than welcome to debate its reasoning/research etc, but to say it is flawed simply becuase a big company paid for it is an ad hominem attack - it is a logical fallacy.
there are many hard working reserchers, sceintists but the peer review is some what like you reveiw mine and i will reveiw yours,
a freind of mine told me about his first paper and how he was told not to publish as it contradicted the reveiwers paper. Allthough he still publishes and produces good work, he left the sceince world.
However much you mistrust the scientific process, you still have no reason to claim anything but artefacts of the photographic techniques. You still have no idea what string theory, quantum mechanics or, apparently, the theory of gravity are. Therefore please just accept that you have wasted a lot of time with your film.
You are wrong shooting with two cameras, provided evidence, video that corripsonds with digital stills,shape and form that is far from circular which includes the web process,delivery of massless particle too plant, trees, but of course you still have not seen the five other videos let alone the thousands of images that breakdown and show process, not to mention the 400 + video that corrispond to the digital stills,
the division process where these things divide,clone themselves and the comparision to unique images of string theory against my photos of the process.
After this we tested the theory, if it fires out of stones the builders must have seen it like my dog caught by accident watching it . it was then we found the rock art, study the shape this dose not happen by chance. we formulated idears why it was lost, what we had seen in the video gave us a clue.
the weakening of magnetic feild cause the loss of the visual understanding. its very simple yet very challenging.Look at reports of a few years ago,of the the space shuttle by cnn where the astronaughts started things described as photons when they approached the vann allen belts, should give you a good idear, increased magnetic feild allows us to see it and also produces more of it by attraction.
I am sorry. I can't answer any of what you say as none of it makes any sense. You clearly have no idea of what magnetic or gravity fields are, have no idea what string theory is or how photography interacts with light. In fact you hve no idea what you are talking about, and you have managed to fool other people by mentioning string theory, magnetic fields and gravity.
Unfortunately I am actually educated. I know that what you say is garbage ("the weakening of magnetic feild [sic] cause the loss of the visual understanding" - what weakening of what field? how could this affect vision? What is visual understanding. See you have no idea what the words you use mean!). You are talking rot and wasting your time!
recently in space the astrounaughts saw a similar process whilst aproaching the vann allen belts(cnn reported this), the process of orbs and waves is highlighted by the magnetic feild like watching the auras at the north, these particles in high magnetic feild become visible, at the moment the field is weak this is partly due to fricton caused by global warming and rising sea levels which causing the earth to turn slower and the earths feild to weaken.
this is not the total picture it far more complicated. i will produce a video of the process but untill people take it seriously and at least look at the evidence it seems as though we have to wait untill its visable again.
there are lots of good papers with good sceince waiting but the resercher/sceintist sit on it or burys it for fear of riddicule but it still remains a good piece of sceince, now you are going to tell me that dose not happen.
An interesting comment, It was quoted in a recent BBC programme about Cladh Hallan was "they only had 50 bodies from the bronze age". If they were talking about the whole of the Bronze Age it would mean they have 50 bodies over a 1,700 period.
So the evidence is scarce, it was estimated by the county archaeologist that in the late bronze age there were as many as 120,000 living there.
Some of these bodies may not be British as Recent research provides evidence that the bodies buried near stone circles were from Europe and not Britain. If 120,000 were dyeing every 40 years we should have around burials 5,100,000 I suppose most were cremated. To estimate their life span on such small amount of evidence is not good. and misleading.
What they did with their dead varied, and affected whether a body survived so long. Some were buried straight to earth, they decomposed quickly, some were burned, some were left out for animals to take care of. What we know allows us to infer a great deal.
i have heard it said these people were barbarians eeking out a subsistance living as a hunter gatherer, yet we have Silbury hill,we can infer what ever we like. these people had a different understanding otherwise we would understand these ancient ways, we cannot apply our logic to their ways, they understood something we do not,we understand things they would not also.
The author will not be changing his viewpoint anytime soon. People have a need to believe in things ethereal, and blurred images are as good a thing to latch onto as any. What are obvious visual distortions with easy explanations to most are other people's ghost, goblins and orbs.
Of course. I have watched the video, and the "orbs" look very much like artefacts. These are parts of the image that are a result of how the light reflects off something, often something very small like dust or raindrops, and how this is interpreted by the camera, especially with regard to very bright spots and out-of-focus spots looking much larger than they actually are.
As an artefact (i.e. artificial) it does not represent a real image, but is caused by interpretation. The fact that the clearest images all use a flash which is close to the lens is not surprising!
I am not a photographic expert. You would have to ask one of those to find out what all of the artefacts are, and how to avoid them on your pictures. I just happen to know one of the causes of bright spots on photos!
That is irrelevant. The artefact does not mean there is nothing there. It means that what is there is not accurately represented on the photograph. It is most obvious on the "rain" and other precipitation pictures, where the flash off raindrops or snowflakes which are out of focus and potentially very intense cause large spots.
You have to learn about Occam's razor. You have not investigated your technique (photography), looked for different explanations and then put forward the simplest explanation. You have just jumped to an assumption that begs more questions than it answers.
I think that where you are wrong, it simplifies things,the big bang expands with string theory at its centre then suddenly stops (gravity to form planets) then srinks to a quantum aspect, yet the universe is still expanding. its like saying its pouring with rain outside but its dry, you cannot have both, once string theory is accepted as not only quantum it will become much more simple. the bringing together of dark matter /energy,string theory and the orbs process.
my currebt feeling is that,at the centre of each planet is a brane
(string Theory) that provides the source of energy that recharges the magnetic feild (not the gravitron), all you have to do is revise string theory and gravity and it fits together
What? Where does string theory and quantum aspect come into it? You can't bamboozle me with pseudo-scientific random mention of the word Quantum - a large part of my degree was in physics. You have to explain how quantum effects are displayed on a macroscopic scale.
