Crop Circle Gallery

[phildee3]

Me too lookfar



I can't believe that, after twenty odd years, you people are still stuck in the "man-made vs aliens" debate!!

What you are missing is huge!

[enthousiamos]

I can't believe that, after twenty odd years, you people are still stuck in the "man-made vs aliens" debate!!

What you are missing is huge!

Unfortnately it is the fault of the 'leading' researchers, who publish books and host conferences, where they continually push the agenda that the circles are being made by ET or other unseen forces, whilst at the same time trying to stamp out any suggestion that they might be made by humans. Many are extremely hostile to anyone even suggesting that certain formations could have been made by humans.

Yes, I agree, this is missing the real message of the circles, which I think is much bigger than the possibility that they were made by aliens, but this blinkered (or deceptive) approach adopted by many of the subjects leading lights needs to be challenged if people are to wake up to the real message.

I think this interpretation of a formation that appeared earlier this year just about sums the situation up:

http://www.cropcircleconnector.com/2011/honeystreet3/Honeystreet-IMG9047.jpg

http://www.cropcircleconnector.com/2011/honeystreet3/11-07-04-alternative-code-t.jpg

[mcmenek1]

Unfortnately it is the fault of the 'leading' researchers, who publish books and host conferences, where they continually push the agenda that the circles are being made by ET or other unseen forces, whilst at the same time trying to stamp out any suggestion that they might be made by humans. Many are extremely hostile to anyone even suggesting that certain formations could have been made by humans.

Yes, I agree, this is missing the real message of the circles, which I think is much bigger than the possibility that they were made by aliens, but this blinkered (or deceptive) approach adopted by many of the subjects leading lights needs to be challenged if people are to wake up to the real message.

I think this interpretation of a formation that appeared earlier this year just about sums the situation up:





I think you've just contradicted yourself, you say you agree with what's been said, then you carry on the "man-made vs aliens" debate!! …………from a pro man-made perspective!.......

Love
&
Peace

[phildee3]

I think you've just contradicted yourself, you say you agree with what's been said, then you carry on the "man-made vs aliens" debate!! …………from a pro man-made perspective!.......

Love
&
Peace

The point is, from my perspective, that the extent of human involvement in the creation of these things is irrelevent because unseen forces work through us all the time.
We are just one of the tools that they have available to them in their creation.

[enthousiamos]

I think you've just contradicted yourself, you say you agree with what's been said, then you carry on the "man-made vs aliens" debate!! …………from a pro man-made perspective!.......

Love
&
Peace

That's missing the point of my post though. The fact is, we are FORCED into a situation of perpetual debate, because the majority of leading researchers REFUSE to publicly acknowledge the part that humans play in crop circles, even when they privately KNOW most of them are created by people. And unfortunately, it is the researchers that hold most sway with the public (well at least the ones that are interested in crop circles).

The circle-makers (many of whom have some incredible stories/information to share) are keen to engage with the researchers, but unfortuantely, the researchers are not keen to engage with the circle-makers. Until this happens, the subject will continue to go round in circles, with the real learning nuggets being missed.

[phildee3]

the majority of leading researchers REFUSE to publicly acknowledge the part that humans play in crop circles,



I'm not sure that this is true. It wasn't a couple of years ago.
Glickers was the only one, and then it was just a vehement denyal of any military involvement.
Can you link to any papers/articles that support your claim?

[enthousiamos]

I'm not sure that this is true. It wasn't a couple of years ago.
Glickers was the only one, and then it was just a vehement denyal of any military involvement.
Can you link to any papers/articles that support your claim?

Well, many may acknowledge manmade formations, but only in very derogatory terms and only on the basis that it accounts for a small proportion of formations.

Lucy Pringle is one such researcher. Here she refers to people who make formations as 'hoaxers', which implies their motivation for making them is to cause problems. This, I feel, shows either a complete lack of awareness of the motivations of human circlemakers or a deeply prejudiced view. She also confirms her lack of interest in manmade formations.

"Many of the hoaxers are on ego trips. We all know that manmade circles exist, but I do not believe there are nearly as many as the hoaxers would have us believe. But I'm not interested in those. As a researcher I'm only interested in the true phenomenon. I will occasionally use the manmade ones as control samples because they are useful. But I'm interested in researching the real thing."

http://www.spiritofmaat.com/archive/dec2/pringle.htm

In the same article she states that she takes dowsing readings that are high in 'genuine' circles, but non-existent in manmade ones. This assumes she knows the difference! As Dr Simeon Heins has shown in his research, abnormal readings can be taken in almost EVERY formation, whether they be known manmade or otherwise!

Here, he explains how he was ostrocised from an 'elite' circle researchers group led by Michael Glickman. He also explains how Linda Howe was deternined to ignore high radiation readings that both he and her measured in a KNOWN manmade formation. This is an interview that EVERYONE with an interest in the origins/ mysteries of crop circles should watch.

CirclemakersTV show28 Dr Simeon Hein - YouTube
(33 mins re Linda Howe, Michael Clickman)

Here is another clip with a circlemaker who raised questions about manmade formations at Steve Alexander's conference recently, demonstrating the closed-minded, almost paranoid attitudes of those running and attending the event.

CirclemakersTV SHOW29 Cameron Kelly - YouTube
(59 mins/ 1hr 20) )

[phildee3]

Well, many may acknowledge manmade formations,



So, you told a porky!



...she refers to people who make formations as 'hoaxers', which implies their motivation for making them is to cause problems.



I disagree.
It implies that the originals were not planker jobs.

So, she's not interested in studying planker formations.
Nothing wrong with that - that's just her preference.

Some marine biologists who study whales have no interest in lobsters.

[impotentwhitecapitalist]

There is no harmony in a 2:1 ratio - only uniform repetition, which never occurs in nature.

Temple Balsall is a manifestation of the controlling, militaristic, machine consciousness (if it is concious at all!). Look at the strife that it has caused!
looks like "they" tried to form it as close to that patch of trees as they possibly could, a definite factor in the nature of the formation that deserves attention.

http://a1.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/184057_261034920576259_111802482166171_1123420_398 7195_n.jpg

i agree it looks very uniform and sharp, almost deadly, but a spectacular formation to look at...

edit: post 211!!

[enthousiamos]

I disagree.
It implies that the originals were not planker jobs.

You can disagree all you like, Phil, but the dictionary definition of 'hoax' is: 'a humourous or malicious deception', which as I said before is showing no understanding or appreciation of why certain people indulge in circle-making, as when you listen to their side of the story, you find that most don't do it for this reason at all.

So, she's not interested in studying planker formations.
Nothing wrong with that - that's just her preference.

Unfortunately there is alot wrong with this attitude, as it is not in keeping with an open-minded, balanced approach and so does not constitute truthseeking, which is what all crop circle researchers claim to be doing. It is also the only way to get a full understanding of the subject.

Now, go and watch the interview with Dr Simeon Haines and tell me what you think of the leading researchers 'preference' to ostracise him and ignore his extremely valuable research information, that just happens to contradict their theories relating to manmade formations.

[silvabak]

if alot are manmade then i ask why such strange often complex geometric symbols an patterns? surely they would be doing different symbols a bit more relevent to them if they were so proud of making them...an why would u work ur ass off quick as u can at stupid times of night just to not claim it an laugh cause u think people believe its aliens.....that does not make sense to me unless these people are morons! which again i cant see some1 being that dumb yet with the knowledge an skills to pull off a great geometric symbol like most are....

or if these so called people are doing it to pass a message then its confusing as fuck, give up, try another way...like maybe letters we understand lol twats..

these are clearly something other than manmade designs...what? is to find out but ive def crossed board weilding human off me list :p

[phildee3]

deadly,



That's why Mark and Stuart are doing as they're told.



the dictionary definition of 'hoax' is: 'a [humourous or] malicious deception',



You're right.
I was trying to be nice and give the bastards some credit.
No more.

