- Posts: 598
- Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2012 7:17 pm
- Location: on the outside looking in
I have stated that many of the formations, even complex ones are man-made. I do not doubt that RD is a circle maker.
As stated in the opening paragraph, the interview was not recorded so I will take that as being some of the anomalies in his testimony could certainly be down to the reporters error, like the Doctor who first noticed it, well he didn't, his pilot did, the Dr disembarked the plane at Thruxton. Also, the testimony of the security guard at Stonehenge (and you can see all of the field from the path around the stones due to it's higher elevation) and that of the farmer is ignored. Also if there were lots of reports to the police they will be on record.
I totally agree with this statement...
ML: "All it would really prove," I said, "is that people CAN make even these extraordinary formations. That does not eliminate the possibility of something paranormal someplace else, but it would suggest that we have to be much more careful and rigorous before we label any of these formations anomalous."
I will certainly ask around after RD the next time I'm in The Barge Inn.
If the testimony of the pilot is accurate then, somewhere there is a doctor with photos of the field as he passed over at around 5.30 that evening. But we are in the conspiracy game and any "evidence" will be dissected and over analysed...
nice find though
― Terry Pratchett
1) You cannot accept ANY of the multiple eyewitness testimony to the rapid formation of some CCs by an unseen force.
2) You cannot accept as real multiple videos and photographs of balls of light flying over crop circles. You simply disregard it as irrelevant.
3) You cannot accept the observational evidence of massive nodal bending and seed head anomalies discovered on day one in many CCs which cannot be ascribed to the effects of phototropism, and certainly not to the effects of stomper boards.
4) You ignore the observable and measurable electromagnetic anomalies discoverable in genuine formations. This evidence you dismiss out of hand because you have not experienced it
5) You cannot accept the documented historical nature of crop circles, as many have posted above
6) In one of your fallacious arguments you state that the reason no human CC making team wants to take up the Galaxy wheel formation challenge for $160,000 because they do not want to reveal their "magic" to the world. Does that same logic apply to team Circlemakers who made a simple formation for the National Geographic debunking "documentary"?
7) You reject the conclusions or credentials of scientists who have studied the phenomenon who believe that there is a truly paranormal phenomenon. You have asked for a list of names. How about Dr. Horace Drew, PhD biochemistry, Dr. Eltjo Hasselhoff, PhD physics, Dr. R. J. Vigoda, PhD, anthropology, Dr. Gerald Hawkins, PhD astronomy, and physics (now deceased) who stated "My approach was to study the intellectual profile behind the patterns, as it turned out to be an even greater mystery than the mechanics of how they are formed. I was not very successful in proving the hoax theory; however, I made some important discoveries along the way...I have proved crop circles can't be a natural phenomenon like whirlwinds, lightning, or unguided plasmas. Futhermore, the intellectual profile (of the genuine Circlemakers), is unique, touching the history of mathematics from Euclid to fractals, and music from Pythagoras to English Church bells. IF THE PHENOMENON IS TRANSCENDENTAL, OUR CULTURE IS NOT CURRENTLY PREPARED TO FACE SUCH A POSSIBILITY, BUT IF IT IS TRANSCENDENTAL, THEN FUTURE SOCIETY IS IN FOR A PROFOUND SHOCK."
Either your mind is too small or too closed to accept the conclusion, or even to admit the possibility that there is a non-human consciousness interacting with the consciousness of humanity in this phenomenon. No serious researcher, including myself, has stated conclusively that it is ALIENS, as you so frequently and derogotorially like to state.
- Phoenix rising
- Posts: 3624
- Joined: Thu Oct 28, 2010 7:43 pm
- Location: Avin a barbecue on Mercury
Since 1994 a group of three 'artists' has laid claim to some of England's most elaborate crop circles. The group originally named Team Satan has since changed its name to 'The circlemakers'- a name seemingly adopted to cause maximum confusion; after all, the real Circlemakers have been involved in making crop circles around the world as far back as the late 1800s, some supported by eyewitness reports claiming that an invisible whorl motion of energy, lasting less than fifteen seconds, flattens the crop in spiral fashion, without damaging the plants.
