http://SaturnianCosmology.Org/ mirrored file For complete access to all the files of this collection see http://SaturnianCosmology.org/search.php ========================================================== /The 2010 Crop Circle Season/ Red Collie crop5croppedbig-CleyHill.jpg */ /*/"What is a book without pictures?" saidAlice. / Thevast majority of humans living on Earth today probably do not believe thatmodern crop circles are any more than what the multinational media tells them:just pranks made by two old geezers from the pub, late at night like SantaClaus, all across southern England while no one is watching (see video here ). Other people believe that crop pictures may be no more than field art,planked out by groups such as the Circlemakers (here ),to help companies sell their commercial goods. For example, there was anadvertisement shown all across north America recently for Pringle's potatochips, where a group of healthy young people dance out into some farmer'sfield, in order to make a "potato chip" crop picture using rope and boards (here ). In addition to the Pringle potato chip company, who else keeps telling us thatmodern crop pictures are human-made? We have Wikipedia (here ), the BBC (here ), the Guardian (here ), National Geographic (here ), or the Discovery Channel (here ). Yet public opinion on this controversial issue may be changing rapidly! Forexample during the week of July 23, 2010, Yahoo News showed a disinformationalmovie about crop circles that immediately generated 2300, mostly vitriolic,reader responses (here ). The current situation appears to be as follows: a great many "authorities" onEarth have been telling people for over twenty years from 1990 to 2010, that /nothingstrange or mysterious/ is happening each summer in the fields ofsouthern England, or elsewhere across Europe. Yet a small but ever-growingproportion of people have begun to rebel. They are defying peer pressure andgroup opinion, as if to say: /"Yes,something strange is indeed happening there, and you are refusing to tell usthe truth about it, Why is that? Are some of the people in power on Earthtoday, afraid of what might happen if everyone learned the truth?" / If the viewers of this article would like to read an independent assessmentof crop circles, current to the end of 2008, please see "What Do Modern CropPictures Mean? " by Harold Stryderight and Charles Reed. Those are two of my various pseudonyms. As a professional scientist with aPh.D. from Caltech, and having worked in research for 35 years at places suchas UCLA, MRC Laboratory of Molecular Biology Cambridge, or the nationalAustralian science laboratory, I find that I need to protect myself from asmall proportion of people who follow crop pictures, but do not adhere to theusual rules of human social conduct. Daniel Pinchbeck and his famous book "/2012:the Return of Quetzalcoatl/" are certainly mentioned in that long review,because: (a) the entire crop circle phenomenon often seems to be focused on ayear 2012; and (b) symbols for Quetzalcoatl sometimes appear in crops, mostspectacularly perhaps on July 5, 2009 near Silbury Hill (here ). So begins my progress report on new crop pictureswhich have appeared during the summer of 2010. It has certainly been a seasonof /socialturmoil/*/,/* among the small band of dedicated individuals who research ortake photographs of crop pictures. But more on that later. The 2010 season began spectacularly at Wilton Windmill in southern England onMay 22 with a crop picture made in yellow oilseed rape, which is a plant withthick celery-like stems that is almost impossible to bend smoothly (rather thanbreak) with rope and boards. Nevertheless, many plant stems in that remarkablecrop picture were found to be bent smoothly, something like an iron barsubjected to high temperatures, then re-cooled into another shape (here ). What did the new crop picture at Wilton Windmill tell us? It showed a famous mathematical formula known as "Euler's Identity", using abinary form of computer ASCII code (here ). Even British newspapers could not ignore this (here) . Then a few weeks later on June 13 at Poirino in Italy (here ), we saw the image of a six-month lunar calendar, in which all of the small "stars"coded for another famous equation "E = mc2", this time using a decimal form ofASCII: Eight days after that on June 21 at Pewsey in southern England, we saw acleverly coded version of the "golden ratio phi to ten digits", or 1.61803399(here ). Whatever anyone chooses to believe about this controversial subject, it wouldhave to be said that the "crop artists" (whomever they might be) are greatmathematicians, and also great graphic designers! Then in July of 2010 we saw three "cubic" crop pictures at Danebury Hill (here ), Cley Hill (here ), or Fosbury (here ). The Danebury crop picture showed a clever version of "Metatron's Cube",which is a famous shape in what is called "sacred geometry": Cley Hill showed us another cubic art motif, which was made famous by Leonardoda Vinci: Fosbury showed us a third cubic art motif, which was made famous by Archimedes: Let us see now: Metatron, Leonardo da Vinci, or Archimedes, None of those "cubic"crop pictures look alien to me! Could the skeptics be right? Could all threehave been made by local human fakers with rope and boards? Or might there besomething wrong with our intellectual presumptions regarding this subject? All three of those "cubic" crop pictures showed spectacular, highly elaboratefield details, or what most researchers call the "lay of fallen crop." Thusfrom a purely technical point of view, they would have been hard to fake. Wehave a known fake from 2010 with which to compare, that was made with rope andboards in East Field on July 29-30, 2010 (here ). It shows considerably less field detail than any of those three "cubic" croppictures, while close-up photographs taken on the ground reveal a stomped-outmess (here ). Still, one cannot really be sure whether any or all of those "cubic" croppictures might be paranormally authentic. That issue has driven a small (butvocal) minority of crop circle researchers into social turmoil this year. Someof them have argued (without any evidence) that /all/ crop pictures from2010 have been human-made fakes, and that there exists a huge "secretconspiracy" among mainstream crop circle researchers, who have been studyingthe subject since 1990, to commission large teams of workers to go out into thefields at night, in order to make fake crop pictures that can later be shown oncalendars or jewelry, simply for the purposes of making money! No doubt a little of this goes on. Yet one can only note here that thelong-term researchers in question (who sell calendars or jewelry) are /relativelypoor/ by normal human standards, and would hardly have enough funds topay for such large-scale efforts! And those crop pictures which are known to be"fake" usually seem quite obvious, and hence are not visited or regarded wellby serious researchers, only by tourists. Finally, the intellectual content ofmodern crop pictures can sometimes be quite high, as shown above for Euler'sIdentity, E = mc2 or the golden ratio. /"Are we really talkingabout the same people here, who would not have received an education in highermathematics?"