File 169980579953.jpg - (127.02KB , 800x1200 , BLQ_2333_DISC.jpg )

File 170102155080.jpg - (243.87KB , 855x1287 , BLQ_2237.jpg )

Is there anything new with this? What happened to Dark?

>>7864
Believe it or not but I've been promoted. This is good news bad news really, because I'm now on a much higher pay band but I no longer work in the department where I used to use the "machine". I haven't been in there since September of last year so haven't been able to carry on with my work.
I do however have many images that I processed but didn't have time to post and explain so I'll do this in the coming weeks as I have a little more time to spare now.
We had a frustrating day with our model in July in that we booked everything, found a perfect location, and got all our equipment working, but had absolutely no visible activity with her. The only saving grace was that we recorded very definite field distortions caused by her. We suspected that these women affect the area around them magnetically and our mass scattering of magnetometers proved that this is indeed the case. Our model distorted the natural magnetic field over an area of some 487,000sq/ft, but considering that she didn't appear to have any outbursts while we were on site this figure may be only a "resting" number. If we could have carried out the study during an outburst I'm sure the figures would have been much higher. I'm working with Tom on and off when I can to try and translate the numbers onto a map.

I'll post as much as I can when I can.

File 170826160747.jpg - (433.41KB , 1776x900 , 96671.jpg )

File 17082616383.jpg - (472.44KB , 1671x960 , BLQ27211.jpg )

File 170826166410.jpg - (534.10KB , 1416x1209 , Schem.jpg )

File 170826185114.jpg - (316.90KB , 1304x644 , 33482.jpg )

File 170826188870.jpg - (203.33KB , 1228x957 , 99412.jpg )

File 17082619163.jpg - (318.03KB , 1378x768 , 2170.jpg )

File 171007663340.jpg - (350.39KB , 1759x756 , BLQ77674.jpg )

Models producing bubble chains.

File 171007666169.jpg - (1.04MB , 1280x1920 , 211239.jpg )

File 171007669460.jpg - (1.81MB , 2266x3405 , BLQ5772.jpg )

File 171128135392.jpg - (610.73KB , 2092x1198 , BLQ_24542.jpg )

>>7286

File 171507888088.jpg - (1.86MB , 2400x1800 , BLQ32297.jpg )

A strange image appears to show energy leaving this model's body not only in the usual way through beams and strange arcs but also flowing down the weir in the water!
Water is often seen glowing at a fairly bright wavelength in the vicinity where the model's body touches the water sometimes by almost 5nm.
However, this image shows material flowing down the weir and being carried away from her body while she fires two very (relatively) bright beams high into the air.

File 171905439441.jpg - (527.85KB , 2972x858 , BLQ1956_7.jpg )

I discovered some time ago by accident that the model called "Bijou" or sometimes "Stracy Stone" also produced beams. (The first instance of this can be seen in #7757)
However, I've noticed that the interaction between Eufrat and Bijou appears to be more impressive than with other model combinations.
In the following images, you will notice that the connections lack the narrow bright electrical features seen in other images as they tend to be far more subtle.
Not only are the connections extensive but they also attain a remarkable degree of symmetry. Normally two models in close proximity will see connections made that cover the path of least resistance (i.e. almost direct) But with Eufrat and Bijou these connections arc away from their bodies in a spiral pattern. This may be as a result of expanding "bubbles" of energy, with these connections following around the outside of those bubbles.
["Bubbles" have been noted in images above and appear to emerge from the nipples sometimes growing to grapefruit or football size before breaking free and drifting away from the body. Or they continue to expand to an indeterminate size in situ.]

These images were taken from a movie where ambient lighting was reduced to such levels that these features were more easily seen than in other pictures of Eufrat and Bijou during the day. As a result, I didn't have to go so hard in extracting the data or enhancing the image. Other features can also be seen in the images these being mainly "ghost beams" the remains of beams that are no longer being produced by the body but contain a certain amount of energy and can still be bright enough to be seen in the exposures.
Many metal fixtures in the images can also be seen to be glowing intensely and I can only imagine that this is the result of the extended and large magnetic field in the room caused by the two women.

File 171905441721.jpg - (504.60KB , 2305x648 , BLQ1958_9.jpg )

>>7888
It's been known for a long time that women have strange powers. Many of the ancient religions had them as almost superhuman figures.

True Anon, I often thought that many of the images of women with rays and such coming from their bodies were more symbolic rather than actual. But from the studies that I've done, it would appear that the latter is true.
It involves the planet's magnetic field and some physical reaction (biological perhaps) within their bodies. It has something to do with their breasts and rib cage as these always show up brightest in all of the images. The breasts especially are the one thing that they have that men don't so must be considered as the main features of the study.
I have by the way looked at men to see if they produce beams and after a week of looking at shirtless guys (not something a heterosexual guy wants to do!) I didn't find one showing these beams, so I'm sure they can be only attributed to women.

Myself and a friend have hired a known model who has a reputation for causing all sorts of minor electrical "gremlins" in cameras, phones and such with other photographers so know that this phenomenon is real.

So, here we have more deep-processed images that show beams and rings, and arcs. Some of these images are almost black in the original image in order to fetch out the features which lie near 370nm (extremely faint)
I've then removed the brighter (overexposed) beams and overlaid the image taken at the usual 375+nm to make the image more recognisable.
These "rings" appear to radiate out from the body although it's not known if they originate from the nipples or the body in general. Every image I have captured of them shows them a fair distance away from the body and I'm pretty sure they are separate features to the "bubbles" which expand from the nipples.
"Arcs" appear to be a connection between two or more women. Although they are not always complete, many of the arcs can be traced back to the respective nipples of individual women. I'm assuming that these are some sort of low current conduit between the women and their shape is created by the combined magnetic fields of them.