String theory is not a brain. It is a theory of how the world works. Magnetic fields don't need recharging. the rest of my degree was in geology, and the source of the Earth's magetic field is well understood, no revision of string theory or gravity required.
No we don't. Where does string theory come into it, how does it express at macroscopic scale? How does gravity, the weakest of all forces, have any influence?
You are taking images of photographic effects, not real things, and assuming they are real. You are not looking at the most obvious explanation. Then you prattle on about fundamental physics that you quite obviously don't understand, as if just mentioning the name of a theory was an explanation.
imagine spinning a frozen ballon of water then let it defrost and then spin it, the little ice age, maunder mimium,dalton mimium, got it yet. this is not the total picture you the have to ask where dose these particles come from, through the membrane?
But until science accepts that they are real, science will be adrift with gravity, string theory and Einstein's theory all fighting. I do not expect anyone to understand the membrane and the flows of massless particle through it, but watch the part where the mist covers the trees is pulled into a small cluster, that how it works in an out of the membrane.
Ever notice how crazy people always try to link fractured thoughts together as if they make sense (not to mention the horrible spelling/grammatical structure)?
1 my butt
2 dinosars
3 the Hevan's Gate cult
any patttern yet
imagine i froze my turds and then bit into thme and broke my teeth, unicorns x 2, dragons and diaphramatical sturctues, fractline time!, you undesrstan. THE EATRH IS FLAT!!! see i prooved it but scinetists don'e underestnad
seen the other videos or just a sports comentator,3,250 hits on first video 60 on last, strange i do not know why people comment seeing a small part of the work. if an orb reflects its image in mirrors, distance from the lense can be established through triangulation, once established calculation can be made of its size, we have taken images reflecting over four meters away from the lense.case over, they exist, even if my spelling is poor
What you apparently REFUSE to acknowledge is the fact that the photographers here are NOT SAYING THESE OBJECTS DON'T EXIST. They are trying to explain to you that INDEED YOU ARE TAKING PICTURES OF REAL OBJECTS IN SPACE AND TIME. You have simply mis-identified them. Jesus Christ. In one of the pictures which you admit was taken during rain, you can actually SEE a raindrop ON THE LENSE with reflections of scenery in it and everything.
Explain the web process which i have sequenced photographs of? Explain how a sphere changes into a bar? (Last images), Why these processes match the video? Why the images look like cell division? Why these images look like the specialized drawings from string theory?
If this is the creation energy you would expect similarities everywhere.
You also seem, figuratively, to be sticking your fingers in your ears and singing "la, la, la ...". I point out that you are completely wrong about gravity and string theory, and you blithely post as if your bizarre ideas were thus confirmed. You really need to understand a lot more about science before making hte claims you are.
Well, I can't imagine what I said that was worse than anything else posted here, but paulcmuir deleted my earlier posts. Nothing abusive, just a call for real evidence, but I guess he's avoiding me, the way baloney avoids the grinder.
if i deleted anything iam sorry,i have no fear as the reserch is extensive,have you see the webs section or still commentating on this part, i notice your posts are confined to this first video, i will delete post if they are repettive and only based on seeing the first video in a series of five,makeing judjuments based on a small portion all the evidence is there. have a look do orbs attach to the back of hands through the web attachments? has it been recorded in bronze age rock art.
what a bunch of complete bullshit... take the same photos from a REGULAR SLR camera and dont use a flash, use faster film instead. Watch as the orbs mysteriously disappear! What silliness!
people still commenting on a small fragment foolish, film critiques who do not see all the film , sports writers leaving after the first quarter then becomming an expert witness to the game, there are five videos that provide evidence, not like darwins theory of evolution, exactly still a theory taught as fact
you do not understand have you ever written any thing it evolves from thought, which is what,the return of the king! these ways are recorded in prehistoric rock art in basel in the 16th centuray why..... because it there how do the waves get to your computer the wave particle exists every where
Now we are getting somewhere, when the data is not attacked due to its strength.
Nearly 2,243 hits on part one, 11 on the final video "Part Four The Omega" Less than half a percent have watched it through, it could be less than that.
This is so boring and stupid. Can't you kids think of something else to do with your cameras?
I would also suggest that you stop drinking and smoking weed before using your cameras. BTW-being scientific does not include using the word "around" when stating quantity.
neither is the fudge factor surrounding gravity, you cannot have gravity in the current form and an expanding universe, and yet we still show our kids the evolution of the horse, which of couse is out of geoglical sequence, sceintists the holders of the truth or ego
why comment, see the series, mirrors reflections and shooting with two cameras should answer the denynial factor look at the evidence then comment all you veiwers cant bear to look otherwise the hits would be the same
Granted that Stephen Hawkings and Mitchu Kaku are fairly clever chaps, they must be shitting themselves. To think that these great intellectuals have gotten String Theory so wrong, poor deluded fools. I bet you'll win a Nobel Prize with your cutting edge research. All it took was a wanker and a digital camera(with a flash,mustn't forget the flash)to blow apart physics as we Know it.
gravity is at odds and conflicts with string theory,once we understand the how gravity works they will realise that string theory is not soley quantum. where is the proof? look at the tether incident in space, see the orbs with holes in them. simply not only quantum!!!!!
Great Proof of Quantum Theory.I have a theory (provable)that the Orbs are in fact Leprechauns. Now, I know that you are all thinking "Leprechauns are extinct! Annihilated in the Fairy wars by the Banshees" but you would be wrong! They are still amongst us.I'm attuned to their presence to a high degree Some of them have sought sanctuary in my body. I have proof. They deliver their dead to me via my nose. I have many of their decaying green corpses as proof.
as you say quantum theory is not proved but you belive it with no evidence. (watch brians greens elegant universe) i provide proof which you deny. there is a cullumative case augument,evidence from various sources ,which are not controlled by one generation or researcher.
The first video has a series of 50 photographs of energy outputting from stones, these were taken on 10 million pixel cannon camera. It took over 5 minutes to film. Each of the photos were between 4-6 seconds apart. At first we notice a reflection in the preview which was not reflected from the other stones..
