Digital cameras CAN see buried gold

[kybob]

Hi all
I took some more pictures using the infrared filter. I am sorry to say I do not believe the halo I was seeing, is an aura coming from the mineral deposit. I have noticed a bright area in the center of each picture I took, but never thought too much about it until, Tim ask me to take one with the energy field off-centered in the picture. I did, and what I seen was the aura did not stay on the target but moved with the center of the picture. I am sorry if I got everyone hope up that this would work (mine included) but we have to accept facts. I have attached a picture to prove this.
kybob

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Minelab PRO-FIND 35 Waterproof Pinpointer Metal Detector for Experts with Tone ID & Adjustable Sensitivity - Grab it through Amazon!

[Tim Williams]

Yep! But the camera you are using still has the IR filter in it and may be adding to this problem. Anyway I will make a trip to an area that may prove promising. I will take different pictures over the course of the day and hope to see something. I still have not received the 1000nm filter. So I will be using the 720nm. I will post later in the week. Even though the picture are showing this spot in the center cased by the focusing of the lens. I still want to try all avenues before giving a finale say. And even if it does not prove to work I now have some cheap night vision stuff for caves and hunting at night when I don't want to be bothered.

Tim

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

HIO KYBOB: I believe that it isn't a lens flare, but a simple change of perspective or viewing angle. The key may lie in the emitting object not being inside of the diamond shaped anomaly. As drawn, if it actually lies outside of the diamond, then it location still remains in the center of the Len's field.

Incidentally, just what is this diamond anomaly? Even the grass is higher etc over it??

Obviously more photographs are needed.

Don Jose de La Mancha

 

[Tim Williams]

For those of you looking for an IR camera here's some on ebay.

http://photography.shop.ebay.com/it...f=1&_fln=1&_sacat=31388&_trksid=p3286.c0.m282

Tim

 

[Midas]

I'm trying to learn this camera and obviously I have a ways to go. I took this one at 9:30 which I think was too late. I opened the aperature and shutter all the way. I didn't realize how long the shutter speed was, several seconds and I was holding the camera without tripod. The first pic is the original, the second touched up with Zoom Browser EX. This is three ounces silver coins.

Hi Mike,

This is your original, with a one-stage enhancement in PhotoStudio.

 

[VICTORIO]

Thanks Mr Midas, I sent for a Canon EOS 350d. It will be here in a few days. If this works and it leads me to Treasure you will know about it. If it don't I will still have a nice camera for Memories of Good Friends and Family.

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

Good morning my buddy SWR, join me?: I wonder why you didn't comment on my last post on the apparant visual shifting of the haze by two different angles ? The Haze seems to actually exist, as evidenced by a pseudo 3 D experiment.

Don Jose de La Mancha

 

[Peerless67]

This experiment could be carried out under controlled condition inside ?
Take 2 identical planters.
obtain enough soil to fill both containers with enough soil to fill them both compacted, also the soil should come from the same place and be thouroughly mixed before sharing it between the two planters.
Use a metal detector over the soil to ensure you are not introducing metalic objects into the experiment.
Fill one planter with soil and compact it.
Fill the second partly and place your gold/silver sample, then fill it the rest of the way and compact it.
If you have a uv light source availiable use it during daylight hours to heat the soil in the 2 containers for a few weeks, alternatively place the containers in a spot in the sun ensuring both get the same exposure to sunlight.
When enough time has passed place the 2 containers 1 at a time in the same spot and "photograph" them.

Does this seem like a scientifically sound experiment ?
If so only one container should give off an aura ?

 

[Functional]

I'm not too fond of the topic name, as it feels misleading to me, but to each their own. Aura's aside, I do know and have posted in the past that IR and perhaps even UV can spot ground disturbance which are likely due to heat variations. I'm just wondering if anyone had thought of using an Image Intensifier, either alone, or in combination with IR, or UV? If I'm not mistaken, image intensifiers cover a wider range of the spectrum including X-rays and Gamma rays.
See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_intensifier
Or just Google it.

