Matthew Williams, Circlemaker

[mike]

So really Matthew the big question here is are all circles man made ?

I dont think we can ever answer this in the affirmative.

You can rightly claim all the circles youve made are man made.

But to the question "have you made all the crop circles ever documented ?" the answer has to be no

I'm not necessarily saying that means some are made by ET,or that some makers are commissioned by intel orgs. But the bottom line is despite all the evidence you or anyone else can provide regarding man made circles, the answer for some people to the first question posed, must always remain "we dont know"

People will look at all the evidence and make their own balance of probability call.

But i doubt either side of the debate will ever convince the other beyond a shadow of a doubt

As ive posted earlier, the reports by human CC makers of paranormal stuff associated with their own works is what makes this subject still interesting for me.
Without that aspect it might well be an open and shut scenario. but its inclusion in the story is what stops me from calling "case closed" on the CC enigma

Even Lundberg hasnt got the whole picture yet

Working backstage with the circles has allowed me to journey into the heart of an anomaly. It's been a real eye-opener, as well as providing a fascinating sociological insight. I certainly haven't got the whole picture yet - but I've got a much clearer one.

Statements like this from human circlemakers leave me with questions, not answers

 

[Constance]

Nobody is asking you to, we're just asking for your summarized opinion on the facts or events or whatever that lead you to believe that this guy is an MI5 agent, we don't need the whole history of CC research to get that certainly? If you can't provide your reasoning, I don't know why you would expect anyone to believe what you're saying or why you would even mention it in the first place, it's extremely bad form to accuse someone of something and then refuse to illustrate the reasons for your accusations.

OK, then I shall have to stand defined as having shown extremely bad form. I thought, and still think, that my reference to the widely surmised MI5 hypothesis to account for the history of the crop circle subject in Wiltshire provided background information evidently unknown to many members of this forum and important to know if one is to understand the context of much of what Matt expressed in his interview -- and much of what is being debated in this thead. If the moderators feel that my posts were inappropriate here, they should feel free to delete them.

 

[Matthew Williams]

Agreed. Especially when he'd attempted to recruit one researcher to help him trick another.

The main question to be asked about cc hoaxing in Wiltshire, as I see it, is why it's gone on as a major pasttime in Wiltshire for more than 35 years and why it's so important to the people who have become key spokespersons for it to continue to pound away with the 'allmanmade' claim (even extending the effort by requesting to be interviewed on the Paracast).

The pounding away over there gets propagated primarily through internet message boards and has reduced much of the cc conversation to diatribes and even character assassinations of prominent researchers who remain unconvinced that all crop circles have been manmade. The human ccmakers who perpetuate these diatribes and character assassinations seek to persuade anyone who will listen to them that literally 'all crop circles are manmade', meaning not just crop circles in the cc hoaxing capital of the world but everywhere and over a very long time (for crop circles [plural] have been observed, reported, and even written about over several centuries, in the UK and elsewhere).

I don't see a rational motivation for the efforts exercised up to the present day in Wiltshire to sell the 'all-manmade' claim. Most people in the world who are interested in crop circles realize that humans can and do make many impressive crop circles (primarily in Wiltshire). That in itself does not (cannot) account for all crop circles worldwide, many of which do exhibit anomalies of biological, mineralogical, and physical kinds. Williams's meagre effort in the Paracast interview to discredit Levengood's research indicates how little the 'allmanmade' contingent has done to refute that research. Chris asked a pertinent question about whether Williams or his ccmaking colleagues had pursued an explanation for the high EM energies measured in a demonstration circle he had produced for some researchers including Simeon Hein. This is a research question that could easily have been explored in making a number of test formations in different circumstances (variations in light, humidity, temperature, degree of moisture in the soil, crop types, etc.). Williams's answer was that he and his colleagues have not pursued such an effort. I wonder why not when it could strengthen the claim that some apparent cc anomalies, at least, can occur in manmade formations.

But rhetoric is easier than research, especially since most of the scientific research that went on in Wiltshire in the 90s was discouraged (in effect made intractable before it could be completed) by several well-organized manipulations presented before the media (including Doug and Dave's 'confession'). So rhetoric it is these days, and in my opinion an opportunity lost to pursue some significant anomalies showing up in our time.

