"Mutilated cow creepy, suspicious"

[trainedobserver]

Ok Mike, I've looked the subject until I was cross-eyed and made a judgement on the evidence at hand. You are welcome to your opinion.

Sorry if I misinterpreted your stance on the origin of these things. I thought you were arguing for a non-human origin, namely aliens. I'm essentially saying these things are of human origin and that while strange things might happen in conjunction with these things it doesn't change the fact everything points to a human origin for complex crop circles and cattle mutilations.

Also, just because I have not reached the same conclusions as you have does not mean I have not made a reasonable and honest attempt to evaluate the evidence. Really man.

 

[mike]

just listen to Williams Crop Circle TV show for example,

CROP CIRCLE MAKER - Matthew Williams

Paranormal researcher Matthew Williams, was the first maker of crop circles in the world to be convicted for his art. Devizes, Wiltshire. (First published in Naked - Magazine of the Weird and Wonderful)

Williams realised that researchers were making ill-judged connections between paranormal events and the crop circles, but this still did not explain the unusual phenomena that the circle makers were beginning to experience themselves in the obviously man-made formations:
“When teams of people go out into the fields and make large talismanic magical symbols, somehow that does actually have some effect on physical reality and strange things happen. A couple of years down the line and a lot more weird experiences had happened to us. But I don’t know how they happen, I just know they happened. I’ve seen small balls of light which have entered the field and chased us out on one occasion. I’ve seen them passing over head. On two occasions we’ve also seen black, shadowy figures. Not as clear as a person, a little bit more rounded, but a human shape. They just disappeared.

The very same individuals you cite as evidence that there is nothing more to CC's than crop grafitti, testify to paranormal aspects associated with the subject.

There is clearly more to this than humans making patterns in cereal crops.

If its case closed as far as your concerned that fine, but imo the evidence suggests anything but case closed.

I reached my conclusions honestly. I've mentioned before how at least two major crop circle researchers now freely admit they have been had and there is no real mystery in "who is making crop circles.

If you are refering to andrews and toftenes, then you have not been honest, either with yourself or with the audience here, the quote above is a classic example of where you have selectivly quoted them out of context, You fail to add that both of them also said

Terje told the show host Matthew Williams that he became interested and involved in crop circles in 2002 and had been convinced they were not made by people. His film received awards but now he felt foolish and embarrassed he said but went on the congratulate the people making them because they had made such a good job of them. He told Matthew that he thought it was time for the truth about all this to be told and went on to say that he was equally convinced now that there were also strange things happening around the circles.

Matthew was the first person who made circles to offer to me what was going on. Beyond the act of making them though, I knew there was something else less easily explained away, i.e. circles I had seen in distant lands and also in England, that were not made by 3 feet long boards and also many unexplained supernatural events directly associated with crop circles

This statement made by you, with no links to support it

I reached my conclusions honestly. I've mentioned before how at least two major crop circle researchers now freely admit they have been had and there is no real mystery in "who is making crop circles

Suggests that these two researchers support your premise all CC's are man made and there is no mystery associated with it.
Thats dishonest mate, i'm sorry but it is.
You pruned out the part where they also say a small percentage are "strange"
Again you dismiss that data, because it conflicts with your prejudice on the subject

You know the drill here Trained, If you make a claim you need to be able to substantiate it with evidence, its the same standard applied to guests on the show.

Youve made the claim 2 major CC researchers now admit they are ALL man made and there is no mystery, could i have a link to these statements ?

 

[trainedobserver]

The very same individuals you cite as evidence that there is nothing more to CC's than crop grafitti, testify to paranormal aspects associated with the subject. There is clearly more to this than humans making patterns in cereal crops.

Mike, haven't I been saying that, yes, strange things are reported to happen around these things? I've never denied that. I don't think it has anything to do with how these patterns are put into these fields however. I think it has more to do with the people involved. I personally have seen nothing in the evidence myself that convinces me that the patterns in the crops are a magnet for anything other than people to whom strange things happen. Does that make sense? It doesn't necessarily follow that the paranormal things associated with Complex Crop Circles are actually related to their construction. Williams for example, has wondered about some paranormal force that influences crop circle makers to make certain formations at certain times and provides numerous examples to illustrate it. While I think that is a possibility there are more prosaic explanations that place the more complex and assumptive hypothesis of paranormal influence lower down on the list for me.