/ Now in order to close this progress report, let us delve into the heart of thesubject. Three crop pictures at Woolaston Grange on July 18, Beggar's Knoll onJuly 27, or Windmill Hill on July 27, seemed to show the first and secondstages of a "proton-proton nuclear fusion reaction" which powers our Sun, or isused in man-made hydrogen bombs (here ): Are they advising us to develop new methods for energy generation, or mightthey be warning us about an upcoming nuclear war? There is little doubt in mymind that the real "paranormal crop artists" can somehow predict the future:see for example the first two slides here , which show how several crop pictures from 2007 anticipated the BP oil spillin 2010. Finally, just a few days ago on July 30, 2010 at Wickham Green in Berkshire, wesaw two circular crop pictures which showed apparently the "face of Jesus" asit appears on the Turin Shroud, along with a complex, unsolved message inbinary code for everyone on Earth (here ): Does anyone seriously believe that those two highly-elaborate crop pictureswere locally human-made? And what might their underlying binary code have totell us? /This summary diagram was prepared by CMM Research on August 8, 2010, based on original work done by George Costanza and Marius Zemaitis on the ‘Circle Chasers’ Facebook website./ In summary, the 2010 crop circle season has been an exciting time (so far). Ithas included many new crop pictures of a mathematical or geometrical nature,along with several other pictures which show nuclear fusion from subatomicphysics, plus a recent pair of pictures which purports to show a "message fromabove" that is intended for everyone on Earth, if we can figure out what itmeans. Where do modern crop pictures come from, if they are not made by local human fakerswith rope and boards? There is no current consensus on this point, nor have thecrop artists clearly revealed their identities in their pictures (except maybeon July 30). Some people believe that they are being made by extra-terrestrialvisitors to Earth, while other people believe that they may come from someother spacetime dimension, whether physical or spiritual, which overlaps withour own. One thing seems certain however: our current way of thinking about "consensusNewtonian reality" must be fundamentally in error, in order for those beautifulfield pictures to keep appearing year after year in diverse places, almost asif by magic, never showing any mistakes, never being found half-finished, andtheir perpetrators almost never being caught, despite intense surveillance ofthe fields in England where they most commonly appear. */ /* /We would like to thank the Crop Circle Connector/ website /runby Mark Fussell and Stuart Dike//, and all of their contributingphotographers (especially Julian Gibsone, Steve Alexander, Olivier Morel and LucyPringle) for permission to reproduce their original images here. None of theseimages are permitted to be used for commercial purposes. / * 8-5-10 * Red Collie's blog * Login or register to post comments * ShareThis * Printer-friendly version Tags: * Crop Circles Comments Surveillence Submitted by Sacateca on Wed, 08/04/2010 - 17:27. I'm definitely in the "believe it when I see it" group. Is there any reliable evidence of this happening without people doing it? There certainly is ample evidence of people doing it. I think the idea that people couldn't do something like this is pretty preposterous--we've done crazier things. Has any NEW information ever been produced? I just don't buy the BP thing three years ago. Even if that was a reference to this years oil spill, it seems like people could have predicted that--it's bound to happen. If it is extra-terrestrial activity, doesn't this seem kind of dickish to anyone else? Are E.T.s scared children hiding between mom's legs talking to us while gazing at the floor or something? I wholeheartedly agree on the fact that, whoever is doing this, these are some beautiful designs! Despite my skepticism I enjoy reading about it, if only for the pictures. * Login or register to post comments a great film on crop circles-> Submitted by ayahuasca on Tue, 08/17/2010 - 03:48. I also was skeptical, but after seeing this doc http://www.cropcirclesthemovie.com i was convinced that these are not man made. * Login or register to post comments Shroud of Turin Crop Circle Submitted by lupus lefou on Wed, 08/04/2010 - 17:31. ummm, the shroud of turin has been carbon dated. It comes from the 700-800 year era and not from a time contemporary with jesus. They know this especially since they recently did find another shroud that was from the era that 'jesus' supposedly lived...and it was significantly different from the one that is regarded as an religious artifact. So...I think someone might be grasping at straws on that one. Perhaps it means something else entirely. * Login or register to post comments Its meaning Submitted by regularjoe on Fri, 08/06/2010 - 23:59. Yes, I believe one could deduce that it means something else entirely. The creators seem to be showing that they possess abilities that we don't possess -- such as the ability to make such complexities -- as well as knowledges that we already have...and don't yet have. This is definitely a face. But it's not a slam dunk that it represents the face on the shroud. The creators seem to lean toward illuminating those who possess a more subtle eye to see. The mathematical signatures given require a more subtle and deeper introspection to arrive at those conclusions. Perhaps, then, this face may be viewed with new realizations of what it means in the days and weeks to follow. Or who it is. * Login or register to post comments People have faces Submitted by Sacateca on Sat, 08/07/2010 - 01:23. People are also trained to recognize faces. We see them everywhere: potato chips, rocks on mars etc. Maybe the creators of these circles are wondering why people are overlapping them at all. Perhaps they are equally perplexed that someone found a face in their designs. * Login or register to post comments Intent with subjective and objective realities Submitted by regularjoe on Sat, 08/07/2010 - 14:38. We can unequivocally conclude that their exists 'something' being conveyed in many of the circles. It would be quite unreasonable for any human to conclude that the golden ratio is not one of the intended outcomes to be subjectively concluded as an objective fact in an earlier formation. Perhaps if it was only to 4 or 5 digits it could be dismissed as a a mere 'random fit' by the conciousness doing the perceiving. However, with ten digits given complete with a decimal point intuitively provided too, the correlation is solid. To conclude otherwise would be quite unreasonable and point to an obvious lack of subjective intellect and unattached objectivity by the one making such a conclusion. If they are manufactured by mere mortals, then one should imagine too the human cooridation required to make each spoke representing a number PERFECTLY fit. Yes, humans do recognize faces most readily. This survival trait is incorporated into the design. The question then becomes for the 'suspect face circle' -- is this an intended outcome for the perceptor to recognize? The answer is clearly more muddled as a face is a more subjective perception if not fully fleshed out. However, if measured, the 'suspect eyes' and 'suspect forehead' match the coordination of an 'ideal', and thus, 'perfect' face. Perhaps even beautiful if actually seen. Lastly, it could be a bunch of dots with no reason whatsoever for their configured placement except for the subjective consciousness of any witnessing human to notice nothing. * Login or register to post comments not so fast...there are some doubts about those particular tests Submitted by lovesrainbows on Mon, 08/23/2010 - 00:58. The carbon dating tests done in 1988 that you refer to are somewhat in question due to the fact that the shroud was in a fire. The effects that the fire had on the shroud and the burned area where they took their sample for testing could provide inaccurate results. http://www.history.com/shows/the-real-face-of-jesus/articles/about-the-shroud-of-turin "In March 2010, researchers unveiled a revolutionary radiocarbon dating method that could allow scientists to safely establish accurate ages for precious artifacts like the Shroud of Turin. Unlike traditional carbon dating, the new process does not require samples; instead, the entire object is exposed to an electrically charged gas that gently oxidizes its surface without causing damage. This means that, someday soon, the world may have a more precise estimate of the Shroud of Turin’s real age." *The Real Face of Jesus,* a History Channel Special as referenced in the above article which aired in March of 2010 had some very compelling scientific information about the Shroud of Turin. i too had just about come to the conclusion that it was impossible to tell for sure or not if the shroud was authentic. watching this show convinced me that it could very well be the real deal. here are three articles from World Net Daily that also discuss some of the issues regarding the shroud and it's authenticity and the 