We then continued until it stopped. During this process we put our hands into the energy they glowed too, I asked john to put his hand on the stone this process was earthed we repeated this twice, the same effect occurred. Most digital cameras have two flashes the lighter sets the focal distance the second provides main flash for image
These two flashes although fast allowed to witness the speed of these particles with our eyes. This we applied to the reviewing process slowing down video tape that is why it has been missed. We recorded 400 videos of the energy moving in less than six months. Included in section two is a stone firing as the digital stills, these bars resemble the open and closed bars recorded in the I Ching, and other cultures across the globe.
@paulcmore have you seen my video? can you tell me what kind of orbs are shown there.
Rico8406 3 months ago
@Rico8406 i have been to your site cannot find it
paulcmuir 2 months ago
Et bien avec nos APNs avec 10 où 13MP même plus ,il y en à des orbes et des brumes et tout ce que nos yeux d'humains ne voient pas.Vou seriez étonnés..J'ai plein et mes amis de recherches sur les orbes aussi...et zoomé ,c'est fabuleux ce que l'on peut voir.
Vive la technologie qui nous révèle autres chose NON visible à l'oeil nu.
Humain soit modeste dans tes certitudes de 3D.
nelriko 7 months ago
that whatever was triggering them was invisible (quit smoking at 3am) & there was a lot of what ever. So for some reason I looked up orbs on the internet & at that time there was very little information about them, that's how I found youtube with maybe 2 videos with no explanations. Since then I'm flabbergasted at the explosion of orb mania & Thank you for the most wonderful videos explaining them. They worked very hard on getting my attention and hundreds, thousands visit me every night?!
cleeg2009 1 year ago
I grew up and live in a very small town way out in the boonies. Around 3am I would get up and go smoke a cigarette on the back yard porch until I noticed the motion detector lights going crazy. At first I thought it was a cat but realized that was impossible. The lights are timed and as soon as the timer shut them off, they would immediately turn back on. I checked them for malfunctions and that's when I really got spooked as I knew
cleeg2009 1 year ago
Look at my channel to see the 2 clips I just uploaded. I captured LOTS of these objects in MOTION in my house during the day.
They come from a place of spiritual love, watch over us and are beautiful.
CosmicMessages 2 years ago
why is nothing visible in the background, that background is needed for scale. it is Interesting but without that scale it could be anything. try and get some background in other videos
Paul
paulcmuir 2 years ago
Thanks for watching my videos.
Sure, no problem, I will shoot the exact spot where they appeared and upload it in a few days.
It was taken inside my house last week against a wall that is wallpapered.
I have seen this phenomenon for the last few years and will post other clips soon.
CosmicMessages 2 years ago
Sorry that I haven't had time to film and upload that area yet, but wanted to give you a reference point.
In the first video called "Other Dimensional Objects in Motion" on the bottom right corner you can see a dark angular object.
It is a picture frame hanging on the wall. The overall frame dimensions is about 22 x 22 inches and the thickness of the dark part is around 3 inches.
continued.......
CosmicMessages 2 years ago
continued....
Sometimes you can see the multicolored wallpaper in the background. I took this footage at about 4 pm inside my home. I was across the room sitting at a desk pointing upwards towards the wall.
At about 50 seconds you can see a filing cabinet for a moment on the bottom right side just below the picture frame.
I hope this helps as I'm just told where to point the camera and that could be anywhere.
Sincerely, Linda
CosmicMessages 2 years ago
could you explain why we have the same orb recorded on two different cameras, also on video and digital camera,are you suggesting all the equipment have marks in the same proportionate place
paulcmuir 2 years ago
I was at a party a while ago and just saw the photos that where taken that night. There are Orbs in a lot of the pics. The cant be light shots/reflections from the camera.
I've heard about these things before but seeing them right beside my head in a picture really makes you think...
I watched a couple of vids today and in one the Orb actually enters a guys head. Theres a few videos on youtube where they are seen around crop circles too.
Strange....
22mpl 2 years ago
Increased magnetic fields slow these things down, particles and charge attach to the orb thus illuminating them. So in genuine crop circles the localised magnetic field has increased, thus illuminating what is all around us the energy of creation
To me its consciousness and the programme of the creator.
paulcmuir 2 years ago
those are just photos taken with a dirty lens, because I get that all the time when I have smudges or finger prints on my lens.
24okay 2 years ago
thanks for the kind sharing
dracentsparkle 2 years ago
Paul, your work is wonderful, your photos stunning. I have had an interest in orbs for a little while now, and this is my first viewing of this video. Is the research undertaken in France, by any chance? The occurrence of this phenomenon there is very high, very gratifying. It also happens to be a part of the Earth where early civilisations left a rich record of life in cave paintings etc.Love it, will now watch more of your work. Categorisation is interesting: ignore the brain-dead,soul-dead?
inmemoryofRo 3 years ago
Most images are taken in my beloved Wales, but this statement is funny as there is nothing that separates us from the oneness. nation, religion, ego all are an illusion in comparison to the source we are created from
for everything is one
paul
paulcmuir 3 years ago
Despite the notion the the creator of these vids may actually beleive in this, I found the series quite relaxing and decent for entertainment purposes.
peacemakerblue1 3 years ago
pure fraud... bullshit...
Hadad8 4 years ago
beyond your comprehension
paulcmuir 4 years ago
thanks, i see these things naturally
pigoprha 4 years ago
have a look at my video "working with the Energy of Creation"
paulcmuir 4 years ago
wow, a bunch of crappy photgraphs. We'd better completly scrap modern physics, or get this guy into a photography class.
Lemminkainnen 4 years ago
Have you seen a paper written by Mary Boyle, Its all done with smoke and mirrors,The circular reinforcment of error.
paulcmuir 4 years ago
Yes, focus the camera on something and/or clean your lens. Although from your description of the camera I believe you have a run of the mill autofocus, which you'd have to actually, yknow, fix on a specific object, esp. with a tripod if not using a flash, or if using a delayed one, to get sharp images.
