Non-Linear/Non-Local Effects?

PART 1 | PART 2 | PART 3 | PART 4 | PART 5 | PART 6

- PART 5 -

Examination of "Bill" Photos

Bill cropped out of only photo Robbert has ever
seen of him. Photo: Susan Hershey

As was done with the "soldier" and "mudmen" photos (where we also had a potential source photo with which to compare the "apparition" images) our photo analyst crops Bill out of the original photo (the only one that Robbert had ever seen of Bill) and alters the contrast and sharpens the image using a Photoshop application. He then draws a red outline around the face in the original photo, adding colored dots centered in the pupils of Bill's eyes, one at the inside edge of the image's left eye, one in the center of the left nostril and at the corners of the mouth.

Finally he re-sized several of the clearest of the first series of "apparition" images of Bill in multiple attempts to make them fit the red silhouette and registration dots.

Red outline and colored registration dots placed
on original photo.

The clearest image from the first series of Bill photos.

Photo analyst's closest match of silhouette and
registration dots from original photo super-
imposed over clearest "apparition"
photo of Bill.

The photo analyst first pointed out "slight discrepancies" which he noted between the original photo of Bill and the clearest of the photos taken by Robbert in the Woodenhead field, in particular:

(a)  the outlines of the face don't completely match, particularly near the
       image's right cheek and left ear;
(b)  the brow creases in the original photo don't appear in Robbert's
(c)  the "arched curve" of the right cheek in the "apparition photos appears
       to be more rounded than in the original photo;
(d)  the dark regions of the "apparition" eyes dffer from original photo;
(e)  there is a "lump-like" structure on the "apparition's" nose that doesn't
       match the original photo; and,
(f)   the distended left ear in the "apparition" photos doesn't appear to
       match the original photo either.

But after continuing attempts using various tools available in Photoshop (i.e., blurring, radial blurring, selecting, rotation, trapezoidal transformations and liquefying distortion) he concluded that most (likely all) of the "slight discrepancies" noted above could probably have been achieved if one had the time and the technical expertise to carry out these manipulations of the original image using various software tools on a computer.

The analyst then described for me, in considerable technical detail, how digital cameras work and how exceedingly complex the operations are that would be required to produce the "apparition" images inside the camera itself--his final conclusion being that "the simplest hypothesis is that someone Photoshopped the images and found a surreptitious way to insert the revised digital images [on a separate flash card] into your camera."

Original photo of Bill with Photoshop "blur" tool
applied by photo analyst.

Original photo of Bill with Photoshop "liquid distortion"
tool applied by photo analyst.

From the multiple distorted and manipulated images the analyst created using the Photoshop software I can clearly see that, in the case of these photos with my brother's face, computer manipulation seems to be the simplest explanation for this series of photos. Without first-hand knowledge or observation of the events which actually took place, the photo analyst is totally reliant upon just the images themselves.

But the simplest answer, if it does not account for all of the actual facts, is just that--the simplest answer. Not necessarily the right one. Here are the facts not accounted for in the "Photoshopped" explanation:

  1. Robbert had no access to my camera until I handed it to him when he asked for it out in the field;

  2. He had no access to my camera supplies, including new chips for the camera (all of which I had counted & numbered before leaving the States & which are kept locked in my briefcase, in my room);

  3. The "apparition" photos of my brother were all taken with my camera but on two different chips, each of them numbered by me previously, and both then checked each day and each night to make sure they were the same chips I had placed in the camera to begin with;

  4. When Robbert is taking photos with my camera we always look though them after about 10 shots or so, to see if anything has appeared and, if so, what--so we both see any images which have appeared within seconds (or at the most minutes) of their appearance, while we are still both out in the field;

  5. Neither Robbert nor I have a laptop computer--when the "Bill" photos were taken we had no equipment with us other than my Pentax digital camera;

  6. Each night, when we are finished taking photos and before I go to bed, I go back through all of the photos Robbert has taken that day, writing down the photo numbers & making notes which describe the types of anomalous photos which have appeared--checking to see that the photos on the camera chip are exactly the same images that were present earlier in the evening; these notes are then dated & placed in my briefcase which is then locked each night;

  7. If Robbert has taken a lot of photos I usually then remove that chip, and file it in my briefcase (always kept locked), and then put a brand new blank (but numbered & dated) chip into the camera; I also check to make sure the new chip is actually blank before closing down the camera and putting it back in it's case, ready for the next photo session;

  8. By 2007, when the "apparition" photos of Bill were taken, Robbert did have a computer (he first got one in July, 2006)--but it has no Photoshop or other software on it which could be used to create the "apparition" images of Bill, and neither Robbert nor I have a laptop. I don't have a cell phone and Robbert's cell phone is a simple one that just makes or receives calls-and he never takes it with us into the fields anyway.