I think you are suggesting that paracast should not have guests which offer other points of view. This requires then that there is a universally accepted answer and that all paranormal exists with one answer -no varied points of view.

You suggest that circlemakers try to use forums and other media in order character assassinate others. However this is simply offering truths like Levengood isnt a doctor tho he claimed he was. This and other things would be classed as assassinations where as I would say they are very important salient points which will make people rethink who they are trusting and whos research they should re-evaluate. You also fail to see that people also use these forums and media to try and get people to distrust circlemakers will many mere suspicions and falsehood such as "we work for Mi5" and are "evil people" for example. The first is just an invented myth and the second is just an opinion... so people are allowed to rag on us all day long but we are not allowed to defend ourselves or the truth?

You say that you cannot see a motivation for why we do it. Its clear I thought. People love the circles so people like circlemakers provide what people love. Circlemakers all over the world have copied what we in the UK started. As explained in the show via the mowing devil argument this may go back into history. Circlemakers enjoy seeing the public see their work in the media via newspapers, tv movies using the concept of crop circles as a storyline. You could ask yourself why do people like music for the same reasons.

I think you need to sweep away your ideas of plant anomalies, microwave damage and cellular changes etc as this was all work pioneered by Levengood who made up his title Dr. He is the only person ever have his paper removed from Pschologia Plantarum journal because they found out its science was totally wrong and that he had called himself a doctor. Up until his death he was still telling people he had his work in this journal when they had removed it and are prepared to speak to anyone who asks them why it was removed. So please put aside this mans' bad science and wait until someone comes along who has the right scientific credentials to say crop circles have strange anomalies. Bear in mind no scientific bodies have found anything of note in the crop circles. That does not mean it may not be there simply that no credible bodies could give a monkeys about it. So its up to people to get real science work done which will be taken seriously and can be repeated which is a fundamental requirement of science. There must be a reason that Levengood work was ignored by biologists right??? Perhaps because they knew better than he! Like nearly ever biologist would know that those "blow nodes" were a normal effect called phototropism and all it took was for Italian researcher Franchesco Grassi to ask an Italian university to look at samples and they said "this is well known about and a very normal effect". This blows away Levengoods research as that of a uninformed man. I am sorry that this is how it is, but we cant change the facts.

 

[Matthew Williams]

And to think he had the nerve to lay blame at the foot of visitors to crop circle sites for damaging the farmer's crop! I thought Gene and Chris should have held his feet to the fire over that one. He is by all intents and purposes a criminal trying to make out that he's the good guy.

I know what I did was criminal damage but I feel that we are cheated out of land rights by birth into a Empire related system... so much like American indians who had their land taken away from them only to them have to ask permission to own a house and live on the land. We in the UK had land stripped away by kings with armies. I choose to fight back with peaceful art as a form of protest against this unfair system which allows rich people to own thousands or acres of land whilst a poor man has to rent from the rich man.

Whilst my views are not universally accepted and some people would rather side with the "system" in charge much as some people want the blue pill and to go back into the Matrix and "believe whatever they want to believe" as the movie states. I prefer to take the red pill and say bleep the system.

Also did ancient man have to ask permission to build stonehenge or put white horses in the chalk on the landscape, or to draw cave art. Why them do we have to grovel and beg these days. No farmer asked my permission to stick chemicals on the and which is actually belonging to us all as part of our birthrights. So if they didn't ask my permission to pollute the water table with their chemicals why cant I make a crop circle which turns peoples mind on to art and the possibilities of thinking outside the box.

Like I say, not politically correct - but I never wanted to be.

 

[mike]

So Matthew whats your take on the reports of equipment malfunction sometimes reported

While using his compass in the Ridgeway crop formation, U.K., Dan noticed that the compass would no longer find true North. From the compass' point of view, North and South were only separated by ninety degrees which is impossible! This occurred while we were standing in the formation and Dan had been walking around quite a bit inside. The compass took about an hour to begin working properly again and functioned perfectly for the rest of the trip. It had never malfunctioned like this before.

documented reports of scientifically measurable anomalies which have occurred inside crop formations - such as cameras failing, new or fully charged batteries going flat within seconds, high electromagnetic fluctuations, in the order of 200-300% increase from the background frequency

These crop circle tourists had their brand new Canon camera stop working immediately upon entering this recent formation at East Kennett in the U.K. A few hours later, the camera was working normally again. We've seen this type of strange electronic equipment failure many times in previous crop circles.