Are you this stupid, or are you trying to con people?
chrisrandolph 4 years ago
have you see the part shooting with video camera and digital camera, shooting with two cameras from two different postiions,so both cameras have marks in the same position nice idear.
paulcmuir 4 years ago
Seen them. 100% unconvincing paranoia.
ThyGoddess 4 years ago
I think you need to learn how to focus your camera. There! I've solved the mysteries of the universe!
Idiots.
Replicant9900 4 years ago
what about the video?
paulcmuir 4 years ago
Just dust and out-of-focus raindrops or whatever.
almo2001 4 years ago
exactly or whatever, like the dark matter or massless particles we know exsist.
paulcmuir 4 years ago
Dark matter is a theory based upon many observed phenomena, which are corroborated by multiple scientists and which are published in peer-reviewed journals. These observations are carefully scrutinized to look for observational errors. When a scientist publishes something, and another has concerns about its veracity, they do a similar experiment in an attempt to verify the effect. I can replicate your results by taking pictures with a dusty lens.
almo2001 4 years ago
send me the images similar to the sequenced shots at the end i would be intrested in these web photos you have do you have many attached to trees?
paulcmuir 4 years ago
Holy crap! You are an absolute retard if you believe these things are anything supernatural. My wife is a photographer and immediately said "those 'orbs' are nothing more than dust, dirt, and digital artifacts."
Remember Occam's Razor: "The simplest explanation is usually correct."
eagleeye1975 4 years ago
the electromagnetic universe
paulcmuir 4 years ago
Yes, we already know you're an idiot and make no sense... You need not keep replying to prove it further.
eagleeye1975 4 years ago
i will be producing another video to explain that last statement but our concepts of gravity is questionable and why things do not work in theories
i understand you think i am an idiot but have you seen all the videos? its intresting people going to judjment before seening the evidence what i have shown is only a small amount of what i have.
paulcmuir 4 years ago
I don't need to see more. The verdict is already in. You're an idiot, and my life is too valuable to spend more of it listening to complete drivel.
eagleeye1975 4 years ago
if your not prepaird to see the evidence why should you comment?
paulcmuir 4 years ago
Because the video we're commenting on here is all the evidence I need! Also... Learn to spell, idiot.
eagleeye1975 4 years ago
nice one!
paulcmuir 4 years ago
Oh geeze. I agree with Eagleeye. You're a retard. Heck, at 3 minutes in you smack around saying these are ORBS? When the sky is cloudy and there's snow on the floor?
Your there orbs are SNOWFLAKES. Could even just be blown off roofs by small winds! I'm canadian, I take plenty of pictures outside and we get LOTS of these "orbs". Get a life.
ThyGoddess 4 years ago
And yes, I did mean "Your orbs there".
But sentence messup put aside my point stands.
Dusts. Particles. It's just out of focus stuff, and
ThyGoddess 4 years ago
...and I think you just need to learn more about photography and the way lens works. God I hate this damn computer sometimes.
ThyGoddess 4 years ago
why did you post here,how do explain the rock art, the orbs attached to the hands and my images, how do you explain the bars that enter the left wrist and left hip that corrisponds to otsi tatoos,how do you explain dust that reflects its self over 4 meters away in ponds and mirrors how do you explain the fact that two images from different locations can capture the same orbs, stage one thats all i can say. fear is an amazing thing.
paulcmuir 4 years ago
Anyone who believes in this nonsense, I have some ocean front property for sale in Iowa.
dean1541 4 years ago
Have you seen all the series?
paulcmuir 4 years ago
You deleted my last comments so I shall repeat myself. You are a deluded, gullible halfwit. It's fucking dust. I bet you'll win a Nobel prize
tenyar 4 years ago
Hi,
If i deleted your comment it was in error, but use language like that and i will delete it deliberately. It comes to something when people resort to anger to get over a point i would call it Neanderthal behaviour but that's an insult to them. Have a look at working with energy video of mine should convince you its not dust.
paulcmuir 4 years ago
Just one word: Caustic.
Look it up, paulcmuir. Wikipedia has articles about Caustic, as in optics and mathematics. Like lense flares, they appear so easily in optical systems. They can really mess up the recording process, especially when out of focus and illuminated by a flash as in your case. There even are CGI SFX to simulate them to make computer animations look more real.
leporidus 4 years ago
have you seen all the series?
paulcmuir 4 years ago
All six videos, yes. Have you taken said optical effects into account? If yes, what did you do to discern those from "real" orbs? If no, why not?
leporidus 4 years ago
how do you account for orbs that attach to trees through webs? and also the back of my hand, the 50 sequenced photographs that produce flash back but when our hands are placed on them the aurous and the bars firing, seen so many times on video stop, this was repeated twice and the same thing happened this was also recorded on video shown in part two.
You can produce orbs with a spray gun but they are different.
paulcmuir 4 years ago
what about the rock art, do not suggest they had digital cameras too, 16th cameras in basel? what optical effect are you talking about. do you mean what is seen by the eye or the lense of the camera? which is more accurate light that travelled millions of light years to hubble or a digital image fifteen feet away which has been recorded throughout History.Choose hubble its easier.
paulcmuir 4 years ago
What about the rock art? Detraction from those orbs?
Orbs that attach to trees through webs? Impossibe to tell from a snapshot. Reminds me of the Moon Hoaxers insisting that shadows were wrong, no stars were captured and those crosshairs were partly covered in those photographs.
Speaking about detraction, I know I know...
leporidus 4 years ago
have you seen me using the energy on video? do you want me to read your feild, this is only possible if you are not suffering pain from childhood
paulcmuir 4 years ago
you have an anticlockwise sprial from your right shoulder, your nose area pulses horizontally,your family dna is surseptable to arthtitus, how are your knees and ankles
paulcmuir 4 years ago
That's it. Goodbye.
leporidus 4 years ago
goodbye, look after the left side of yor stomach
paulcmuir 4 years ago
This is complete drivel. I challenge you to provide evidence of your claimed ability to see/read people's auras.
