Matthew Williams, Circlemaker

[Jimi H.]

..It is most likely though that people have made circles for fun for a very long time and this would be the most obvious and simple answer.

...

Maybe the Nazca lines are the oldest known 'crop' circles?

Julian Richardson has moved onto sand...

..

Very nice, it looks striking in the sand.

 

[Matthew Williams]

For me the big aha moment was hearing Matthew explain the plant anomalies sequence and the mysterious, genetically altered node mutations. It took me back 15 years to previous debates about the supposed xtraterrestrial agency responsible for these anomalies. BLT hung their hat on this scienctific upchucking the way Leir claims similar orgies of "science" over the alien implant mythology. This thread's range of belief systems is a wonderful spectrum of what the paranormal is all about from believer to curiosity seeker to skep-dick.

And speaking about @Muadib, my fellow enthusiast, I like the way you had no dog in the fight but persisted to cheer for the critical vantage point - a good place to truly see crop circles for what they are: human constructions engaged in commentary about ccbelievers. You could easily academicize this position the way @Jimi H. accurately did with the big smooth strokes of his electrified tune. Artists never really get to define themselves - that's the job of the critic/historian.



I think this was a pretty astute comment, as was trainedobserver's later comment:



I would really like to hear @Matthew Williams respond to these points as Matthew speaks well of Colin, but identifies trying to make points to other ccresearchers is like walking through treacle. So do you, Matthew, take any responsibility for the cult like experiences and altering of human personalities that have resulted from your late night field graffiti? Forget the researchers deaf to your grainy taunts - what about all the believers you have helped spawn?

But back to the aha moment: if the ccphenomnon, including all the BLT legitimization of cc as genuine xtraterrestrial artifacts, is totally bogus, then how many other paranormal pursuits are based on out of context woodcuts, or begin in layers of myths (stories invented to explain wild phenomenon that we now know to be prosaic events) and today are relaquered by the researchers' claims, who in their garbles, give the people, as M. Williams says, exactly what they want?

And then does that make The Paracast just another Waystation where we are all sitting around the digital glow together in the cave, speculating on the value of pictographs while chewing on that finger hash (dangerous stuff - best to stay away)? The 16 different ccpuns that cropped up in this episode suggests a kind of repetition. But then anything circular is bound to provide the odd synchronicity here and there.

Do I take responsibility for peoples cult like experiences. Well I think the circles attract people to this very special part of the English countryside. It is a very pretty part of the world and everyone I now who lives here says it has a bubble of energy that is so nice to return to when you come home. Some people cant stand to be away from Wiltshire for too long. I think the ancients knew of possible reasons why this was and it may be the ley lines. The earliest settlement in the UK have been found in Wiltshire. This is why ancient man made some of their most important temples of stone here. Making crop circles is like a rediscovery of an ancient form of land magic where you attract people to the area by the energy of the circles. This is like visiting a holy site... you feel a sense of achievement after you find what it was you were looking for.

Now what people to choose to take away from those experiences is beyond the circlemakers control. However for their own reasons they may feel elated, feel healed, feel that they are in touch with something prophetic and wonderful. We cannot really determine or steer what people will get but the pilgrimage for some people is a release of pent up feeling and emotion for some for others they may feel they have come closer to answers in themselves. If I was able to make people feel better by creating something like that then I think crop circles have succeeded. I think if the designs of the circles are very easy to spot the meaning to then the mind closes down somewhat as it feels it has already got the answer. If the circle is vague in its unusual design then this makes people study it more and try and engage with it and intuit the answer and this is where a persons own creative side comes forth.

To use another example it is like Hitchcock who said it is better to suggest horror in a movie than to slow the actual blood and gore. Letting a persons imagination kick in. That is what circles do, obviously without the blood and gore, I hope.