1988 carbon dating tests which were done. Evidence favors Shroud of Turin as real thing http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=17688 3D-face creator says Shroud proves resurrection 'Jesus was more than just a spiritual event' http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=135321 Shroud of Turin's age miscalculated? Questions raised over 'faulty' carbon-dating tests http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=64881 OVE...is a powerful force!....USE the force! * Login or register to post comments more information for Sacateca Submitted by Red Collie on Wed, 08/04/2010 - 19:37. Dear Sacateca, yes, there is really good and unmistakable evidence that large and complex crop pictures can be produced without anyone in the field where it happens. On July 7, 2007, Winston Keech was joined by Gary King and Paula Presdee-Jones (his girlfriend at the time) on top of a hill overlooking East Field in Wiltshire, where Winston had set up four cameras of various kinds (visible, infrared). Then between 3 AM and 3:15 AM, a huge 300-meter long crop picture appeared silently in the field below, with something like 200 individual circles. No humans were there either before, during or after. When studied later, many of those circles were perfectly "round" as photographed from above, but "elliptical" when measured by tape on the ground, because the surface on which they appeared was hilly and uneven. Four hours later at 7 AM, the British military sealed off that field and went in to take samples. British military helicopters then flew over East Field, and Winston (still awake) caught them playing cat-and-mouse games with three or four small metallic objects that were flying around like rugby balls. There were many local news reports at the time, yet the subject was not reported in any national or international paper. Please see the long review cited above for references, or do a Google search for "East Field crop circle 2007" to see a a wide range of data and/or opinions. Best, RC * Login or register to post comments Thanks... Submitted by Sacateca on Thu, 08/05/2010 - 02:19. ...but no thanks. While I appriciate your help in pointing this out to me, I can't take this seriously at all. You're talking about an eye-witness account that offers no real evidence. I found a bunch of videos and write-ups about this occurence online which all point to how this was all /filmed /yet where is the evidence on film? Why is it that all these people have fantastic cameras when it comes to the interview segments but completely shoddy ones when filming the actual 'event'? Someone saying something happened just isn't enough for this cat daddy, sorry. I'd have to believe that America was "fighting terror" if I believed this. Nope, for me it's back to common sense. * Login or register to post comments “Young Man Intrigued by the Flight of a Non-Euclidean Fly” Submitted by Brian George on Sun, 08/08/2010 - 11:14. Hi Sacateca, “Sense” and “common” do not always go together. There can be no Science without curiosity. * Login or register to post comments Well Done Red !!! Submitted by SiriArc on Thu, 08/05/2010 - 01:46. *2 Cents From This Zone: Crop Circles Are A Prime Example: The Patterns Were There From The Beginning But Are Activated From Implicate To Explicate By Various Time Codes To Facilitate The Planned Metamorphosis From: http://forum.noblerealms.org/viewtopic.php?id=4301 And Continued At: http://nobledreams.co.uk/viewtopic.php?id=555 *11 23 11* AD VO ZIN * * Login or register to post comments videos of the 7-7-2007 crop picture forming in East Field Submitted by Red Collie on Thu, 08/05/2010 - 04:44. www.youtube.com/watch?v=lOlwyXkick4&feature=related or www.youtube.com/watch?v=udw3mF8XHTs&feature=related or www.youtube.com/watch?v=uJiHikYSZjU&feature=related It was 1000 feet long and 500 feet wide, with 97,000 square feet of flattened crop. No one was there, except for three people watching on a nearby hill with several cameras. * Login or register to post comments Circle makers Submitted by Simen Seigmann on Thu, 08/05/2010 - 04:57. Are definitely geeks, no matter who it is that makes these * Login or register to post comments “…Some people believe Submitted by Romans on Thu, 08/05/2010 - 07:26. “…Some people believe that they are being made by extra-terrestrial visitors to Earth, while other people believe that they may come from some other spacetime dimension, whether physical or spiritual, which overlaps with our own. …”. This is not reality, it is fantastic ... In reality a genuine "Crop Circle" are created by the forces nature of terrestrial origin, which usually escape the attention of researchers. Theoretically - a genuine "Crop Circle" with set of arbitrarily complex patterns is result action of the instantaneous decline of pressure of air on the external shell of stalk of plant, Theoretically substantiated a pattern genuine "Crop Circle", http://admin.nyos.era.lv/doc/engl_main_crop_circles.pdf , Fig.127., whose the geometrical complication is comparable with the geometrical complication of pictures July 17, 2010 at Fosbury. * Login or register to post comments paradox Submitted by wanderlust on Thu, 08/05/2010 - 10:55. they could be made by clever hackers who are tapping into scalar wave technology that world governments have been developing in secret for years. they could also be made by hyperdimensional tricksters, or the maya messaging us from te other side. really, it's silly to waste so much energy on the "who" aspect... ultimately, crop circles are a paradox,inexplicable by our modern ways of thinking, and challenge our fundamental ways of knowing, forcing us to evolve our consciousness, or ignore the evolution taking place. * Login or register to post comments For me the 'who' is by far Submitted by ada on Fri, 08/06/2010 - 17:30. For me the 'who' is by far the most interesting aspect of them, but it does seem a challenge trying to get a definite answer. I enjoyed in this video (about 52 mins in) the notion that some are man-made yet the people making them enter into an altered state of consciousness while doing so. http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/7710612 Also apparently even man-made circles can generate energy anomolies that affect electrical equipment etc. http://mountbaldy.com/openingminds/pictures/ * Login or register to post comments truth Submitted by regularjoe on Sun, 08/08/2010 - 15:45. This quite accurate. * Login or register to post comments hee hee hee Submitted by Jeff Charest on Mon, 08/09/2010 - 00:12. 1) reality is fantastic. Existence is fantastic. It's F-in' FANTASTIC! 2) The natural forces hypothesis was debunked years ago, by the man who originated the 'plasma vortex' theory himself--he eventually just gave up on his own idea as being obviously insufficient. 3) those must be some pretty damn smart air pressure fronts! 4) perhaps you can go there and try to substantiate your theory with empirical observation? "God sends meat, the devil sends cooks." * Login or register to post comments why is it so hard Submitted by Japer2012 on Thu, 08/05/2010 - 11:03. Why is it so hard to believe that these elaborate works of art and math are something not of our planet? Are people that arrogant to truly convince themselves of our undeniable superiority over these cropcircle phenomena? It just doesn't add up, even the greatest artists of all the ages made minor mistakes, some of these circles are flawless, not stepped on with boards but instead seemingly grown rapidly on one side (genetically mutated) to create a bend in the stalk to gently form a patern. whether it is aliens from another time sector or interdimensional mayan dragons creating these things the fact remains something very transcendental is happening here that cannot be fully explained by conventional human understanding. remember the wisest of men know one thing, and that is that they know nothing, please skeptics convince yourself of your own lack of undestanding and accept your complete lack of control over this. "in order for there to be order... there must first be disorder" * Login or register to post comments An Alchemical Confession Submitted by Brian George on Thu, 08/05/2010 - 12:35. Hi Red Collie, The north and south crop circles with the image of the “Shroud of Turin” certainly took me by surprise. It was almost exactly a year ago that I posted a “confession” on the forum for Amely Greeven’s RS essay “Crop Circles; An Invitation,” in which—in the guise of a 432,000 year old trickster—I claimed to be the actual creator of the Shroud of Turin, of the Great Pyramid of Giza, and of the current group of crop circles at Wiltshire. It is fascinating to see how the circle makers play games with our well-worn preconceptions, as they mock our opposition of the “subjective” and the “objective” worlds. The complexity of this season's group of crop circles leaves me breathless, and yet it seems as though no display of other-dimensional power will—or ever could—be adequate to budge the average “skeptical reductionist” from his/her conceptual sandbox. An essay that incorporates and develops some of my posts on this forum—“2 Big Birds Open the 1 Preexistent Sphere”—should be going up on RS sometime over the next few months. Here is the end of section 11 and the beginning of section 12: Please allow me to put on the mask of the Trickster for a moment. I have been alive for 432,000 years, and have finally come to understand a few things about Nature. Let us ask, “If all of physics is a projection from the omnipotent depths of the Psyche, what then constitutes a ‘proof’?” As you know, the principle of Occam's Razor dictates that the simplest explanation is almost always the best one. Faced with a world-wide phenomenon of staggering complexity, in which more than 70 giant crop circles have appeared over the summer in the area of Wiltshire alone, it would seem that the simplest explanation is "confession.” Not only does confession meet every standard of scientific rigor but it is also good for the Soul. Iny0urbrain, you wrote, “The first crop circles appeared in 1966 and the creators of the circles eventually admitted crafting the hoax after recent tales of UFOs. Now that digital space/flight imaging is more affordable and graphing software is widespread, it’s amazing that these human and computer crafted pieces of art are thought of as anything more.” Ru Callendar, you wrote, “I was particularly taken with one circle, a simple symbol that I saw in a book...I had it tattooed on my shoulder blade. 12 years later I became very close friends with someone, and a few months into our relationship the subject of crop circles came up. He mentioned he had made one circle and well, you can guess where this is going. The beauty of a dawn reveal of a new formation is nothing to the look of astonishment on someone's face when a glyph they stamped into corn over a decade before manifests on a friend's back.” Well, I "confess" to creating the Shroud of Turin as well as to both designing and building the Great Pyramid at Giza—I guess that clears that up! We can all rest easier now. For, as I have demonstrated, these things have been now “debunked”, and thus are not really “mysteries” after all. 12 *Vertical burn* “Islands have appeared and disappeared. (Santorini) was the center of an ancient religion where lyric dances of a strict and heavy rhythm were performed, called ‘Gymnopedia’.”—A Guide to Greece Hello Ru Callendar, You wrote, “The Shroud of Turin?? Pleeese.” Thanks for your appreciation of the finer points of etiquette. These days, so few among the living can be bothered to say please. In any case, as regards the “Shroud of Turin”—I didn’t think that it was fair to keep people guessing, or to any longer deny my key part in the deception. By means of photographic telekinesis, perhaps Da Vinci has imprinted his own face on the Shroud—200 years before his birth? If so, it is odd that the coins placed upon the eyes should date to the reign of Tiberius Caesar, as detected by a team of researchers at NASA, and further analyzed by Andre Marion, professor at the Ecole Superieure d”Optique. But no, it was all along just me—having fun. Someone has to translate the Language of the Ancients into history, and one of the only ways to do so is through paradox. It is also necessary to “separate the wheat from the chaff”—not an agricultural concept by the way—as well as to set into motion the Geometry of the Philosophers, as exemplified by the theorems that I projected onto Wiltshire. All in a day’s work! * Login or register to post comments True Science.... Submitted by iny0urbrain on Sat, 08/21/2010 - 23:27. ...requires *collecting* evidence and *analyzing* it in a useful manner. My main issue with crop circle research is this... Everywhere I see the claim that "many plant stems...were found to be bent smoothly, something like an iron barsubjected to high temperatures, then re-cooled into another shape." If this is by any means a COMMON occurance in crop circles, why aren't samples being collected? Where's the graph of "looks like bent by human feet" circles VS "looks like the stalk was genitically altered" circles. I refuse to believe that stems are *most often* supernaturally bent when there's zero photographic or scientific evidence for every new circle. This photo is NOT ENOUGH. Along the same vein, I want to see the statistics on circles that have magnetic or other physical, MEASURABLY ODD qualities. Surely there are statistics and graphs about a handful of remarkable circles with strange characteristics. But, again, only a handful. Where is this information for *ANY* OF THE CIRCLES IN THE PAST TWO YEARS? * Login or register to post comments The ghost of revolutions past, Submitted by Brian George on Sun, 08/22/2010 - 10:29. Hi Iny0urbrain, In a letter to Kepler, Galileo wrote, “"What do you have to say about the principal philosophers of this academy who are filled with the stubbornness of an asp and do not want to look at either the planets, the moon or the telescope, even though I have freely and deliberately offered them the opportunity a thousand times?” Even now, I can see the illustration in my 5th grade science book. Here is Galileo pointing to the telescope, or to the moon. And here are the church officials and the famous academic philosophers—with looks of horror on their faces, and with their hands thrust out in gestures of refusal. It is not clear whether this actually happened—either once or more than once, or in 3-dimensional space—or whether the story was a theatrical construct by the scientist. In any case, the story has become true through many tens of thousands of repetitions. In the theatre of my memory, I can play out the scene as follows: “No, Mr. Galileo, we will NOT look through your ‘telescope!’ You cannot make us, and you will cause much trouble for yourself if you persist in these observations that there are ‘craters’ on the moon.” In “Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds,” the Scottish historian Charles Mackay wrote, “Of all the offspring of time, Error is the most ancient, and is so old and familiar an acquaintance, that Truth, when discovered, comes upon most of us like an intruder, and meets the intruder’s welcome.” In “On the Dangerousness of the Zero,” I wrote, “Too often, these days, it is the conventional scientific explanations that fly in the face of common sense, and that are actually the screwiest and most implausible…A true 'Enlightenment' position would be one that argues in favor of open-ended inquiry; it would put Curiosity always at the forefront of its virtues. “We should not regard an explanation as the ‘simplest’ simply because it corresponds to our existing system of beliefs. Conversely, we should not regard an explanation as ‘far-fetched’ simply because it calls attention to the limits of our knowledge, and thus forces us to question everything that we believe ourselves to ‘know.’” Janet Ossebaard’s site http://www.circularsite.com is pretty impressive, and has good photographs of the various anomalies. At the moment, the kind of large-scale data collection and classification that you are looking for is difficult, not only because of the “liminal” nature of the phenomena, but also because almost all mainstream scientists and academics have shown a somewhat surprising reluctance to commit career suicide. Let us say that, once again, Galileo