BigTallLankyDude 4 years ago
ask leporidus
paulcmuir 4 years ago
He certainly didn't seem impressed by your "diagnosis".
The thing that seperates scientific method from mere faith is the reliance it has on evidence and critical reasoning.
You have provided no evidence for your ability to read auras. You refuse to listen to alternative explanations to your orbs. Therefore, it seems you don't have either trait necessary to science.
BigTallLankyDude 4 years ago
I regret wasting my time on your videos. Clearly, you have no desire to actually learn - you are hell-bent on your theory and will listen to nothing else.
BigTallLankyDude 4 years ago
after many years of research slowley piecing the evidence together,once partially understood, we then searched for other evidence to prove the theory,this evidence spans time and is from an independent source.
it is what it is, to you my freind its dust infront of the lense.they are just pictures and video,wood cuts from 16th centuray and tons of rock art. thats what it will remain, to you, i respect your right to opionion. but thats all it is.
paulcmuir 4 years ago
it will be seen again as in nurenberg,basel, the 1720's(Dalton Mimiumum) and ancient pre history
paulcmuir 4 years ago
Ok, just to make this very clear: "Orbs" are the result of you camera's flash bouncing off water drops, snowflakes and other dust-like particles. The rest of your images are the result of very poor photographic technique and equipment. Period. Introductory photo classes are filled with examples of these, and prove only that you are a terrible photographer. Read some basic photography books and this will all be very clear to you.
ddelorm 4 years ago
two cameras video reflections over water ponds, mirrors, just look at the evidence 5 videos commenting on one
paulcmuir 4 years ago
You dont even need the flash. A passing car, the moon, lights from a near by house or just about anything will give you "orbs". It's funny to those of us who are photographers to see people trying to get the effects that we speand a great deal of time and money on eliminating.
moneywater23 4 years ago
what is light a wave or a particle?
paulcmuir 4 years ago
The correct answer is that it's neither and both, of course. It makes it easier for us to model in certain circumstances thinking of it as a wave, and in other circumstances as a particle.
It's a little bit like asking if water is a liquid or a solid.
mnemkitty 4 years ago
of course its both and if light behaves like theses waves that carry orbs, alot can be gained by videoing this event, these waves travel over feilds of energy(possibly magnetic) they slow down and these spheres break free. .
paulcmuir 4 years ago
so if light behaves in the same way it can only have a constants speed in wave format as a form of magntisum causes its slowing and sepperation, as observed in basel which our research backs up.I suggest pass light through high magnetic feilds.....it should display particle properties, turn it off it should conform back to a wave
paulcmuir 4 years ago
Clean you god damn lenses LOL
pitdog75 4 years ago
have you seen the video section or are just another sports commentator
paulcmuir 4 years ago
Seriously, man, the lenses! Clean them!
The hail pictures are good; nothing supernatural in them, but they look nice.
valhar2000 4 years ago
seen the others, iam not trying to be rude but i find it stange to only see part of the research and suddnely to become an expert
paulcmuir 4 years ago
its raindrops on the lenses and such, LOL
anyway, you do not DETECT energy by shooting pictures, make some proper measurements of those "energy - emitting" stones and be done with it.
train-spotting is more productive....
pitdog75 4 years ago
seen the bit with two cameras and mirrors
paulcmuir 4 years ago
What is your point here?
BigTallLankyDude 4 years ago
iam not intrested in money, but i do not understand, what do you mean? i gave up work for two years, recently my work ended up with two oxford sceintists who i belive between then have published sixty papers on mangntisium they wanted to work with me in their labs, but i am not intrested, i am intrested in hi deffinition video equipment the video camera was a 300 dollar one and does not capture fast moving objects well you will see that in video two.
paulcmuir 4 years ago
There is no such thing as "mangntisium".
Not even in Oxford.
MONDARIZDK 4 years ago
spelling the only flaw, nice one see the others videos, six in all, no one has the courage
paulcmuir 4 years ago
it takes at least a generation for sceintific acceptance, most never see it and generally other take the credit, there is too much investment in string theory and quantum mechanics to accept it. it will be seen again like in 16th centuray in basel then it may be accepted
paulcmuir 4 years ago
None of what you say about science is true. Acceptance of a scientific idea depends on the evidence for it, not any given number of generations following its discovery. Relativity, for example, did not take a generation to be accepted. In any event, there is nothing about your pics or the assertions that you're making about them that constitutes "science".
sva1994 4 years ago
the sceince of ego,the evidence is there but i am not expecting a person to understand by watching the first video
paulcmuir 4 years ago
If by "there", you mean in the videos, you are wrong, since I've seen them. Evidence is not a label that you arbitrarily slap onto any ol' piece of information. TRUE evidence is that which stands up to the scientific method. The poorly written and inscrutable comment that begins your post above is irrelevant.
sva1994 4 years ago
Actually what he paraphrased there was an Arthur C. Clark quote: "New ideas pass through three periods: It can't be done; It probably can be done, but it's not worth doing; I knew it was a good idea all along", which is, most unfortunately, quite accurate in the WHOLE of human society; yes, even the scientific community.
Aunukia 4 years ago
three stagesof scientific acceptance
1 deynial
2 there may be somthing in this
3 why didnt i think of that
thats how its been and will allways be
paulcmuir 4 years ago
And you are not a scientist, so will apparently remain forever in stage 1.
randomxnp 4 years ago
the whole peer review process lends itself to poor sceince and fudge factor,coupled with that and you have directed sceince by big business, not a good cocktail for the truth. tobacco is not addictive, no global warming,minkey whales need culling,pesticides in the food chain do not cause cancer, all underwritten by sceince, no thank you, just observing something that there.
paulcmuir 4 years ago
The peer review process eliminates those things. Any scientific theory with poor reasoning or a flawed experimental approach can be examined and denounced, thus removing poor research techniques and dodgy theories.