I think even the BBC had equipment issues once inside a circle

 

[Constance]

So really Matthew the big question here is are all circles man made ?

I dont think we can ever answer this in the affirmative.

You can rightly claim all the circles youve made are man made.

But to the question "have you made all the crop circles ever documented ?" the answer has to be no

I'm not necessarily saying that means some are made by ET,or that some makers are commissioned by intel orgs. But the bottom line is despite all the evidence you or anyone else can provide regarding man made circles, the answer for some people to the first question posed, must always remain "we dont know"

Well said. It needs to be added that crop circle research continues on the part of researchers (unfortunately no longer supported -- actually insupportable -- by academic scientists and the institutions that fund and publish their research). The short-circuiting of that research in the 90s is the primary reason for my own argument with the hoaxers and whoever/whatever has engineered the current dominant public perception of crop circles as 'all manmade'. I'm convinced that the series of media events (beginning with Doug and Dave's 'confession' and soon moving on to Operation Blackbird and one or two others) were mounted to destroy scientific interest interest in crop circles. That those well-organized manipulations of public perceptions succeeded is an intellectual outrage.

As ive posted earlier, the reports by human CC makers of paranormal stuff associated with their own works is what makes this subject still interesting for me.
Without that aspect it might well be an open and shut scenario. but its inclusion in the story is what stops me from calling "case closed" on the CC enigma

It's exceedingly ironic that the hoaxers' current spokesmen (MW being a primary one) are now pressing the issue of hoaxers' paranormal experiences in the fields after a history of generally ridiculing paranormal hypotheses concerning cc. As I mentioned earlier, it seems to be an attempt to draw more interest back to the cc subject, but the motivation for it is unclear.

 

[Matthew Williams]

Suit yourself, I still think I got the gist of what you were saying, here's how you started assessing him:

So, it seems to me you're mad, and you're calling 'our' guest a bonafide criminal. Why not point out Striebers cowardly behaviour instead?

From my perspective, Williams is a bonafide real-life non-paranormal trickster, and some people swallowed it, hook, line and sinker.

I will always defend what I did as an attempt to catch a bad researcher out Mr Glickman - who was back then calling himself Professor Glickman when he wasnt a professor. Since I revealed this he has stopped using this false title. I wanted Whitley to know that this was the calibre of the person he was having on his show... ie a man who didnt know as much about circles as he said he did. I think in the end it showed up two bad researchers, Glickman and Strieber.

 

[Matthew Williams]

You really are a beauty as we say here in OZ...the guy destroys peoples crops and then says after being asked by gene and chris, why is the number of crops diminishing?...and he says "because it costs alot of money to be involved in this past time...insert facepalm...so the poor farmers who are living on the bread line because multinational corporations are raping them should foot the bill for this guys illegal activities? During the interview he was asked why they couldn't ask the farmers if they could use the fields with their knowledge and he replies..we couldn't afford the cost to create the circles..again it's ok for the farmers to foot the bill? Is he a criminal? you tell me?

A lot of the famers who didnt get offended by having circles on their land charged entry to the fields and made a lot more money than the crop would have given them. Thats a bonus to them. The miserable farmers who wanted to expend massive efforts to keep people from seeing the circles and wouldnt charge entry just ended up getting sad and angry and lost the value of the crop. Now some would say well its not for circlemakers to force the farmers hand into becoming a tourist attraction... but then no farmer asks me if its ok to spray pesticides which pollute the water table and cause my allergies to get worse...

There is a saying around here. "You never see a poor farmer". When you hear the stories of farms shutting its often because foreign produce can be imported for cheaper than a farmer can farm with all the associated costs. That is a governmental thing based on costs to run, fuel and regulations for dealing with livestock etc. You still see farmers driving around in BMWs and Jags and Range Rovers and driving 300,000 tractors and having their own half a million pound combine harvested tucked away in the shed. Sure they are poor - living with tennis courts and swimming pools on their little farm estate. My heart goes out to many of those Wiltshire poor farmers.

