Aliens & Espionage: Crop Circles and the CIA Coverup | The Why Files

a reply to: Ophiuchus1

Fabulous reference. I remember seeing something like this. This is why I put up with people laughing when I say crop circles. The cellular changes. Other anomalies that can't be faked and are not found in the man made circles.

Thank you!

a reply to: CoyoteAngels

But its no good comparing bent plants with standing plants.

You need to compare known manmade bent plants with unknown made bent plants.

I think point 8 in the referenced source shows what will then be found.

a reply to: Ophiuchus1

Nancy and BLT have been discussed quite a bit in other threads on here.

originally posted by: chunder
a reply to: CoyoteAngels

But its no good comparing bent plants with standing plants.

You need to compare known manmade bent plants with unknown made bent plants.

I think point 8 in the referenced source shows what will then be found.

Yes, in some respects that web page is self-debunking pseudoscience, to the extent it's trying to show there is such a thing as a "genuine" or not man-made crop circle versus "man-made" crop circle.

Note this caption from the first photo in #4:
www.bltresearch.com...

Expulsion cavity typical of those often found in crop circle samples, but very rarely seen in control plants examined by W.C. Levengood. However, the data indicates this abnormality is not present in all "genuine" formations.

So first of all, your point has to be applied here too where the so-called "control" plants are apparently plants from the same field but not in the crop circle. If the objective of the analysis is to determine if crops are flattened by humans with planks or whatever, one would need to get to the crop circle within 24h and pay the farmer and a circlemaker to flatten some nearby crops. Then the crops flattened by the circlemaker would be a better "control". It seems like pseudoscience to compare flattened crops with not flattened crops and then claim the changes in the flattened crops have some mysterious non-human origin if the control doesn't include human-flattened crops.

And in this regard, #8 is the nail in the coffin of the claim as you point out, saying they see the same effects in some lodging flattened plants not in the crop circle. So the effects may have something to do with crops being flattened, whether they are in a crop circle or not.

The second point in that caption is that "the abnormality is not present in all "genuine" formations. So, even by this pseudoscientific analysis, those "blown out" symptoms are not a clear evidence of "genuine" formations if sometimes they occur and sometimes don't occur in so-called "genuine" formations. (and there's really no way to tell the difference using the methods of cerealogists, but I provide some hints on how one might do that at the end of this post)

A circlemaker who opined on this says whatever the "cerealogists" are seeing occurs without any microwaves, and a careful read of that web page does tend to support that conclusion, especially in section 8 where they talk about lodging, which is sort of the self-debunking part of the article.

However, circlemakers apparently like it when their circles are pronounced "genuine" and not man-made so they can get creative in trying to obtain such claims, like sprinkling iron filings in the circle which make circle enthusiasts gawk at the magical properties of the circle and say it must be "genuine". Or any number of other techniques may be used, and if they wanted to blow out more nodes to make it look impressive, they could take a magnetron with them attached to a battery to do that. It seems the height of silliness to imply that aliens are the only ones with magnetrons when humans have literally millions of them, one in every microwave oven.

So based on the aforementioned points about the website about similar damage occurring in downed crops outside of crop circles, I doubt magnetrons are used to inflict the damage. But even if someone was really convinced that the damage had to be caused by microwaves, why would anybody assume that the source must be alien magnetrons instead of human magnetrons when humans have such an abundant supply of magnetrons?

A scientist named Richard Taylor pointed out that humans could use magnetrons too, though he's not sure if they are actually using them to make crop circles, it's just one possible explanation. I think the point chunder makes shows we don't even need to resort to that explanation since the symptoms occur in lodged crops too, not just crop circles.

Physics May Explain Mysterious Crop Circles

Microwaves, Taylor suggests, could be used to make crop stalks fall over and cool in a horizontal position — a technique that could explain the speed and efficiency of the artists and the incredible detail that some crop circles exhibit.

In fact, another research team claims to be able to reproduce the intricate damage inflicted on crops using a handheld magnetron, readily available from microwave ovens, and a 120-Volt battery.

Finally, while all complex circle designs are presumably man-made, the old simple circles that are just a round or oval section might not be man-made if they are caused by atmospheric vortices, which can range anywhere from "dust devils" to "tornadoes" which if they just quickly touch down in one spot could make a circle. If it touches down and moves a little before dissipating then it might make an elongated circle like that old "mowing devil" case.

There were some crop circles in Australia made by wallabies, but I think that's pretty rare and again it's a simple circle, not a complex formation.

Crop circles: Myth, theories and history

Perhaps the cutest crop circles to make international news were simple ones spotted in Tasmania's legally grown opium field in 2009. The opium is grown for the pharmaceutical industry, which uses the plants to make drugs such as morphine. According to the Australian state's attorney general, wallabies were getting into the fields and hopping in circles after eating the opium poppies and "getting high as a kite," NBC News reported that year. The disoriented wallabies were stomping on the poppies, causing crushed circular patches.

My point being maybe there have been some very simple circles not man-made (though I am reluctant to use the term "genuine" which cerealogists tendd to imply means "alien-made"), especially the old historical examples. But such simple phenomena could not result in the more complex designs so humans likely made all those, and all the claims some crop circles could not be made by humans can be debunked. The argument that human circlemakers don't have access to microwaves may be one of the dumbest things I ever heard, but even the microwave damage claim appears to be self-debunking as discussed above.

a reply to: Arbitrageur

Thanks.

I was just about to post a similar reply.

BLT are just pushing pseudoscience.

a reply to: chunder

I was discussing the stalks in manmade circles vs stalks in the circles of unknown origin. They are different.

a reply to: Ophiuchus1

I remember reading that several years ago.

It doesn't follow what I had mentioned on my previous post, a comparison between the three possibilities, normal plant, plant on a hand-made crop circle, plant on a crop circle by unknown methods.

It's interesting that they did experiment that MIR process (they probably can't) along with the microwaves, to see if the joint processes result in a crop circle like plant, instead of assuming that the processes would work without affecting each other.