Crop Circles are Man Made, and here is why!

reply to post by atlasastro


Gary King probably gets advance info from circle makers. They get recognition and he gets money. It's all neatly tied together now. Great post!

reply to post by aliencatlady


Thanks for dropping by,
Yes, I think it is pretty well looking like that too.
The makers, and those that handle promoting the "mystical" side of the CC phenomena.
There are more than just Gary, Charles Mallet is another "expert" that springs to mind. He also heads a "research group" and also makes the "balls of light" claim.

I dont believe that Crop circles have anything to do with Aliens, it just seems to me as if it would be a massive waste of time and money to send Aliens halfway around the galaxy just to draw Graffiti in some farmers paddock

reply to post by Daisy-Lola


I'm too stupid to figure out how the trick was done, therefore aliens did it.


Don't kill the myth!

[edit on 4/1/2010 by DGFenrir]

reply to post by DGFenrir




The myth will live, don't worry.
It will just become formally known as the Myth, rather than the truth.
So it will just be exposed, and not harmed in any way or exposed to cruel and unusually treatment as per the "Myth welfare and protections act of 2010 ATS".

reply to post by DGFenrir




The myth will live, don't worry.
It will just become formally known as the Myth, rather than the truth.
So it will just be exposed, and not harmed in any way or exposed to cruel and or unusual treatment as per the "Myth welfare and protections act of This Thread 2010 ATS".

[edit on 4/1/10 by atlasastro]

It is obvious some ccs couldn't have been man made.

Such as the one at stonehenge made in 30 min. NO man could have done that in 30 min. There are so many cases just like this.

I am not one of the belief humans are running around in the middle of the night pitch black with microwaves ovens either!
You who didn't understand (know the facts) there has been blown nodes in some genuine ccs.
www.bltresearch.com...

The anomalies and the extremely fast making time of some enormous ccs proove that humans didn't make them.

ETs probably did, no matter how silly that may sound to some.

It sounded silly to me a few years ago too, but now when I KNOW they exist that seems like the most logical explanation as you think about it.

reply to post by UfosExiZt


The node claim is made by Levengood et al from BLT.
The studies are flawed.
In Levengood's 3 papers published in the 90's concerning the phenomena, Levengood in his equation for measuring node variation actually starts the node length at 0. Levengood then concludes that any length after that is a variation from the norm. This is flawed. The linear model showing variation across the circles is also flawed as it leaves data out or fails to acknowledge it.

With the use of Equation 2, a corrected analysis was
performed employing the values of NL, N0 and the corre-
sponding distances from the epicenters as reported by Le-
vengood and Talbott (1999). As in the latter reference,
data points corresponding to the central ‘tufts’ in the for-
mations were omitted in the analysis. It was found that
the Pearson product moment correlation coefficient, R
(Levengood and Talbott 1999), decreases in one of the
reported cases.

www.ecn.org...

So here we have BLT leaving out data and one of the studies actually shows decreases in Node trends across a circles from the centre.

Many people may be ignorant of the fact that circles continue to grow after being made and plants respond to any change with phototropism, geotropism or gravitropism.

We need to know exactly when and where sample are taken from in the circles, so time is critical in evaluating the geotropic effect on plants that are flattened but continue to grow.

Here are example of geotropism on nodes and internodes.

This time course and location of gravitropically induced curvatures in stems of goosegrass (Galium aparine L.), a member of the Rubiaceae, have been investigated. In the early stages of the response (0–5 h), curvature develops throughout the growing region, and is followed by an autotropic straightening which affects the internodes only, leading to the production of essentially straight internodes some 15 h after the onset of gravistimulation. Curvatures developing in the nodal regions, however, continue to increase over this period, and are not subject to reversal by autotropism. The nodal curvatures are not entirely dependent on the presence of any other part of the plant, since marked curvatures can be induced in isolated nodal segments. This pattern of response leads ultimately to correction of the growth direction of the plant by means of curvature responses confined exclusively to the nodes, despite the initial participation of both nodes and internodes in the gravitropic reaction.

www3.interscience.wiley.com...
The study above clearly finds examples of geotropic curvature of nodes as well as internodal curvature with straightening so we know it occurs naturally.
simple explanation with graphic example

The Node claim is only based on 4 circles, only 4, that the BLT group published. They continue to claim that they are researching but have never published anything else. But the node and 'energy" claim is now mythology within the CC community and internet forums like ATS.