Just a thought.

F.

 

[Tim Williams]

IR can give you added info on a site or help you do things in the dark. Check this vid I did showing a cable line that was put down about 3 weeks ago.



Tim

 

[VICTORIO]

That is all I need. If I can find the Old Burro Trails leading to the closed / concealed mine It will be all I need. If I find an aura just more icing on the cake.

 

[SomeGuy]

This experiment could be carried out under controlled condition inside ?
Take 2 identical planters.
obtain enough soil to fill both containers with enough soil to fill them both compacted, also the soil should come from the same place and be thouroughly mixed before sharing it between the two planters.
Use a metal detector over the soil to ensure you are not introducing metalic objects into the experiment.
Fill one planter with soil and compact it.
Fill the second partly and place your gold/silver sample, then fill it the rest of the way and compact it.
If you have a uv light source availiable use it during daylight hours to heat the soil in the 2 containers for a few weeks, alternatively place the containers in a spot in the sun ensuring both get the same exposure to sunlight.
When enough time has passed place the 2 containers 1 at a time in the same spot and "photograph" them.

Does this seem like a scientifically sound experiment ?
If so only one container should give off an aura ?

You need 3 people:

Person 1 mixes the soil and plants the metal, labeling each planter "A" or "B" on the bottom where the labels can't be seen. Person 1 leaves the area, person 2 enters and randomly selects the containers and moves them to their final location, next to each other where they are exposed to the same conditions. Person 3 photographs both containers in one photo and looks for aura.

Actually, this still won't do it, since the photographer/ image processor has a 50/50 chance of "guessing" correctly; to be statistically significant, you need a minimum sample size of 30.

 

[Functional]

This experiment could be carried out under controlled condition inside ?
Take 2 identical planters.
obtain enough soil to fill both containers with enough soil to fill them both compacted, also the soil should come from the same place and be thouroughly mixed before sharing it between the two planters.
Use a metal detector over the soil to ensure you are not introducing metalic objects into the experiment.
Fill one planter with soil and compact it.
Fill the second partly and place your gold/silver sample, then fill it the rest of the way and compact it.
If you have a uv light source availiable use it during daylight hours to heat the soil in the 2 containers for a few weeks, alternatively place the containers in a spot in the sun ensuring both get the same exposure to sunlight.
When enough time has passed place the 2 containers 1 at a time in the same spot and "photograph" them.

Does this seem like a scientifically sound experiment ?
If so only one container should give off an aura ?

You need 3 people:

Person 1 mixes the soil and plants the metal, labeling each planter "A" or "B" on the bottom where the labels can't be seen. Person 1 leaves the area, person 2 enters and randomly selects the containers and moves them to their final location, next to each other where they are exposed to the same conditions. Person 3 photographs both containers in one photo and looks for aura.

Actually, this still won't do it, since the photographer/ image processor has a 50/50 chance of "guessing" correctly; to be statistically significant, you need a minimum sample size of 30.

This sounds like one of those blind tests, but I don't know if it would be a single blind test, or a double blind test. I wonder if one could find enough blind followers to participate in this test?

Actually, I don't know how well this type of test would work using planters. I've been mulling over the idea of "Aura's" and while I was initially, and continue to be somewhat sceptical, there may be some aspects of the idea that aren't totally inconceivable.

As admitted by posters to this topic, what I am seeing in the pictures posted here, isn't really an aura, it is an "enhanced" digital image that has been altered using software. And I could do similar things with photoshop to morph a tree into pointing at an "anomaly". That doesn't mean that there isn't something to the idea, just that the science isn't supporting the claimed observations. With this in mind, I thought I'd chime in and throw around a few ideas that could be possible causes of an "aura" detectable by unaltered digital imagery, that could be tested in a real world environment.