[impotentwhitecapitalist]

love the fluidity of the flattened crops on the outer body of this one... very natural, very microorganismal, reminds me a lot of microscopic fibers like cell flagellum...
This one is a bit special:

http://www.cropcircleconnector.com/2011/roundwayhill2/roundway2011a1.jpg

and don't get me started on the inter-locking, weaving pattern on the outer edge of this one, very crafty, and the geometry is amazing, reminiscent of merkaba vehicle of light or metatrons cube...
... And this one

http://www.cropcircleconnector.com/2011/Etchilhampton/etchilhampton2011a.jpg

more discussion on these two? very intriguing... both formed on the same night?

[phildee3]

love the fluidity of the flattened crops on the outer body of this one... very natural, very microorganismal, reminds me a lot of microscopic fibers like cell flagellum...


and don't get me started on the inter-locking, weaving pattern on the outer edge of this one, very crafty, and the geometry is amazing, reminiscent of merkaba vehicle of light or metatrons cube...


more discussion on these two? very intriguing... both formed on the same night?

Thanks you for bring the beautiful back into the discussion.
All formations are yantras. By contemplating them we absorb the energy that is behind their design.
Looking at the merkaba formation enables us to incorporate the light-vehicle into our soul-being.
Similarly, those formations that are based on purely rational, arithmetic functions resonate at frequencies associated with disharmony, conflict and death; those that are based on fractal geometry (incorporating irrational numbers, the Fibbonaci sequence, the golden section, etc.) resonate at life-giving /healing frequencies.

Roundway Hill (2), the upper one in your posting, looks like an orb giving birth to baby orbs - sometimes seen in the photographic orb phenomenon.
Compare this to our biological cell division and you will see the difference with reproduction on the higher dimensional planes.

[enthousiamos]

if alot are manmade then i ask why such strange often complex geometric symbols an patterns? surely they would be doing different symbols a bit more relevent to them if they were so proud of making them...an why would u work ur ass off quick as u can at stupid times of night just to not claim it an laugh cause u think people believe its aliens.....that does not make sense to me unless these people are morons! which again i cant see some1 being that dumb yet with the knowledge an skills to pull off a great geometric symbol like most are....

or if these so called people are doing it to pass a message then its confusing as fuck, give up, try another way...like maybe letters we understand lol twats..

these are clearly something other than manmade designs...what? is to find out but ive def crossed board weilding human off me list :p

I used to ask the very same questions until recently, re manmade formations. There is no doubt that many aspects of the crop circle phenomenon are a mystery, but only when you objectivelly look at all sides of the argument(s) do things start to make some kind of sense.

I'm not going to discuss all these points here (again), but I'd suggest checking out the following video, which give some interesting insight into the mind-set of the circlemaker.

Circlemakers DOCU 3hrs PART2 (1.5hrs) - YouTube

Circlemakers DOCU 3hrs PART1 (1.5hrs) - YouTube

[phildee3]

I used to ask the very same questions until recently, re manmade formations. There is no doubt that many aspects of the crop circle phenomenon are a mystery, but only when you objectivelly look at all sides of the argument(s) do things start to make some kind of sense.

I'm not going to discuss all these points here (again), but I'd suggest checking out the following video, which give some interesting insight into the mind-set of the circlemaker.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GpnZpZQpIDs&feature=channel_video_title

Well, I've watched the first hour and every guy interviewed has admitted to their works being hoaxes - by your definition.

[enthousiamos]

Well, I've watched the first hour and every guy interviewed has admitted to their works being hoaxes - by your definition.

Rob Irving says in the very first minute of the first video that he's never 'hoaxed' a crop circle and many others reiterate this view, so I don't quite know what you are referring to. But rather than focus on point-scoring, just watch, listen and broaden your horizons a bit. If you don't like or agree with what you hear, that's fine, at least you've given it a go.

[phildee3]

Rob Irving says in the very first minute of the first video that he's never 'hoaxed' a crop circle and many others reiterate this view, so I don't quite know what you are referring to.



I'm referring to their admission that they are deceiving people.



But rather than focus on point-scoring, just watch, listen and broaden your horizons a bit. If you don't like or agree with what you hear, that's fine, at least you've given it a go.



I've watched the whole thing now, although I think it's a bit much to expect anyone to watch for three hours to get a point across that could have taken twenty minutes. It shows me nothing new. I have always been of the opinion that the true circlemakers use a variety of tools, and that human plankers are just one of them.
As far a me being narrow minded, mate, check it out! There is no mention in this documentary of any of the other tools, besides human plankers, that the real circlemakers use. That's narrow minded (although, to their credit, they do acknowlege that there are higher forces at work).

Don't expect me to spend this amount of time again on what I have made quite clear that I already know.
I have other things to do, like look at the wider picture of the CC phenomenon - which most of the researchers are doing (Glickers excluded!).

One such person is Nick Kollerstrom (PhD Maths) who found new theorems, never before known to man, used to create some formations. Now that is exciting!!

[enthousiamos]

I'm referring to their admission that they are deceiving people.

I've watched the whole thing now, although I think it's a bit much to expect anyone to watch for three hours to get a point across that could have taken twenty minutes. It shows me nothing new. I have always been of the opinion that the true circlemakers use a variety of tools, and that human plankers are just one of them.
As far a me being narrow minded, mate, check it out! There is no mention in this documentary of any of the other tools, besides human plankers, that the real circlemakers use. That's narrow minded (although, to their credit, they do acknowlege that there are higher forces at work).

Don't expect me to spend this amount of time again on what I have made quite clear that I already know.
I have other things to do, like look at the wider picture of the CC phenomenon - which most of the researchers are doing (Glickers excluded!).

One such person is Nick Kollerstrom (PhD Maths) who found new theorems, never before known to man, used to create some formations. Now that is exciting!!

That's cool mate. Not a problem with me. I'll check out Mr Kollerton when I get a chance.

Btw - I didn't post the vids for your benefit, I posted them for silvabak who asked about the motivations of circle-makers. You just started your point scoring shananagans again!

I've got better things to do too, so good night!

[phildee3]

I'll check out Mr Kollerton when I get a chance.



That's Kollerstrom.
I've not been able to find out what those theorems are.
I'd be very interested to know if anyone comes across them in their CC studies.



Btw - I didn't post the vids for your benefit,
I posted them for silvabak



You were talking about me watching it in message 2767.
There's a link to member's email adresses for private messages.



You just started your point scoring shananagans again!



I don't know what you're talking about.
I have no knowledge of any point scoring system, or what that's about.
Everything posted here is for everyone who reads it.

[phildee3]

I've not been able to find out what those theorems are.
I'd be very interested to know if anyone comes across them in their CC studies.



Here we go - here's five;
http://www.cropcircleconnector.com/ilyes/ilyes16.html

If these theorems were discovered by humans, would they not publish them in a peer-reviewed journal first, rather than in the fields where they might be missed?

How many more are there that have been missed? :eek:

[phildee3]

Excellent!!

http://www.cropcircleconnector.com/2011/knolldown/knolldown2011a.html

[phildee3]

I have no knowledge of any point scoring system, or what that's about.



I think I've just figured out what you mean, enthousiamos.
You're implying that I'm trying to get one over on you?
Well, I'm not.
Nothing would make me happier than for someone here to educate me on some aspect of the phenomenon that I didn't know about previously.
That's the whole reason why I'm interested in the subject - to learn and discover.

[the mark]

Excellent!!

http://www.cropcircleconnector.com/2011/knolldown/knolldown2011a.html

Excellent indeed.

http://www.cropcircleconnector.com/2011/knolldown/knolldown2011c.jpg

[enthousiamos]

I think I've just figured out what you mean, enthousiamos.
You're implying that I'm trying to get one over on you?
Well, I'm not.
Nothing would make me happier than for someone here to educate me on some aspect of the phenomenon that I didn't know about previously.
That's the whole reason why I'm interested in the subject - to learn and discover.

Ok, that's cool.