"Taken as an isolated criterion node size data cannot be relied upon as a definite verification of a ‘genuine’ crop formation. From these observed variations, it is quite evident that [cell wall] pit size alone cannot be used as a validation tool.” [1]
W. C. Levengood, “Anatomical Anomalies in Crop Formation Plants,” Physiologia Plantarum 92 (1994): 356-363.

Levengood himself admitted that the node does not infer any cause. So why do I need to address the Node claim when the researchers responsible for it considers that it does not validate anything about crop circles.
If Individuals actually researched the claims of BLT and Levengood they would actually realize that the group thinks that a NATURAL phenomena known as Ionic Plasma Vortices are responsible for the phenomena.

There are common aspects among the anomalous features listed in Tab. I which provide clues to the general forces producing crop formations. The affected plants have components which suggest the involvement of rapid air movement, ionization, electric fields and transient high temperatures combined with an oxidizing atmosphere. One naturally occurring and organized force incorporating each of these features is, as previously mentioned, an ion plasma vortex, one very high energy example being a lightning discharge.

www.bltresearch.com...
Anatomical anomalies in crop formation plants
W. C. Levengood
Levengood. W.C. 1994. Anatomical anomalies in crop formation plants. - Physiol. Plant. 92: 356-363.
Now, Levengood et al are saying some sort of energy vortex, similar to lightning may be creating the circles. No one has seen anything remotely like that or even claimed that. Levengood also refers to it as being Natural. But many people quote these anomalies as being supernatural whilst totally ignoring the conclusions of BLT and Levengood.
As flawed as BLT are, people twist this little bit of scientific investigation that is occurring as proof that supernatural forces are creating CC's.
Here are criticisms of BLT that should be considered when quoting node phenomena and the electro-magnetic radiative claims.
www.csicop.org...
www.cicap.org...
This is a another review of BLT,and some think it is positive, but it is clear in its criticism.

By no means does the author pretend to present a ‘lithmus
test’ for distinction between a ‘genuine’ crop formation,
whatever it may be, and a hand-flattened area of crop. Much
more data would have to be analyzed and thorough statistical
studies will be necessary before such a criterion can be defined.
However, the position-dependent pulvinus length, and in
particular the apparent organised character of the data
analysed, is interesting and stimulates further study.

www.ecn.org...

BLT have no right to claim that there is any criteria to identify crop circles as man made or other.

Google is your friend.

There are no trees on Mars.

Best thing I could think to do would be to drop by one of these farms and see if they will let you do it (payment I am sure) and agreed to keep their mouth shut. It would at least punch some holes in either theories, whether man made or not i mean.

reply to post by ventian


I agree.
In fact, hen you look at the density of wheat and crop farming in the most prolific areas in the UK, there are relatively few ares in which wheat crops etc are actually farmed.

This makes it even more specific in looking for "CC events".

It is a wonder that "researchers" and "experts" who have been studying the phenomena for 20 years cannot capture one being made.

They even know there will be circles next year.
Yet they cannot set up a simple system based on crop location within areas of incredibly high incidences of CC formation in order to capture the phenomena.

I wonder why that is?

Read the OP, and see how big the business is!
I wonder if that is why they haven't caught the makers yet?

Thanks for you reply.
Cheers.

reply to post by atlasastro

Ofcourse BLT can't say these ccs has been created by ET.

However, since some features of the genuine ccs can't be explained by human making www.bltresearch.com... , as well as in the incredibly short timespan these ccs has been made (the one by stonehenge in 30 min!www.dudeman.net... ) , it would be very safe to say that humans couldn't have achieved these aspects.
1. Humans can't make a "giant" cropcircle in a couple of minutes, it would take hours, therefore humans are ruled out at once at this point.
2. Many many anamolies exist in some of the genuine ccs which can't be reproduced by humans such as blown or elongaded nodes. This anomalie only exist INSIDE the cropcircles, and nowhere else. No explanation has been found for this phenomena. There are many anomalies just like this one that rules out humans.
3. No whole video of a cc being made has been filmed that is perfect and huge in lets say 1 hour. Let alone in pitch darkness.
No proof what so ever humans have done a huge cc in a a very short amount of time (for example less than 1 hour).

The list could be loooong.


As I said, only stupid sceptics ignore the facts and they only believe what they want to believe and try to find proof that backs up their belief.
A so called self fullfilling prophecy.

So again, Google the facts and you shall find. I've googled some for you as you can see since you seemed to get lost in your ignorant delusional little world. Hope it helped.

reply to post by UfosExiZt


Do you have proof that the circle was made in 30 minutes?

The professional circlemakers will never claim any cc and will never release a "making of" video of a complex crop circle.