Firstly, while I don't know and established science doesn't seem to know, of any "emanations" caused by gold, silver and other precious metals that would result in an "aura" being detected by a digital imaging device, that doesn't mean that it couldn't happen. Depending on the brand of digital camera, (there are differences between brands), it is possible detect images beyond the normal human range of sight and viewing infrared images, where there are infrared emissions to be detected, is an example of that. Other wavelengths can also be viewed using the right filters in combination with an emission source for that frequency. An example of this would be the security features embedded in common currency that are only visible using UV, and in some cases IR lighting, in combination with the appropriate filters for viewing.

What I'm thinking, is that maybe what is being detected, is not an aura emanating from a gold, silver, or other type of deposit, but rather from an interaction involving a combination of factors, that could include common background radiation, radon gas, common chemicals in the soil, and moisture in combination with temperature and light variations, etc. I know that scientists would normally like to measure possible causes of a claim involving an "aura" such as this in a controlled laboratory environment, but I don't know if it would be possible to recreate all the potential conditions in a laboratory setting.

So, while I'm not going to jump on the "Aura" bandwagon, I'm not going to totally dismiss the idea either. But, any time I see digital images altered using software that claim to illustrate some form of treasure lurking beneath, I'll take it with a grain of salt.

F.

 

[Midas]

This experiment could be carried out under controlled condition inside ?
Take 2 identical planters.
obtain enough soil to fill both containers with enough soil to fill them both compacted, also the soil should come from the same place and be thouroughly mixed before sharing it between the two planters.
Use a metal detector over the soil to ensure you are not introducing metalic objects into the experiment.
Fill one planter with soil and compact it.
Fill the second partly and place your gold/silver sample, then fill it the rest of the way and compact it.
If you have a uv light source availiable use it during daylight hours to heat the soil in the 2 containers for a few weeks, alternatively place the containers in a spot in the sun ensuring both get the same exposure to sunlight.
When enough time has passed place the 2 containers 1 at a time in the same spot and "photograph" them.

Does this seem like a scientifically sound experiment ?
If so only one container should give off an aura ?

You need 3 people:

Person 1 mixes the soil and plants the metal, labeling each planter "A" or "B" on the bottom where the labels can't be seen. Person 1 leaves the area, person 2 enters and randomly selects the containers and moves them to their final location, next to each other where they are exposed to the same conditions. Person 3 photographs both containers in one photo and looks for aura.

Actually, this still won't do it, since the photographer/ image processor has a 50/50 chance of "guessing" correctly; to be statistically significant, you need a minimum sample size of 30.

This sounds like one of those blind tests, but I don't know if it would be a single blind test, or a double blind test. I wonder if one could find enough blind followers to participate in this test?

Actually, I don't know how well this type of test would work using planters. I've been mulling over the idea of "Aura's" and while I was initially, and continue to be somewhat sceptical, there may be some aspects of the idea that aren't totally inconceivable.

As admitted by posters to this topic, what I am seeing in the pictures posted here, isn't really an aura, it is an "enhanced" digital image that has been altered using software. And I could do similar things with photoshop to morph a tree into pointing at an "anomaly". That doesn't mean that there isn't something to the idea, just that the science isn't supporting the claimed observations. With this in mind, I thought I'd chime in and throw around a few ideas that could be possible causes of an "aura" detectable by unaltered digital imagery, that could be tested in a real world environment.

Firstly, while I don't know and established science doesn't seem to know, of any "emanations" caused by gold, silver and other precious metals that would result in an "aura" being detected by a digital imaging device, that doesn't mean that it couldn't happen. Depending on the brand of digital camera, (there are differences between brands), it is possible detect images beyond the normal human range of sight and viewing infrared images, where there are infrared emissions to be detected, is an example of that. Other wavelengths can also be viewed using the right filters in combination with an emission source for that frequency. An example of this would be the security features embedded in common currency that are only visible using UV, and in some cases IR lighting, in combination with the appropriate filters for viewing.