[enthousiamos]

Excellent indeed.

http://www.cropcircleconnector.com/2011/knolldown/knolldown2011c.jpg

I visited these 2 yesterday and both had a good feel about them. The dumbell pattern has recurred a few times this year. Could it relate to this?:

http://www.cropcircleconnector.com/2011/cooks/cooks-venus1.jpg

[enthousiamos]

I think the season could be ending on a high...

http://www.cropcircleconnector.com/2011/jubilee/cherhill001.jpg

:)

[jamesc]

Here is some info on some well respectable scientific academics including a one Nick Kollerstrom who have studied or investigated some crop formations and their conclusions to date;:cool:

************************************************** ********

The Scientific Investigation of Crop Circles;
by John Horn, M.D.

As a boy I was fascinated with science and nature. I had chemistry sets, a microscope, and a telescope that I prized because I sold greeting cards door to door to get it. I collected rocks and fossils. During the summers I delighted in catching lizards, turtles and insects. I graduated from a large mid-western high school co-valedictorian in 1976. I got a BS degree in zoology from the University of Arkansas in 1980, and then went on to medical school. I have practiced internal medicine now for 22 years in a small town in central Kentucky.


In 1990, while browsing for a good book in the science section of Joseph-Beth bookstore in Lexington, Kentucky, I came across a book entitled Circular Evidence – the first book ever written about the phenomenon of crop circles. It had been co-authored by Colin Andrews – an electrical engineer; and Pat Delgado – an electromechanical design engineer who had formerly worked for NASA. I found it to be extremely intriguing.


Even though the formations they studied from the years 1983 – 1989 were simple designs, upon close examination, they discovered that these simple designs contained some surprising hidden mathematical and geometric relationships. Furthermore, Andrews and Delgado could never find clear evidence that these crop circles were made by human beings.


For example, sometimes these crop circles would occur in the middle of fields which had no tramlines; no tracks except for their own could be found leading into or out of the formations. Further scientific scrutiny followed with DR. Terence Meaden’s book entitled The Circles Effect and its Mysteries which was published in 1989.


Dr. Meaden held a PhD in physics from Oxford University. He also concluded that crop circles were not made by human hoaxers, helicopters, or secret military aircraft; and there were not made by any then understood physics of whirlwind vortices. He worked diligently on the theory that they were formed by atmospheric vortices never before encountered or described by science. In a manner of just a few years though, this theory had to be discarded as crop circle formations began to show counter – rotating bands of flow, straight lines, and boxes;


Since then, the scientific investigation of the crop circles phenomenon has continued thanks to some very bright people who have been able to approach it with objectivity and intellectual honesty. Unfortunately, the scientific facts are largely unknown and unacknowledged by the general populace as the “powers that be” (and their proxies of “mass media”) have seemingly colluded to debunk and dis-inform the world about this genuine phenomenon. Also quite unfortunately, the scientific investigation is somewhat limited and has not been carried out by any mainstream academic institutions that seem constrained by the current scientific paradigm and current political correctness of academia.



In the years since 1990, I have acquired most of the books and documentary DVDs on the subject of crop circles. I have become obsessed to discover the truth about the crop circles. I want to understand both their origin as well as their meaning. In 2007, and again in 2009, I travelled to Wiltshire, England (the geographic focus of the crop circle formation phenomenon) to investigate for myself. These visits confirmed to me the anomalous nature, anUnequivocally, the scientific evidence to date reveals that GENUINE crop circle formations are not being made by people through any means of mechanical flattening (nor by human beings using any currently available human technology!).



At this point, let me state up front that complex crop art can be made by skilled teams of human hoaxers. Yet, to be clear, though human made crop art is real, it does not equate to the GENUINE crop circle formations. Recent evidence has come to light that the primary teams of people involved in creating complex crop art are funded by the British Intelligence agency MI5 as a program of public disinformation. This evidence has been well substantiated in Richard Hall’s recent documentary Crop Circles – The Hidden Truth.

So what is the scientific evidence that separates the GENUINE crop circle formation from a human created crop art? In general, the scientific evidence fits in the following categories:


1) Mathematical and geometrical analysis
2) Physical changes to the affected plants
3) Seed germination anomalies within crop formation plants
4) Soil anomalies from within crop circle formations
5) Magnetic field anomalies detected from within formations;


Before covering these lines of evidence, I would refer the reader to an excellent website, www.cropcirclewisdom.com which provides links to the major researchers and their posted research upon specific websites.
For me, some of the most compelling evidence for a non-human origin of crop circle formations exists in the mathematical and geometric analysis. In the early 1980s, Gerald Hawkins, then professor of mathematics and astronomy at Boston University was challenged to prove or disprove the human origin of crop circle formations.


His analysis of 18 early formations revealed the surprising finding that many of the circular elements were related to one another by “diatonic” ratios. Their proportions to each other were equivalent to the ratios of frequencies of the adjacent white keys of a piano keyboard. Such a result could certainly not occur by chance. It seems extremely unlikely that human hoaxers would have encoded such hidden mathematical proportions in a hastily produced crop circle formation over a few hour period in the dark of night.


Hawkins was astonished by this finding. He began a more in depth analysis of formations and ultimately discovered five new theorems of Euclidean geometry which had never before been published in any textbooks of geometry, ancient or modern! In Hawkins own words he concluded,
“Crop Circles are a phenomenon of the end of the 20th century and the media were all opting for hoaxers as the cause, so I decided to investigate the hoax theory.


I have a fairly broad background in astronomy, mathematics, physics, and radio astronomy, but even more fortunately – as you will see – I am my wife’s harp tuner…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 found the circles contained musical information, new mathematics, and even a code which, by statistical analysis, has confidence level of intentionality. The circle sizes gave numbers which matched diatonic rations, which are the step ups in pitch of the white notes of the piano…I have proved that crop circles can’t be a natural phenomenon like whirlwinds, lightning, or unguided plasmas. Furthermore, the intellectual profile 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.”:D;)For the mathematically minded and curious, Dr. Hawkin’s description of the newly discovered theorems was published in an article titled, Probing the Mystery of Those Eerie Crop Circles in Cosmos Journal vol. 1, no. 2, pages 22-28, 1992. It was also published in Crop Circles: Theorems in Wheat Fields, Science News, vol. 150, no. 12 (October 1996), page 239.



Another examination of the mathematics of crop formations is contained in a book by mathematician Nick Kollerstrom titled Crop Circles, The Hidden Form, published in 2005. In this book Kollerstorm shows how early crop circle quintuplets (a large central circle surrounded by a square of four smaller satellite circles) demonstrated an exact solution to the age-old geometric conundrum of “squaring the circle”. This geometric problem sought to construct a square on a circle whose perimeter is exactly equal to the circumference of the circle using only a compass and straight edge.


Kollerstrom also examines many of the complex fractal patterns that appeared in the mid to late 90’s. As further evidence of the non-human origin of crop circle formations, he examines a complex formation in Aldbourne, Wiltshire appearing on July 24, 2005 that demonstrated a previously unheard-of manner of constructing parabola.



Bert Jannssen, a Dutch geometer has an excellent website that can also be accessed through www.cropcirclewisdom.com. Jannssen has the amazing ability to reconstruct on paper the geometric steps required to make the most complex formations. One of his startling discoveries relating to the construction of genuine formations is in regards to so-called “construction lines” and “construction points”.



In his book, The Hypnotic Power of Crop Circles (2004), he shows how certain geometric construction lines and points that are requirrequired to lay out the formations are often not found on the ground. Furthermore, these lines and points, when found on the ground often did not extend to parts of the formations which would have to have been subsequently erased on paper. It is a fairly detailed and complex argument that Jannssen makes, but in his geometric analysis of the Tawsmeade Copse crop formation of August 9, 1998, he states;

“These crop circles were NOT made by humans; at least not in the traditional physical way.;) Human beings did not make the formations, but the (geometric) techniques that were used were based on human logic.”


My favorite crop circle formation occurred at Crooked Soley on August 27, 2002. It was a double helix of human DNA. Its design was a beautiful closed loop of the double helix of DNA 300 feet in diameter enclosing a completely undisturbed central circle of wheat approximately 150 feet in diameter. A small book titled, Crooked Soley – A Crop Circle Revelation was written about it bgeometers John Michell and Alan Brown.