  9. I was watching Robbert closely during the first "Woodenhead" session, when the first 50 images of Bill appeared in daylight. I stood close to him and could clearly see that Robbert held nothing in front of the lens, ever. He just held the camera in one hand out in front of his face 2 ft. or so, and then periodically clicked the camera shutter.

My primary point is that I maintain careful control over my camera and all the camera supplies I bring with me to Holland. My second point is that Robbert doesn't have the necessary software on his computer nor the knowledge of how to use such software, nor any other fancy technological gadgets. Therefore, if we are sincere in our desire to understand both how these photos are occurring and what they might then possibly mean, we must look elsewhere.

One of the clearest images from 2nd photo session in the "Woodenhead" field,
Bill's ear no longer protruding (contrast enhanced).

In an earlier report ( we pointed out that my Pentax operating manual states that the camera "may not function correctly" in situations where strong "magnetic fields" or "electromagnetic radiation" is present. And since Robbert consistently reports being aware of an external "presence" when the anomalous photos are occurring, could it be that what he is sensing is some kind of unusual magnetic field or the presence of electromagnetic radiation? Could this be affecting either the operation or the settings on the camera?

Or, as Robbert has repeatedly stated, could he actually be sensing the presence of an external consciousness or energetic force unperceived by the rest of us? One that is utilizing him as a "medium" through whom the various images are projected onto whatever camera he happens to be using?

To dismiss Robbert's statements regarding his awareness of this external "presence" (or "cosmic energy," as he sometimes now refers to it) as an outright lie or an hallucination is also easy (not to mention arrogant, if one has no direct personal experience of the situation). But how can such an evaluation (proffered usually by people who have never even met Robbert and who have no first-hand knowledge or experience of these bizarre events) be regarded as seriously as the observations and testimony of the hundreds of totally reputable people who do know Robbert and who have repeatedly witnessed such events while in his company--some of us now over many, many years?

"Apparition" Images on a German Colleague's
Camera at the "Woodenhead" Field

Robbert van den Broeke and Andreas Muller at the
"Woodenhead" field, August 2007. Photo: N. Talbott

In 2007 Andreas Muller, a German crop circle colleague of mine whom Robbert had never met, visited Hoeven a week or so after my brother's image had appeared on my camera in the "Woodenhead" field. Multiple amazing incidents had occurred in this field earlier that summer, including multiple crop circles, Robbert disappearing in front of two witnesses, and a possible "ET" (, and Andreas was eager to see any circles left in the field and also to meet Robbert and perhaps observe some of these strange incidents himself.

Robbert and I are both night people but we managed to set off for the "Woodenhead" field with Andreas by late afternoon, while there was still good light. Andreas had brought along his Olympus E-330 digital camera and almost as soon as we arrived at the field Robbert asked to use Andreas' camera. Since the Olympus is more sophisticated than the cameras Robbert usually uses he had to ask Andreas to set it in "auto" mode, after which he began taking photos.

Immediately images of a figure began to appear. Among them was a series of what looks like the same man.

The second of seven images of an unknown man taken by Robbert
with Andreas's Olympus E-330 camera at "Woodenhead"
field, August 2007.

In the 3rd, 4th and 5th images the man is very indistinct--but notice
that the field itself is in focus.

In the 6th and 7th images more details of the man's face and suit emerge, but
now the field is out of focus--all images were shot within 3 minutes.

Since these images appeared on Andreas' camera we thought perhaps he might recognize the figure, but he did not--and neither did Robbert or I. Other even stranger images also appeared, interspersed with this unknown man, but these will be covered in a future report.

As is always the case when human figures appear in the photos, the flash did not fire--although in this case the natural lighting was bright enough so one would not have expected it to. A check of several of the normal photos taken at the same time shows that the flash did not fire in these, either.

Over 3 minutes and 14 seconds Robbert took a total of eleven anomalous images--the first nine in a row, then one normal image, then the last two of the unknown man again. Although we stayed in the field a bit longer and Robbert continued taking photos, no other anomalies occurred. As in the past the anomalies, if they are going to occur at all, most often begin right away, almost as soon as Robbert starts taking photos, after which they sometimes cease altogether. When he and I are alone the anomalies often continue for hours or off and on all night--but with new people joining us it is more typical that they appear in brief spurts.

Neither Andreas nor I saw Robbert do anything unusual while he was using Andreas' camera, but we had not expected the anomalies to begin so quickly and, so, had not set up ideal observation positions. Later that night, in a different field, Robbert took many more anomalous photos using Andreas' camera ( and we were able to pay closer attention during that session.