were to drop two cannonballs of different sizes off of the top of the Leaning Tower of Pisa, and one cannonball fell up while the other one fell down. And if, in addition, this happened not only once but several dozen times, would it be “reasonable” to assume that nothing strange was going on? * Login or register to post comments Leaving Science Submitted by Themon the Bard on Tue, 08/24/2010 - 17:47. Thirty years after walking away from a promising career in academia, I've found myself able to articulate why. "Science" is a practice comprised of certain rules of observation, inference, etc., etc. All the stuff you spend years learning in school. All the stuff that gets beaten to death in creationist blogs. "Science" is also a human profession, performed in a social setting. It is not uncommon that there are only a few hundred people in the world truly qualified to review your work, sometimes no more than a few dozen. Yet there are /thousands /of people involved in every aspect of any scientific study, from grant authorization to departmental approval to editorial selection in the major journals -- most of whom are not qualified to review your work, yet are in a position where they must do so, anyway. Since they are not, by definition, qualified to review your work, they review it by other more general criteria in line with their own principal concerns. Will I get bad press or a rebuke for authorizing funding of this study? Will this research make my department a laughingstock? Is this study "sexy" enough to keep our journal readership high? Furthermore, if I'm a taxi driver and I tick off my fare, I let him out and pick up another one. If I tick off my boss, I go to work for a different cab company. At worst, I move to a different city and start over. But if I've spent twelve years training to be a vacuum-ultraviolet spectroscopist with a specialization in solar flare activity, and I tick off three of the twelve established "experts" in the field -- tick them off for any reasons at all, from overt scientific fraud through badmouthing their favored political party at a dinner party through sleeping with their daughters -- I've pretty much trashed my career. "Science" as a profession is intensely /political/. Thirty years ago I didn't understand this, though I saw it and knew I didn't like it. Now I have a son-in-law trying to get his research published in /Cell/, and I get to watch the process from the outside. Science-as-a-practice is only a tiny fraction of the process. The rest is politics and marketing. So you have to look at "scientific research" in its political and economic setting if you want to understand why certain research is done, and other research is not done. If you think taxes should be raised and Social Security should be expanded, you aren't going to last very long in the Republican Party. If you think "crop circles" are worth studying, you aren't going to last very long in mainstream academic science, and the quality of your work (or lack thereof) will have little or nothing to do with it. -- Themon * Login or register to post comments hmmm... Submitted by jaiaquarian on Wed, 09/15/2010 - 14:53. Well, this evidence is not from the past two years but it does debunk a lot of the junk spewed by those who would rather put fingers in their ears and pretend everyone who's curious about this is CRAZY raving mad. This link is to an article about the science examining crop circles and determining that yes, SOME of the crop circles are created from a single electromagnetic point source from above. Published in a peer-reviewed and reputable magazine. http://www.ufo-blogger.com/2009/04/physicist-offers-scientific-proof-that.html I am convinced this is a bigger mystery than the debunkers and the very well-funded hoaxers would want anyone to believe. Sure there are hoaxers, but the sheer AWESOME and symmetrical beauty and precision is tough to replicate on paper. Try that in the dark with boards and ropes, eneven terrain, people watching for signs of activity and good ol' fashion human ineptness. If you're not marvelling, you're at least partly brain dead and you don't have to believe its aliens. There is a good chance (and some anecdotal evidence) that circle placement and type of formation are influenced by human thought and suggestion. I don't claim to know who or what, but i LOVE the mystery and will kepp studying. Just wish i didn't have to wade through so much skeptic (or or new agey) hooey to get the gems on this debate. * Login or register to post comments worth sharing Submitted by signs on Thu, 08/05/2010 - 17:19. http://www.spiritualgenome.com/page/crop_circles_explained.html * Login or register to post comments Thanks! Submitted by Themon the Bard on Thu, 08/05/2010 - 20:07. To Red Collie, for keeping us up to date on this. I love the news of the crop circles, because the inject a sense of wonder and fun back into a world that is all too ... dirty. Polluted with our worries and cares. It is a mystery how they are made, yet all that mystery shrouds very little more than a sense of beauty. I like that. I'm a little curous about the "boards and ropes" explanation. Geometric construction using ropes and boards is not trivial. Decades ago I participated in a national mathematical competitive exam in the US called the Putnam. I was pretty pleased with getting three points out of one hundred twenty on this six-hour, twelve-question test -- indeed, I got a $25 local prize for that score. Median score of contestants, nationwide, ranges between zero and twenty points, depending on the year. I remember one of the practice questions, which was simple enough to state: construct the focus of a parabola using a straightedge and compass. We worked through this one in a practice session, and it is a significant beast. So to the boards-and-ropes-hypothesis explain-awayers, I would lay this as part of the the burden of proof: show /how /a given image was laid out using ropes and boards. In many cases, I suspect this would require more mathematical genius than any of the mathematics embedded in the image itself. Just a thought. -- Themon * Login or register to post comments yada yada . Submitted by mczilla on Thu, 08/05/2010 - 19:36. Pictographic geometry is the universal language, and it's obvious on inspection that the more compelling of these formations were not done in the dead of night by a couple of drunken welshmen wielding boards and ropes. Something is trying to provoke and/or communicate. It's a mystery that invites our consideration. * Login or register to post comments Feedback Submitted by John Topp on Thu, 08/05/2010 - 22:43. Thank you Red Collie for presenting the information clearly. A few of us on Evolver have started up a group called the Collective Unconscious Project (T-CUP). In early June I started posting "The Weekly Symbol" as an experiment to see how an arbitrarily chosen symbol would feed back and be reflected in synchronicities amongst those involved, and I was also thinking about possible correspondences with crop circles. We've had some interesting things happen, I think. We definitely had the symbols show up strongly in synchronicities amongst the 5 or so people that were active with this. We also saw links with crop circles in a way that I think is significant. A couple of examples; the day after starting the first symbol, a crown, one member found herself driving behind a car with the license plate CROWN. A crop circle appeared that day that looked like a birds eye view of a crown, quite similar to the image I had posted for the symbol. The choice of an eye symbol was followed by a formation in Italy looking very much like an eyeball. Eyes have also featured in many formations since. After posting the waterfall symbol, a formation appeared at water's edge resembling concentric ripple patterns - water fall. I will link to comments that show the most obvious links with crop circles. I recommend scanning the whole thread to get a feel for how it's been working. Weekly symbol:Waterfall http://www.evolver.net/group/collective_unconscious_project/discussion/w... Weekly symbol:Seahorse http://www.evolver.net/group/collective_unconscious_project/discussion/w... Eye