Yes in some parts of the country livestock and cattle farming by traditional methods is suffering because of mega agri farms doing mass cattle farming and nobody can compete with this enterprise run by greedy types who care little about the welfare of animals who are treated like machines and crammed in sheds and pumped full of chemicals to fatten them up etc etc. People want cheap meat - greedy types will give them cheap crap meat. The expensive meat comes from poorer farmers producing higher quality produce but often unable to compete. Its a complicated argument but one I am not too much interested in because farmers are just interested in killing the land and animals for food as seeing as Im a vegetarian - there isnt much that a farmer says to me that impresses me often.

Its like meeting military people who are quite happy to put bullets in peoples heads, often innocent peoples heads at that. I call that being a trained murderer but in some peoples eyes these are "heros". Sorry to be controversial. What im getting at is there are two sides to every story.

 

[Matthew Williams]

I Haven't listened to the episode yet, but I got to say this is some impassioned response. I am hoping you guys touched on the logistics that these circles must have involved. As one who does find it hard to comprehend that, given the various logistics and equipment needed and lighting...assuming that not all crop circles were done by the light of a full moon and/or flashlights, the time involved be it just a few people or if it was a group of people and the number of them over the years how is it that matt was the only one nabbed...because of whitley it seems...and only a couple of confessions. Talk about a tight lipped tight knit community. Having said that Muadib's posts nailed my sentiments exactly (including the fervour) here. I admit I pretty much fast forwarded through the Colin Andrews episode but if he claimed that he created a crop circle with his mind, muadib brings up a very, very, good point, also despite my prior points I am certainly not ready to claim that crop circles are a form of a communication because if "they" were, as muadib pointed out "they" are doing a piss poor job about it. The only thing we come away with is "so the aliens know algebra, good for them" what's more why make someone fly thousands of feet above the earth to in order to communicate with them. Do "they" not understand we all have email now? and understanding that I'm not knowledgeable about crop circles per say, you don't hear of many circles that are created in more remote hard to get to areas, if someone wanted to communicate with us but only at altitude the skys the limit there are planes crisscrossing this globe everywhere so that things should be all over the place not just farmers fields, which conveniently offer easy access but at the same time if it's just a bunch of artists and one feels that earth is suitable to be used as a canvas why not just kill some grass using lime in a neighborhood park ? If it sounds like in trying to have it both ways I guess I am because in this situation both sides of the argument seems to have more holes that bring up even more questions.

If in the near future Monsanto comes out with some kind of seed guaranteed to be resistant to crop circle makers and chatty aliens then we 'll all know who is behind this.

Why use crop. Simple its an easy medium to shape with a plant of wood and the design shines in the sun and looks impressive. One cant do this in grass with the same effect, it looks messy. Sand circles are popular now but the sea washes them away. At least with a crop circle you get time to study it and its there for a few months a year then also washed away by a combine. So in this effect crop circles are recyclable and unlike using paints - they are an environmentally friendly art form made in a living substance. Maybe it is the fact that the substance is alive can add to energies which are detected by others with equipment. If the people didnt actually walk in the circles after creation then the farmer could recover more of the corn which would be a bonus.

 

[Matthew Williams]

dr.abbadon, do you have a link to that article by Mary Bennett reviewing MW's presentation at Devizes town hall? Thanks for the information you provided there.

Oh no not Mary Bennet - lord save me now.

 

[Matthew Williams]

Very little is 'straightforward' in the insular world of crop circles in Wiltshire, the cchoaxing capital of the planet, where crop circles became a site of ideological struggle decades ago.



The question of paranormal influence in crop circles was raised decades ago by cc researchers at the point when it became obvious, in the increasingly complex circles, that intelligence of some kind was involved in the designs, leaving Meaden's purely physical meterological hypothesis behind. It's not serious cc researchers that are currently pushing the theme of 'paranormal influence' on cchoaxers; it's the hoaxers themselves who are doing that. What is their motivation for doing so now? It appears to be a desire to reinspire public interest in crop circles (interest that widespread hoaxing itself destroyed). The question is 'why', for what purpose? Is it civic interest on the part of cchoaxers, given that the local economy depends heavily on tourism centered around the cc? Is it the difficulty of finding something new to occupy the hoaxers' lives and minds after all these years? Is it force of habit? Is it the desire to perpetuate the ideological battles between researchers and hoaxers that have long since transcended the circles themselves in Wiltshire's local 'ccworld'? Maybe all of the above. Maybe more. Jimi H observed in this thread that Wiltshire's ccworld is ripe for sociological analysis and I think he's right about that. But to accomplish such an analysis will be difficult even for a team of sociologists since some of the information needed to understand what happened in Wiltshire over the last four decades is unavailable to the public.

