Navigation:  Documents > B - C >

Channeling ET and the Orb Phenomenon

Previous pageReturn to chapter overviewNext page

Channeling ET and the Orb Phenomenon


By David E. Twichell


One of the more elusive aspects of the UFO/abduction phenomenon is the ability to telepathically communicate with other-dimensional beings, or channeling, that is alleged by some of those involved in the abduction process. I am presently involved in the investigation of one such “channeler”. During our first experiment, some very interesting anomalies presented themselves. The subject of this investigation wishes to remain anonymous. Therefore, she will hereafter be referred to as “Martha”.


I had agreed to meet with Martha and a friend of hers, who also reports alien and other dimensional contact, at her apartment in a small town in Michigan for a light lunch to be followed by a channeling session. Martha’s friend (let’s call her Mary) had brought her 35mm camera, Martha had her own 35mm on hand and I had brought an Olympus Camedia digital camera (model # C-450 zoom) and a camcorder. All digital pictures were taken from the same spot, with the same interior lighting and within a one-hour time span. The blinds were closed to the door wall, which was the only source of outdoor lighting in the room.


Martha reported feeling a “cold spot” on the right side of her head as a prelude to communication with the alleged entity. Martha allegedly communicated many interesting things that are not relevant to the subject of “orb photography” but may add credence to the validity of the experiment. I will relate two examples that occurred during the experiment for the purpose of validation.


(1) After my repeated insistence that the entity offer physical proof of its existence, Martha said, “your camera is off.” I had the video camera trained on all participants and she asked me to check it. “They tell me ‘your camera is off’”, she said. I checked the camera but it was still functioning properly. I checked my digital camera and it was still fine. Mary’s camera was also functional. Martha’s camera was on and sitting near me. I picked it up and snapped off two frames. Then, attempting to take a third picture, the camera jammed. The button would not depress. The LED, indicting whether or not the camera was on, no longer illuminated. Martha indicated that she had placed new batteries in the camera that morning. The film had advanced to # 13 of 24. I suggested that I had tried to take the third picture too quickly after the previous one, causing it to jam and cease functioning. (Such is still a possibility.) Martha found that she was able to advance the film to the end of the roll by pushing the appropriate button, indicating that the batteries were still functional. Once the film had advanced to the end of the roll and was removed, the camera functioned perfectly as before.


(2) I asked the alleged entity to tell us from what planet or solar system he originated. He refused to say. I followed this by saying, “I am thinking of a solar system that some contactees claim they are in communication with or have been abducted by. I will concentrate on this word. You give it to Martha and she can give it to me." At first she uttered a couple of words that were nowhere near what I was thinking. Then, she said, “I can see the word spelled out in front of me now . . . A –R –E –N – O – U – S”. I said, “Try again”. As she concentrated, she tried to change the “N” to a “J” but was insistent about the “A –R –E and O – U – S. The word I was concentrating on was “Arcturus”. However, I was misspelling it in my mind. I was thinking “A –R –C – T –U – R – O – U – S”. Martha had no prior conscious knowledge of this word.


The film from my camcorder did not display any anomalies that I could detect in its review. Martha’s 35 mm film was later developed and displayed nothing out of the ordinary. I had taken thirty pictures with my digital camera. There were no anomalies found in the immediate vicinity of either of the two women. However, on three frames taken of the opposite area of the room, I detected three apparent “orbs” that had been undetectable to the naked eye at the time the shots were taken.


In one photo, a large, white, transparent orb is seen above and on the entry door to the apartment. Upon close inspection, the orb appears to display a complicated, “raised ridge” configuration throughout its structure. In another photo, a fainter white orb can be seen on the top of the closet door on the left side of the frame. (Later analysis through digital enhancement would detect at least three other positive orbs within this shot.) In the third photo, a very small white spot can be seen near the wall to the right of the entry door and to the left of a wooden chair about one foot above the floor. All of the areas where these orbs are seen were double checked by Martha after the photos were examined and found not to actually exist on the walls. Neither was the anomaly seen with the naked eye at the time of shooting the pictures.


The photos were sent to three separate investigators for analysis.


(1) A recently formed study group that is in the process of scientific analysis of the orb phenomenon. The group is headed by well-known crop circle researcher Jeffery Wilson Director of "Independent Crop Circle Researchers Association" (ICCRA).


(2) Dr. W. C. Levengood, a biophysicist from Grass Lake, MI, who is world renown for his work in crop formations and cattle mutilations (bovine excisions).


(3) Barry Taylor, a professional photographer and photographic analyst from Australia.


The only person to respond to this case from the study group, to date, was Dr. Charles Lietzau Ph.D a high school biology teacher and a scientific consultant for Michigan MUFON. Based on countless “control” photographs he has taken of dust and lint particles, salt, sugar and other like “set-up” props, his conclusion was “a classic example of near lens reflection.”