In this book they show that there are two methods which can be used to reconstruct the formation on paper. Both methods require multiple lines and circles emanating from the center point which would be in the standing central circle of wheat. They conclude from the geometric analysis that there is no possible means for the formation to have been laid out on the ground (since the central circle of wheat is completely undisturbed). Incidentally, this formation appeared at the same time that a conference on the DNA nucleosome was being held at Cambridge University.


A well-known DNA biochemist who was in attendance at the conference was so amazed by the formation and convinced of its authenticity as something of non-human origin that he has become a crop circle researcher. He is a member of the CMM Research group, but because of his academic position he has chosen to be known by the pseudonym Red Collie. Another member of the CMM Research group is the American engineer Michael Reed, who solved the meaning of the so-called pi formation of June 1, 2008.

This formation which resembled a ratcheted spiral was 150 feet in diameter in young barley beneath the ancient Barbury Castle hill fort in Wiltshire, England. It depicted pi to ten digits in a graphic form never before depicted in any book of mathematics. Each arc of the ratchet represented a whole number multiple of 36 degrees of a circle. There were ten arcs followed by three closed circles indicating that I went on infinitely.


An excellent book, which examines the sacred geometry of crop formations, was published in 2009 by former professor of architecture Michael Glickman. Glickman is an icon in the world of crop circle research that I have been fortunate enough to visit as a guest at his home. I won’t discuss this book for the sake of brevity with this article, but suffice it to say that Glickman has a sharp mind and a brilliant wit. He has been lecturing about the esoteric geometry and mathematics of crop circles for more than a decade. He likes to refer to the Circle Makers as the “Sisters” with a grin as he points skyward.:cool:

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++
http://www.cropcircleconnector.com/images/hiddenform2002.jpg


CROP CIRCLES;

THE HIDDEN FORM;

By Nick Kollerstrom;

Published by Wessex Bocks;

Nick Kollerstrom, MA Cantab PhD and FRAS, has written several books and is a well-known contributor to crop circle journals. He has worked as a school Mathematics teacher in Surrey for some years and presently holds a research fellowship at London University.

[jamesc]

Here is a condensed formate on crop formation geometry by Nick Kollerstrom;This guy is respected in his field of expertise and has formulated some very interesting conclusions, the below links are recommended for those who take this mystery seriously and do not reject or dismiss the possibility that SOME formations are or could be possibly of non human origin;:cool:
************************************************** ********
For the schoolchildren of tomorrow;:cool:;)

CROP CIRCLE GEOMETRY;by Nick Kollerstrom;


http://www.hypermaths.org/cropcircles/imgs/cover.jpg


http://www.hypermaths.org/cropcircles/imgs/heptstar.gif


http://www.hypermaths.org/cropcircles/imgs/doublepent.jpg





1 - Welcome; http://www.hypermaths.org/cropcircles/chapter1/

2 - Two; http://www.hypermaths.org/cropcircles/chapter2/

3 - Three;http://www.hypermaths.org/cropcircles/chapter3/

4 - Four; http://www.hypermaths.org/cropcircles/chapter4/

5 - Pentagram; http://www.hypermaths.org/cropcircles/chapter5/

6 - Six;http://www.hypermaths.org/cropcircles/chapter6/

7 - Spirals; http://www.hypermaths.org/cropcircles/chapter7/

8 - The Plot Thickens; http://www.hypermaths.org/cropcircles/chapter8/

9 - Astronomy; http://www.hypermaths.org/cropcircles/chapter9/

10 - 2006 Formations; http://www.hypermaths.org/cropcircles/2006/


link for his HYPER MATHS web site;http://www.hypermaths.org/cropcircles/chapter1/

[phildee3]

The dumbell pattern has recurred a few times this year. Could it relate to this?:

http://www.cropcircleconnector.com/2011/cooks/cooks-venus1.jpg



It could.
Or it could relate to some other conjunction.
Then again it could relate to something more abstract.
Or it could relate to all of the above.
Or none of them.
Why try to narrow it down?
I thought this was all about expansion of consciousness!

[phildee3]

I think the season could be ending on a high...

http://www.cropcircleconnector.com/2011/jubilee/cherhill001.jpg

:)

Understatement of the year!

I thought it was only possible to project the image of a three-dimensional object onto a two dimensional plane, a four-dimensional object onto a three dimensional plane, etc., etc. but here we have a five-dimensional object projected onto a two-dimensional plane!

This must be the first time this has ever been done!

[the mark]

I think the season could be ending on a high...

http://www.cropcircleconnector.com/2011/jubilee/cherhill001.jpg

:)

Why, what are you smoking?. :p

And what does foj mean?...... Fourth Of July?..... Find One Job?...... Frozen Orange Juice?.... Father Of Jesus?.

Or is it better viewed from this angle?.

http://www.cropcircleconnector.com/2011/jubilee/jubilee2011f.jpg

It looks like a spaceship!. No?. Either way, I need to update my video. :cool:.

[enthousiamos]

Yes, this latest one is absolutely astounding. The only thing I'm not sure about is the f.o.j thing. It would be easy to read all kinds of stuff into the significance of this, but I suspaect it is just a 'tag', as the very same one has been used a number of times in the past. See below. If that is the case, it's a great shame as it downgrades the formation for me, as it takes away much of the mystique.

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6186/6046363868_30fd5d84ac.jpg

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6073/6046363862_cd1a3d50cc.jpg
This one is from 1999.

http://www.temporarytemples.co.uk/imagelibrary/images-1998-enlarge/39-dadford-buckinghamshire-10-07-98-wheat-35mm-.jpg
1998

[dolores1]

Excellent!!

http://www.cropcircleconnector.com/2011/knolldown/knolldown2011a.html

Brilliant! Ta. D.:D

[phildee3]

I'm not sure about is the f.o.j thing.

...it downgrades the formation for me, as it takes away much of the mystique.



Think again...

It is thought to be the signature of Quetzalcoatl who taught the Mayans math and astronomy!

This is the first time a 5D form has been represented in two, or even three, dimensions.
This is astounding!!

[elton]

The foj thing is a tag used by the guys who made it. Sorry, aliens.

[phildee3]

The foj thing is a tag used by the guys who made it.



Which is who?
And how did they generate the penteract projection program?
This achievement is far beyond the requirement for being awarded the Wolf or Abel prize!

[phildee3]

That's some long bits of string they've got in China!

http://www.earthfiles.com/news.php?ID=1882&category=Environment

[tifavi]

Think again...

It is thought to be the signature of Quetzalcoatl who taught the Mayans math and astronomy!

This is the first time a 5D form has been represented in two, or even three, dimensions.
This is astounding!!

Looks like the symbols from the Wingmakers painting to me!

[phildee3]

Looks like the symbols from the Wingmakers painting to me!

Can you post a link, please?

[impotentwhitecapitalist]

Can you post a link, please?
http://www.wingmakers.us/wingmakersorig/www.wingmakers.com/arrow/chambers/chamber1.shtml

[redorbluepill]

Think again...

It is thought to be the signature of Quetzalcoatl who taught the Mayans math and astronomy!

This is the first time a 5D form has been represented in two, or even three, dimensions.
This is astounding!!

Can this statement be verified?

[phildee3]

Can this statement be verified?

The non-existence of something can never be verified - only the existence of something.
I'm sure that if this had been done those of us who have been looking at 4D projections in journals and various websites would have seen it.

[redorbluepill]

The non-existence of something can never be verified - only the existence of something.
I'm sure that if this had been done those of us who have been looking at 4D projections in journals and various websites would have seen it.

Often stated but not entirely true. If the existence of something can be proven; it's non existence can be as well.

[phildee3]

Often stated but not entirely true. If the existence of something can be proven; it's non existence can be as well.

How?

In an infinite universe you could never stop looking for it.
You'd never know, for sure, if it wasn't just over the next horizon.

[phildee3]

Nothing new since Aug 15th (Jubilee Plantation, nr Cherhill). :(
I'm not surprised.
The circlemakers reached the limit of their capabilities on this one!
Too bad the immensity of it's significance has been missed.