Three Unknown Men Appear on
Dr. William Roll's Camera

Nancy & Dr. Roll in Hoeven, October 2008.

In the fall of 2008 I had arranged for the noted American parapsychologist, Dr. William Roll (, to come to Hoeven for a few days prior to a professional conference he was to attend at the University of Utrecht. Dr. Roll has published extensively in the scientific literature during his professional career and is highly respected for his work on RSPK (recurrent spontaneous psychokinesis), and I have been keeping him informed over the years about Robbert and the bizarre events which constantly occur around him.

Dr. Roll and Robbert and I spent 2 afternoons and evenings out in the fields, during which time Robbert used Roll's camera primarily--obtaining a wide range of new photo anomalies of the type we call "Light Phenomena" events (, as well as a few "UFO" photos ( But these were not the only anomalies which appeared on Dr. Roll's camera.

Dr. William Roll dictating his ongoing observations of Robbert
during our first night out in the fields.

Over many years Robbert has developed the habit of aimimg the camera at his own face during times when he feels a particular "energy" is present. On the second afternoon of Dr. Roll's visit we were all at Robbert's "special" field and Robbert decided to do this. In broad daylight--and with Dr. Roll and me watching--six images (taken consecutively over about a minute) appeared on Roll's camera which show at first a "smokey" substance in front of Robbert's face which then develops into a man's face superimposed over Robbert's.

First of 6 photos taken out in the field with Dr. Roll & me
present as Robbert aims the camera at his own face.

In another of the 6 sequential shots on Dr. Roll's camera an
unidentified man's face seems to be forming.

Only shot of the 6 in which the unknown man's face is fairly
distinct; it now obscures Robbert's head. Flash
did not fire in any of these photos.

This incident occurred during a break in a series of "light phenomena" photos which had been occurring and was also preceeded, and followed, by multiple totally normal photographs. As can be seen, it is still quite light in the field and both Dr. Roll and I could see Robbert clearly as he held the camera out in front of his face and took the photos.

Two other adult male faces had appeared the previous night while Robbert was using Dr. Roll's camera at home after dinner, again holding it out in front of his face and then taking multiple shots in a row. One man's face appeared in 24 photos--always the same image (as was the case with the images of my brother), but sometimes closer or farther away from the lens, sometimes very clear and at other times faint and/or strangely distorted.

Robbert is wearing a blue-checked shirt which can clearly be seen as the man's face begins to form. You can also see just a little of Robbert's spikey hair just above the "apparition" face.

One of 24 photos of what looks like the same male face.
Here it is only partially formed.

In another shot in this series on Dr. Roll's camera the man's
face is clearer. Again it seems to be centered directly
in front of Robbert's face.

In this shot the man's head seems to be at a different angle
& completely occludes Robbert's head.

Here the same man's face is smaller & now completely within
he photo's frame, again obscuring Robbert's face.

Immediately following the 24 images of this unknown man another, totally different male face appeared in the next 15 shots. With this third male face it again looks like the same basic image over and over, and it also varies in distinctness, size of image, and focus distortions of parts of the room and/or Robbert's shirt.

Here Robbert face is clearly visible and the new man's face
smaller but fairly clear.

Man's face has become larger, but notice the distortion in
almost all of the rest of the photo.

Clearest image of this 3rd unknown man's face.
Background seems to be in focus.

Man's face is still large, but some parts of the background
are out of focus again.

Another photo in which the man's face covers Robbert's
entirely, but background focus seems OK.

Because Robbert was using Dr. Roll's camera when these three different male faces appeared we had hoped that Dr. Roll might be able to identify them, but he could not, nor could I or Robbert. And so we cannot be certain these images represent men who are deceased, although we suspect this is likely. As always, when human faces appear the flash did not fire.

If anyone reading this report does recognize any of these images we would appreciate any information that can be provided.

Dr. Roll was not in the same room when Robbert took the last two sets of male images and, so, cannot comment about them in particular. But he was present and watching when Robbert took the shots of the first man while we were all out in the field the following day and--regarding those--he saw no indication, no evidence whatsoever, of deception or fraud.

The last section of this report (Part 6) presents a series of images which include--for the first time--several children, taken during my Easter, 2008 visit to Holland, with Robbert using my camera again. I was with Robbert as he took all of these photos, as usual moving around a bit as Robbert moved so as to aim the lens in the direction of the "energy." As time goes along the "apparition" images change, but overall they seem to be more and more clear, as you will see.

<< Return to Part 4 | Top | Continue to Part 6 >>