http://www.evolver.net/group/collective_unconscious_project/discussion/w... Hand http://www.evolver.net/group/collective_unconscious_project/discussion/w... Crown http://www.evolver.net/group/collective_unconscious_project/discussion/w... * Login or register to post comments Yep Submitted by Sacateca on Fri, 08/06/2010 - 17:10. Most logical response. * Login or register to post comments Wickham Green's "face" is Mona Lisa Submitted by Planetary Resident on Fri, 08/06/2010 - 18:02. That "face" at Wickham Green appears to me to be not a Shroud of Turin "Jesus" image, but another well-known work by Leonardo da Vinci, the portrait of "Mona Lisa". * Login or register to post comments I thought the same thing Submitted by Jeff Charest on Mon, 08/09/2010 - 00:05. ...di Da Vinci encode something in that painting? Are crop fields his new medium? Who was that man anyway? What's going on here???????? "God sends meat, the devil sends cooks." * Login or register to post comments Please Submitted by Ru Callender on Sat, 08/07/2010 - 07:09. spare us your trickster persona Brian George, it isn't as funny as you think it is. Or at least think of something new rather than re printing your stuff from last season. People like Sacateca save Reality Sandwich from it's tendency towards po faced acceptance of new age authoritarianism. Good points well made, keep thinking your way towards the truth. Jasper2012, why is it so difficult for you to believe that it is people making them? What have you got against us humans, aren't we creative or pure and good enough in our intentions? All said and done, it is shaping up to be a season of beauties. Funny how as the nights get longer the formations become more complex... * Login or register to post comments The conspiracy of amnesiac birds Submitted by Brian George on Sat, 08/07/2010 - 10:38. Hello Ru Callendar, Again, you have missed the point, as you tend to do. You have ignored my philosophical arguments—for example, that the “simplest explanation” may, at certain times, also be the most mysterious one, while the conventional explanation may not account for most or any of the facts; instead, you have moved quickly on to insult my sense of humor. Gee, that really hurts! And here I thought that I had made a friend for life. Let me see if I have followed all of your arguments correctly. You have: a) Insulted a person who has criticized your ideas; b) Complemented a person who agrees with you; c) Made it clear that you disapprove of the entire conceptual framework of Reality Sandwich, which is made bearable only by; d) The person who agrees with you. Does that about sum things up? Oh, and the complexity of a crop circle is related to the number of minutes in the night. Are you serious? Is the “Beggar’s Knoll” crop circle, created on July 27, 2010, really more complex than the “Pewsey ‘Golden Ratio’” crop circle, created on June 21, 2010? And are either of these more complex than the “Mandelbrot Series” crop circle, created in 1996, in a field right next to Stonehenge—a popular tourist destination that you might have heard of—which was not there at 5:30 PM but was completed by 6:00 PM. The specific point that I was making here, which was echoed in the comment by John Topp about the Evolver T-CUP Project, is that—in displays of “circular logic,” which we should perhaps view as a kind of “remedial education”—it seems possible for an image to move from the future to the past, as well as from the past to the future, and that the boundary between the “subjective” and the “objective” worlds is not at all what it appears. Who creates what, and where does the first form originate? Which came first, the chicken or the egg? The playing of complex games does seem to be at the heart of the phenomena of the circles. When I made this somewhat arbitrary connection between the “creator(s) of the Shroud of Turin and the creator(s) of the crop circles at Wiltshire, I certainly never expected that a Shroud of Turin crop circle would appear the following summer. Clearly, “Brian George” is not the creator of these circles, but this is only true for the “Little Brian,” or the “Little Ru,” for that matter. I would argue that we are all members of a punctuated but never broken field of consciousness—both human and alien and altogether “other”—that stretches back to the beginning of creation, and beyond. It is this field that creates the circles, which speak to us in a forgotten and yet somehow distantly remembered language. They are “koans” or “catalysts,” whose job it is to provoke our leap into a primal depth of energy. There, with a bit of help from the “alternate versions” of ourselves, we will reclaim our capacity to move freely through the ocean. There is indeed much new material in “2 Big Birds Open the 1 Preexistent Sphere.” These particular excerpts were quoted for their documentary value in regards to the Shroud of Turin/ Wiltshire association. These are the lines that immediately follow in the section where I broke off above: “The right hand may not know what the left hand is doing; it does not follow that the opposite is true. The left hand may be aware of every action of the right, of what it will do in the past and has done in the future, and of the marriage that will follow an apocalyptic war. “Soon—as you allow yourself to be picked up and transported by my voice—you will discover that it is quite easy to be dead. To oppose me is an insult to the one hyper-dimensional sphere! “Or not, as the case may be. The safest bet is to actively do nothing. “Here Beauty becomes convulsive, as was specified by Breton. “The music that assaults your brain is vertical. Earth menstruates, dismantling all but the most gigantic of my clocks. For thousands of years there are no horizontal signs. The once electric fields are desolate. Quite suddenly, the signs are back. “My memory is that of the last man standing.” * Login or register to post comments On A Limb.. Submitted by Sacateca on Sat, 08/07/2010 - 16:47. I'll go off on a limp here and agree with Ru. At least Ru and I (and others) are attempting to make clear and concise points. You say, "Again, you have missed the point, as you tend to do." Could this be at all related to the fact that your arguments are so convoluted they border on typed-diarrhea? I mean, this: /"//Let me see if I have followed all of your arguments correctly. You have: a) Insulted a person who has criticized your ideas; b) Complemented a person who agrees with you; c) Made it clear that you disapprove of the entire conceptual framework of Reality Sandwich, which is made bearable only by; d) The person who agrees with you. Does that about sum things up?"/ certainly doesn't "sum up" Ru's comment at all. There is no logic in it, it only tries to come of as logical. Not just an insult game, Ru's comment questions why it is so hard for people to believe in the capabilities of humans to create even somewhat miraculous things. I think this is a *very *relevant question. Perhaps even the crux of the debate. Saying: "It is this field that creates the circles, which speak to us in a forgotten and yet somehow distantly remembered language." doesn't seem to me like someone solidifying their point; rather, it seems like someone grasping. I really don't get this point at all. It seems to appear suddenly and with no attempt at an explanation. I simply fail to see how "revelations" of the Golden Ratio or the Mandelbrot Series or part of the sequence of Pi are really revelatory at all. Again, I'll ask, is any of this information new? * Login or register to post comments The two sides of a broken mirror Submitted by Brian George on Sun, 08/08/2010 - 07:50. The two sides of a broken mirror, from which smiles the Cheshire Cat Hi Sacateca, "Typed diarrhea"--good one. Way to elevate the discussion! You wrote, “Ru's comment questions why it is so hard for people to believe in the capabilities of humans to create even somewhat miraculous things. I think this is a *very *relevant question. Perhaps even the crux of the debate.” In the study of classical rhetoric, this would be referred to as an “argument by straw man.” You set up a straw man; then you knock him down. Who anywhere on this forum or this site is arguing