[subl1minal]

I think of all things I'd love to know about this Earth, is who the fuck makes these! They blow my mind.

[isuncertain]

I think of all things I'd love to know about this Earth, is who the fuck makes these! They blow my mind.

They blow my mind harder. Awestriking.

Just like to say a big thanks to chattanova for the selection of pics posted.

[musicmaker]

This is a message for all those pain in the arse circle makers out there. Stop making circles. Maybe if you stop making circles then the public would be able to find out whether there is a genuine phenomena. No-one is interested in seeing man made formations. Even if it was you all along the moment has passed and the public are not interested so why continue? Maybe to dilute a genuine phenomena? :eek: I love hearing the posts by you guys,"Oh by the way it was us all along". Jeez give me a break. If it could be explained by planks using planks of wood, sorry people using planks of wood I'm fairly sure all the scientists and engineers would realise this or perhaps they are all victims of some kind of mass dilliusion and in fact people who make formations using planks of wood are far better to analyse them? If it was man made the military would not interested and the government would not get involved in a disinformation campaign.

[terrorworld]

Near Munich, Bavaria, Germany, very new:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZFSm5aVb6Q&feature=related

[terrorworld]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_KoR2t-iM9k

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CnNWG1lrV4k&feature=related

[terrorworld]

...to delude the sheeple masses into believing all crop circles were man-made has the name 'The circlemakers', originally 'Team Satan' - ;)
look at this website:
http://www.cropcirclesecrets.org/circlemakers.html

The main distinctive mark between the false and the real crop circles are foot traces between parts of the designs (problem: If people have already investigated these designs by foot these traces will of course also show up), and a frequently complex design, often including a message or other information.

[phildee3]

Exciting!
http://www.cropcircleconnector.com/2011/eastfield2/eastfield2011b.html

[phildee3]

A new crop circle was spotted two days ago:
http://www.cropcircleconnector.com/2011/roundwayhill3/roundway2011c.html

Looks like mirrored Fibbonaci spirals to me (although they could be Nautilus; they're not the same thing - see: http://www.shallowsky.com/blog/science/fibonautilus.html)


I don't recall seeing any in December before!

(We also missed the one in East Field in October).

[jesta_g]

A new crop circle was spotted two days ago:
http://www.cropcircleconnector.com/2011/roundwayhill3/roundway2011c.html

Looks like mirrored Fibbonaci spirals to me



yeh looks like this geometry to me -

http://www.soulsofdistortion.nl/images/fractal_heart.gif


I think, as with many crop circles, the "message" in the circle is relating to the heart field. As seen from above the "stream" or flow of the field (torsion field) moves in this mirrored Phi spiral that forms the "heart" shape we see in this crop circle.

G


p.s. it's also very similar to the main body of the mandelbrot set...

http://jond4u.jonathandickau.com/images/Mandel.jpg



so relating the heart field/mandelbrot id say this crop circle follows the reoccurring pattern, as the majority of crop circles do, of FRACTAL geometry.

IMO the message may be telling us that if we learn to consciously control our heart field (heart coherence) we alter the (fractal) universe around us.... just a thought.

[phildee3]

It's not a Mandlebrot but your first diagram looks very much like it to me.
What is it?
Do you have a link?

I don't agree that the majority of crop circles are based on fractals. Very few, in fact.

[jesta_g]

It's not a Mandlebrot but your first diagram looks very much like it to me.
What is it?
Do you have a link?

I don't agree that the majority of crop circles are based on fractals. Very few, in fact.


Nah, as I said that crop circle looks like the main body of the mandelbrot, it looks more like the mandelbrot than my previous example of the "Heart field phi spirals" diagram.

That diagram is taken from examples of the inertia flow of the heart field, ie Heart Coherence. viewed from "above".

http://www.fractalfield.com/

http://www.heartcoherence.com/

http://www.heartmath.org/

Look at that crop circle again, it is a "heart shape" tho is rounded like a perfect circle eg the body of the mandelbrot not the pointed edge that two phi spirals interlacing form.


... very few crop circles are based on fractals?... dunno what crop circles you looking at pal but the majority crop circles ARE based on fractal geometry, fractal mathematics, and fractal sequences. ALL Geometry is fractal in nature, roughly what? 90%? of crop circles are based on geometry therefore yes the majority of crop circles are based on fractals... ie -

http://www.soulsofdistortion.nl/images/Crop_Circle_spirals.jpg

http://cropcircleceilings.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/Copy20of20GREEN20FRACTAL20.jpg

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/imagenes_circultivos/circuloscultivos14_14.jpg

http://api.ning.com/files/rYXJV*jyRSnoJCnxpuCxrP9Jq*8fVKnzFQqvF05MnvFTH-4J9cvuRYBOvQao7rl0JMpiMqd41RWuYZRaQbwQJzIAiseuUiL9/angel.gif

http://static.flickr.com/3026/2614585745_8ef1240dd4.jpg

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/49/140410437_d0119ee7de.jpg

http://synapticstimuli.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/crop_circle_060720_berkshire_straight_soley.jpg

http://www.cropcircleconnector.com/images/fig%2011.jpg

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_I4TNmqK7ohc/TLKmOjvE-7I/AAAAAAAAAAs/ow7BxGMDQc4/s1600/crop-circle3.jpg

http://www.sciencephoto.com/image/177624/large/E7520132-Mandelbrot_Set_crop_circle-SPL.jpg


and then some...

http://www.3foldsun.com/sfs.jpg

http://www.starnationgallery.com/articles/images/fractal_of_man.jpg

http://siderealview.files.wordpress.com/2010/08/pewseywhitehorse2010c.jpg

http://www.wiolawapress.com/solar/solar_FractalSquarejpg333.jpg

http://www.brainsturbator.com/img/bubbles.jpg

and that's just a minute hand full of the examples that show us fractal sequencing in segments of geometry.

note also a majority of crop circles, one way or another via various angles in geometry, provide a blueprint of the torsion field which is based on fractal physics, fractal mathematics and fractal geometry. Its no coincidence that our heart emits this same field via resonate standing wave form patterns during emotional states of bliss, ie heart coherence.

Now, if we take into account that consciousness is the driving force of the universe, and all biological life, matter, energy is inter-weaving, FRACTALLY, within this "source field" then our heart emissions can alter matter ie reality. As partially proven by Dr. Masaru Emoto that our conscious thoughts and feelings interact and alter water and biological life.

So, back to my original point, I believe most if not all crops circles give us this FRACTAL/Geometrical blueprint thats found micro/macroscopically throughout the universe. If we learn to tap this source field via mechanics, technology or even with our own hearts we will discover, or should i say re-discover, a science that incorporates all systems of life within this spectrum of reality.

Geometry is language, geometry is math, geometry is co-ordinates, geometry is cymatic, geometry is FRACTAL. I think we are very close, if not already have, to solving the message contained within crop circles.

If there's one thing we can agree on, if you do not understand what i have provided here, is that crop circles are designed for us to interpret and translate and that once translated the information we are provided with reveals an understanding of ourselves and the universe we long forgot or did not know in the first place.

[phildee3]

... very few crop circles are based on fractals?... dunno what crop circles you looking at



All of them.

The dozen that you've posted represents less than 1%



ALL Geometry is fractal in nature,



Nonsense.
Fractals are dependent on iteration.

Most geometry is not.

[onee]

Why would ET's make these instead of just showing themselves. How does this benefit the ETs.

[onee]

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-SLbAf2P_Dlw/TjEelA4kPmI/AAAAAAAAEuo/IAYqxhl2TQs/s1600/CherhillOH70.jpg

http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/af7b5e37bec8.jpg

http://i.thisislondon.co.uk/i/pix/2009/06/mike-skinner-crop-415x485.jpg

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2011/08/01/article-2020910-0D3F6F7000000578-664_634x433.jpg

[mcmenek1]

For the cropcircle connection to the London 2012 Olympic Games and the symbology for a fake Alien Invasion during the London 2012 Olympic Games see these links........

http://forum.davidicke.com/showpost.php?p=1060674397&postcount=147

http://forum.davidicke.com/showpost.php?p=1060674452&postcount=149

Love
&
Peace

[the mark]

So, when does the 2012 season commence?. :)

[phildee3]

So, when does the 2012 season commence?. :)

When the first formation appears.

