Crop Circle which blows the debate wide open

[Mogwa]

My three year old niece draws elaborate designs in the sands at the beach that fascinate me. They're usually a series of spirals and circles, and easily as intricate as some crap circles I've seen that were attributed to "aliens" by the likes of our friend Whiley Strieber.
Maybe she's one of those hybrids planted here to conquer the world. As I said, she's three, and can already read quite a bit of prose as long as it isn't too abstract. Her brother is six and reads at a sixth grade level. Damn, what happened to me? I guess I crapped out in the genetic lottery. When I was six all I cared about was eating, watching movies and playing with plastic army men. Ten years later those were still my basic interests, except I swapped the army men for flesh and blood women.
I was probably better off before. Oy.

 

[skunkape]

Maybe she's one of those hybrids planted here to conquer the world. As I said, she's three, and can already read quite a bit of prose as long as it isn't too abstract. Her brother is six and reads at a sixth grade level. Damn, what happened to me?

I was especially bright as a tot myself. I could read proficiently at 5 and knew the Latin base words for all of the dinosaur-names by first grade. I always perceived grown-ups as being a little messed-up in the head early on. Now that I am a grown-up, I realize that my intuition was dead-on from the beginning.
We're not here to conquer the planet, us hybrids. We just need a little "Slack."
It could possibly be more accurate to say that the "aliens" are here to un-conquer the planet.
<input id="gwProxy" type="hidden"><!--Session data--><input onclick="jsCall();" id="jsProxy" type="hidden">

 

[thefoundryman]

Some more complete pics from crop circle connector.

 

[thefoundryman]

I was especially bright as a tot myself. I could read proficiently at 5 and knew the Latin base words for all of the dinosaur-names by first grade. I always perceived grown-ups as being a little messed-up in the head early on. Now that I am a grown-up, I realize that my intuition was dead-on from the beginning.
<input id="gwProxy" type="hidden"><!--Session data--><input onclick="jsCall();" id="jsProxy" type="hidden">

Me too Skunk, cut from the same yarn you and I. Not sure if you heard the episode of Paratopia I was on, but we even sound alike. Willing to guess that you are 6ft tall and 160 lbs too.

 

[skunkape]

Me too Skunk, cut from the same yarn you and I. Not sure if you heard the episode of Paratopia I was on, but we even sound alike. Willing to guess that you are 6ft tall and 160 lbs too.

5'11 1/2" and 165 lbs...and hung like a mule. Which epicure of Parasmokia you referencing?
<input id="gwProxy" type="hidden"><!--Session data--><input onclick="jsCall();" id="jsProxy" type="hidden">

 

[brado]

That could be said of many of things we talk about on these forums

True enough but UFO's don't hang around, neither do cryptozoological creatures. This puppy will be there long enough for someone to get there and do some science on it. I wish they would!
B

 

[thefoundryman]

5'11 1/2" and 165 lbs...and hung like a mule. Which epicure of Parasmokia you referencing?
<input id="gwProxy" type="hidden"><!--Session data--><input onclick="jsCall();" id="jsProxy" type="hidden">

5,11' and 3/4", 165lbs and My partner will testify to the Hung Factor.
Born Aug 5, 1977
Parasmokia EP. in question. , If I had a Texas accent I could be your frickin doppleganger!

 

[TClaeys]

Here, find out how it's done: http://www.circlemakers.org/

Question:

Is there any information on how the circlemakers make the elongated nodes or explusion cavities that is found in the literature and samples taken??

This is the weird thing for me. Is it a question of these effects (elongation and expulsion) that the making of such a circle causes OR is there some misleading "research" that makes us think that these effects are the product of the circle?? I don't know if that even makes sense so let me try again.

Are the elongated and expulsion effects :
1. A product of some manmade circle engineering
2. Not really there at all (fabricated lie/hoax)
3. There, but also evident in grain outside the circle. Perhaps the researcher has cherry picked data inside the circle and not even looked or even ommitted data outside of the cicle that would contradict the effects inside the circle.

What to make of the crop anomalies?? Has this been addressed because I can't find it and it seems to be a distinguishing point.

Am I getting my question across here guys because for some reason I'm having trouble from brain to keyboard.

I mean we shouldn't rule out human creativity, ingenuity, and determination. We could make the complex patterns and the weave with a good plan. No doubt. But the "other" stuff is a bit more puzzling (or not). Help me out.

 

[Mogwa]

Question:

Is there any information on how the circlemakers make the elongated nodes or explusion cavities that is found in the literature and samples taken??