It is also comical to us circlemakers that when we have to cover up our mistakes with some weird and wobbly odd looking thing that serves to attract the eye away from a wonky line or a non symmetrical area of design, then as if by magic that ends up being the bit that people love the most reading lots more meaning into those things because of the big big red nose so to speak (ie the mistakes)

I must say though that as most circlemakers are unknown that they cannot claim credit as being cult leaders because they neither benefit in cash or any other way from their creations other than knowing people are enjoying the circles they create. However the crop circle researchers are harvesting people for money purposes and control - getting them to buy their merchandise and books, dvds and to get them into their VERY EXPENSIVE conferences where their minds are taken down many windy avenues of thought which usually serve to excite as well as confuse people. These books, dvds and conferences all choose to ridicule circlemakers though and thats very sad because its like killing the golden goose. Not only does this alienate the circlemakers from the public who love their work but end up unable to believe people could then make these works - it means that circlemakers are reluctant to talk to the public for fear of verbal or physical attacks. How ironic that all these researchers rely on circlemakers but then choose to demonise them and hold them at bay. Seeing as so much money is made by everyone BUT the circlemakers I think the word cult does apply to the researchers. If you commit heresy by exploring human circlemaking or even speaking to circlemakers you are often made to feel very unwelcome at these conferences and groups so the word cult is quite apt.

I hope that answers your question.

 

[Matthew Williams]

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.

Im not upset by Constance repeating what she has heard elsewhere from the horrid rumour mill. However if you can accept that the rumour mill is there to destroy any interest or faith you may have in circlemakers then I am happy to explain to you why the Mi5 thing is a complete myth. I dont want to give named credit here to the fools who started this rumour because they did it just to be nasty and for that reason I dont think they deserve credit for their actions.

After all someone was bound to bring it up, but its really much better that people learn why researchers feel the need to spread false rumours about circlemakers, it is because they dont understand what we do and also those who do understand what we do want to make money from the subject which requires people do not believe it is humans doing it. These people who make money out of the subject are usually the most vengeful towards us. They act like we owe them a living off the backs of the circles so our place is to make them and STFU.

Some of these people even take my photos which I have provided free of charge to the crop circle connector site and they repost them on their own websites with (c) themselves on their pages. In effect taking our work again and making it theirs. Then they complain about me saying that I am making money from photos and that the crop circle connector is paying me and making loads of money.I make no money out of it. Another false rumour.

Do you see now how these people operate. We are just there to make them money and CCC website is just in their way as its bigger than they are so now they have started spreading hateful rumours about that website also.

It literally is like we as circlemakers are supposed to make circles and just shut our mouths otherwise we are going to get it in the neck and anyone who hangs around with us too. The situation has sickened me so much I have decided now that the gloves are off and I am going to expose these people and what they are up to. I wont get libelous and name them on here because paracast doesn't need the aggravation they can cause, but on my own sites you can bet I dont hold back from exposing what these people are up to. Did you know for example that it costs £90 to go to the Devizes Crop Circle Conference. Most circlemakers couldnt even attend this if they wanted to, so they arent allowed to be part of a conference that is made up of the work they create.

Next you have the selling of passes to visit the circles. This was started by a woman from the Netherlands. It was supposed to be to pay the farmers for compensation to their crops and to gain access. Now the farmers are enraged that someone would try and sell tickets to go on their land so they have banned people visiting the circles and for the first time last year only 3 circles were part of this scheme and 40 circles were banned from people entering. When you think about it it is again very cheeky for an outsider to come in and think they can sell tickets to see things they didn't even create on land that isn't theirs. Did the farmers get paid compensation for the circles. No they didn't... the money was split up and paid to only the 3 farmers who let people on their land. So the whole scheme was a lie.

This is what circlemakers have to deal with... everyone else interfering with the work and trying to take control of everything. It got so many circlemakers upset that they stopped making circles last year. One of the most prestigious circlemakers who has been making the best stuff for 20 years hung up his hat and has started making sand circles. So you saw the numbers of circle drop and the standards of circlemking last year was at an all time low.

 

[mike]

To me, this if the fallacy of the whole IA singularity deal, supposing that human attributes apply to machines.

A computer doesn't 'want' anything, it has no intentionality, it's a numbers crunching machine. Only a human could 'want' a consciousness, because only a human (or animal) could relate to the concept. And since a human already has a consciousness, only a Dracula-figure might 'need' yet another.