[hagbard_celine]

Why would ET's make these instead of just showing themselves. How does this benefit the ETs.That's a good question, however their motives may be ones we can't understand.:confused: I often ask myself: "Why do they make strange signs? Why don't they just speak in plain English?" or: "Why don't they land on the White House Lawn and talk to world leaders?" But this is anthropomorphizing. We shouldn't assume they think like we think.

[phildee3]

Why would ET's make these instead of just showing themselves. How does this benefit the ETs.

Why do you think they do it to benefit themselves?
What makes you think that "they" are ETs? Maybe they are ITs.
What makes you think that "they" are not us?

[openwide]

Are there any examples of people being able to make convincing crop circles?

[enthousiamos]

Are there any examples of people being able to make convincing crop circles?

Most mainstream researchers will tell you that there are no good examples, only bad ones, but they know as well as I do, that this is a lie. There are many good examples of known human-made crop circles, but the mainstream researchers certainly will not draw your attention to them, because it is not good for business to talk about human involvement in crop circles. There is much evidence in the public domain if you look in the right places. Check out the work of Colin Andrews and see the video below for some of the best documented evidence.

This video was filmed with night-vision cameras by convicted circlemaker Matthew Williams last summer. It is not brilliant quality, but clearly shows people making a known, huge and complex formation. It is a crop circle that was hailed as one of the best of the 2011 season and pronounced ‘genuine’ by many esteemed researchers.

Rivar6000xAT10bit_WindowsMedia - HD 1080p_ConstrainedVBR.wmv - YouTube

[elton]

Awwwwwwwwwwww

Don't spoil it.

That video was faked by the ptb I bet.

[jamesc]

Just throwing this in here because maybe what we are seeing in the OP video is a rather hurried and crude attempt at trying to debunk the original formation. No doubt thought that the OP video does show people in the process of creating a crop formation but is it the same or actual field of the original formation depicted in the picture below that is claimed in the OP video.There are very important discrepancies found in this video in the text i have provided below.;)


Take this below for instance;


His whole story is full of anomalies. On his CMTV website he states, quote:-

“Next we can take the camera and night vision unit as was used on the night to the same location as the Serpent was in and set up the same shot from roughly the same location. I think I should be able to find it quite well as I had to jump over a fence several times to go back to my car to recharge batteries and swap them over into the camera to continue the 5 hours of shooting.”

The hillside he supposedly shot the film from is used to graze sheep as can be seen on Google Map. They are kept in the pasture and off the road with a continuous wire fence and there is a gate into the pasture very close to the car park where Mathew claims to have parked. Why jump over the fence when a gate was at hand ? He says he went back to his car several times. How many times is ‘several’ must be more than two; was it three or four. How long did the recharged batteries last?

He says he has five hours of video but measured via the Google Map data, his camera position is some 400 metres from his parked car so he has an 800 metre ( near half a mile) trip per battery change. How long would it take to complete a change operation and get back to his camera position?

Normal walking pace is around three miles per hour so allowing for the battery swap over at the car, the hill climb, re-setting up the camera and the dark conditions, even with a torch, he would need a minimum of ten minutes per trip. Several trips would eat into his filming time, three trips would lose him half an hour, possibly more, bearing in mind that on that date there was only five and a half hours of darkness.


He says the plankers had commenced work before he arrived and he says he did not see the work completed, his story is unbelievable. To get five hours of video and do the battery changes he would have had to be at the site a minimum of five and a half hours. To be unobserved the plankers would have had to work in the dark for a considerably longer period than when Mathew was present, but this cannot have happened, the period of darkness was too short.;)




http://www.cropcircleconnector.com/2011/rivar/IMG0231.jpg


Below is text showing the discrepancies and contradictions of Mathew Williams Night Vision Video and his claims.;)

************************************************** *************
West Wood Hey Down Serpent Formation of the 29th July 2011.

Further evidence confirming that the Mathew Williams Night Vision Video is a fake made to debunk this genuine non human made formation.

Refer to the Crop Circle Connector website article for this formation and examine the daylight photo which appears in the ‘Field Report Section’ on the relevant page. The superb ground level photo taken from the hillside at the head end of the Serpent shows exactly where the large mansion appears at Trapshill in the far distance higher and a few degrees to the left of the gap in the trees. In the video the centre of intensity of the disputed ‘house light’ occurs in the centre of the gap. It cannot originate from the house as Williams originally claimed.


However he has now changed his story. :rolleyes: His recent Google Maps video on Face Book draws a line between his claimed camera position and the large farm complex well to the east of the mansion, showing the line crossing trees at a small circular copse. This is false too, as a close inspection of the Google zoomed image for the copse area will show. The trees there block the line of sight to the farm.

There are no other likely properties and no street lights in the lanes which he has said could also be the light source.:rolleyes:

The camera angle looking across the formation which we see in the night vision video does not change throughout the whole film. Could this happen given the number of lens and battery changes he claims to have made? The camera alignment must have been frequently disturbed, the tripod moved and it would have been apparent in the video .

Finally, why did Mathew site the camera so far away from his car when the formation would have been in full view of almost any position half way up the hillside? Would he really have given himself the 800 metre time wasting walks and the repeated need to hunt in the dark for his tripod.


Silly man! :DThe obvious answer is that his whole claim is spurious The video is a Photo Shop or similar production with images cloned from one or more of the excellent photos on the Connector site. It must have been quite difficult to do, it took him 5 months. Unfortunately the end result isn’t worth the effort, it fails as a debunking operation as so many of his efforts have failed over the years. Why do his sponsors continue to support him?

Jack Sullivan. Jan 2nd 2012.

Appendix;

The end to end length of this formation, based on the approximately 2metre wide wheelbase of a typical spraying tractor, is over 1000feet. It would be an enormous task for any human team to create in the hours of complete darkness between the 28th and 29th of July. Sunset was at 19.58 hrs on the 28th and sunrise at O4.18 on the 29th the day of its discovery Taking twilight into account the plankers had about five and a half hours to complete the formation unobserved. Mathew says he has five hours of night vision camera tape of its creation.


He also says he missed the beginning of the operation and that he ran out of tape before it was completed.:rolleyes:Judging from the amount of work done as shown at the end of his night vision video and from the progress made during his filming, there was a great deal more planking needed before sunrise.:confused:

Also it is obvious that to achieve the symmetry and accuracy of the formation seen in the various CCC daylight photos, setting out the datum points, arc- centers and construction lines in darkness would have required very careful work and would have consumed a lot of the total time available.

As there was only some five and a half hours of darkness the setting out would have had to be done in a very few minutes before the five hour night vision video start shows the planking well under way This seems to be a very tall order in view of the enormous size and complexity of the formation, and, it is complex! :D

All the curves would have required a radial measure based on a fixed center. In plankers terms, this means a man must stand and rotate at a central point holding the end of a measured length of rope or tape. A man at the other end of this tape then treads out or planks out the required arc to an accurate predetermined length determined by markers placed during the preliminary setting out process. Forming plain swirled circles is easy by this method but the ones along the spine of the serpent here require much more consideration.

The central ‘Spine Circle’ scales out at a diameter of near twenty meters. From this the Spine Circles going to the head and tail diminish in both directions at a rate of about eight percent. So the circles immediately next to the central one have a diameter of 18.4 meters (20x.0.92) and the next ones down measure 16.93metres.


To produce the smoothly reducing serpent body without distortion these diminishing diameters must each be precisely calculated, measured and located exactly on the center line of the arcs of the serpent body.The plankers ‘must’ follow all the necessary steps as follows.

1: Create the central circle using a radius of 10 meters.

2: allow a small space then locate the next radius of 0.92 meters on the arc of the spine.


3: allow the small space as before then locate the next radius of 8.47metres on the arc of the spine.Then continue this process in both directions for all the spine circles.