If you are refering to andrews and toftenes, then you have not been honest, either with yourself or with the audience here, the quote above is a classic example of where you have selectivly quoted them out of context, You fail to add that both of them also said

I'm sorry Mike that was not meant to be a direct quote, but my understanding of the situation after having listened to those two guys talk about it. If they are holding out on some percentage of Complex Crop Circles being of a non-human origin now, I think it is only a matter of time before they eliminate whatever small number they are considering as non-human by conferring with the crop circle makers. I think things are at the point now where the identities of the makers of the vast majority of Complex Crop Circles are known within the community. I can only hope that Andrews and Toftenes are getting some help in identifying their outlying cases once and for all.

This statement made by you, with no links to support it

You want links? Use the search and look for the postings I've made over the years here on crop circles. I admit to being too lazy to replicate them. I've posted numerous links and videos over time. Go listen to everything Williams has put out on the Internet. (link below somewhere) I have repeatedly encouraged Gene to get that guy on the show to no avail. Go dig into the personalities within the Crop Circle research community and see who is really who they say they are. I have posted links on that subject in the past as well.

Suggests that these two researchers support your premise all CC's are man made and there is no mystery associated with it.

Again, that was in no way written to suggest that I was quoting anyone. Also, you will note I was specifically talking about who makes crop circles and not other things.

I apologize if I've misrepresented them, I don't think I have, however, if you will find and listen to the Crop Circle Makers TV episodes with Collins and Toftenes (links to which I have posted in previous cc threads), you'll hear them talk about realizing that human beings can and do make the incredibly complex crop circles in which odd-magnetic and electrical phenomena reportedly sometimes occur. You'll hear them talk about the dishonesty within the crop circle research community to admit this and so forth.

Youve made the claim 2 major CC researchers now admit they are ALL man made and there is no mystery, could i have a link to these statements ?

Can I have a link to where I said that Collins and Toftenes said ALL first? Because you know I did not do that.

I said:

I've mentioned before how at least two major crop circle researchers now freely admit they have been had and there is no real mystery in "who is making crop circles."

The last thing that I want to be is dishonest. You are free to interpret the quoted statement above any way you please however if you want to know what is intended:
I meant to convey that Collins and Toftenes are now saying in interviews that they both now realize that human beings can and do make Complex Crop Circles. The whole thing about being had does come out if not expressed in that manner. I put the quotes there around who is making crop circles in an attempt to focus the statement on how the crop circles are made as opposed to anything else that may be happening in association with them, not as some quote of those two men. Perhaps I should have written that differently. You will notice at no time do I use the word all or associate mystery with anything other than their origin as well. Honesty?

Here is one link. While you are there watch the rest of the Circle Makers TV episodes. I admit they are painful to watch at times but you are getting the inside dope. If you haven't watched his crop circle documentary from years past it is an absolute must watch. You can find it in his playlist.

I have to admit Mike that I don't see the use in throwing endless quotes and links up in a discussion about this business like we're having when we both have a demonstrated understanding and knowledge of the material. I'm not trying to make a case to a newby here or present a scholarly examination of the subject.

Let's drop back and look at what it is we are disagreeing about. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

1. The origin of Complex Crop Circles and Cattle Mutilations.
2. Their relevance to UFO phenomena.
3. The presence of a Spartacus gambit associated with them.

1. I contend (not speaking for anyone else) that absolutely all Complex Crop Circles have such a high probability of being man-made I have no problem stating that the modern Complex Crop Circle phenomena is nothing more than a human art form around which a cult of sorts has formed. That strange things are reported around or in these things doesn't surprise me given the individuals who are attracted to these things. I think if you review the work of Matthew Williams and his associates that is freely available on youTube that you'll get a good idea where I am coming from and why, some of which I have discussed previously. Although Williams isn't the sole source of this information his site is a good place to go for the inside scoop and clues to follow on the research/maker community.

2. In my estimation after reviewing the evidence that everyone else has access to on the Internet that Complex Crop Circles and Cattle Mutilations are of human origin. That there is some high strangeness involved is again not indicative as to their origins and does not connect them to the UFO phenomena as a source, some form of communication from their occupants, or anything of that sort.

3. I reject the notion that governments or other groups are faking Complex Crop Circles or Cattle Mutilations in some attempt to obfuscate real ones based on two things. One, the real ones have proven to man-made to begin with (in my estimation), and two, that such an expensive and risky operation to mask the small percentage someone believes to be non-human is unsound on every level from militarily, economically, and politically. The reason question is, "Why would they bother?" Every nightmare scenario imaginable is out on the table and promoted as reality by some faction or another already. Just to name one operational problem. It makes no sense to me but that is ok, a lot of things don't.