Dr. Levengood, in collusion with the late Dr. John L. Gedye, has devised and patented a device for the purpose of detecting very subtle, self-organized groups of “charge density pulses” (CDP), which are within all living systems as well as within the very environment around us. He refers to these as “implicate” or “subtle energies”. Dr. Levengood has many years of experience with this type of energy that radiates from biological forms, often shows up on film and is able to measure them under laboratory conditions with the CDP device. He referred to the anomalous orbs as “solitrons” that refract light inward and are present in the environment for a minute fraction of a second, dissipating before the average human brain can register their presence. “The camera is more efficient than our eyes,” Levengood observes. However, he is quick to note that some people are able to see them all of the time. He referred to a scientific dissertation on the subject, published in Science Magazine, entitled “Optical Spatial Solitons and Their Interactions: Universality and Diversity” George I. Stegeman and Mordechai Segev (19 November 1999; 286: 1518-1523 [DOI: 10.1126/science.286.5444.1518]).


The late David E. Caywood, an alien experienceer and co-author with Landi B. Mellas, of "The Other Sky: Reclaiming Who We Are and Why We Came Here" (Blue Star Productions, Sun Lakes, Arizona, 2002) had the ability to see orbs and conducted photographic experiments that proved his claims. He would say, “There is an orb to my right.” An associate would snap a picture of him in the right side of the frame. When David indicated that the orb was no longer there, another picture was taken of the same area. Invariably, the first shot produced an anomalous orb exactly where he claimed he had seen it and the second shot showed nothing out of the ordinary.


Dr. Levengood concludes that the “orbs” in the photographs are “self organized light” that represent these subtle energies and were formed as a result of the higher state of consciences of the channeler in this experiment.


Barry Taylor has been a professional photographer all of his adult life and is presently a news cameraman for regional TV and Sports events. He began analyzing UFO and orb photographs in 1996, when he personally witnessed and photographed a UFO. “Having seen and photographed UFO's,” Taylor says, “I find an invaluable combination when doing image or video analysis for others. This also applies to some degree where analysis of orb images is concerned. I have a keen eye and attuned judgment based on long term study and testing of otherwise difficult images to identify. There are certain features that are unique to most images, and the use of ‘False Colour Enhancing’ techniques can reveal these features. It has been proven to work with UFO images, and is also useful for adaptation to orb images for analysis. It is the careful interpretation of the results that makes for a good analysis.” Mr. Taylor’s enhancement software and techniques are similar to those used by NASA to study the internal structure of Comets and other low light distant objects like Dust clouds etc.


“This method can reveal small variations in colour and light densities.” Taylor explains. “These are displayed as different colours. It is like tuning in a radio. There are numerous frequencies within a given bandwidth. In the case of photos, there is a range of shadings or tones in each visual colour. When digitized, working with pixels allows adjustment through a scale of density and contrast adjustment without destroying the original data. Using this method during orb analysis has revealed unique internal structural features not seen in set-up, out-of-focus images.”


Mr. Taylor confirmed the fact that the “raised ridge” configuration within the largest orb, above and on the entry door, did not contain the concentric ring design of a dust or lint particle. Using an “edge detect” enhancement technique, the erratic texture within the orb image further demonstrates its unique and unidentifiable properties. The other orbs in a second picture were likewise enhanced with the same result.


He was most fascinated by the smallest orb. Once again, with the use of “false colour enhancement”, he was able to determine that the source of the illumination was generated from a very small point within the orb – not a reflection of the camera flash or something on or near the lens. Dr. Levengood verified this observation. There is a fuzzy corona in front of the illumination. “The small size of the source and the overall size of the illumination suggest a very strong energy at work to produce this one.” Taylor declared. “This object is not an illuminated dust particle by the flash. It does not show the features of a near-lens artifact. It is a different phenomena possibly associated with the group gathering.” (My italics.)


Barry Taylor’s full analysis of this case, and the photos associated with it, may be viewed by going to


This case is still under investigation. The orbs in these photos may be considered circumstantial evidence only. However, as evidenced by Dwight Connelly’s excellent lead article in the June 2004 issue of the MUFON UFO Journal, concerning the Robbert van den Broeke case, there are unexpected and anomalous images that appear in 35mm and digital photographs that cannot be arbitrarily dismissed out of hand. As Barry Taylor observed, “We have a lot to learn about the unique features of the genuine orb that mysteriously shows up in film and digital photos. This is a genuine phenomena occurring world wide and deserves a serious approach to find answers.”


David E. Twichell


David E. Twichell is a featured contributor to this WorldOfTheStrange website.

Contributions include: Blimp or UFO?, Channeling ET and the Orb Phenomenon, Is The Day of UFO Disclosure Near?, Is The Veil Becoming Thinner?, NARCAP Boss Snubs MUFON, Record Year of Dubious Renown!, The Global Implications of the UFO Reality, Trusting Your Sources, Anomalies Found in Roswell Metal, Understanding the Biblical UFO Hypothesis




Page url:
This page was last updated on: 1/21/2011

Website designed and created by TJ Elias - Houston, Texas
Copyright© 1996-2011 - TJ Elias
Contact Us