One major problem for the plankers here would have been the apparent non-existence of a construction line marking the centre of the serpent body.How did they find this absolutely necessary line?

The required precision to two decimal places or so of the diminishing circles radii and positioning would seemingly rule out doing the calculations piece by piece in the field. Adding weight to this opinion is the fact that any diameter of any circle a given distance from the central one in either direction is virtually the same. This all points to one conclusion. For a team of plankers to make this formation, all the arc radii, circle centers and diameters would have to have been pre -calculated and fully dimensioned on a very accurately drawn plan.


A ‘measure and work as you go’ process could not have produced the symmetry and precision we see at West Woodhey Down. Mathew Williams’s night vision video is a crude piece of Photo Shop work, uselessly used to support a claim that The Serpent was the work of plankers.

What may have convinced Croppie researchers that he has a valid claim would be if could produce the fully detailed working plan drawing as shown to be necessary above and provably dated to before the formation appeared, but, of course there never was and never has been such a plan.

JS Dec.29th 2011.

link; http://www.cropcircleconnector.com/2011/rivar/comments.html


At the end of the day this video needs investigation for any signs of tampering or CGI manipulations or photo shopped anomalies, just like those debunkers that shout from the roof tops "has it be tested for CGI" so it is with this video i feel in light of the discrepancy's highlighted in the above text.

[enthousiamos]

Just throwing this in here because maybe what we are seeing in the OP video is a rather hurried and crude attempt at trying to debunk the original formation. No doubt thought that the OP video does show people in the process of creating a crop formation but is it the same or actual field of the original formation depicted in the picture below that is claimed in the OP video.There are very important discrepancies found in this video in the text i have provided below.;)


I find it quite sad that people are so unwilling to let go of personal beliefs, even in the face of huge and growing evidence to the contrary. There are more night-vision video recordings planned for the coming season, which hopefully will put an end to all the petty squabbling and then we can really start to look at the deeper mystery that lies behind the circles - a mystery far more significant than whether aliens are trying to contact us!

[phildee3]

I find it quite sad that people are so unwilling to let go of personal beliefs, even in the face of huge and growing evidence to the contrary. There are more night-vision video recordings planned for the coming season, which hopefully will put an end to all the petty squabbling and then we can really start to look at the deeper mystery that lies behind the circles - a mystery far more significant than whether aliens are trying to contact us!

I think there are very few people who think like that, particularly those who have actually looked into the phenomenon - even a little bit.

[jamesc]

I find it quite sad that people are so unwilling to let go of personal beliefs, even in the face of huge and growing evidence to the contrary. There are more night-vision video recordings planned for the coming season, which hopefully will put an end to all the petty squabbling and then we can really start to look at the deeper mystery that lies behind the circles - a mystery far more significant than whether aliens are trying to contact us!

Nothing sad about exposing hoaxers at their own game,if there is circumstantial evidence showing deliberate attempts at debunking by false claims the surely those responsible are in my view sad.You quote that there are more night vision recording planned, can you name who is planning them and what are the motives behind these night vision recordings.If a intelligence of non human origins is responsible for some of these formations then yes that to me is SIGNIFICANT and yes it might be other than alien.

The fact that the information i posted showed important discrepancy's with Matthew Williams Night Vision Video is to me highly SIGNIFICANT.If as you say we need to end the petty squabbling ect then exposing a KNOWN hoaxer at attempted fraudulent debunking is to be welcomed is it not and not played down to insignificance.:confused:

It is not considered vandalism by some farmers.( including loss of earnings by damaged crops ),that i would hope that any knowledge of planned or future crop making by hoaxers is reported ,after all we need to weed out those that seek to corrupt, confuse and have planned debunking agendas for there crop formations.It is sad that some people feel the need to dismiss important information containing discrepancy's of any claim that sets out to debunk for the sake of non transparent and fraudulent claims.

There was one huge and complex formation that appeared at night when it was raining and no real traces of human interference was found , now what we need is for the the hoaxers to replicate to the exact detail of one of the most complex and huge designs at night and in the time frames allowed and show no signs of human manipulations.

Its the hoaxers that have muddied the waters and set out to confuse and derail the genuine scientific investigation's of those formations that appear complex in nature and design not those that expose them at their attempts of deliberate fraudulent debunking attempts. ;)

[enthousiamos]

Nothing sad about exposing hoaxers at their own game,if there is circumstantial evidence showing deliberate attempts at debunking by false claims the surely those responsible are in my view sad.You quote that there are more night vision recording planned, can you name who is planning them and what are the motives behind these night vision recordings.If a intelligence of non human origins is responsible for some of these formations then yes that to me is SIGNIFICANT and yes it might be other than alien.

The fact that the information i posted showed important discrepancy's with Matthew Williams Night Vision Video is to me highly SIGNIFICANT.If as you say we need to end the petty squabbling ect then exposing a KNOWN hoaxer at attempted fraudulent debunking is to be welcomed is it not and not played down to insignificance.:confused:

It is not considered vandalism by some farmers.( including loss of earnings by damaged crops ),that i would hope that any knowledge of planned or future crop making by hoaxers is reported ,after all we need to weed out those that seek to corrupt, confuse and have planned debunking agendas for there crop formations.It is sad that some people feel the need to dismiss important information containing discrepancy's of any claim that sets out to debunk for the sake of non transparent and fraudulent claims.

There was one huge and complex formation that appeared at night when it was raining and no real traces of human interference was found , now what we need is for the the hoaxers to replicate to the exact detail of one of the most complex and huge designs at night and in the time frames allowed and show no signs of human manipulations.

Its the hoaxers that have muddied the waters and set out to confuse and derail the genuine scientific investigation's of those formations that appear complex in nature and design not those that expose them at their attempts of deliberate fraudulent debunking attempts. ;)

You can do all the detective work you like on the Matthew Williams video, it matters not. It really just smacks of desperation to cling on to the romantic and unrealistic view that people can’t possibly do this. Get over it, people can and do make fantastic formations!

I hate to sound patronising, James, but your views are just so out of touch with the reality of crop circle research today. You sound like a researcher from the 90’s, when they genuinely believed that humans could not possibly be involved with making crop circles. I was one of them too! But, today, you will find that most hardened researchers no longer believe this. Most still will not admit so publicly (because they have too much to lose by dong so), but privately most now acknowledge that humans are and have always been at the centre of the crop circle mystery.

The longest serving researcher of them all, Colin Andrews went public with this view a number of years ago (and has amassed a huge amount of evidence to back it up!), as did Andrew Collins and I actually had a correspondence from another very well known researcher only yesterday, confirming that he is also rapidly moving towards this view. He admitted that he and others like him no longer refer to manmade crop circles as ‘hoaxes’ and, somewhat reluctantly, agreed that there is much to learn from the study of manmade formations too.

There is no question in my mind that there is more to the mystery than merely people making nice designs in the crop - and I don’t believe ALL crop circles are manmade - there is something much more profound at work here, probably linked to human consciousness, and I believe the human element is absolutely essential to unraveling the truth behind the whole mystery. But by denying that humans are involved or merely catagorizing their involvement as ‘hoaxes’ is ignorant and irresponsible. For a start you should try talking to or at least listening to known circlemakers and see what actually motivates them. You will not only be surprised at their answers, but amazed at what they can tell you about their experiences!

Many crop circle researchers are guilty of using the subject to further their own agendas and filling their pockets, by putting their own ‘spin’ on the subject, that makes people believe it is an entirely other-worldly phenomenon. Admitting that humans are involved is simply not good for business. But this nonsense has to stop. In the end, as we shall soon see, it actually does not matter who or what makes the circles, what we can learn from the whole subject is far more important than anything else.

[jamesc]

You can do all the detective work you like on the Matthew Williams video, it matters not. It really just smacks of desperation to cling on to the romantic and unrealistic view that people can’t possibly do this. Get over it, people can and do make fantastic formations!