This is the weird thing for me. Is it a question of these effects (elongation and expulsion) that the making of such a circle causes OR is there some misleading "research" that makes us think that these effects are the product of the circle?? I don't know if that even makes sense so let me try again.

Are the elongated and expulsion effects :
1. A product of some manmade circle engineering
2. Not really there at all (fabricated lie/hoax)
3. There, but also evident in grain outside the circle. Perhaps the researcher has cherry picked data inside the circle and not even looked or even ommitted data outside of the cicle that would contradict the effects inside the circle.

What to make of the crop anomalies?? Has this been addressed because I can't find it and it seems to be a distinguishing point.

Am I getting my question across here guys because for some reason I'm having trouble from brain to keyboard.

I mean we shouldn't rule out human creativity, ingenuity, and determination. We could make the complex patterns and the weave with a good plan. No doubt. But the "other" stuff is a bit more puzzling (or not). Help me out.

I can share your frustration on this subject, but there's nothing unusual about that; it's the standard situation when dealing with any genuine paranormal phenomenon.
My problem is the automatic assumption that "aliens did it," combined with the credulity of so many who accept almost every crop glyph as being genuine.
I don't know what's behind it all, but I suspect that little gray people from Zeta Reticuli are very unlikely to be responsible.

 

[TClaeys]

My problem is the automatic assumption that "aliens did it," combined with the credulity of so many who accept almost every crop glyph as being genuine.
I don't know what's behind it all, but I suspect that little gray people from Zeta Reticuli are very unlikely to be responsible.

I completely agree. It just seems to me that the "debunker" crowd always insists that humans could make these things. And yes I think that is quite true. But they never offer any explanation for any of these other things. It's like "Listen idiots, people make all these things", .... "and the elongated nodes are explained by ......uhhhmm, give me minute". Actually they never even mention it.

 

[gadgetman]

Hi folks, as a newbie to the forums, please don't shoot me down in flames. I have a theory about crop circles.

According to Colin Andrews one way of determining if a crop circle is "real" or a hoax is the way the nodules on the stalks are blown out due to possible microwave heating.

We can all guess that the US are developing satellite warfare under the black projects.

How about this? To calibrate the instruments on board these satellites and to test, perhaps the controllers are having some "fun" at our expense by focusing these devices onto the crop fields of England and creating these strange patterns. Very much like a laser show which "draws" precise patterns in the darken sky.

 

[Schuyler]

How about this? To calibrate the instruments on board these satellites and to test, perhaps the controllers are having some "fun" at our expense by focusing these devices onto the crop fields of England and creating these strange patterns. Very much like a laser show which "draws" precise patterns in the darken sky.

A lot more probable than aliens, IMO. Welcome to the forums.

 

[David Biedny]

Gadgetman,

Welcome to our forums, and for my money, you might very well be right. That theory - which I've heard before, BTW - is entirely possible. Probably, I'm not sure, but possible, yeah, I would agree.

dB

 

[TClaeys]

Now that would be something else huh?? Lasers from space. I don't know if we could do that or not with such accuracy. But something needs to account for the expulsion cavities assuming they are accurately recorded and a true result of crop circle formation. So it's certainly as valid as any theory involving aliens.

But I wonder if such a device could both blow out the swelled nodules of a grain, elongate some, and at the same time gently bend over the crops as well. I don't have any idea.

 

[conor]

Look at the place they are happening...in and around stone henge. I would like if there are aliens involved. But ancient peoples felt a need to make this place a focal point for their.... religious experiences (but it is important that that we distingish between what we see as religion nowadays and what they saw as religion, probably a very natural kind of religion, not so exclusive to what ever humans say is right is right). It is an area of what they call "high strangeness", and it was respected as such. The gods intervened, and the gods were modern code for human experince as it experienced life, in all it's multi-faceted layers. Thus gods were metaphors for natural occurences (and unnatural and also human emotions and action). So, we have an outlet for a connection with the earth, our home, which transcends more than words, more than things we can articulate....

For so long in the western way of thinking about things, we have seen ourselvews as the centre, the rock with which to see everything else on the planet as in comparison to. But we are what we are. Perhaps a bit methodical and creative than most of the other animals on this earth, but still no less or no more. I am not part of the whole creationism vs darwinism thing. That is just people taking sides in a debate which is more about politics than anything else. I think that darwinism is the best possible scientific understanding of the way things work. Does that preclude other ways of doing things? If it does, prove it. Is there a God? If someone says yes or no to that answer, does that say anything about darwinism? IMO, no, because the atheist vs theist debate is a political one, NOT a scientific one, or a religious one. It is people trying to find a side, when in reality, perhaps we can say what is in the bible isn't true for us NOW. But was it true for people back then? Truth is not eternal, but yet in a sense it is, because for the person on the ground, that is the truth. Science should be veiwed as a tool, and it should not be used as the answer to everything, for, lets face it, everything is pretty much unknowable. It is not THE one way, but it is one of many ways. I don't know why I am going on about this in this post, but I think it is really important, and that's why I wrote it, especially when it comes to the paranormal.