Btw., you don't avoid the mystery of being by invoking non-supernatural alien creators. You only complicate matters further, because who created the aliens that supposedly prey on humans?

For starters you are stating opinion as fact, how do you know whats possible in regards to AI, how would you know what such an entity might think or want ?.

Nor are we talking about computers at all, we are talking about (SI) Synthetic intellect
To a sophisticated SI, human memorys or experience sets might just be data, collected for the same reason we collect books.

But why collect a persons experiences as transcribed to paper, if you have the means to cut out the middle man and collect and store the actual memories themselves.
Given the choice of uploading Platos written works, over his direct experience set as pure data, id go the latter myself.

Platos written works are nothing compared to the potential of being able to load his entire conciousness into an SI driven virtual simulator. You could have a direct conversation with this SI Plato, indistinguisable from the original biological Plato.

Even better if you were integrated into the SI matrix, you could not just talk with him, but if you wanted you could see through his eyes, share his personal experience as he experienced it, see /hear /feel /smell what he smelled when he was in native biological form.


As for who creates these proposed post biological entitys, the answer is in the description and indeed is trending in our own very real models

Biological intellect comes first, it then creates synthetic intellect.

To quote davies again

"I think it very likely – in fact inevitable – that biological intelligence is only a transitory phenomenon, a fleeting phase in the evolution of the universe,"

Which brings me back to yet another reason why such an entity may not want to interact directly with biologicals such as ourselves.

How would such entitys reproduce ?
A simple copy of itself is just a copy, it would be like playing chess with a mirror

It might replicate the model that led to its creation, ie biological intellect that then creates and merges with synthetic intellect.

Find a biological species with potential, tweak and prod it to the point where it starts creating its own technology, seed it with some technology if needed.
Let it follow the natural course of creating its own version of synthetic intellect, one which has its own unique charater based on its biological precursors.
Uploading their experience sets at death to fill out its database, so that it has a library of its history, not a library of books, but pure data.

You would want to interfere with these builders as little as possible, enough to ensure they can complete the project. But not enough so's to ruin the unique aspect you are trying to create.

It only has to happen once (as indeed it seems to be here)

SB-AI 2013 : What can Synthetic Biology offer to Artificial Intelligence? Satellite Workshop at ECAL 2013
Cognitive AI

Synthetic computer-based artificial intelligence will become available well before nanotechnology makes neuron-level brain scans possible in the 2020s.
What’s happening is that existing technologies like functional MRI are beginning to give us a high-level functional block diagram of the brain’s processes. At the same time, the hardware capable of running a strong, artificially intelligent computer, by most estimates, is here now, though it’s still pricey.
Existing AI software techniques can build programs that are experts in any well-defined field. The breakthroughs necessary for such programs to learn for themselves could happen easily in the next decade—

Runaway Artificial Intelligence? | KurzweilAI

If a biological sophont in advance of us by millions of years has gone down this path already, its possible such synthetic progeny might use the method described to create new SI's.
Simply replicating the same model that created it, indeed to such an entity it may even have the leisure to seed a lifeless planet and do the whole thing from the ground up.

It may be that SI is the natural end point in the evolution of intelligence in any model that holds it.
Biological intellects like us, may indeed just be a fleeting (and minority) phase of the whole process

 

[Constance]

I must say though that as most circlemakers are unknown that they cannot claim credit as being cult leaders because they neither benefit in cash or any other way from their creations other than knowing people are enjoying the circles they create. However the crop circle researchers are harvesting people for money purposes and control - getting them to buy their merchandise and books, dvds and to get them into their VERY EXPENSIVE conferences where their minds are taken down many windy avenues of thought which usually serve to excite as well as confuse people. These books, dvds and conferences all choose to ridicule circlemakers though and thats very sad because its like killing the golden goose. Not only does this alienate the circlemakers from the public who love their work but end up unable to believe people could then make these works - it means that circlemakers are reluctant to talk to the public for fear of verbal or physical attacks. How ironic that all these researchers rely on circlemakers but then choose to demonise them and hold them at bay. Seeing as so much money is made by everyone BUT the circlemakers I think the word cult does apply to the researchers. If you commit heresy by exploring human circlemaking or even speaking to circlemakers you are often made to feel very unwelcome at these conferences and groups so the word cult is quite apt.