When a massive crop circle materialized beneath the gaze of Stonehenge in 1996, it was alledged by one of their close friends, Rob Irving, that the group made the said fractal pattern- a representation of the computer-generated Julia Set fratal- despite the fact that two pilots, a security guard and a gamekeeper all claim the formation appeared within a fifteen minute window one Sunday afternoon. It subsequently took a team of eleven surveyors five hours just to measure the design.
The same claim appears to have been made on a pattern three times the size at Windmill Hill, since its blueprint now adorns the home page of their web site (they have since removed it because their claim has come under scrutiny)- all this despite the logistics requiring a circle to be made approximately every 58 seconds. A surveying company who analyzed the site quoted a minimum of five days just to mark the site alone.
No wonder that with their ability to bend the rules of physics, levitate above the untouched wheat and master the laws of invisibility, 'the circlemakers' have since become media darlings, gaining lucrative commissions from the BBC and Sky Television, even Mitsubishi, for whom they made a crop circle shaped like a van over the course of two days, requiring the use of daylight. And police protection.
At the end of the 1998 season they were commissioned by Yell to construct a simple roulette of 100 circles (left), which became part of a debunking programme by the BBC, who stipulated that they should make this in a popular area of Wiltshire to prove that humans cannot get caught hoaxing crop circles. As it turns out, they were caught within the first few minutes of their endeavour, proving just how hard it is to hoax patterns in the English countryside. Even in the dark. The final design, based on straighforward ninefold geometry, failed to reproduce any of the unusual biophysical and electromagnetic features already proved to exist in the real phenomenon; even the geometry itself is flawed. Despite the hit-and -miss result, this is Team Satan/the circlemakers best attempt at generating a pattern that almost fits the unalterable laws of sacred geometry, although it has taken them five years to get this far.
In the summer of 1999 'Team Satan/circlemakers' were allegedly sponsored by the Daily Mail to create a crop formation beside Avebury stone circle (above left). The triangle format, containing 33 rough circles and incised with straight edges, was supposed to depict the 3-D illusion often referred to as Necker's Cube.
Work was apparently carried out between 11.30 PM and 5 AM, employing eight people. And yet four seperate eyewitnesses claim that no such pattern was visible in the field, which adjoins a popular avenue of standing stones. One couple was walking beside the field - which stands with an incline of 30 feet - at 12.30 AM and recall seeing no design in-progress despite the light from the full Moon. Clearly, they could not have been making the crop circle. However, the physical discrepancies of the design also do not preclude that this is a genuine crop circle, either.
We can see a classic comparison between hoaxers' work and the genuine phenomenon: above right, a fabulous example from 1994, the year the hoaxers claim to have started, and ironically also placed beside the famous stone circle. This pattern is visually far more complex than the 1999 hoax design, suggesting that the hoaxers are getting worse at their craft in relation to their experience! While the latter is merely a design without meaning, the 'spider's web' design, by contrast, incorporates encoded ratios, and the harmonic laws of sound frequency, as proved by experiments in cymatics during the 1960s.
The 'spider's web' crop circle also encodes Hawkins' Fifth Theorem- part of a series of new mathematical theorems discovered in crop circles. These are based on the works of Euclid, yet these theorems are missing from Euclid's thirteen Treatises on Mathematics- the foundation of our system today. Additionally, this design is encoded with diatonic ratios- mathematical fractions fundamental to the music scale, and the chances of anyone hitting these by accident are one million to one.
Read on for a reply from the fakers known as The circlemakers
# 1, just because you have visited a crop circles does not mean you have experienced one.. that's like saying I went to visit the Coloseum and hence I know all about the Roman empire. If you sat in a circle whilst it was being made.. then fair enough... did you sit in a circle whilst it was being made?
# 2, I can and indeed DO accept videos as evidence, but not when they have been debunked, now, regardless of whether the debunking is fiction or fact, by presenting an opposing view opens up room for debate on that video.. you see a video and you believe it, that is fine, until you see another video of how that video was made, then you can no longer be 100% certain that the initial video was authentic. But talk about hypocracy, YOU are the one who will blindly follow without refernce to opposing views.. me, I keep my options open.
# 3, I can indeed accept the so called evidence that makes us think a human could not have made the CC's, that is the very reason why I still entertain this topic with interest, I, unlike YOU, keep the options and possibilities open. If I didn't accept it I would NOT be debating it, I would simply let you believe whatever delusion you wanted to, much the same as I leave religious people to their own belief systems when in fact I do not believe.