Perhaps this confusion stems from the fact that America is a nation without a history. I don't mean to offend anyone, but folklore is a part of the history of any country, which is not teid to the country as a political entity but rather to the land.

We do identify forces in folklore. They take strange forms, but they do take forms, and thus can be normalised in a way. Science does not allow for that. It does in it's pure form, as a tool. But as a belief system, and that is what people mix it up with, and as a way of explaining the world, it is sorely lacking. That, IMO, is the great irony of science, the quest for knowledge being made into a belief system in itself.

That's why I advocate a openminded approach to crop circles.

I think I've just about explained my point of view to anyone in the paracast forums who maybe wondering "what is this guy all about". Is it wishy washy? I hope it is.

 

[Roro]

I think David and Gene have dismissed Nancy Talbot since their last interview with her where they got onto the subject of Robbert van den Broeke in Holland, but I think BLT research, and some other researchers, have learned to identify those circles that are man made and those that probably are not. If a circle has not been investigated scientifically then all we have is speculation.

As for Nancy and Robbert van den Broeke, I've heard her interviewed many times over the years. I think she's too close to that family to be considered an investigator of Robbert van den Broeke, so if you want to talk about him just let her tell the story and make of it what you will. But don't throw out all the good work BLT has done on crop circles because you think the Robbert van den Broeke story is wacky. In my opinion, David needs to mellow out sometimes.

 

[David Biedny]

Roro,

Read the forums. I've stated - repeatedly - that I absolutely respect BLT and Nancy for their work on crop circles. I've not thrown any of it out, I'm not sure why you have that impression. I am less enthused about Robbert. Is there something not clear about my position?

Gene, of course, can speak for himself.

dB

 

[Gene Steinberg]

Roro,

Read the forums. I've stated - repeatedly - that I absolutely respect BLT and Nancy for their work on crop circles. I've not thrown any of it out, I'm not sure why you have that impression. I am less enthused about Robbert. Is there something not clear about my position?

Gene, of course, can speak for himself.

dB

No disagreement. For some reason she got too close to this family and thus is accepting stories and evidence that's not been properly vetted. She has let her emotions take over, I fear, and that doesn't help in evaluating this case. She needs to step back.

As to the crop circle work, it has evidently been well done. But maybe she just tried too hard to find additional confirmation, which is where it stands.

I'm also curious what the other BLT members think about Robbert.

 

[AnnetteMarie]

Hi folks, as a newbie to the forums, please don't shoot me down in flames. I have a theory about crop circles.

According to Colin Andrews one way of determining if a crop circle is "real" or a hoax is the way the nodules on the stalks are blown out due to possible microwave heating.

We can all guess that the US are developing satellite warfare under the black projects.

How about this? To calibrate the instruments on board these satellites and to test, perhaps the controllers are having some "fun" at our expense by focusing these devices onto the crop fields of England and creating these strange patterns. Very much like a laser show which "draws" precise patterns in the darken sky.

that makes a lot of sense, for the last 20 or 30 years. but what about BEFORE then? how long have they been 'calibrating' their controls and the focus of the beams?

I think back to the 60's, maybe very early 70's, when a local from my old neighbourhood reported crop circles, PLUS seeing some sort of craft floating above his fields, the circles were the evidence of the machines.

Eddie was not known to be a hoaxer or a liar, although he is at least 5 years older than me and I only met him because he was also in my sister's wedding party, I would confidently say any who knew him would have no trouble believing he gave an accurate accounting of what happened.

so we have very plausible explanations for these phenomena for about 30 years or so, perhaps more - but those explanations can only go back so far in time.

or can they.....8)

 

[Roro]

Roro,

Read the forums. I've stated - repeatedly - that I absolutely respect BLT and Nancy for their work on crop circles. I've not thrown any of it out, I'm not sure why you have that impression. I am less enthused about Robbert. Is there something not clear about my position?

Gene, of course, can speak for himself.

dB

I based my comment entirely on the June 28th show. By the end of the podcast the tone of the interview was (in my opinion) less than respectful. It sounded to me like you (David) had decided she was a total nutcase. I'm glad to hear that is not the case and hope that when you are ready to talk crop circles again you will have her back (if she is willing). The volume of discussion on the boards is admittedly more than I have any hope of keeping up with and so I had not read your previous comments.