BigTallLankyDude 4 years ago
Yes, science is often funded by big business, but this is not a bad thing... in fact, it's irrelevant. If you wish to criticise a theory you do not agree with, you are more than welcome to debate its reasoning/research etc, but to say it is flawed simply becuase a big company paid for it is an ad hominem attack - it is a logical fallacy.
BigTallLankyDude 4 years ago
there are many hard working reserchers, sceintists but the peer review is some what like you reveiw mine and i will reveiw yours,
a freind of mine told me about his first paper and how he was told not to publish as it contradicted the reveiwers paper. Allthough he still publishes and produces good work, he left the sceince world.
paulcmuir 4 years ago
It's entirely possible that you friend's paper was refused publication for other reasons. For example, it may have been completely wrong.
BigTallLankyDude 4 years ago
it was published about fourty years ago
paulcmuir 4 years ago
That doesn't change the fact that your friend's paper may have been completely wrong.
BigTallLankyDude 4 years ago
exactly one of them was wrong,it was not the Dr's as i call him.
paulcmuir 4 years ago
However much you mistrust the scientific process, you still have no reason to claim anything but artefacts of the photographic techniques. You still have no idea what string theory, quantum mechanics or, apparently, the theory of gravity are. Therefore please just accept that you have wasted a lot of time with your film.
randomxnp 4 years ago
You are wrong shooting with two cameras, provided evidence, video that corripsonds with digital stills,shape and form that is far from circular which includes the web process,delivery of massless particle too plant, trees, but of course you still have not seen the five other videos let alone the thousands of images that breakdown and show process, not to mention the 400 + video that corrispond to the digital stills,
paulcmuir 4 years ago
the division process where these things divide,clone themselves and the comparision to unique images of string theory against my photos of the process.
After this we tested the theory, if it fires out of stones the builders must have seen it like my dog caught by accident watching it . it was then we found the rock art, study the shape this dose not happen by chance. we formulated idears why it was lost, what we had seen in the video gave us a clue.
paulcmuir 4 years ago
the weakening of magnetic feild cause the loss of the visual understanding. its very simple yet very challenging.Look at reports of a few years ago,of the the space shuttle by cnn where the astronaughts started things described as photons when they approached the vann allen belts, should give you a good idear, increased magnetic feild allows us to see it and also produces more of it by attraction.
paulcmuir 4 years ago
I am sorry. I can't answer any of what you say as none of it makes any sense. You clearly have no idea of what magnetic or gravity fields are, have no idea what string theory is or how photography interacts with light. In fact you hve no idea what you are talking about, and you have managed to fool other people by mentioning string theory, magnetic fields and gravity.
randomxnp 4 years ago
Unfortunately I am actually educated. I know that what you say is garbage ("the weakening of magnetic feild [sic] cause the loss of the visual understanding" - what weakening of what field? how could this affect vision? What is visual understanding. See you have no idea what the words you use mean!). You are talking rot and wasting your time!
randomxnp 4 years ago
recently in space the astrounaughts saw a similar process whilst aproaching the vann allen belts(cnn reported this), the process of orbs and waves is highlighted by the magnetic feild like watching the auras at the north, these particles in high magnetic feild become visible, at the moment the field is weak this is partly due to fricton caused by global warming and rising sea levels which causing the earth to turn slower and the earths feild to weaken.
paulcmuir 4 years ago
this is not the total picture it far more complicated. i will produce a video of the process but untill people take it seriously and at least look at the evidence it seems as though we have to wait untill its visable again.
paulcmuir 4 years ago
And that somehow refutes LankyDude's comments *how*, exactly?
sva1994 4 years ago
"there are many hard working reserchers, sceintists but the peer review is some what like you reveiw mine and i will reveiw yours.."
No, that's not what the Peer Review Process is. Trying researching it.
sva1994 4 years ago
there are lots of good papers with good sceince waiting but the resercher/sceintist sit on it or burys it for fear of riddicule but it still remains a good piece of sceince, now you are going to tell me that dose not happen.
paulcmuir 4 years ago
I'm going to tell you that if you want to assert that, you're going to need evidence for it, and not a mere assertion to that effect on YouTube.
sva1994 4 years ago
"Ancient man" knew diddly. That is why the average lifespan was less than 40 years.
jeremebp 4 years ago 2
An interesting comment, It was quoted in a recent BBC programme about Cladh Hallan was "they only had 50 bodies from the bronze age". If they were talking about the whole of the Bronze Age it would mean they have 50 bodies over a 1,700 period.
So the evidence is scarce, it was estimated by the county archaeologist that in the late bronze age there were as many as 120,000 living there.
paulcmuir 4 years ago
Some of these bodies may not be British as Recent research provides evidence that the bodies buried near stone circles were from Europe and not Britain. If 120,000 were dyeing every 40 years we should have around burials 5,100,000 I suppose most were cremated. To estimate their life span on such small amount of evidence is not good. and misleading.
paulcmuir 4 years ago
What they did with their dead varied, and affected whether a body survived so long. Some were buried straight to earth, they decomposed quickly, some were burned, some were left out for animals to take care of. What we know allows us to infer a great deal.
jeremebp 4 years ago
i have heard it said these people were barbarians eeking out a subsistance living as a hunter gatherer, yet we have Silbury hill,we can infer what ever we like. these people had a different understanding otherwise we would understand these ancient ways, we cannot apply our logic to their ways, they understood something we do not,we understand things they would not also.
paulcmuir 4 years ago
The author will not be changing his viewpoint anytime soon. People have a need to believe in things ethereal, and blurred images are as good a thing to latch onto as any. What are obvious visual distortions with easy explanations to most are other people's ghost, goblins and orbs.