ps: Richard Hall's documentary concerning cchoaxing and hoaxers is only the latest expression of the perception (decades old) that government interest and activities concerning the cc phenomenon have manipulated pubic perceptions concerning the possible origin(s) of crop circles.

Constance, crop circle makers have always tried to impress upon researchers that they were making them but it is the research community who is in extreme denial of the existence of competent circlemakers. We never told people that had to believe in aliens or some such other but the idea started after the Doug and Dave era and persisted on. Most circlemakers I know will always point people at evidence of human made origins. Some teams which like to play the tongue in cheek game because they want their art of be vague and legendary like a myth I think are entitled to play it that way but I am not one of those people. I prefer to be straight down the line with what I present which is why Colin found it much easier to deal with me.

There has never been any govt sponsorship of circlemaking. I have seen Richard Halls documentaries on the subject of crop circles and know that he didnt attempt to speak to myself or other circlemakers at any time. Much like the believer community he think he has the answer and then just uses believers to back up his arguments. This as far as I am concerned reeks of politics rather than science.

Yes I would agree that circlemakers (we prefer that term over "hoaxer" thanks) can ge very obsessed with maing circles but as I have stated on the show and on many other occasions, when you are a circlemaker who believes that coincidences happen in the circles you make it becomes an obsession to see what comes next - what piece of magic and mystery and to observe peoples reactions to your work. Most circlemakers hate the slog of making the circle but love the reactions it gives. Give a circlemaker a day of rest and he is ready to go out and do another one. Its also a social thing in that it brings people together - circlemakers to work with each other and the public who love to flock to the circles and meet others in an environment where people feel free to open up and share experiences they have had with the paranormal.

 

[Matthew Williams]

A trickster might also damage stuff in attempting to prevent enlightenment to the genteel citizens.

In point of fact, one of the original CCmakers org members, Robert Irving, has attempted to employ the 'trickster' in some of his hyper-rhetorical representations defending cchoaxing and seeking to undermine his readers' confidence in collective analysis of and reasoning about all phenomenal appearances encountered in the world. Sorting all this out will be a task for the more philosophically oriented sociologists.

Every circlemaker is different. Do not be quick to jump to tarring all circlemakers with the same brush. This is the exact reason I created the 3 hour documentary called Circlemakers which is available on you tube. Is is also why I created CirclemakersTV, so you the circle enthusiast could experience for yourself the attitudes and opinions of circle creators to realise that they come from very different backgrounds and belief systems. Robs "trickster" element as you perceive it does not tally with me for an example... as I believe that circles create genuine paranormal activity. You really should watch the shows and I am sure it would surprise you to see that there is more than "hoaxing" going on and that it can be positive.

 

[Matthew Williams]

I guess if you're intent in finding a paranormal aspect to these circles then that would make sense. It just strikes me as odd that a higher intelligence with a supposed important message to convey to mankind would be worse at communicating than we are. I've heard a lot of theories for the circles and I don't pretend to know what your personal interpretation is, but what I get from most circle enthusiasts is kind of the same thing that you tend to get from some believers in UFO's, ie crop circles are here to convey a message or make us think. If that's the case, it just seems to me that there are so many more effective ways to go about it, ways that will get people's attention and actually lead to something positive. Instead, they seem content just to screw with us, it doesn't strikes me as the way an actual higher intelligence would attempt to communicate, it's ineffective at grabbing the vast majority of people's attention and the messages are never anything beyond what we already know.