I hate to sound patronising, James, but your views are just so out of touch with the reality of crop circle research today. You sound like a researcher from the 90’s, when they genuinely believed that humans could not possibly be involved with making crop circles. I was one of them too! But, today, you will find that most hardened researchers no longer believe this. Most still will not admit so publicly (because they have too much to lose by dong so), but privately most now acknowledge that humans are and have always been at the centre of the crop circle mystery.

The longest serving researcher of them all, Colin Andrews went public with this view a number of years ago (and has amassed a huge amount of evidence to back it up!), as did Andrew Collins and I actually had a correspondence from another very well known researcher only yesterday, confirming that he is also rapidly moving towards this view. He admitted that he and others like him no longer refer to manmade crop circles as ‘hoaxes’ and, somewhat reluctantly, agreed that there is much to learn from the study of manmade formations too.

There is no question in my mind that there is more to the mystery than merely people making nice designs in the crop - and I don’t believe ALL crop circles are manmade - there is something much more profound at work here, probably linked to human consciousness, and I believe the human element is absolutely essential to unraveling the truth behind the whole mystery. But by denying that humans are involved or merely catagorizing their involvement as ‘hoaxes’ is ignorant and irresponsible. For a start you should try talking to or at least listening to known circlemakers and see what actually motivates them. You will not only be surprised at their answers, but amazed at what they can tell you about their experiences!

Many crop circle researchers are guilty of using the subject to further their own agendas and filling their pockets, by putting their own ‘spin’ on the subject, that makes people believe it is an entirely other-worldly phenomenon. Admitting that humans are involved is simply not good for business. But this nonsense has to stop. In the end, as we shall soon see, it actually does not matter who or what makes the circles, what we can learn from the whole subject is far more important than anything else.



So you feel that those claiming All FORMATIONS are the work of hoaxers and feel that these sources of hoaxers that are shown to be UNTRUSTWORTHY are not important.Was it not you who presented this video as evidence that this particular formation was done by humans and when i provided evidence of discrepancy's in it you ignored or failed to comment on them, all evidence needs to be included and considered for a better understanding ,is that not the scientific way after all.:confused:

Yes the patronizing is emanating from those who rule out any possibility of none human involvement and disregard evidence of deviant claims by those set out to muddy and confuse subject. Not all investigators are in it for the money as you have said , (that old chest nut again),to dismiss any unknown or none human origins for some formations is in my view extremely premature.

You sound as if you know more than you are telling in you quote of ,"as we will shall soon see", what is the "that" that we will soon see.Why should the non human or unknown origins be dismissed, have there not been unknown lights/objects been witnessed at crop formation sites.

Yes Colin Andrews is entitled to his views and rightly so as he is a respected and experienced researcher but so where the scientific academics who laughed at the idea that the world was round and not flat and that man would never fly or sail the Atlantic ocean .

What i am saying here is that it is still too PREMATURE to dismiss or rule out even a ET or unknown origin for some formations.Sadly there has been just too much manipulations and interference from those intelligencer's that do not want the unknown origin gaining any foothold in this subject and one of them has been the military intelligences.

Of course there is a high number of hoaxed explanations for many formations but not all and there is money to be made also for hoaxing too, especially when some of that money comes directly from governmental military sources that fund those responsible for the hoaxed formations to discredit or confuse any serious perceptions of unknown sources of some formations and that kicked of seriously in the 90s.

What has changed in that time since the 90s,yes the hoaxing has evolved into a more elaborate manifestation but has the deliberate debunking hoaxed formations that still set out to confuse those formations that are possible unknowns.

Remember people like Matthew Williams set out to debunk, that is the difference here and anyone can claim responsibility for anything.The desperation is not in the embracing of any new ideology or change its in the way in which this new ideology or change manifests its self and the sources responsible and their desperation into trying to pass off debunking hoaxed formations as evidence that ALL formations are from mundane and explainable sources.

I have also never denied that people can and have made or designed elaborate formations, that was never my point, it was the fact that the debunking sources are trying to convince through fraudulent means.;)

[onourway]

You can do all the detective work you like on the Matthew Williams video, it matters not. It really just smacks of desperation to cling on to the romantic and unrealistic view that people can’t possibly do this. Get over it, people can and do make fantastic formations!

I hate to sound patronising, James, but your views are just so out of touch with the reality of crop circle research today. You sound like a researcher from the 90’s, when they genuinely believed that humans could not possibly be involved with making crop circles. I was one of them too! But, today, you will find that most hardened researchers no longer believe this. Most still will not admit so publicly (because they have too much to lose by dong so), but privately most now acknowledge that humans are and have always been at the centre of the crop circle mystery.

The longest serving researcher of them all, Colin Andrews went public with this view a number of years ago (and has amassed a huge amount of evidence to back it up!), as did Andrew Collins and I actually had a correspondence from another very well known researcher only yesterday, confirming that he is also rapidly moving towards this view. He admitted that he and others like him no longer refer to manmade crop circles as ‘hoaxes’ and, somewhat reluctantly, agreed that there is much to learn from the study of manmade formations too.

There is no question in my mind that there is more to the mystery than merely people making nice designs in the crop - and I don’t believe ALL crop circles are manmade - there is something much more profound at work here, probably linked to human consciousness, and I believe the human element is absolutely essential to unraveling the truth behind the whole mystery. But by denying that humans are involved or merely catagorizing their involvement as ‘hoaxes’ is ignorant and irresponsible. For a start you should try talking to or at least listening to known circlemakers and see what actually motivates them. You will not only be surprised at their answers, but amazed at what they can tell you about their experiences!

Many crop circle researchers are guilty of using the subject to further their own agendas and filling their pockets, by putting their own ‘spin’ on the subject, that makes people believe it is an entirely other-worldly phenomenon. Admitting that humans are involved is simply not good for business. But this nonsense has to stop. In the end, as we shall soon see, it actually does not matter who or what makes the circles, what we can learn from the whole subject is far more important than anything else.

YOU are the one who is out of touch

[airria]

Hill Barn. nr East Kennett, Wiltshire. Reported 15th April.

http://www.cropcircleconnector.com/2012/hillbarn/eastkennertt.2012b.jpg

[hagbard_celine]

Hill Barn. nr East Kennett, Wiltshire. Reported 15th April.

http://www.cropcircleconnector.com/2012/hillbarn/eastkennertt.2012b.jpg Yippee! 2012 kicks off.:) The early rape ones are like the starter before the wheat and barley fields ripen and more spectacular circles emerge.:cool:

[phildee3]

Posted today on CCC - seven superb grass circles in Holland:
http://www.cropcircleconnector.com/inter2012/dutch/Bosschenhoofd2012a.html

[hagbard_celine]

Posted today on CCC - seven superb grass circles in Holland:
http://www.cropcircleconnector.com/inter2012/dutch/Bosschenhoofd2012a.htmlNice one!:cool: Thanks.:)

[the mark]

Duality into unity, perhaps?. :cool:

http://www.cropcircleconnector.com/2012/yarnburycastle/danbury2012d.jpg

http://www.cropcircleconnector.com/2012/yarnburycastle/yarnburycastle2012a.html

[phildee3]

Here's an interesting one:
http://www.cropcircleconnector.com/inter2012/dutch/Hoeven2012a.html

[thefallguy]

I went to the flower of life circle the other day and made a short film.

2012 Uk's first Crop Circle (Inside view) - YouTube

[phildee3]

http://www.cropcircleconnector.com/2012/WaterEatonCopse/WaterEatonCopse2012a.html

[the mark]

http://www.cropcircleconnector.com/2012/WaterEatonCopse/WaterEatonCopse2012a.html

I like that one. :cool:

And I've got a feeling that I'm gonna like the next one even more. :)

[the mark]

http://www.cropcircleconnector.com/2012/uffington/uffingtonwhitehorse2012h.jpg

http://www.cropcircleconnector.com/2012/uffington/uffington2012a.html

[phildee3]

I've got a feeling that I'm gonna like the next one even more.



Did you?

[the mark]

Did you?

I was only kidding. I don't have feelings. :D

[the mark]

Having said that, it is artistic. One of the comments on CCC says "sunspots", I say "transit of Venus"...... the Transit of Venus - YouTube

What do you think?. :)