What I'm thinking, is that maybe what is being detected, is not an aura emanating from a gold, silver, or other type of deposit, but rather from an interaction involving a combination of factors, that could include common background radiation, radon gas, common chemicals in the soil, and moisture in combination with temperature and light variations, etc. I know that scientists would normally like to measure possible causes of a claim involving an "aura" such as this in a controlled laboratory environment, but I don't know if it would be possible to recreate all the potential conditions in a laboratory setting.

So, while I'm not going to jump on the "Aura" bandwagon, I'm not going to totally dismiss the idea either. But, any time I see digital images altered using software that claim to illustrate some form of treasure lurking beneath, I'll take it with a grain of salt.

F.

Good post! You should be able to get auras from planters providing they are placed in direct contact with the ground. However, bearing in mind that it has been scientifically proven that the observer in an experiment can influence the results, it would be a far easier experiment to use the method to just go out and find treasure.

In most cases the aura is visible on the 'raw' image, without using photo editing software as several images on this thread show. However, a simple, one-click enhance on a photo editor makes the aura, position and nature of the target much clearer. If anyone sees this as 'cheating', feel free to struggle on using raw images.

Midas

 

[jb7487]

This does not apply to a human standing nearby simply watching what someone else is doing.

I think what he is trying to say is that if the observer is also the tester then they can influence the results. For example, if you know where you planted something then you are likely to post process the image until it shows up to prove the point.

 

[StogieJim]

Hi,

This just keeps going round and round; what fun there is in confusion.

Victorio didn’t believe in auras “…Until I saw them............. Several Times.” Here’s a tip if you used ALL CAPITALS your statement would be more persuasive.

Functional said "image intensifiers cover a wider range of the spectrum including X-rays and Gamma rays." No, they don't. They use silicon photodiodes which are sensitive to visible and near-infrared (~400-100nm). Your reference clearly states infrared in several places and calls specifically out 800-900nm which is near-infrared.

In a later post he also says “…established science doesn't seem to know, of any "emanations" caused by gold, silver and other precious metals that would result in an "aura" being detected by a digital imaging device, that doesn't mean that it couldn't happen.” Perhaps not but, it does lower the probability to a very very very small value. This very small number approximates the probability that treasure auras exist.

SomeGuy is correct about conducting a double-blind test and about the need for numerous repetitions to eliminate simple luck from the results. Someone said “the difference between luck and skill is duration”.

Midas says ”You should be able to get auras from planters providing they are placed in direct contact with the ground.” Why oh why on God’s green earth is this true? Can someone explain this without hand-waving and faulty deductive reasoning? An example of which is, all metals decompose therefore gold decomposes. The conclusion is not valid because the first premise is not true. Gold “… is unaffected by air, moisture and most corrosive reagents” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gold). This example is based on reply # 237, Real de Tayopa: “Metal does decompose, including Au.”

Also, Midas says “… it has been scientifically proven that the observer in an experiment can influence the results.” I suggest that he is mistakenly referring to the Heisenberg uncertainty principle (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncertainty_principle) which pertains to measurements made at the quantum level and may not be relevant to capturing treasure auras with digital cameras. On the other hand, perhaps he meant the observer (the person) needs to have the right attitude, think the right thoughts, or have a pure heart in order to capture the elusive aura. If that’s the case, then unless you plan on donating the found treasure to charity, your heart is not pure and this is why the aura will not reveal itself to you.

When folks fail to capture treasure aura, it's always something that the experimenter did wrong and never that the concept is founded on wishful thinking and ill founded logic.

SWR: I wish I could agree with you about coming to a consensus but, I don’t. There are a few true believers, a few hardcore skeptics (these two will never agree), and a bunch who fall in between the two points. They (without the benefit of education in chemistry, physics, or remote sensing) push around one loosely formed thought after another much like a gusty wind scatters leaves back and forth. Therefore, this group will never settle or agree on anything.