File 172468300355.jpg - (561.35KB , 2048x1080 , BLQ_44708.jpg )

File 172468302041.jpg - (225.79KB , 800x600 , BLQ_44884.jpg )

File 172468303843.jpg - (257.67KB , 841x1262 , BLQ57759.jpg )

File 172468306169.jpg - (199.46KB , 800x800 , 7626.jpg )

File 172468307691.jpg - (398.74KB , 1500x1000 , BLQ_7654.jpg )

File 172468316561.jpg - (0.96MB , 1409x2113 , j7b_034.jpg )

File 172951230582.jpg - (231.24KB , 933x1400 , BLQ_5333.jpg )

File 172951232145.jpg - (268.82KB , 1536x864 , BLQ_5320.jpg )

File 173127549851.jpg - (257.61KB , 1920x1080 , BLQ11201.jpg )

File 173515149638.jpg - (81.64KB , 901x534 , BLQ6861.jpg )

It's just shit hitting the lens at peculiar angles, these kinds of porn shots are done with professional lighting setups. Get a candid photo and observe no "rib rays"

Guy coming up with a magnetic field psychic E edgy theory and not even considering the enormous lightbulbs that get carted onto porn shoots and aimed square at the woman's tits and pussies.

>>7907
>7906
If you look back through some of the pictures you can see candid> images that have these things. The original poster also hired a model and shot his own images I guess without lighting etc, how you explain that?

>>7908

I can see porn, porn, porn, porn and one pap of Britney Spears, all of it of course having been shooped before public release

I looked at the photo he took and I think it's sunlight and/or effects caused by post processing

This reminds me of when people were trying to convince me halos are real by showing photos of too sharp JPGs causing errors and strangeness

Moreover this experiment they ran was not serious. Why did they not have the model change position right away, to see if the energy rays changed too? Why did they not take photos before she arrived, while she was fully clothed, wearing cotton, wearing leather, wearing plastic? Why did he not show the result when taking photo of a man? Or with the camera at a 90° angle to the previous position? And more especially, why did they make the model play with her pussy like that? OP admits himself it was a "treat" to see titties irl. Run out of time for more serious things? I question OPs intent and professionalism.

This is the definition of psuedoscience... There's no comparison, there's no repetition. So how can it possible rule out confounding factors?

This isn't experimenting to see if the sky is blue or chickens lay eggs, this is a crazy hypothesis so you need some crazy evidence to support it. And porn shoots, pap shots and an excuse to touch yourself isn't enough.

>>7910
Hello Anonymous, I don't think the original poster is trying to prove anything he is asking questions about the things he's seen.
I have to admit I do believe in other things that we can't explain and I believe we women are special. It been know since ancient times that women are connected with mother Earth and have special relationship with her.
I think what dark has done here is highlight this.

Just thought I'd leave this here.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rgL61TJBFbQ

File 175242462960.jpg - (358.54KB , 1439x1077 , BLQ_5525.jpg )

File 175242476338.jpg - (261.59KB , 1067x1520 , 1765.jpg )

Yes

File 177093279671.jpg - (257.34KB , 922x1112 , BLQ9956.jpg )

File 177093284450.jpg - (304.64KB , 1536x1152 , 4827.jpg )

File 17709328733.jpg - (57.34KB , 768x576 , B5128.jpg )

File 177093290936.jpg - (73.11KB , 768x576 , B5129.jpg )

File 177461400597.jpg - (453.12KB , 1020x1533 , 1174.jpg )

File 177461403979.jpg - (409.13KB , 1510x1152 , 1627.jpg )

File 177461406854.jpg - (777.28KB , 2691x1800 , 9324.jpg )

File 177461455615.jpg - (253.59KB , 1920x1080 , 177.jpg )

File 177487990826.jpg - (263.80KB , 1280x720 , 9334.jpg )

File 178058966946.jpg - (391.52KB , 2384x800 , 5525.jpg )

>>7906
Hello,

In answer to your statement, yes, it could be light produced by the sun, interior/exterior lighting, etc. But from what I've observed, the very precise alignment of the beams, flares, and bubbles, in my view, rules that theory out.
Lens flares, for example, usually align with the point source of light and are pretty predictable.
I've even run images containing many lens flares through the computer using the same settings and sensitivities, but what appears in the final image is exactly what is in the original. (See Attached)
The beams and bubbles that appear in these images do not align with a point source of light; rather, they are perfectly aligned with the model's tits, or in the case of bubbles, are often seen drifting randomly around the model. Moreover, these structures do not appear in the visible image as flares do and only show up via deep image processing.

The admittedly amateurish study that Thomas and I have done with our own model proved that whatever is appearing on images of these women has something to do with electromagnetism, and/or the interaction of the women and the planet's magnetic field.

I had been promoted out of the department where I was able to use the instruments and computers, so my investigations had to cease. However, I've since returned to the department (in part thanks to Donald Trump!), and I'm able to use the equipment again. It's had several upgrades since I last used it, and it's now more sensitive, detecting elements such as argon, Nitrogen, and Oxygen. It's also been enhanced with A.I., so it takes care of some of the work I'm unable to do manually. I'm still not authorised to use this "officially", so my postings here will be on a when-able basis.

So, I revisited the well-known photo shoot that Eufrant did in some woods and in an abandoned building, as the outburst she had here seemed very vivid when I last processed these images. I use this particular model to study because of the many hundreds that I've looked at over the last 5 years; she is the most consistent in producing bright beams and bubbles. Also, I think many cameras at this time began to be able to capture many wavelengths of light other than the standard RGB.

Hopefully, with the following images, I can convince you that what appears in the images is not only real, but is 100% associated with the model and not an artefact caused by the camera lens or lighting.