that humans cannot “create even somewhat miraculous things.” Not me—who believes that a now lost world-maritime culture was once far more sophisticated than our own; that the 7 Rishis could control the weather; that all megalithic sites were constructed as the nerve-nodes of one geomagnetic grid, and that the Earth itself could be imagined as a kind of man-made ship. This is actually how I spend most of my free time during the week—in attempting to conceive of and then create a few “somewhat miraculous things.” Many “skeptical reductionist” arguments have the tone of aggrieved religious fervor. “What have you got against us humans, aren't we creative or pure and good enough in our intentions?” sounds much like, “Why do you think that Jesus Christ can’t save you?” But Crop Circle Making is not some sort of Olympic competition, with Humans on one team and Aliens on the other. Science follows where the evidence determines that it should go—however radical must be the change in its concepts or its methodology. If humans were to suddenly remember where they came from, and how strange and powerful and paradoxical that place of origin is, then the whole of the human/ alien controversy would fade into irrelevance. Transpersonal memory does not allow one be “safe.” Do not seek—for you will find what has been planted on the Earth. The true investigator does not invest the whole of his Ego in one outcome. He is curious, and never knows for sure what horizon the next “fact” may open up. * Login or register to post comments few be willing to live this truth stated by Brian: Submitted by regularjoe on Thu, 08/12/2010 - 11:12. "The true investigator does not invest the whole of his Ego in one outcome. He is curious, and never knows for sure what horizon the next “fact” may open up." America may be likened unto a giant rod. The world has been deluded by its constantly ejected semen of thought. America too possesses the most glorious spiritual opportunities relative to anywhere in world. * Login or register to post comments The "uncanniness" of the sign Submitted by Brian George on Sun, 08/15/2010 - 11:54. Hi Sacateca, I had written, "It is this field that creates the circles, which speak to us in a forgotten and yet somehow distantly remembered language." In response, you said that this statement *"doesn't seem to me like someone solidifying their point; rather, it seems like someone grasping. I really don't get this point at all. It seems to appear suddenly and with no attempt at an explanation."* The only thing wrong with this statement is perhaps excessive wordiness. Other than that, I will stand by what I have said. The sentence could be revised as follows: "It is this field that creates the circles, which speak to us in a forgotten and yet somehow familiar language." The concept that I am playing with in this statement is a very old one indeed, and refers back to the root meanings of the word "education." This word derives from the Latin "educere," to "bring out" or "lead forth"; thus, to "educate" is to "bring forth" knowledge that is already in existence. True knowledge is "uncanny"; we feel that we have seen a thing before. To "rear" a child is to bring him/ her back to an earlier state of connection--to what existed before the drinking of the "waters of Lethe," before the cutting of the umbilical cord, before the separation of the "person" from the "daimon." In this classical view, we are not "empty vessels" that a teacher must "fill up"; we are preexistent "knowers," now amnesiac, for whom a sign might serve to reactivate the once common "art of memory." * Login or register to post comments Through the mirror, and back, and through the mirror again Submitted by Brian George on Mon, 08/16/2010 - 09:01. Hi Sacateca, You wrote: *“Could this be at all related to the fact that your arguments are so convoluted they border on typed-diarrhea? ** * *"**I mean, this:* */'Let me see if I have followed all of your arguments correctly. You have: a) Insulted a person who has criticized your ideas; b) Complemented a person who agrees with you; c) Made it clear that you disapprove of the entire conceptual framework of Reality Sandwich, which is made bearable only by; d) The person who agrees with you. Does that about sum things up?'/* *“certainly doesn't 'sum up' Ru's comment at all. There is no logic in it, it only tries to come off as logical.”* Don’t shoot the messenger! This is my diagram of the arguments that were presented by Ru Callendar. You will get no disagreement from me if you say that the structure is not logical. When did I ever claim that it was? Let us take a closer look: a) “Insulted a person who has criticized your ideas.” This corresponds to: “Spare us your trickster persona Brian George, it isn't as funny as you think it is. Or at least think of something new rather than re printing your stuff from last season.” b) “Complemented a person who agrees with you.” This corresponds to: “Good points well made, keep thinking your way towards the truth.” c) “Made it clear that you disapprove of the entire conceptual framework of Reality Sandwich…” This corresponds to: “People like Sacateca save Reality Sandwich from its tendency towards po faced acceptance of new age authoritarianism.” d) “Which is made bearable only by the person who agrees with you.” This corresponds to: See b and c. These function in a kind of ‘through the looking glass” feedback loop. You may certainly have a more upbeat attitude toward these arguments. How could you not? Personally, I am not impressed by such “logic,” which is really just a form of name-calling. * Login or register to post comments Secrets of the Stars... Submitted by Five on Mon, 08/09/2010 - 18:10. " To the seasoned traveler of the stars, a race who lives daily with access to the library of the universe, and fails to use it, is more primitive than the race who has yet to discover fire"...Ken Carey* *The Third Millennium- Ken Carey *OpeningThe Etheric Antenna, page 87 Wonderful research and presentation , Red Collie. I believe that we are being given the secrets of the universe with these beautiful geometric and mathematical (crop and sky) formations. ..and for this we should be very grateful... Anyone who has studied astronomy/astrology/geometry/mathematics can see the correlations very clearly..... (yea..it takes a while to figure them out) (+) * Login or register to post comments Crop Circles and the 9/11 Cube Submitted by William Downie on Sat, 08/07/2010 - 13:05. The two formations at Danebury Hill and Cley Hill bear some resemblance to the 9/11 Cube. Please see my article on this webmag: http://www.realitysandwich.com/911_cube The cube of three, 27, portrayed by the Danebury Hill circle may be a reference to the cube of nine, 729, which is the square of 27. This is the main body of the 9/11 Cube. The Cley Hill structure is identical to the three slices I cut through cube 729 to create the 9/11 cube. The number of spheres contained within the slices, 19 (Cley Hill) and 217 (9/11 Cube) are both hexagonal numbers, which would explain why the Cley Hill formation contains a hexagon. The reference to Metatron's cube in the Danebury Hill formation that you noticed is also appropriate, as the essential features of the 9/11 cube are contained within Metatron's cube. Another piece of evidence that leads me to this conclusion: the number of days into the third millenium when these circles appeared. These are 3474 and 3477. Now, in the system of gematria I use in my article Jesus = 74 and Christ = 77. In the reduced value system of gematria Immanuel = 34. The three days between the appearance of the circles may also be a reference to the three days between the crucifixion and resurrection of Christ -- the crucifixion, if I am correct, being the very event reenacted on 9/11, which was itself a manifestation of Christ's Second Coming. Finally, the number 217 (the number of spheres contained within the three slices through the 9/11 cube and the number implied by the three buildings that fell on 9/11) is the gematria of this phrase: Christ's Second Coming = 217 However, it is also the gematria of the crop circle locations! Danebury Hill + Cley Hill = 217 If this really is a reference