I think your idea about whatever the intelligence that may have been behind this phenomenon at one time having moved on is an extremely interesting one. Perhaps that's why we seem to be continually spinning our wheels when it comes to these types of phenomenon and yet we seem to get nowhere. They start the trend and we perpetuate it, and by the time most people are aware of it the real phenomenon is long gone, leaving us frustrated and confused. I can't really see why the intelligence would want to communicate in such a hit and run fashion, but it's an interesting idea nonetheless.

perhaps all the circles have to do is make people go wow and "what if" and then the process is set in place that the person will become more open minded and new ideas will flow in. If a circle can do that then it has succeeded. If people want to view it as simply highly complicated art that talented people can do in the dark then that still makes that type of person go "wow" as to our potential. Also the underground nature of how people get away with making art which is so much open to interpretation - ie it isn't an advert or a slogan or a message of some kind - it is an invitation to you to decide what it means to you... so for each person a circle can mean something different. That is also a great power of the circles.

 

[Randall]

So if Pepsi commissions a crop circle of their logo, what is the message? That Pepsi is affiliated with aliens? Cereology hasn't communicated anything substantial about aliens or anything else. So what's the point? Nice wall calendars? Cool T-Shirts? So what if UFOs haven't communicated anything either. At least with UFOs we know we're not dealing with the local vegetation.

 

[Matthew Williams]

What if there is an aspect to this thats skirting the rules?
In the same way a political graffiti artist doesnt add his name and home address to his/her message.

It may be that landing on the white house lawn or motherships over london and new york are simply not allowed.

OR

They may not be trying to communicate with us, just coax us down a path to a point when they can

It may not be a black and white issue, communication or not, zero or one, on/off.

Perhaps the process must by necessity include a prelude



In that context it makes perfect sense for the message to be to a degree ephemeral and ambiguous.
It gives those who are not ready for such a reality a way out, and those who are subtle confirmation.
A quantum telegram, whose contents must be resolved by the individual observer

If crop circles were a message in one language the anyone who didn't speak it wouldn't get the message. Perhaps in creating an unusual geometric form we are talking to a subconscious part of our minds which responds to feelings and emotions rather than language. So maybe crop circle designs can work like music or maths as a universal language which can be interpreted by people with their own cultural overlays if they wish or to represent something deep inside us.

Do not forget we are highly visually orientated beings and what better way for a higher conciousness to communicate than via a subtle subliminal message. Would not a crop circle qualify as such?

 

[DaveM]

I know what I did was criminal damage but I feel that we are cheated out of land rights by birth into a Empire related system... so much like American indians who had their land taken away from them only to them have to ask permission to own a house and live on the land. We in the UK had land stripped away by kings with armies. I choose to fight back with peaceful art as a form of protest against this unfair system which allows rich people to own thousands or acres of land whilst a poor man has to rent from the rich man.

Whilst my views are not universally accepted and some people would rather side with the "system" in charge much as some people want the blue pill and to go back into the Matrix and "believe whatever they want to believe" as the movie states. I prefer to take the red pill and say bleep the system.

Also did ancient man have to ask permission to build stonehenge or put white horses in the chalk on the landscape, or to draw cave art. Why them do we have to grovel and beg these days. No farmer asked my permission to stick chemicals on the and which is actually belonging to us all as part of our birthrights. So if they didn't ask my permission to pollute the water table with their chemicals why cant I make a crop circle which turns peoples mind on to art and the possibilities of thinking outside the box.

Like I say, not politically correct - but I never wanted to be.

I know what I did was criminal damage but I feel that we are cheated out of land rights by birth into a Empire related system... so much like American indians who had their land taken away from them only to them have to ask permission to own a house and live on the land. We in the UK had land stripped away by kings with armies. I choose to fight back with peaceful art as a form of protest against this unfair system which allows rich people to own thousands or acres of land whilst a poor man has to rent from the rich man.

Whilst my views are not universally accepted and some people would rather side with the "system" in charge much as some people want the blue pill and to go back into the Matrix and "believe whatever they want to believe" as the movie states. I prefer to take the red pill and say bleep the system.

Also did ancient man have to ask permission to build stonehenge or put white horses in the chalk on the landscape, or to draw cave art. Why them do we have to grovel and beg these days. No farmer asked my permission to stick chemicals on the and which is actually belonging to us all as part of our birthrights. So if they didn't ask my permission to pollute the water table with their chemicals why cant I make a crop circle which turns peoples mind on to art and the possibilities of thinking outside the box.

Like I say, not politically correct - but I never wanted to be.