zorroe11 4 years ago
Selling horsepoop as tasty candy is an art. Looks like this dude has it down cold...
zorroe11 4 years ago 2
i take it that you have seen the other videos this is one of five
paulcmuir 4 years ago
Someone tell this person the definition of "artefact" as it applies to imaging, and its common etymological roots with artificial.
randomxnp 4 years ago
could you explain this point more simply
paulcmuir 4 years ago
Of course. I have watched the video, and the "orbs" look very much like artefacts. These are parts of the image that are a result of how the light reflects off something, often something very small like dust or raindrops, and how this is interpreted by the camera, especially with regard to very bright spots and out-of-focus spots looking much larger than they actually are.
randomxnp 4 years ago
As an artefact (i.e. artificial) it does not represent a real image, but is caused by interpretation. The fact that the clearest images all use a flash which is close to the lens is not surprising!
randomxnp 4 years ago
look at the second video with the use of two cameras and mirrors
paulcmuir 4 years ago
I am not a photographic expert. You would have to ask one of those to find out what all of the artefacts are, and how to avoid them on your pictures. I just happen to know one of the causes of bright spots on photos!
randomxnp 4 years ago
That is irrelevant. The artefact does not mean there is nothing there. It means that what is there is not accurately represented on the photograph. It is most obvious on the "rain" and other precipitation pictures, where the flash off raindrops or snowflakes which are out of focus and potentially very intense cause large spots.
randomxnp 4 years ago
You have to learn about Occam's razor. You have not investigated your technique (photography), looked for different explanations and then put forward the simplest explanation. You have just jumped to an assumption that begs more questions than it answers.
randomxnp 4 years ago
I think that where you are wrong, it simplifies things,the big bang expands with string theory at its centre then suddenly stops (gravity to form planets) then srinks to a quantum aspect, yet the universe is still expanding. its like saying its pouring with rain outside but its dry, you cannot have both, once string theory is accepted as not only quantum it will become much more simple. the bringing together of dark matter /energy,string theory and the orbs process.
paulcmuir 4 years ago
my currebt feeling is that,at the centre of each planet is a brane
(string Theory) that provides the source of energy that recharges the magnetic feild (not the gravitron), all you have to do is revise string theory and gravity and it fits together
paulcmuir 4 years ago
What? Where does string theory and quantum aspect come into it? You can't bamboozle me with pseudo-scientific random mention of the word Quantum - a large part of my degree was in physics. You have to explain how quantum effects are displayed on a macroscopic scale.
randomxnp 4 years ago
String theory is not a brain. It is a theory of how the world works. Magnetic fields don't need recharging. the rest of my degree was in geology, and the source of the Earth's magetic field is well understood, no revision of string theory or gravity required.
randomxnp 4 years ago
so we have it gravity, string theory an Ensteins work in harmnoy.... nice one !!!!
i suggest you look at all the videos first. All of them you may get it, but i doubt it.
paulcmuir 4 years ago
No we don't. Where does string theory come into it, how does it express at macroscopic scale? How does gravity, the weakest of all forces, have any influence?
You are taking images of photographic effects, not real things, and assuming they are real. You are not looking at the most obvious explanation. Then you prattle on about fundamental physics that you quite obviously don't understand, as if just mentioning the name of a theory was an explanation.
randomxnp 4 years ago
Cullumative case augument.
1 seen in bronze age
2 seen in basel and nurenberg 16th century
3 seen in 1720
any pattern yet,
imagine spinning a frozen ballon of water then let it defrost and then spin it, the little ice age, maunder mimium,dalton mimium, got it yet. this is not the total picture you the have to ask where dose these particles come from, through the membrane?
paulcmuir 4 years ago
But until science accepts that they are real, science will be adrift with gravity, string theory and Einstein's theory all fighting. I do not expect anyone to understand the membrane and the flows of massless particle through it, but watch the part where the mist covers the trees is pulled into a small cluster, that how it works in an out of the membrane.
paulcmuir 4 years ago
Ever notice how crazy people always try to link fractured thoughts together as if they make sense (not to mention the horrible spelling/grammatical structure)?
1 my butt
2 dinosars
3 the Hevan's Gate cult
any patttern yet
imagine i froze my turds and then bit into thme and broke my teeth, unicorns x 2, dragons and diaphramatical sturctues, fractline time!, you undesrstan. THE EATRH IS FLAT!!! see i prooved it but scinetists don'e underestnad
Aunukia 4 years ago
seen the other videos or just a sports comentator,3,250 hits on first video 60 on last, strange i do not know why people comment seeing a small part of the work. if an orb reflects its image in mirrors, distance from the lense can be established through triangulation, once established calculation can be made of its size, we have taken images reflecting over four meters away from the lense.case over, they exist, even if my spelling is poor
paulcmuir 4 years ago
What you apparently REFUSE to acknowledge is the fact that the photographers here are NOT SAYING THESE OBJECTS DON'T EXIST. They are trying to explain to you that INDEED YOU ARE TAKING PICTURES OF REAL OBJECTS IN SPACE AND TIME. You have simply mis-identified them. Jesus Christ. In one of the pictures which you admit was taken during rain, you can actually SEE a raindrop ON THE LENSE with reflections of scenery in it and everything.
Aunukia 4 years ago
Explain the web process which i have sequenced photographs of? Explain how a sphere changes into a bar? (Last images), Why these processes match the video? Why the images look like cell division? Why these images look like the specialized drawings from string theory?
If this is the creation energy you would expect similarities everywhere.
paulcmuir 4 years ago
You also seem, figuratively, to be sticking your fingers in your ears and singing "la, la, la ...". I point out that you are completely wrong about gravity and string theory, and you blithely post as if your bizarre ideas were thus confirmed. You really need to understand a lot more about science before making hte claims you are.
randomxnp 4 years ago
Well, I can't imagine what I said that was worse than anything else posted here, but paulcmuir deleted my earlier posts. Nothing abusive, just a call for real evidence, but I guess he's avoiding me, the way baloney avoids the grinder.