I would just like to add that when I began looking at Crop Circles years ago that I initially believed that they could be of non-human origin. So I did not have some predisposition that they were man-made, believe it or not. The more I looked into the claims of crop circle researchers, some of whose credentials didn't pan out like Levengoods, and listened to actual crop circle makers, the more I realized that something else was going on. So, it isn't like I approached this subject with my mind made up about it, I made up my mind after reviewing the various sides of the issue. I guess I feel like at some point with this stuff you have to get off the fence about it if you can. I felt like I could plop down on the side of man-made origin without compromising my integrity. If I am guilty of anything then perhaps it is laziness and sloppiness in presenting my argument.

I certainly didn't mean to misrepresent anyone in any of this and don't believe that I have. If you still think I have dishonestly presented anything then I'm sorry, that certainly isn't my intention. Crop Circles and Cattle Mutilations are interesting to me (obviously) but I do not find them to directly related to my main paranormal interest in UFOs other than where they intersect the community of people interested in strange things.

Crop Circles are a big deal being made about essentially nothing of consequence and Cattle Mutilations are a big deal that is being relegated to something of no consequence when it obviously isn't. I think that this is occurring has nothing to do with anything paranormal that is associated with them however.

 

[mike]

I reached my conclusions honestly. I've mentioned before how at least two major crop circle researchers now freely admit they have been had and there is no real mystery in "who is making crop circles

Thats the quote, not circle makers but researchers, and it was dropped into the discussion in the context of supporting your insistence, your repeated and vehement insistence that CC's and CM's are of human origin.

You cherry picked the part where they say they "had been had"
The part where they say they have changed their views, and that where once the believed only a small percentage were man made, they now believe the reverse the vast majority are in fact of human origin.
You didnt provide any links to those "admissions" just your own heavily edited synopsis pruned of anything that doesnt fit your prejudiced hypothesis

when you compare

I reached my conclusions honestly. I've mentioned before how at least two major crop circle researchers now freely admit they have been had and there is no real mystery in "who is making crop circles

with

circles I had seen in distant lands and also in England, that were not made by 3 feet long boards and also many unexplained supernatural events directly associated with crop circles

Which was also part of Andrews statement, the misrepresentation and dishonesty, the selective and biased quoting is painfully apparent.
And while i would normally accept this as an honest mistake, in this case i cant because youve insisted over over that youve spent a huge amount of time researching this subject, that in your own description, have done your due diligence and more.

Perhaps next time you quote "two major crop circle researchers" you should add a link to the statements, so we can read the entirety of the alleged quote, and not a prejudiced and pruned summary

 

[trainedobserver]

I'm going on his interview with Matthew Williams on Circle Makers TV. See the link below . I don't have a transcript, nor was I intending to quote him verbatim or I would have done it differently.

It is my understanding after listening to both Andrews and Toftenes on William's show, and reading the words of Collin Andrews himself, that both understand that Crop Circles that they once thought of otherwise were in fact made by people. I didn't intend to make it seem as though they were saying all of them were since that was beside the point (in my mind), but I can see where you might get that. I wasn't trying to be deceptive at the most I was sloppy.

Here is a link for Toftenes from Crop Circle Wisdom that includes the call-in. The producer of ' Cross overs from another dimension ' apologies to crop circle fans.


Here is something about Toftenes on Andrews website.
Crop Circles - The Final Phase and The Truth. Who or What Is Behind The Intelligence of Interaction?

Collin Andrews, May 20, 2011
"Award winning film-maker Terje Toftenes who made the documentary "Crop Circles: Crossovers From Another Dimension" appeared unexpectedly via Skype on Circlemakers TV during the show this week (May 18th, 2011).

Terje told the show host Matthew Williams that he became interested and involved in crop circles in 2002 and had
been convinced they were not made by people. His film received awards but now he felt foolish and embarrassed
he said but went on the congratulate the people making them because they had made such a good job of them. He
told Matthew that he thought it was time for the truth about all this to be told and went on to say that he was
equally convinced now that there were also strange things happening around the circles.

Most people who have followed this subject know that I came to this conclusion myself eleven years ago and
announced it on BBC television during 2000. I revealed the outcome of a two year investigation specifically into
people making crop circles and rounded up the figures that showed then that around 80% of crop circles in
England during 1999 and 2000 were man made."