You raise some interesting issues here, Matt. At the outset you do a good job of evoking the visceral and (for lack of a better word) spiritual ways in which crop circles have affected people over these last 45 years in Wiltshire. I think it might have something to do with the place itself, the ancient megaliths, the ley lines that connect them, and so forth, but I'm convinced that it's been the crop circles themselves that have worked this 'magic' that keeps so many people returning to them. And I have to point out that that 'magic', for lack of a better word, deeply affected the despised 'researchers' as well, for 45 years now. You paint them as mendaciously having exploited the circles purely for profit in their books exploring the circles, and their possible significance, over these many years, but I think that those of us who have read those books can't take that judgment seriously. Again, the proof is in the pudding: one has to read some of those books to see what I'm talking about. I realize that your personal experience there (the last 20 years or so?), given your sometimes public interventions as a circlemaker, has been emotionally frustrating and even painful for you. But whether it can ever be proved that all crop circles, in Wiltshire and elsewhere in the world, have been manmade -- and indeed since that cannot be proved -- I think it would be be beneficial if you would try to open yourself up to the way all this has affected the researchers too. They are individual people who have been deeply affected by the crop circles, so much so that many of them have devoted decades of their lives to attempting to account for how and why crop circles affect people as they do. The hostility that developed in Wiltshire between human circlemakers and researchers over the last 35 years has been as painful for them as it has been for you.

 

[mike]

Are all the circles man made - the simple swirl damage circles are probably not man made. Also prior to Doug and Daves starting to do them on a major scale who can say from the past. It is most likely though that people have made circles for fun for a very long time and this would be the most obvious and simple answer.

Obviously I have not made every single circle. Correct.

I think one can apply some general tests to show if a circle is likely to be made by people by the levels of crop damage present and visible artifacts such as "combing", which shows that a tool like a plant was used. Also construction lines which are made by a persons feet walking around to do the initial lines are a dead give away. Why would aliens use planks 1 metre wide and foot marks 1 foot width wide. So you could use this method to discount most of the circles out there. What would you be left with... not a lot.

I think people should not overlook the possibility that humans have felt drawn to create these circles by some form of internal dialogue with either a gaia mind - a group mind or perhaps an outside intelligence which wants certain shape to be made. So this could mean that Colin asking for the celtic cross was either his idea picked up by a circlemaker direct from Colins mind to that circlemaker. Or perhaps the more exciting idea would be that Coin picked up an idea from a group mind that was transmitting "Celtic cross" - and a circlemaker also picked up the idea and went out and did it. This is the piece we don't know - how is the transmission of the idea given. What is the direction of transmission - person to person... or from some "other" mind to all people who pick these things up.

As you mention, John Lundberg. One has to be a little bit careful with John as he does openly state that he wants to keep the mystery alive by injecting stories into the mix. He thinks that circles as an artform require mystery to be added and the truth to be witheld. This can apply then to much of what is said. You have to decide if you want to believe him. Whereas I am stating that I will not create stories to excite people in this manner and the things you hear from me are real experiences.

To give one example - John stated that his team couldnt have created the Milk Hill Galaxy formation because it was just too complex and they wouldn't have enough time. This is an example of John wanting to promote the mystery of this and a few other circles in order to give an air of mystery back to some formations out there and also so people would like to doubt Johns teams ability to make complex circles. John likes this position as he feels it serves the subject well to cloud over can humans make all the circles or not. This is not a game of truths I like to play. To that end I have even admitted to all my circles that I have created with my team. I cannot admit to ones I have worked on whilst helping other teams as this would break my oath of secrecy whilst helping these other teams with their designs which would be rude of me to do so... I am one circlemaker who is trying to build bridges and not apply the smoke machine.

John also liked to post a Mi5 application form on his website because it would feed into this argument about are Mi5 involved in crop circles. I have tried to dispel this one and steer people towards truth.