The simple proof that treasure aura is nonsense is that even after a few books have been published and sold in the FICTION section, nothing has been patented, no equipment is for sale, and no one is presenting their finds in a credible arena. The true believers will say that all the successful treasure hunters keep their methods/findings secret; but this transparent sophistry because it can't be disproven and doesn’t add anything to the discussion. (A sophism is a confusing or illogical argument used for deceiving someone.)

Despite all the confusion, I’m sure everyone means well. To those who want to believe, good luck. To those who don’t know, don’t just assume aura exists and run around snapping images and ruining your cameras. Do some research in remote sensing and start by theorizing (based on what is known about gold) what could cause the aura. What is the nature of the aura (wavelength, strength of signal and noise), what equipment is capable of recording it then set up simple experiments to prove your theory and report on your methods and results. Vague images that could be the product of image manipulation are not proof of anything. That is the scientific process and valid theories will stand up to it while silliness falls by the wayside.

I won’t bother you with my rants anymore.

Jim

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

HI Jim: you posted , among others ---> The conclusion is not valid because the first premise is not true. Gold “… is unaffected by air, moisture and most corrosive reagents” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gold). This example is based on reply # 237, Real de Tayopa: “Metal does decompose, including Au.”
~~~~~~~~~
Sheesh Jim, you certainly haven't done your home work. There are dozens of natural conditions in which Au decomposes in the ground. In doing so, it gives off energy which may be in the visible spectrum or anywhere else in the energy spectrum.

Don Jose de La Mancha

 

[StogieJim]

My dear friend Don Jose,

Not enough homework? My dear Sir, I’ve done enough homework to earn a Ph.D. in the field of Remote Sensing. Also, I’ve been paid for 13 years of hard work in the field of Remote Sensing.
Here is a link to one of my papers: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/search/freesrchabstract.jsp?arnumber=1295179&isnumber=28800&punumber=9079&k2dockey=1295179@ieeecnfs&query=(spectral+similarity)%3Cin%3Emetadata&pos=1
These are my credentials; but, enough of the small talk.

What references can you give that supports your statement that the decomposition of gold “… gives off energy which may be in the visible spectrum or anywhere else in the energy spectrum”?

If you can, please provide answers with references to at least fairly credible sources to the following simple questions:

1 What energy does gold give off as it decomposes?
2 What wavelengths are involved?

Of course, I suspect that you will not be able to provide satisfactory answers or credible references.

Instead, I predict you will prevaricate, hand-wave, and generally fail to answer my questions. Perhaps you'll say: ‘I’ve done that so many times before’ or ‘It is so well known that I need not’ or ‘clearly you will never accept what you don’t understand’, blah, blah.

Your friend in the search for knowledge,

Jim

PS: Midas, would you like to answer these questions?

 

[Kentucky Kache]

If you can, please provide answers with references to at least fairly credible sources to the following simple questions:...

Neat trick. Now all you need do is say that the references (the ones you don't agree with) are not credible.

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

good morning Stogie, not belittling your scholastic achievement or abilities in any way, especially in your field, but suggesting that you should study a bit more with an 'open' mind. Many of the natural occurrences of Gold Decomposition or conversions / combinations in Nature are utilized in normal commercial recovery processes. Cyanide's, Halides, Acids, Mercury, and on. Need I mention the Oceans?

All of these are found in the western states. As you are undoubtedly aware, all chemical reactions can be described as ionic exchanges. These are simply put, electrical in essence or body which are generally measureable or calculable.. It is not outside of reason that many will be in the visual or capturable ranges and are capable of being detected in many ways

I suggest reading up on Atomic Absorption devices. for example.

As for a PhD, while admirable in itself, does not automatically equate superior intelligence in my experience. Many top names in the sciences and higher education were guests at my parents home In California. I was made privy to many of them on a personal basis, most were brilliant people, but some , one in particular, was a PhD in Geology. He couldn't, literally pour it out of a boot with out help.

So please refrain from posting data on Education or titles for me, it falls on deaf ears, as for the others perhaps they may be impressed.

Don Jose de La Mancha