Howdy Guest!  / Create an account
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Vote(s) - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Critical thinking and the Orb
I said that I was prepared to engage logically. I'm just answering honestly. You guys want to win as bad as I do, but you just won't admit it. If you didn't, you wouldn't be resorting to all these cheap tactics, which are not based logic, to try to discredit me. According to the Rules of Debate, I have already won based on several technicalities. But, unlike a megalomanic, I am willing to give the both of you a "head start" as it were, overlook my rightful claim to victory, and really discuss this.

Really, can't we be on opposite sides of this discussion without being enemies? Aren't we grown up enough to do that?
I'm grown up enough to know that I have provided information which shows FACTS to back up my opinion, which is why I reached the opinion I have. You have done little more than attempt to attack the method which it is being presented.

Until you have some actual information to discuss, I won't be revisiting this thread. Enjoy 'winning'.
“Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.” ~Philip K. Dick

Forget it. I wanted to enjoy discussing. Show me the facts in this material, because all I see are claims which haven't been supported, preamble, conjecture, and historical background.

You two are no different than those whom you accuse of blind belief and non critical thinking. You're skeptics, but your position is no more based on fact than those who err on the side of belief. Thus, your attempts to convince others will be empty and ineffective.

So BRING me the facts you rest upon. If you don't I will assume that deep down, you have no confidence whatsoever in your skeptic position. And that will prove that you're a blind believer in those who claim authority.
In the sense of orbs not being paranormal, I'll have to side with UnR and SG. This isn't because of the links they supplied, however. Take a couple classes on proper methods for photography (not paranormal anything), and they explain to you how to avoid/what orbs in photos are. As a critical thinker, there is a LOT less required to maintain the far-supported claim of orbs being more of a result of poor/uninformed photography, than of them being anomalies of the paranormal. That does not mean that I or anyone are lazy to "search for the truth", that just means that following proper channels of logical thought would tentatively make orbs non-paranormal. I say tentatively, because I'm not sure whether or not ghosts or the paranormal would normally leave orbs in a photograph. That's a completely different can of worms that starts off with the question of do ghosts exist. If that can't be answered, then no one can claim that orbs are even occasionally the result of paranormal activity.

While I agree in orbs not being paranormal, the academic in me cringed for your links. Try and find support from reputable photography schools, academic journals, or articles in scholarly papers/magazines. They are available and free, in many instances. I had to do my own searching, in my school library, but came to the same conclusion as you. The important thing here is that it doesn't matter if the conclusion is right, if the premises supporting them are not strong sources. Those sites looked like any 13 year old could put them together, and make a claim (as scientific as they are). "And I had a control. And I had a dusty room. And a flash." "Did you have anybody there from public or scholarly channels to ensure the integrity or the results?" "I had an adult." Really...
SG, your link was better, if only because of the man saying he had the title "Dr.". But the quality of the site (sketchy), makes it just as plausible that the man's first name was "Dr.". If we want to be nit-picky about Critical Thinking, welcome to the Master's Degree expectation of it.
Perhaps they can't be proven by way of photography. But I still see them. I can make that claim, but obviously I can't prove it. Very likely they are a projection of what I see inside my head, much like a film projector projects images onto a screen. That may not be paranormal, but the internal mechanisms by which this happens are mysterious. When I really think about it, my feeling is that all paranormal phenomena is pretty much exactly that. I suppose these images, elaborate or not, could be dismissed as mere hallucination, and by your argument, a much easier premise to maintain than something far more nebulous. Still, I would love to find out why I see so many strange things, both inside my head, and outside as well. A brain scan might turn up something.
Truthfully, it might not be a brain issue at all. Recently, I had to go to the optometrist, because I felt I was seeing little circular dots (translucent in nature) crossing through my vision. When I went through the examination, we found out that I just had a minor eye virus that causes these things to happen. There wasn't a brain issue, there was just a small virus that would leave in time, and it did.