Here is the CircleMakers TV show with Collin Andrews.

 

[mike]

But again lets start with Toftenes,

and went on to say that he was
equally convinced now that there were also strange things happening around the circles.

Thats not consistant an all man made scenario

You quote andrews

I revealed the outcome of a two year investigation specifically into
people making crop circles and rounded up the figures that showed then that around 80% of crop circles in
England during 1999 and 2000 were man made."

But he also says

A Formal Statement by
Colin Andrews

An estimated 20% of crop circles show no evidence of being made by people, while 80% do.

On Wednesday the 9th of August, I announced on national television and radio the outcome of an ongoing investigation into aspects of the crop circle mystery.

Four years ago I began measuring the EarthÎs magnetic field in and around crop circles. The project was initiated by on-going reports of anomalous magnetic phenomena such as spinning compass needles inside crop circles (witnessed by me amongst others during the 1980Îs), unusual failures of electronic equipment and radio frequency interference. The project enlarged findings of a German-based study conducted in the early 1990Îs.

The magnetometer survey included complex crop patterns as well as simple circles. Results showed a descriptive magnetic signature in a hand full of simple circles and basic geometric patterns. This signature consists of an increased magnetic reading which replicates the actual design of the crop pattern being measured, but occurs out of sync with the design by 3-5 degrees in a clockwise direction.

These findings may prove to be the basis of a natural mechanism involved in the creation of the formations or it may be a residual magnetic effect resulting from the creation of the crop circle. The model I have been developing, and will be collaborating on with further scientific input, is that the magnetic flux involved creates an electric current which effects the plants. The question of what causes the magnetic flux still remains.

and

I knew there was something else less easily explained away, i.e. circles I had seen in distant lands and also in England, that were not made by 3 feet long boards and also many unexplained supernatural events directly associated with crop circles

and

As a new study claims some crop circles are created by shifts in the earth's magnetic field, George Bishop, of the Centre for Crop Circle Studies, expounds on the phenomenon.



According to Dr Colin Andrews, who has studied crop circles for 17 years, about 20% are caused by eddies in the earth's magnetic field - the rest are man-made. He thinks a mysterious shift in the electro-magnetic field creates a current that flattens the crops in its path.
Is it plausible?
"Yes - it's a nice rounded theory," says Mr Bishop. Like Dr Andrews, he says all but the simplest circles are hoaxes.
The theory could explain why in some circles, microphones and recording equipment hit interference, he says. Some years ago, a BBC crew had difficulty recording in a circle.


"If the circles are formed by electro-magnetic eddies, there may be a residual charge of energy," Mr Bishop says.

You did it again, your last paragraph in the post above was

Most people who have followed this subject know that I came to this conclusion myself eleven years ago andannounced it on BBC television during 2000. I revealed the outcome of a two year investigation specifically into
people making crop circles and rounded up the figures that showed then that around 80% of crop circles in
England during 1999 and 2000 were man made."

Again you selectivly quote andrews, only where it "fits" your human origin hypothesis. you have to discard the other 20 percent he talks about as not being man made
You quote this researcher in the context of supporting you human origin hypothesis, and thats just not true, he clearly says 20 percent are not human origin

You write off as "So what ?" the magnetic anomaly aspect.

Which brings us full circle, in order to make the square peg that is the totality of the data, fit your round hole hypothesis, you have to shave the data, discarding 20 percent of it.
As such i find your conclusions to be suspect.

Im not saying i'm right and you're wrong, im saying your hypothesis must discard 20 percent of the data, data that imo is perhaps the most significant portion of the mystery.
The spartacus gambit hypothesis doesnt need to do that, it reconciles all the evidence.

Is it the answer ? i dont know, but i personally find a hypothesis that can reconcile all the data, rather than discard as inconvenient 20 percent of it, more satisfying

 

[trainedobserver]

Ok, Mike. What 20% of the data are you talking about? What data? Collin Andrew's opinion that 20% aren't man-made? What are you going on? Collin Andrew's or any other researcher can pull some number out of the air but what are they basing this on? You take this as proof of a paranormal origin for 20%?

On magnetic anomalies. Do you have any data to compare this to? Where is the control data? Where are the readings for non-formation crop fields? Does anyone ever get magnetic anomalies, electrical failures, weird feelings outside of crop formations? Of course they do. How does that data compare with readings taken from inside circles? Is the percentage higher, lower, no difference? Are there claims of magnetic anomalies occurring in crop circles that humans have just made? Yes there are. What does that tell you if anything?