Codswallop58 4 years ago
if i deleted anything iam sorry,i have no fear as the reserch is extensive,have you see the webs section or still commentating on this part, i notice your posts are confined to this first video, i will delete post if they are repettive and only based on seeing the first video in a series of five,makeing judjuments based on a small portion all the evidence is there. have a look do orbs attach to the back of hands through the web attachments? has it been recorded in bronze age rock art.
paulcmuir 4 years ago
what a bunch of complete bullshit... take the same photos from a REGULAR SLR camera and dont use a flash, use faster film instead. Watch as the orbs mysteriously disappear! What silliness!
lennyhipp 4 years ago
have you see the triangulation using mirrors, section 2 and 3, also shooting with two cameras, just another sports commentator
paulcmuir 4 years ago
Argh... pseudoscientific woo-woo at its best. I am feeling slightly amused, as well as sickened.
The LotR-soundtrack truly did not deserve this.
cynsanity 4 years ago 2
people still commenting on a small fragment foolish, film critiques who do not see all the film , sports writers leaving after the first quarter then becomming an expert witness to the game, there are five videos that provide evidence, not like darwins theory of evolution, exactly still a theory taught as fact
paulcmuir 4 years ago
Nicely done. Good choice of music. It's rubbish, of course.
wombat1950 4 years ago 2
Man, some people are just too dumb to be allowed to use cameras. Return them to the shop and go back to drawing in the dirt.
Macduff8 4 years ago
Why?! Why did you defile the LotR soundtrack with this? This is just stupid.
Stupidlimitednames 4 years ago
you do not understand have you ever written any thing it evolves from thought, which is what,the return of the king! these ways are recorded in prehistoric rock art in basel in the 16th centuray why..... because it there how do the waves get to your computer the wave particle exists every where
paulcmuir 4 years ago
. . .what? There are these things called periods (or full stops). Have you, by any chance, heard of them? You may want to consider using a few.
Stupidlimitednames 4 years ago
Now we are getting somewhere, when the data is not attacked due to its strength.
Nearly 2,243 hits on part one, 11 on the final video "Part Four The Omega" Less than half a percent have watched it through, it could be less than that.
paulcmuir 4 years ago
This is so boring and stupid. Can't you kids think of something else to do with your cameras?
I would also suggest that you stop drinking and smoking weed before using your cameras. BTW-being scientific does not include using the word "around" when stating quantity.
Bullettube 4 years ago
neither is the fudge factor surrounding gravity, you cannot have gravity in the current form and an expanding universe, and yet we still show our kids the evolution of the horse, which of couse is out of geoglical sequence, sceintists the holders of the truth or ego
paulcmuir 4 years ago
I pity anyone who buys this tripe.
harryogre 4 years ago
why comment, see the series, mirrors reflections and shooting with two cameras should answer the denynial factor look at the evidence then comment all you veiwers cant bear to look otherwise the hits would be the same
paulcmuir 4 years ago
This is the greatest discovery since the N ray and cold fusion!
wbarnum 4 years ago
Did "The Ancients" have digital cameras too?
akirauma4831 4 years ago
That's in part 2.
wbarnum 4 years ago
You cannot be this delusional...
NotTheAntichrist 4 years ago
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe." Albert Einstein
wbarnum 4 years ago
Let's see, a buch of picutes of light froma camera flash reflectin off of dust and rain within a few inches of the lens. Truly mystical.
hockeyman449 4 years ago
look at the work with mirrors and triagulation in video 2 and 3, proving distance from lense, thanks for looking, good luck.
paulcmuir 4 years ago
Granted that Stephen Hawkings and Mitchu Kaku are fairly clever chaps, they must be shitting themselves. To think that these great intellectuals have gotten String Theory so wrong, poor deluded fools. I bet you'll win a Nobel Prize with your cutting edge research. All it took was a wanker and a digital camera(with a flash,mustn't forget the flash)to blow apart physics as we Know it.
tenyar 4 years ago
gravity is at odds and conflicts with string theory,once we understand the how gravity works they will realise that string theory is not soley quantum. where is the proof? look at the tether incident in space, see the orbs with holes in them. simply not only quantum!!!!!
paulcmuir 4 years ago
Great Proof of Quantum Theory.I have a theory (provable)that the Orbs are in fact Leprechauns. Now, I know that you are all thinking "Leprechauns are extinct! Annihilated in the Fairy wars by the Banshees" but you would be wrong! They are still amongst us.I'm attuned to their presence to a high degree Some of them have sought sanctuary in my body. I have proof. They deliver their dead to me via my nose. I have many of their decaying green corpses as proof.
tenyar 4 years ago
as you say quantum theory is not proved but you belive it with no evidence. (watch brians greens elegant universe) i provide proof which you deny. there is a cullumative case augument,evidence from various sources ,which are not controlled by one generation or researcher.
paulcmuir 4 years ago
The first video has a series of 50 photographs of energy outputting from stones, these were taken on 10 million pixel cannon camera. It took over 5 minutes to film. Each of the photos were between 4-6 seconds apart. At first we notice a reflection in the preview which was not reflected from the other stones..
paulcmuir 4 years ago
We then continued until it stopped. During this process we put our hands into the energy they glowed too, I asked john to put his hand on the stone this process was earthed we repeated this twice, the same effect occurred. Most digital cameras have two flashes the lighter sets the focal distance the second provides main flash for image
paulcmuir 4 years ago
These two flashes although fast allowed to witness the speed of these particles with our eyes. This we applied to the reviewing process slowing down video tape that is why it has been missed. We recorded 400 videos of the energy moving in less than six months. Included in section two is a stone firing as the digital stills, these bars resemble the open and closed bars recorded in the I Ching, and other cultures across the globe.
paulcmuir 4 years ago
there are nearly two thousand posts on this first video and 30 on the final, yet everyone is a an expert.
paulcmuir 4 years ago