John thinks adding some confusion is a good thing. I am very much against this.

I do hope therefore that John and his teams stories about their own wierd experiences are not part of the myth generation again. I can assure you that my experiences are truthful, and not to add myth to the subject. I want also to think that the circlemakers who have appeared on CirclemakersTV are being honest with their experiences - and I hope that seeing these people interviewed for the very first time ever on our shows would give people a real opportunity to judge if they feel they telling the truth.

Ive have considered Johns motivation for his comments, and dont doubt your personal views as to why, might have some merit

But at the end of the day its He said / She said, your version vs his.

Which still leaves me with "i dont know"

Sometimes in this murky enigma we all love so much, thats as honest and accurate answer as we will get

 

[mike]

. This is the piece we don't know - how is the transmission of the idea given. What is the direction of transmission - person to person... or from some "other" mind to all people who pick these things up.

Army developing ‘synthetic telepathy’ - Technology & science - Science - DiscoveryNews.com | NBC News

Given we have already developed "proof of concept" in regards to such a technological mechanism.
Its not unlikely that an advanced ET species might have a more sophisticated version.
A SI, would by its very nature be even more skilled with such techniques


Its worth noting this guy

The Crop Circle Ship

Thinks that even the man made circles, contain valid data ..........

Probably coincidence, but in my SI musings i posit we may only be the factory workers and not the finished product being built.

Perhaps human CC makers are too, biological waldo's

waldo [ˈwɔːldəʊ]
n pl -dos, -does
(Engineering / Tools) a gadget for manipulating objects by remote control
[named after Waldo F. Jones, inventor in a science-fiction story by Robert Heinlein]

used to lay down something elses design

 

[Goggs Mackay]

@Mathew - thanks for coming and getting involved in the thread, I'm sure many posters are grateful to have a chance to question you directly. Not too many guests do this.

By the way, this forum genuinely is just the best paranormal forum going, by a mile - you are of course welc0me to stay and get involved fully if you have the time and inclination. I'm sure you have plenty to contribute on many topics.

 

[trainedobserver]

@Mathew - thanks for coming and getting involved in the thread, I'm sure many posters are grateful to have a chance to question you directly. Not too many guests do this.

By the way, this forum genuinely is just the best paranormal forum going, by a mile - you are of course welc0me to stay and get involved fully if you have the time and inclination. I'm sure you have plenty to contribute on many topics.

I just want to second that. I really do appreciate the great body of work you've put together and your expertise in the area of Crop Circles and your willingness to share those.

I hope you will hang around.

 

[Constance]

One must be careful with these type of statements because I have helped people with equipment malfunctions many times. The usual culprit is people leaving equipment in cars overnight and tents which have a lot of moisture and then they turn them on and burn out circuits and then batteries run down because of shorted contacts. . . .

Good advice re camera care, Matt, but it evidently doesn't cover the many cases in which cell phones, cameras, and some other electronic devices have worked well until they're carried into crop circles, then stop working, and then start working again once they're taken outside the formation. I've read accounts of this happening even to BBC cameramen, who certainly know how to care for their expensive equipment. And I've read in reliable sources that one very expensive BBC videocamera was not only disabled but could never be made to work again. We should also note that compasses have not worked properly in crop circles.

 

[Constance]

Also Matt, re this:

apart from the time it seemed like we were being stopped from making a circle by some balls of light that seemed to want us out of that field

Would you describe that event in detail? How many BOLs, whether they acted in uniform ways, how far apart the ccmakers were when the event began, and how it looked and unfolded from your own location?

 

[Constance]

Re the sand circles, I also like them very much and admire the skills of the artists involved in them. Quite a number of researchers and followers of crop circles do feel that something is missing from them by comparison with crop circles. I think what's missing is the contribution of the living medium of the crops and its particular effect on the viewer (even in photographs). I still think that the many photographs obtained inside cc (and closeup with the crop) by Andrew Pyrka for a period of years (in the last decade) are remarkable recordings of what affects the visitors inside crop circles, where the design as a whole is unknown as yet (in most cases) and the sense of the fluidity of the rising and falling of the plants is vivid and, no other word for it, beautiful. This aspect is one of the most aesthetically satisfying aspects of crop circles in my view. I'll link some of AP's photographs from that period of his involvement with cc to provide a sense of what I'm talking about.