And you should do your own research and not believe everything the BLT researchers tell you.

[edit on 18/1/2010 by DGFenrir]

even if one crop circle was not man made, and there are more than one out of the thousands upon thousands that are unexplainable, that would give the crop circle phenomena credibility.

Originally posted by UfosExiZt
reply to post by atlasastro

 

Ofcourse BLT can't say these ccs has been created by ET.

However, since some features of the genuine ccs can't be explained by human making www.bltresearch.com... , as well as in the incredibly short timespan these ccs has been made (the one by stonehenge in 30 min!www.dudeman.net... ) , it would be very safe to say that humans couldn't have achieved these aspects.

BLT can't say ET's created cropcircles, but you then say it is safe to say that humans don't make them.
Just show me one circle being made in 30 minutes by something none human.
Just once dude.
That is all you have to do.
Otherwise it is safe to say that you are injecting an explanation without evidence.

1. Humans can't make a "giant" cropcircle in a couple of minutes, it would take hours, therefore humans are ruled out at once at this point.

You have no evidence that these circles appear that quickly. It is a claim based on "witness" testimony.
You are injecting a criteria in CC making that you have no evidence to support. Therefor it is assumed, an assumption.

2. Many many anamolies exist in some of the genuine ccs which can't be reproduced by humans such as blown or elongaded nodes. This anomalie only exist INSIDE the cropcircles, and nowhere else. No explanation has been found for this phenomena. There are many anomalies just like this one that rules out humans.

No explanation you say has been found, but you have found an explanation. You say they are not man made. The Node claims are fraudulent. Show me photo's of blown nodes taken on site for all the crop circles you claim are not man made.
Just the facts please. Blown node photo's taken onsite at crop circles.
Show me the published research that states these are unexplained.(hint:there are 3 by BLT, all heavily criticized and flawed and inconclusive, as even admitted by BLT AND BLT STATE A CAUSE WHICH IS NATURAL.)
SO even if BLT are right, the CAUSE is NATURAL. BLT site A NATURAL CAUSE.
BLT say the the UNEXPLAINED PHENOMENA can be EXPLAINED by a NATURAL CAUSE.
Is that sinking in yet?

3. No whole video of a cc being made has been filmed that is perfect and huge in lets say 1 hour. Let alone in pitch darkness.
No proof what so ever humans have done a huge cc in a a very short amount of time (for example less than 1 hour).

The list could be loooong.

Yes, your list of no evidence is extremely long.

As I said, only stupid sceptics ignore the facts and they only believe what they want to believe and try to find proof that backs up their belief.
A so called self fullfilling prophecy.

Yes, we sceptics are stupid. We think there are trees on Mars. Oh, hang on, that is you.

So again, Google the facts and you shall find. I've googled some for you as you can see since you seemed to get lost in your ignorant delusional little world. Hope it helped.

How are those trees on Mars going.
Did you google that?

Why do CCs appear in the UK tenfold compared to other wheat or crop growing nations?

This to me completely suggests that men are making them. Do the aliens favor the English wheat? What's the deal with that? For every 1 American circle, or Aussie circle, there are probably upward of 10 UK circles within that same time preiod. And why aren't we seeing circles in Asian, or African nations where there are crops?

reply to post by spinalremain


There is a cultural significance to the locations that see the most crop circles.
They are also close to a huge population in that they are not far from London.
There is also excellent transport to these culturally significant location for a huge "audience" that travel, tours, and experiences these culturally significant sites.

You do the math.
Create circles.
You have the annual influx of tourists and locals that travel to significant historical sites.
The crop circles are then immersed and infused in the same mythology and mystery as the culturally significant sites like Stonehenge etc.

Business.
$
Crop Circles.

2010 cc tours already available for 2010 cc appearances.
2010 cc conferences already organized to talk about the 2010 cc season appearances and what they mean.
Merchandise, Industry Trade Fairs surrounding CC jewelry, calenders, alternative CC medicines, CC music..........

Business, culture, industry.......Crop Circles.
All Man Made.

reply to post by atlasastro


A very enjoyable and informative thread atlasastro - I've appreciated your logical processes, sense of humour, and respect for those members who contribute useful or thoughtful counter-views. It is disappointing to see some members resorting to insult and labels to make a point, though I can understand why when some people are very passionate about this topic.

Crop circles are an amazing and beautiful form of design. I'd love to be able to see and investigate them for myself and share my own personal experiences. Reports of cellphones not working inside the circles, or people experiences certain 'vibes' or energies once they enter the circles just adds to the intrigue.

