the fact of the matter was no I didn't take a temp. and yes it was a cheap digital camera go back 15yrs I didn't think it was cheap then. and I didn't create alog but I will tell you this we would go out there and we could take pictures from the road and not get even one Orb and as soon as I would call spirit to come out this is the pictures we would get. I have no reason to lie. What there was or is to gain I have already done that. I was sharing some of my experiences does rejection bother me use to actually it intrigues me. knowing the truth is more important to me. scientific research in the paranormal. most professionals think its a joke.I look at it as more of a spiritual enlightenment.and I have hundreds of letters from people thanking me for sharing this enlightenment. I suppose that would also be up for debate on the sincerity of the letters.that I don't think I will put out for debate.the house still stands if you are interested in it. Hunted houses are fun to explore but in the end most houses that are hunted the ghosts belong where they are and if they are demonic why would you want to try to remove them if they are imprisoned in a house ?

Which I think all relates back to the fact that even if you've caught the most unbelievably fabulous event ever on a photograph, and it was real as real can be. If that photograph can be duplicated by other means, then its not a reliable means of documenting an event.

I think that really is what we're all basically saying. It's not a reflection of the validity or invalidity of the event itself, but rather the means of recording it.

When you get right down to it, the only person or persons who really have first hand of a paranormal event are those who were there when it happened. Where the real trick comes in, is in documenting that event in such a way that it minimizes the possibility of contamination. This in turn is compounded by the fact that most true paranormal events don't happen on queue. So its seldom a situation where you can say "Lights, Camera, Action!" and record a paranormal event. If only it were that easy at times.

Another key factor (and I think this is where a lot of people steer in the wrong direction) is that you want to do exactly that "DOCUMENT A PARANORMAL EVENT". So often I see photographs taken in hopes of spotting something paranormal which was not there at the time of the recording of the photograph. I personally think that's the wrong approach.

Actually Norman, I think what you're trying to do in some of your other photographs taken of you when you are contacting spirits, is amazing. I think you're basically on the right track with that and I'm totally fascinated by that line of exploration. You have a verifiable paranormal event taking place that you're merely trying to photograph in some way. And that is the perfect way to go about it. Then its just a matter of finding the optimal method for trying to record that event in a way that gets you the clearest definition.

But as for the practice of taking pictures, with a flash, and looking to see what appears. I personally can not get on board with that. Its basically fishing, and there are too many possibilities for false positives to make the real positives valuable.

I'm in the IT security field (among many other things). And I can relate this to that field in many ways. Especially to the aspect of "SPAM" detection and removal from E-Mail. There are many filters out there that attempt to identify spam but the balance of detecting valid E-Mails that just look like spam, to real spam that looks like valid E-Mails is just so difficult it renders that method of detection almost useless. I think the same happens here with Orb pictures.

Our efforts could be spent so much better by going down a path which would yield better positive evidence. And that evidence would in turn be accepted by more individuals.