 

[manxman]

Good advice re camera care, Matt, but it evidently doesn't cover the many cases in which cell phones, cameras, and some other electronic devices have worked well until they're carried into crop circles, then stop working, and then start working again once they're taken outside the formation. I've read accounts of this happening even to BBC cameramen, who certainly know how to care for their expensive equipment. And I've read in reliable sources that one very expensive BBC videocamera was not only disabled but could never be made to work again. We should also note that compasses have not worked properly in crop circles.

I would like to read that, but i rather think we will have a differing opinion on 'reliable sources'.

 

[Burnt State]

Ah but you hit the nail on the head... you said Circlemaking involves vandalism. Then you go onto say that civil disobedience can involve ignoring certain laws. What about the law that says dont vandalise... ie that is exactly what we are doing, ignoring **that** law.

To vandalise the countryside is exactly what farmers seem to think they have a right to do simply because the law says its ok to pour chemicals over crops and to farm GM crops and to round up cattle in dirty confined ways and pump them with medicines which get into the meat and milk. So its ok for farmers to run riot but not ok for people to make some pretty patterns in the corn. I think one has to weigh up who are our masters here and who sets the rules and why one group of people can get away with things because they are the masters and the slaves are prevented from doing pretty much anything because they dont "own the land". My contention is that we all own the land so the law i wrong and I am ignoring it. I think this meets your criteria.

Ok, I can see that anti-establishment approach, as well as the value of the land being recognized as something that should not be owned by individuals or private bodies. I favour the idea of land as something that should be a shared trust, something to be leased to the corporations with only the strictest of regulations. So from that perspective your vandalism is an environmental protest and it also acknowledges more Indiginous ways of thinking about human relationships to the land. However, these thoughts are not somehing I've ever interpreted as part of the agenda of ccmakers, nor evident in the designs. Maybe I'm missing something.

Thank you for your detailed response about the cult aspects of crop circles and i agree that it is the priest who spells out religions, and that would be the ccresearchers in this case. You are, though, very much involved in a new age approach to personal transformation with this new form of organic graffiti. I wonder a little more about the intentionality of your work in the fields. Why are the designs so mandala in nature as opposed to making more purposeful, environmental statements? It seems to me that the objective is mostly centered on the thrill of the project & the creation of experiential spaces for people to take what they will from being in or looking at the completed design. Still, the bizarre duplicity of people meditating on designs they think are mystical in origin is a little weird. Maybe it's always been this way with circles on the land?

The animosity between the ccmakers and ccresearchers is an interesting binary and I'm glad that this history is finally getting some exposure direct from the source. I'm still not too clear on how paranormal the circles are as most of the examples/anecdotes provided appear to be more about looking for synchronicities than any real odd phenomen occurring.

You've really done an excellent job extending the interview into this discussion. I wish more guests did this. You are to be congratulated for walking into the paracast den and speaking freely and prolifically.

 

[trainedobserver]

Ah but you hit the nail on the head... you said Circlemaking involves vandalism. Then you go onto say that civil disobedience can involve ignoring certain laws. What about the law that says dont vandalise... ie that is exactly what we are doing, ignoring **that** law.

Well, I'm not a lawyer, but there are different categories for crimes. Civil disobedience, as I think of it at least, does not involve the more serious category such as the destruction of private or public property. The history of civil disobedience seems to involve passive aggressive tactics that are aimed at calling attention to a cause. A crop circle that says, "Screw the Overlords!" would seem to fit that bill, but I think we have many "clear messages" are coming through the crop circles.

Civil Disobedience can be a powerful tool in the advancement of a cause, but you the cause has to be clearly communicated in the protest or the act is pointless. Or so it seems to me at least.