All of these claims about paranormal events surrounding them aside, my opinion remains that crop circles are just another side show in the faux-reality show my friend.

If you want to believe in a paranormal origin for crop circles go ahead and be my guest but I am unconvinced. If you want to believe the government, military, or whomever is so concerned with public perception of crop circles and cattle mutilations that they construct their own to throw us off the scent then by all means do. I don't see it. They have much bigger fish to fry and more important issues to address.

This is just going round and around. You can have the last word, impugn me some more, whatever you care to do.

 

[mike]

Proving the old adage about none so blind.
You are happy to use andrews 80 percent are man made statement, but are forced to trivialise in order to discard the other 20 percent he talks about.

You are supposed to formulate a hypothesis that matches the data, not prune and massage the data to fit the hypothesis, which is what you are clearly doing.

As we've seen over and over in this dicussion, the same sources you are happy to cite as relevant, you will also label irrelevant when they dont agree with your hypothesis, aka cherry picking.

 

[SonofaSkunk]

aka cherry picking.

aka, had his mind made up before this thread ever started.

 

[trainedobserver]

aka, had his mind made up before this thread ever started.

Well you got me there. Yes, I made my mind up about this business some time ago and have yet to see anything to change it.

 

[mike]

To believe that the government runs around making yard art and butchering animals just to keep people from believing that real aliens are doing it is implausible for so many reasons. You have budget, personnel, and resource considerations that make such operations unlikely

I wanted to address this aspect too

Investigators need to take the advice of Gabe Valdez to heart

One of the most recent theories of Valdez made Howard Eliason quit his teaching job in Florida and move to New Mexico to continue with the search for truth. Eliason holds a PhD in education and is convinced that Valdez’s theory that some “obscure government agency” being responsible for the mutilated cattle holds a lot of water.
The evidence is strange, and it’s that strangeness that attracted both men to the mystery.
Valdez has documented finding gas masks, glow sticks and strange monitor-like devices near some of the mutilated cows. He has even documented clamp marks on the broken legs of the cows

So according to Valdez some obscure govt agency IS expending budget, personnel, and resources. Indeed in the human origin scenario time and money are solid factors.
In regards to CM's the question remains why ?
Why expend budget, personnel, and resources to obtain data that could be obtained far cheaper and easier via other clandestine methods, which leave nothing suspicious behind, like pretending to be a rancher/butcher/restauranter who likes to source and stock their own meat.
You get the same data but without the budget, personnel, and resource considerations
You could even steal the cattle
http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/11/28/9073821-western-states-see-comeback-of-cattle-rustling

And yet the extra budget, personnel, and resource considerations are being expended leaving behind in the cases valdez investigated what looks like a classic cattle mutilation.

I contend that the extra budget, personnel, and resources , which we know are being expended are being done so for precisely that purpose.
Indeed Valdez's conclusions say just that. That some obscure govt agency is leaving behind what look like classic cattle mutilations.
If the objective is to obtain data that makes no sense, its cheaper and easier and less suspicious to get that data other ways.

So according to Valdez some obscure govt agency is expending budget, personnel, and resources, leaving behind what looks like a classic CM.
But that doesnt translate to all CM's being of human origin.
This little anecdote describes it nicely

A mathematician, a physicist, and an engineer were travelling through
Scotland when they saw a black sheep through the window of the train.

"Aha," says the engineer, "I see that Scottish sheep are black."

"Hmm," says the physicist, "You mean that some Scottish sheep are
black."

"No," says the mathematician, "All we know is that there is at least
one sheep in Scotland, and that at least one side of that one sheep is
black!"

In Valdez's own conclusions at least some CM's are the work of in his own words , some obscure govt agency.
But that doesnt mean all scottish sheep are black

Whats implausible imo is that some obscure govt agency would expend considerable budget, personnel, and resources

Why does it cost so much to run helicopters?
I saw a guy on tv today, and he was talking about how much it costs to run helicopters when they are searching for people in the ocean. He said that it costs $3,000Au. per hour to run each helicopter

To obtain data that could just as easily be obtained by purchasing the cattle outright.

What we know from Valdez's research is the extra money is being spent, leaving behind what looks like a classic CM............

This is entirely consistant with the Spartacus gambit

 

[trainedobserver]

An Edmund Gomez interview. He discusses the marking and mutilation of his cattle along with his theories about what it is was all about.

 

[tyder001]

Jacques Vallee doesn't seem to buy the "two men hoaxing argurment."