Occam's Razor is the principle that I appeal to, about the easier conclusion to maintain. At least 99% of the time, I think it to be true. The idea is: The most easily supportable is likely what you will be able to experiment to be true. However, "all orbs are non-paranormal in nature" might not be something you agree with. In that case, to appease you, "a vast majority of orbs are explainable by non-paranormal means" is likely a much more acceptable claim. It leaves room for your paranormal, but it also still leaves room for the possibility that it is explainable by non-paranormal means, but we just haven't figured out how to explain them yet.
Just had my eyes checked by a specialist. Super healthy. The biggest compliment I've been paid in 10 years, lol.
As far as the sources, I was using examples of different experiments that have been done to debunk orbs in pictures as being paranormal. I also included a statement from Fujifilm where they were addressing this issue. Says a lot when a camera company themselves acknowledges the issue of orbs showing up in pictures.

Another reason for orbs to show up in photos is lens flare..this link offers some advice for avoiding that.
“Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.” ~Philip K. Dick

I did mention four manufacturers have explained away orbs but it was a mistake at least 5 have. Kodak, Sony, Panasonic, Cannon, and Fuji.
Here is a link from Fuji and the copy of Cannon. But why post links as she see's like a camera and knows more then the manufacturers
The problem you have been experiencing is due to a phenomenon not associated with the camera.
When a picture is taken and reviewed afterwards, circular spots may be noticed on the picture. The problem does not occur with every picture. Additionally, the spots are randomly positioned throughout the picture. Highest concentration is in areas closest to the flash unit when the picture was made.
The cause of the problem is common to a lot of digital cameras with small CCDs, not just the Canon digital cameras. Such digital cameras have a greater depth of field compared to 35mm cameras, due to their smaller focal distance. This in even higher degree when the camera is set to wide angle.
Because of the above, small dust particles, droplets of water, etc., drifting in the air close to the camera and not within depth of field for normal 35mm cameras, are within depth of field for digital cameras. Under normal circumstances this is not too big a problem, as these are very small.
When flash is used, its light illuminates these dust particles or water droplets, and these therefore show up and are extemely obvious on pictures taken. The problem is worsened, because the flash unit is positioned close to the lens barrel.

Due to the setup and operation of digital cameras using small CCDs, there is nothing that can be done about this phenomenon. You can take some measures though, to prevent this problem from occurring as much as is possible.

Switch off flash in environments where there are likely to be small dust particles or water droplets in the air. To compensate for this lack of flash, you can increase the ISO value on your digital camera if this feature is available on your camera.
Use an external slave flash unit further away from the camera and partially cover the camera's flash. These units are not available from Canon, but there are third party companies producing such units. Make sure a slave flash unit is chosen which can also be set to synchronize with the second flash as used by Powershot cameras. With Powershot cameras, the first flash is used to measure, the second is the actual flash.

This sheet is Copyright Canon. No attempt is made to infringe copyright.
Belief bias occurs when we make illogical conclusions in order to confirm our preexisting beliefs. Belief perseverance refers to our tendency to maintain a belief even after the evidence we used to form the belief is contradicted.
I have never felt anything particularily paranormal with orbs in photos anyway. Thanks for this post.

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  32 Animated Videos Teach You Critical Thinking UglyNRude 0 1,742 07-07-2016, 05:27 AM
Last Post: UglyNRude
  Carl Sagan's Rules for Critical Thinking and Nonsense-Detection UglyNRude 2 3,634 05-09-2015, 04:35 AM
Last Post: angelaura
  I recommend a Critical Thinking (CT) scan UglyNRude 1 2,114 12-04-2014, 10:23 PM
Last Post: Dauvis
  How to use Critical Thinking During Paranormal Investigations. UglyNRude 3 10,604 07-02-2011, 10:23 AM
Last Post: scarygirl67

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)

About Talk Paranormal Forum


              Quick Links

              User Links


  • ...
  • ...
  • ...
  • ...