"...as some people have the ability to accurately identify the pitch of any musical note..."

I get the point, but the example is not good. We can TEST the pitch of a musical note and measure it directly and repeat it, and record it...etc.... auras are something that we can't photograph, measure, record, repeat under controlled conditions..etc. (Kirilian photography is itself a disputed technique) If only a limited number of people can 'see' them, then the answer might be that that they are mistaken (I don't accuse anyone of lying) and that the phenomenon is subjective, like vivid dreams.

It's a funny argument that whenever someone 'sees' something that others don't (like two little girls at Lourdes) that the answer must be "oh, the rest of you just aren't tuned in" or "The Virgin Mary didn't choose to appear to you."..etc...

We sceptics hold our stubborn position, not because we know such claims are totally impossible, but because we know that the are other ways and conditions that can cause someone to subjectively have experiences that seem real. It is here that Occam's Razor is applicable.

All you have to do is read reports from 10 witnesses to an accident or crime to realize that the car can't be both red AND brown, and the guy with the gun couldn't have both 6'3" and 5'7"..etc... The mind can be fooled, even when the supposed memory is recent and intense!!

It is always worth investigating, (indeed investigations go on constantly) and SOME vivid & intense experiences may indeed reflect reality. (Little Hawk may indeed have seen a 'real' phenomenon when that 'alien ship' appeared....but who, and what and how and why?...etc) When we have demonstratable, repeatable, public, recordable instances...preferably with artifacts, THEN we can do more than shrug and say "well, that must have been interesting".