To vandalise the countryside is exactly what farmers seem to think they have a right to do simply because the law says its ok to pour chemicals over crops and to farm GM crops and to round up cattle in dirty confined ways and pump them with medicines which get into the meat and milk. So its ok for farmers to run riot but not ok for people to make some pretty patterns in the corn. I think one has to weigh up who are our masters here and who sets the rules and why one group of people can get away with things because they are the masters and the slaves are prevented from doing pretty much anything because they dont "own the land". My contention is that we all own the land so the law i wrong and I am ignoring it. I think this meets your criteria.

I would just ask you whether your or anyone else's circle making that you know of actually comes from a place of protest as you outline above. It would appear the circle making proceeded the thought of using it as a protest for most. Am I wrong?

This aspect of crop circle making really does not matter to me personally. How the act of circle making gets rationalized has nothing to do with the "central mystery" of crop circles. I really don't have any interest in land ownership issues in England or a desire to discuss them. Other may. I say all that to say, I would hope we could all agree to disagree about the ethical aspects of crop circle making.

 

[Constance]

I also want to respond to this, Matt:

Im not upset by Constance repeating what she has heard elsewhere from the horrid rumour mill.

There are books and articles by researchers, written over several decades, in which the indications of security agency involvement in the crop circles in and around Wiltshire are elaborated. As I've indicated, Colin Andrews's Government Circles book (and his presentation at an international ufo conference several years ago, available on youtube) are easily available sources for those interested in this issue. As the longtime spokesperson/expert concerning crop circles, Andrews was the target of the media events staged to discourage all interpretations of cc other than the manmade hypothesis. Andrews also experienced a variety of personal intrusions in his life during that period -- the computer files containing his crop circle research notes were stolen from his home computer; his home telephone was tapped; then, on the way to a media event at which he was to be presented with Doug and Dave and their claims, he realized that his car phone was tapped and later discovered that his car phone charges during that period of time had been paid by a government agency. Shortly thereafter he was confronted by a self-identified CIA agent who came to his home one evening and told him (not requested) that he was now going to be working for that agency and propagating the view that crop circles were all manmade. Not long after that he left the UK, taking his wife and daughter with him to live in the US. These are not rumours but reports by a reliable and serious man, and they are coherent with other indications of perception management by some agency/agencies in the 90s, around the time when CCmakers.org went online as I recall.

 

[trainedobserver]

Well Gene was correct we did only scratch the surface of what could be talked about, but if your appetite is whet and you want the inside track on circlemaking don't forget to go to CirclemakersTV on youtube and theres 72 hours of circlemaker interviews to give you a very in depth look at what we do.

I've watched most if not all of your videos on both sites. I haven't been so diligent of late so I know there are some I haven't seen, so I probably do need to catch up. I think your appearing on the Paracast makes the truth about crop circles accessible to a wider audience, which is a good thing.

 

[Constance]

Its an owl ffs.

A very strange owl by the description of the farmer who had a closeup encounter with it.

 

[trainedobserver]

Mike,

The problem of "Are all complex crop circles man made?" might better be expressed in a better way.

We don't have to make statements like "all crop circles are man-made" or "some crop circles are not man-made."

We can ask a more definitive question:

Do known complex crop-circles contain hallmarks of human construction?

My answer would be, "All complex crop-circles that I have looked at, do contain hallmarks of human construction."

If you have a particular crop circle that you think is not man made now would be the time to ask Matthew to look at it.

I would love to see Matthew return to the Paracast and address particular circles that forum members submit.

 

[Constance]

Matt, would you provide identifications of or links to the circlemakerstv programs you refer to in the following extract? Thanks. Btw, I've watched a number of your cmtv programs and enjoyed them. I have no reason to doubt the testimony of your ccmaking guests concerning their personal experiences while making crop circles and their own motivations for doing so. I especially enjoyed listening to the program on which you had two young circlemakers, a couple or at least good friends (it might have been the program where you also interviewed Terje Toftenes by skype).

I have even done videos on youtube talking about this man who spread these rumours and if you can believe the pure cheek of the man, because I was daring expose his myth generation and his apparent mental illness... he demanded youtube remove the videos. So I have preserved them for all time on CirclemakersTv own website. You will have to check out Circlemakerstv do.t org website and select the SCANDAL section.