I have been reading your spin on how the 'evil greedy' farmers have polluted the soil and have given you hay fever. I had to pipe in. Give us all a break, okay? My take on what you do is hooliganism, pure and simple. Sorry Mr. Williams, but the system we live in is based on people owning property. If you don't like it, get a meaningful job and purchase some land of your own. From what you said on the webcast, it is always the other person who is the bad guy, never yourself. It's Whitley Streiber, the farmers, those crop circle people who write books and print calendars on your hard work. Funny how you never take any blame onto yourself. Maybe it is time to grow up and take some responsibility for your actions and quit blaming others.

I know what I did was criminal damage but I feel that we are cheated out of land rights by birth into a Empire related system... so much like American indians who had their land taken away from them only to them have to ask permission to own a house and live on the land. We in the UK had land stripped away by kings with armies. I choose to fight back with peaceful art as a form of protest against this unfair system which allows rich people to own thousands or acres of land whilst a poor man has to rent from the rich man.

Whilst my views are not universally accepted and some people would rather side with the "system" in charge much as some people want the blue pill and to go back into the Matrix and "believe whatever they want to believe" as the movie states. I prefer to take the red pill and say bleep the system.

Also did ancient man have to ask permission to build stonehenge or put white horses in the chalk on the landscape, or to draw cave art. Why them do we have to grovel and beg these days. No farmer asked my permission to stick chemicals on the and which is actually belonging to us all as part of our birthrights. So if they didn't ask my permission to pollute the water table with their chemicals why cant I make a crop circle which turns peoples mind on to art and the possibilities of thinking outside the box.

Like I say, not politically correct - but I never wanted to be.

 

[Heidi Lemmer]

I have been reading your spin on how the 'evil greedy' farmers have polluted the soil and have given you hay fever. I had to pipe in. Give us all a break, okay? My take on what you do is hooliganism, pure and simple. Sorry Mr. Williams, but the system we live in is based on people owning property. If you don't like it, get a meaningful job and purchase some land of your own. From what you said on the webcast, it is always the other person who is the bad guy, never yourself. It's Whitley Streiber, the farmers, those crop circle people who write books and print calendars on your hard work. Funny how you never take any blame onto yourself. Maybe it is time to grow up and take some responsibility for your actions and quit blaming others.

Well said Dave, was just ready to write the same thing. It's kind of like having a peaceful protest and some idiot breaks off and starts smashing all the glass on the shops along the way. Add a few cars, burn a garbage can, bust the fire hydrant and wow, we have art, a statement, payback to all the rich. To me, Mr. Williams sounds like an extreme game player, someone who thoroughly enjoys messing with peoples heads.

 

[trainedobserver]

Heres the thing, people try and force an explanation, its either real or a hoax 1 or zero.

The hoax/real paradigm is based on a false assumption, i.e. that crop circles are of mysterious, anomalous, or unearthly origin.

That is a good question for Matthew. How many crop circles are created with the intent to make someone believe they were other than man-made? I'm thinking a very low percentage. If true then man-made crop circles are not hoaxes. They aren't paranormal, but they are not hoaxed paranormal events either.

The man-made explanation really does not have to be forced. You can look at the things and see the signs of human construction.

 

[mike]

I have to add also that i find the logic in the argument since some crop circles are man made, all crop circles must be man made flawed.

Its akin to saying since i can paint van gogh copies that fool the experts, its stands that all van gogh's must be fakes

"Suspicion has been cast on some thirty works by van Gogh, put on the market by the art dealer Otto Wacker, which are now thought to be forgeries. Within a short space of time this has done more for the artists fame than his prophets were able to achieve"

This article considers the subject of 33 paintings attributed to van Gogh which were first pronounced genuine in the standard catalogue of his work, then collectively rejected as fakes, and at a yet later stage partially reclassified as genuine. Today it is an established fact that the pictures are fakes, so it is difficult to comprehend how neither the art experts nor the courts at that time were able to reach
satisfactory conclusions.

Vincent van Gogh: The Fakes Controversy

 

[manxman]

No it does'nt mike.

ive been shooting [decoying] over 'crop circles' for nearly forty years of crop protection, they are just wind blown areas of crop, that go down during torrential rain storms, normally where the crop is the thickest, hence why you do not see natural 'circles' at the edge of fields, where the crop is at its thinnest.