Interesting article lays out the science behind the crop circle phenomenon.

Found an article that highlights several of the contentions that exist in regards to crop circle discussion. Among the impressive quotes in the article:

"The result: Three articles in peer-reviewed journals, two in Physiologia Plantarum and another in the Journal of Scientific Exploration. All identified dramatic heat-related physiological alterations in grain samples gathered from Europe and North America that couldn’t be explained by pranksters pressing simple wooden boards into the fields."

and

"Dr. Robert Reynolds, the former president of the Clay Minerals Society and Dartmouth College professor emeritus of geology and mineralogy, was utterly stumped by the transformation of crystalline structures in the surface soil beneath the stricken crops. The changes he observed would’ve required temps of between 1,500 and 1,800 degrees F, sustained over a period of hours."

Would be interested in the opinions of others regarding this.

Link: devoid.blogs.heraldtribune.com...
Source: The Herald Tribune
Date: June 17th, 2011





Please Read: Posting Work Written by Others:
Going forward, if you post something that is not 100% your own writing or work you must use the EX TAG, post NO MORE THAN 10% of the original (or three paragraphs, whichever is least), and GIVE A LINK TO THE SOURCE MATERIAL. If the work you are posting is not on the internet, from a book for example, you MUST give a credit for that Book ( the title), its Author and Publisher.

To actually believe that 2 men made these works of art with string and boards, no foot prints leading to the sites and with the precision and size to consider...is harder to believe than the Alien Theory.

IMO

I don't know what or who is responsible, but I'm very sure that 2 dudes crawling around in the middle of the night with strings and boards didn't do it.

Maybe the smaller, simpler versions but not those huge works of art.

looks like the bloggers are picking up on an old MUFON report from 2004
www.scribd.com...

reply to post by jude11


plenty of time lapse youtube videos showing just that. e.g. www.youtube.com...

the question is are all crop circles hoaxes?

Originally posted by youallcrazy
reply to post by jude11

 

plenty of time lapse youtube videos showing just that. e.g. www.youtube.com...

the question is are all crop circles hoaxes?

Exactly...some, but all? Can't believe that.

reply to post by worldriot

S&F for the find. At last an article I can investigate more.

Thanks.

reply to post by jude11

Who says 2 people did it? Just as the designs have gotten more complex, so have the number of people involved.
www.circlemakers.org...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Those three articles have been pretty well gone over on ATS, BTW.

Originally posted by youallcrazy
reply to post by jude11

 

plenty of time lapse youtube videos showing just that. e.g. www.youtube.com...

the question is are all crop circles hoaxes?

They didn't say how long that took them in that film. I say not all crop circles are Humanmade. And I wonder why We haven't seen evidence of severe gaffes - I mean, if One is making a circle and then makes a mistake and it is not close but close enough to know an error has occurred - kinda hard to "change the design" with something like that.

The node anomalies, the radiation anomalies, and soil anomalies in some circles points to more than a bunch of Guys with boards, sticks and tape measures. (And have any sticks ever been accidentally left? The Guy mentions that You don't want to leave any - but has any ever been left?)

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by jude11

 

Who says 2 people did it? Just as the designs have gotten more complex, so have the number of people involved.
www.circlemakers.org...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Those three articles have been pretty well gone over on ATS, BTW.

edit on 6/18/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)

You're right on that one. 2 people would no longer be possible for some of these but I remember years back when the first vids started surfacing and they were usually 2 people. Now for some of these, it would take many but I still can't imagine many of these being man-made...either by 2 or 10 people. IMO

Originally posted by Amaterasu
And I wonder why We haven't seen evidence of severe gaffes - I mean, if One is making a circle and then makes a mistake and it is not close but close enough to know an error has occurred - kinda hard to "change the design" with something like that.

There was one posted recently that to me showed such human mistakes.



The pointy bits of the star heading out from the center circle are *almost* but not quite aligned correctly. They dont point directly out, but *almost* so. Its like a human in the middle of the night might have got it close but not quite perfect.

What about Ice Circles

What if they are found in areas humans don't normally go?

www.mondovista.com...

www.cropcircleanswers.com...

some are man made and they are easily identifiable as man made...


this thread is the best evidence of unexplained crop circles.
Crop Circles...with some actual evidence

Still my favorite:

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/10479dc0ac00.jpg[/atsimg]

reply to post by jude11


Have We seen the known crop circle makers make those repeated circles as in that "butterHuman?"

Just curious, because I would like to see Them do that - and keep tufts in the centers like some have, too.

If you look closely the examples that were made by these guys, you can see how the bottom of the crops is smashed, while in the other ones, the crop is somewhat bended outwards. It doesn't makes sense.

I find it unusual the topic is moved into such a vague category. In my opinion, relegating scientific data to "highly speculative conspiracy theories" is close in comparison to surpressing a discussion regarding the article. That is unfortunate, as I was genuinely interested in the opinion of others about this.

reply to post by alfa1


Conceivable... I suspect this is Humanmade. But then again... Who knows what the design is supposed to look like, eh?

Thanks for that.

reply to post by Amaterasu


What always interested me about that work is the resemblance to Da Vincis Vitruvian Man.

Originally posted by jude11
To actually believe that 2 men made these works of art with string and boards, no foot prints leading to the sites and with the precision and size to consider...is harder to believe than the Alien Theory.

IMO

I don't know what or who is responsible, but I'm very sure that 2 dudes crawling around in the middle of the night with strings and boards didn't do it.

Maybe the smaller, simpler versions but not those huge works of art.

edit on 18-6-2011 by jude11 because: (no reason given)

Really? More ludicrous than aliens? That really makes me angry - to think that people shrug off and even disbelieve the ingenuity of mankind. Read up on this link and then... well, I'm sure you'll find a way to rationalize it, so maybe don't bother. I know it's about wishful thinking, and not evidence.

As for evidence - well, what do you know... the "scientific articles" referred to in this blog are none other than BLT Research! The institution famous for putting forth bad science. Every one of their claims, when independently tested, turned out to be a hoax or perfectly natural. That's how "real" science works. One study comes along, makes some claims, then other scientists review the studies, then attempt to replicate them for objectivity. If that fails... then you have nothing.

All those claims evaporate upon examination, and all you're left with are some fancy designs in crops and wishful thinking. Don't for a moment think that the people who truly make these designs are fools. They are artists. The more you attribute their work to that of space visitors leaving clues to super tech, the more you're just complimenting these clever Brits.

Originally posted by worldriot
I find it unusual the topic is moved into such a vague category. In my opinion, relegating scientific data to "highly speculative conspiracy theories" is close in comparison to surpressing a discussion regarding the article. That is unfortunate, as I was genuinely interested in the opinion of others about this.

I can see your point and yes it has veered a little. I think the underlying issue is still one that compares the two. Those being the scientific data and the theory of whether these are man-made or 'other'. IMO

If they are man-made, how do we explain the heat signatures? I believe that all discussions on crop circles need to have both angles to fully investigate.