Talk:Aura reading

factuality
I came across this on new pages and was in the process of softening up the NPOV but ran into an edit conflict, I'll wait until the original editor is done (later this afternoon AEST) and put my edits back in without interfering. By the way, if you are going to tag it, it's usually a great idea to put some comments on the talk page :-) Elomis 21:48, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

I worked on it to and came up with the following


 * Aura Reading is the art of investigating the human energy field, or the energy fields of other sentient beings.


 * Auras are energy bodies, made of electro-magnetic energy. Auras contains precise information about how an organism including communication, truthfulness, emotions, sexiness, and reactions to power.Fact Temporary reactions to life situations show up, along with long-term proclivities, chronic complaints, and gifts of the soul. Auras represent a huge reservoir of information that anyone can access unlike expression and body language, auras cannot be faked. An aura reading can be used for relationships, self-knowledge, healing, and consumer skills.


 * In popular culture, auras are seen as colors. This is open to dispute and Carolyn Myss has gone on record that she reads auras diagnostically without visualising the aura. Teacher and spiritual healer Rose Rosetree has developed a system to counter the "color by number" method of aura reading. It can be measured with regular photography.


 * Anyone can learn to read an aura provided the instructor allows the student to use his or her genuine gifts. The success rate for reading auras as colors is not so encouraging. Barbara Brennan’s system, probably the best known in the United States today, requires that students match her perceptions in order to be considered competent aura readers. Some aura readers, known as empaths, are born, not made. It is claimed that they can read auras and feel an experience similar to being that individual. This contrasts to non-empaths who read auras.

However the redirect works alot better in my opinon. David D. (Talk) 22:25, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Another issue is that the Rosetree books appear to be spam. David D. (Talk) 22:28, 17 October 2006 (UTC)