What is suspicious about the two older men's "confession" is that it appeared simultaneously on the front pages of international papers and on CNN the same day. Any published author familiar with the difficulty of getting media attention will know that it takes a very powerful public relations firm to get a story to the front page of the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times, Le Figaro and many other papers the same day.


Where did the two pensioners get the kind of clout that would spin their claim around the planet? The result was instantaneous: The press and, more importantly, most scientists lost all interest in the story for 10 years.

Here is a link to the article. He seems to think it could be a weapon of some kind. I think both the military and the aliens are still in play right now. I have said before that I don't believe in aliens from space. But, I honestly don't know. And until I can figure out what it was I saw in the night sky hovering and then zig zagging around I won't be able to say "I know" much of anything. I keep going back and looking in the same spot but so far nothing else has "flown" over that path. Wouldn't a satalite have come back over at some point? Anyway, here is a link to the Vallee article.

Actually, here is a better link. It is part of an overall discussion that Vallee is having on a blog. You can google and follow along if you are interested.
Jacques Vallee: Of Crop Circles, meme wars and web-based flypaper - Boing Boing

Crop circles: "Signs" from above or human artifacts? by Jacques Vallee

 

[trainedobserver]

I'm talking cattle mutilations and you are talking crop circles.

Nevertheless, complex crop circles promoted as non-human artifacts are absolute nonsense and even Jacquee Vallee can be wrong. Their history, origin, and propagation are not that mysterious. My simple answer to anyone who doubts that human beings are responsible for them (with simple tools like ropes, boards, and even more complex devices such as rollers, exotic beam weapons are unnecessary) is to just find and talk to some actual crop circle makers. It doesn't take long before the scales fall from your eyes. If they don't and you (not necessarily you Steve) are still one of those who just can't believe humans can or are making the complex crop circles researchers sell calendars of, well good luck to you. It is a sad subject I don't care to go back and forth about. Folks can believe purple unicorns prance about and create them for all I care.

 

[tyder001]

Busted! Late in the day and I had just read this blog with Vallee. Put it in the wrong place. You are right however, Vallee or anybody else can be wrong. We do well to be skeptically open minded and not follow guru's .

 

[boomerang]

From the FBI's electronic reading room:

FBI — Animal Mutilation

There seems to be some genuinely creepy stuff here if you can make out the fuzzy quality pdf images.

 

[tyder001]

I just can't figure out why an alien culture would need to mutilate animals. Even if you say "well they are studying DNA or earth's biology" it still doesn't make sense. You can build a starship and travel across time and space but you have to butcher an animal to study it? Just have "Scotty" beam it up and you can have the whole damn thing if you want it. On the other hand why do governments need to butcher animals in fields across America? How does that distract the public (the media has done a masterful job in labeling u.f.o. sightings as crackpots and the planet Venus.) I don't know what is going on. Cults? Predators? Aliens? Government? Vandals? I do think that sometime a natural predator kill gets blown up by hysteria and called mutilation. Anyway, good link to the F.B.I. site boomerang.

 

[tyder001]

I also finally went back and read some of the links that Mike provided. I do think there are some valid questions there. The problem is that much of this field is covered with "sightings" and "accounts" which in themselves are important but not very amenable to the "Scientific Method." On the other hand I'm one of those heretics that don't think all truth is found by the "scientific method." But, what about the radiation and other odd phenomena that have been reported? You can measure those but they don't seem to satisfy one particular outcome over another. We had a rash of mutilations back in the early 90's in North Alabama. I don't think anybody ever came to a "conclusion" but then it kind of went away or the media lost interest. Anyway, good debate and even though I have my own ideas about it, I'm willing to take an objective look.

 

[tyder001]

Mike posted: Paranormal researcher Matthew Williams, was the first maker of crop circles in the world to be convicted for his art. Devizes, Wiltshire. (First published in Naked - Magazine of the Weird and Wonderful)

Which led me to google and I found this link. Which is interesting.

https://flic.kr/p/534365742

http://www.flickr.com/photos/hotcherry/534365742/


I think I will look a little more into this one. Although, I had hoped that Whitley Strieber was honestly looking for truth. ( he may be) But, he doesn't come off to well in the above article. Still, there are two sides to every story and the article isn't actually about Strieber.

 

[tyder001]

I'm posting before I start work today. Which means my office pc blocks out some images. So, I can't tell if my own link worked or not. I'll have to check once I get home this evening. Oh well, time to start earning my bread.