# 4, Nope, the electromagnetic 'evidence' has also been debunked (FFS, you should know this with all your research). They have shown repeatedly how that evidence could be EASILY planted at the sites. Again, who is ignoring what?
# 5, YES, again I can accept the historical evidence, it holds as much water however as believing that a man called jesus walked on water.. reaility is that maybe, the people of yesteryear did see something and they did document it as they believed they saw it, and maybe just maybe, the crop circle artists of today have seized on that and maybe that's what motivated them to make this whole illusion.. where do you think modern CC makers got their ideas from? Give them a little more credit Cog.. if you were to make up a mystery would you not do your homework, what a better place to start than by dragging up old folklore?
# 6, Nope, I never said that I agreed with team cropcirclemakers argument.. I just presented their interview.. our history is littered with people taking credit for other's work... this is everywhere and what better plagerism could exist when you know that real makers will never own up? Or maybe, they are playing with us in order to keep the magic going? You see, if they proved 100% that they did it, the illusion is gone... prove it 90% and there is still a 10% probability for people like you and me to cling on to a dream.
# 7, Nope, I counter this by stating that you accept information far too easily, just because someone is a scientist does not mean they too should understand all the techniques, many scientists have been fooled, we know this as fact.. how many innocent people have been convicted on the basis of so called professional conclusions drawn by experts in the medical field or science, only to be found innocent at a later date? And where do your scientist ever say that "I have proof that an alien did this" or "I have proof that a spirit made this"?etc etc.. rather I believe they say "I have proof that it is unlikely or improbable that a human made this"... they offer no proof of who made them, they simply state the improbability of human involvement.. Now, show me ONE respected scientist who has PROOF that ther was alien, spirit being or natures involvement, and I will gladly accept that as proof.
Cog, do you understand the true nature of a conspiracy theorist? It is not to blindly accept that which is so apparent... it is to delve deeper and deeper and just when you think you got the answer, you dig deeper again... I heard a saying in a movie once.. "just when you think you are fucking them, you discover that they are indeed fucking you"... what we see and reality are often 2 different things... and it is NOT that I believe that man made all these crop circles, nor is it that I believe that aliens made them, it is that I believe I do not truly know, and, NO evidence to date has concluded the matter for me.. so, in the interest and spirit of DTV and true conspiracy theorists, I do the digging and I ask the questions so as to eliminate the doubt, I do not replace one belief by another belief, I replace one belief by a fact, otherwise it is still only a belief.
So, by your own words, you have discounted human involvement, discounted (based on the scientists quote you postsed) that they could be natural occurances, so what does that leave you Cog? Aliens is just about all I can think of... unless you have another explanation?
If you read my posts on this matter, you will have read that I have always maintained that whilst I do not know how all these CC's were formed, and whilst I would LOVE to be proven wrong on this topic (and let's face it, who would not want to categorically know that aliens made the circles?), on the balance of probabilities all signs at this stage point to human involvement.
Now... do you have a picture of a CC without the irrigation equipment lines? I can't find one.. and please stop the insults, I know it must be frustrating you to deal with pig headed people like me, however (and trust me on this one) you will be vindicated if you are correct, and I would love you to be correct and me to be wrong as it also vidicates me. So I will push and push till undisputable truth is revealed.. and at the end of the day Cog, you can believe whatever you like dude I am not here to convince you, just to argue with you.
Phoenix rising wrote:I whole heartedly agree, the same can be said of the BBC, the debunkers are obviously pre selected shills and there is no real attempt to address the real issue apart from employ play school presenters who seem to talk condescendingly to the audience like they are kids
Some of the stuff that they come out with is beyond ridiculous. Problem is, they, the skeptics, have no backgrounds of any credence. They question the validity of very sound witnesses, who do have the credentials to give weight to their respective testimonies. That Dr of Media studies (LOL) even went as far as trying to insinuate that the base commander at Rendelsham, might have been intoxicated. He also cast a number of unfounded dispersions against the other key witness to the event.
The best mainstream UFO TV programme, IMO, was UFO hunters.
- Related topics
- Last post