Even if some crop circles do have odd or unexplainable characteristics, that doesn't necessarily prove that aliens did them, for as you have clearly stated, actual solid proof of alien craft making them hasn't presented itself. Even if such a craft was witnessed, that doesn't necessarily prove that it was other-world technology either.

Though despite this lack of confirmed evidence, I still choose to believe that a majority of crop circles are indeed formed by beings of other planets. That seems anti-logical I know, but I take into account the many unexplained sightings of objects in the sky, personal testimonies of witnesses, and the accounts of some individuals who have claimed to have meet advanced/more evolved human beings from our solar system.

Are they telling the truth, or are they deluded? - maybe - Science has already proven that life doesn't exist on these planets. i.e doesn't exist in the form of solid physical, liquid or gas. Are there higher levels of physical matter yet to be discovered? - Maybe.

If there is a possibility that other options exist, even seemingly remote ones, you will always get people who will believe in these possibilities. Doesn't make for good logical discussions, but does allow for the investigation and discovery of what could be.

I look forward to reading how this thread progresses over time

Cheers

reply to post by xfiler

Originally posted by xfiler
reply to post by atlasastro

 

A very enjoyable and informative thread atlasastro ......though I can understand why when some people are very passionate about this topic.

Thank you for those kind words. You are right to point out the passion exhibited by members of ATS in relation to the topic, it is one I share, although from a vastly different perspective.

Crop circles are an amazing and beautiful form of design.......energies once they enter the circles just adds to the intrigue.

There are amazing, regardless of what cause we attribute to them. And there are some intriguing claims of unusual occurrences surrounding the formations.

Even if some crop circles do have odd or unexplainable characteristics, that doesn't necessarily prove that aliens did them, for as you have clearly stated, actual solid proof of alien craft making them hasn't presented itself. Even if such a craft was witnessed, that doesn't necessarily prove that it was other-world technology either.

I am glad that you see my point. I would also like to add that my belief dismissing ET or Alien as the cause of CC's ,does not dismiss ET/Aliens as existing. I think some people infer that from one simply claiming CC's are man made. Which I think challenges some people and fuels passionate responses.

Though despite this lack of confirmed evidence, I still choose to believe that a majority of crop circles are indeed formed by beings of other planets. That seems anti-logical I know, but I take into account the many unexplained sightings of objects in the sky, personal testimonies of witnesses, and the accounts of some individuals who have claimed to have meet advanced/more evolved human beings from our solar system.

I accept your belief. What makes us difference is that I do not accept what you consider is the evidence that supports your belief. I too have taken into account many, if not all that you mention but I have arrived at a different conclusion. Such is life.
I do not think it is illogical to form a belief, you have considered things and formed a belief. That seems logical. It is the value that you and I have placed on those things as evidence that we have both considered, that makes us different.

Are they telling the truth, or are they deluded? - maybe - Science has already proven that life doesn't exist on these planets. i.e doesn't exist in the form of solid physical, liquid or gas. Are there higher levels of physical matter yet to be discovered? - Maybe.

There are many mysteries to be uncovered. I agree too, that there may be even more abstract causes that we could not even begin to understand or imagine. But I am not given to explaining CC's by only what I can imagine.

If there is a possibility that other options exist, even seemingly remote ones, you will always get people who will believe in these possibilities. Doesn't make for good logical discussions, but does allow for the investigation and discovery of what could be.

I agree. I have no problem with investigating or discussing possibilities.
But if anyone is intent on injecting any possibility into a debate specifically surrounding a cause, I would prefer that those injecting that "possibility" show the cause so as to say that it actually exists. And then we can discuss this "existence" as also possibly causing CC's.

I look forward to reading how this thread progresses over time

Cheers

Thanks. I am actually studying the last 20 years of UK CC's in an attempt to work out some Ideas on predicting dates and location for the 2010 CC season. There is a lot to look at as you can imagine, but I hope to post my thoughts on next season here soon, or I may even start a whole new thread. Either way, I would welcome your thoughts.

Thank you for your time. I really enjoyed reading your post. I think certain other people that have posted and that share your beliefs could take the serious lesson evident from your approach to the thread and topic. Let there be no doubt, that I did too.
These being eloquence, humility, honesty and intelligence.

[edit on 14/6/10 by atlasastro]

Been a while posting on this thread but I Just saw another CC video on this thread with Gary King, spreading the same old same story in order to sell 2012 now.

Same old story, now used to qualify 2012 religious myths. I guess the crop circle crowd need to keep business rolling along
Here it is.