Double-blind Aura Viewer Test

[Chocolate Chip]

Wouldn't our ability to adapt to the dark give the viewers an advantage here? We can all see objects in the dark after some adjustment.

Not if there is absolutely no light available:
http://nasaexplores.nasa.gov/show_912_student_st.php?id=040504154415

The eye has to have the ability to adapt to changing situations. At night, the eye adjusts the light gathering capabilities to allow more light in, so the rods and cones can be used. If there is no light, the rods and cones are not activated, so the brain sees darkness.

The tricky part would be having absolutely no light allowed into the enclosure at all, such as cracks under a door, slits between curtains, things like that. The only "light" there should be is that of the "aura".

 

[geni]

The tricky part would be having absolutely no light allowed into the enclosure at all, such as cracks under a door, slits between curtains, things like that. The only "light" there should be is that of the "aura".

The UK has a few old mines which you can get guided tours around you could probably arange to hire one for any test.

 

[pfedorch]

No Humans at all!

This is an old thread, but here's my two cents: Use the dummies ONLY. If a reader sees any auras at all, that would be interesting. This eliminates all worries about the human moving, breathing, etc. Perhaps first let them view the aura of a real person dressed like the dummy vs. a dummy next to that person. Once they're confident they can see the aura, and distinguish it from that of the dummy (should be no aura, right?), then you do the dummies only test.

 

[Sideroxylon]

Young Emily Rosa did this well back in the late 90s.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emily_Rosa