to the 9/11 cube then it is a further demonstration that 9/11 really was connected with the return of Christ and it has fascinating implications regarding the origin of crop circles. * Login or register to post comments Nanu nanu Submitted by Brian George on Sun, 08/08/2010 - 00:54. Hello Ru Callendar, 1) I was just turning your phrase “New Age authoritarianism” over in my mind. The use of this phrase raises several questions. These are as follows: a) Do you know the meaning of the word “authoritarianism?” And b) Should this phrase be classified as a “concept” or an “argument?” —Or perhaps, once again, we should simply refer to it as an “insult.” Such verbal devices are a means of dressing up complacency in a courage suit, as well as of never having to venture beyond the force-field of one’s “comfort zone.” 2) Perhaps the threat of “New Age authoritarianism” is similar to the threat of “Feminazism”—that octopus of evil, against whose influence Rush Limbaugh has so energetically warned us? Have jack-booted angels forced you to remove meat from your diet, or to think only positive thoughts, or to undergo shamanic surgery without anesthesia in their UFO, or to drink large quantities of ayahuasca? Laws for telepathic openness would result in irreparable damage to one’s Reason. Just as unisex restrooms have resulted in irreparable harm to one’s genitals. Alas, it is too late now! * Login or register to post comments hey guys what's going on in this comment area... Submitted by groove is in the heart on Sat, 08/07/2010 - 22:14. ... oh lawdy! * Login or register to post comments Et in Arcadia ego Submitted by Brian George on Sun, 08/08/2010 - 10:07. 1) To the “Skeptical Reductionist,” If you are truly convinced that there is nothing of significance going on, then why do you spend so much time—or any time at all—in thinking about crop circles? What is there left to know? I am reminded of a joke that I first heard in junior high: A woman is talking to her closest friend at the office, and says, “Last night—at 10:30 or so—the phone rang just as I was getting into bed. I answered it, and this pervert was doing his heavy breathing act. Oh Margie, I can't begin to tell you how upsetting that phone call was! For three hours the man said the most horrible, disgusting things!” 2) Hi Groove is in the heart, In deference to you I will try to bow out after this comment. Once again, it is time to take a bath, and for my “Inner Warrior” to reinsert himself into his Morphogenetic Cylinder. * Login or register to post comments Mona Lisa Submitted by deredder on Sun, 08/08/2010 - 15:22. Definitely a representation of the 'Mona Lisa'. * Login or register to post comments a few questions Submitted by seachanged on Sun, 08/08/2010 - 17:31. Why do crop circles mostly appear a little before the grain harvest season in England? Why don't we see "crop circle" type formations in freshly fallen snow? Why do crop circles appear only in fields that have cultivator rows? Or, why don't we see crop circles in uncultivated grasslands? And why would extraterrestrials use ASCII to communicate the physics equation E=M x C (squared) when they clearly have the ability to typeset it and put it down in real letters? * Login or register to post comments some answers for seachanged and others Submitted by Red Collie on Sun, 08/08/2010 - 18:48. Many thanks to the webmaster Steve for doing an excellent job of preparing this long essay, and also for adding a new slide above, which explains the amazing math and geometry seen at Wickham Green on July 30! And to Daniel for showing an authentic interest in the subject. 1. Crop pictures may appear at anytime, anywhere there is a suitable field of plants ready to be shaped. 2. Last winter there were several "snow circles" with no footsteps around them, no signs of melting, and apparent excess snow removal in places where the pattern appeared. 3. Most fields do have rows or tramlines, but often images appear say halfway between tramlines, maybe 10 meters away from the closest walking point, with no explanation of how they got there. 4. For whatever reason, the true crop artists never talk to us directly in simple English or Chinese or Russian letters, but have always used ASCII code. I see that the discussion here has so far paralled a certain "social turmoil" which was witnessed in England this summer. "Every great truth goes through three stages", as the philosopher said. Meanwhile, there were just two more very elegant crop pictures found yesterday on August 8, one cut out immediately by the irate farmer, so please go to Crop Circle Connector, click on "2010", "August" and judge for yourself? To close on something which Malachi Martin once wrote: "authnetic mystery is not the same as untruth". * Login or register to post comments I love the bedunkers Submitted by Jeff Charest on Mon, 08/09/2010 - 00:17. y'all are like some old loony tunes-mad scientist characters hopping about spouting theories and statements that make those of people really studying these events sound almost banal. God bless ya! Go see for yourself; otherwise you have only opinions to offer. which of course you are free to hold, your opinions, but to tryt to frame them as the reality which others who have actually been there and experienced lack is quite the logical fallacy. "God sends meat, the devil sends cooks." * Login or register to post comments Aaaarggghhh!! Submitted by Ru Callender on Mon, 08/09/2010 - 06:21. I've been sucked back into the vortex of comments about this topic, something I promised myself I wouldn't do this year, but Brian George's reprinting of parts of our exchange from last year has stung me into it. For those interested in what was said last year you can find it in the archives, I think it was after an article on the circles by Amy George. I will try not to reproduce to much of what was said, although -sigh- we must indeed cover some old ground. Firstly, I would like to apologise for what seems to some of you to be a lowering of the tone from Reality Sandwich's usual supportive discourse into this base disagreement. I am British, and therefore slightly more abrasive. As you know, our first words are usually sarcastic, so please don't read too much into it, but I have an instinctive, perhaps even cultural dislike of the kind of self important rubbish brought to the table by someone like BG. There are many, many interesting people who use Reality Sandwich with much to say, but in my humble opinion, BG is not one of them. I find his onanistic noodling almost as dull as the hijacking of interpretations of this years circles by fundamentalist Christians. Yes, that could be seen as combative, insulting even, but is this comments page for genuine discussion or simply reinforcement of established beliefs? Dissent is often less welcome on the fringe than it is in the belly of the beast, what I meant by New Age Authoritarianism. As William Blake said, Opposition is true friendship. Also, being British I have actual experience of crop circles! I live less than a hundred miles away from ground zero, and have visited hundreds of the classics over the past 16 years. I have slept in them, tripped in them, even made a couple of simple, paltry circles myself, no great shakes but to my mind bewitching mandalas of staggering beauty. I have personally measured many, and often found them to be at odds with the perfect dimensions espoused by some researchers, but I have also been swept up in the extraordinary events that surround them. I am not a 'Sceptical Reductionist' who thinks the case is closed. For me, the fact that artists with ropes and planks of wood and surveyor's tape and architects software makes every one of them is just the beginning of the mystery, for magical things do happen and I remain as captivated by them as when I first stepped into The Julia Set. The phenomenon is about the intersection of belief, magic, science, group dynamics, peer pressure to conform, selective blindness, myth, the fallibility of our most highly educated, money, ego, our need to have a priest caste between us and mystery, our unquenchable religious thirst and the genuinely weird and unexplainable, and anyone who has run around Wiltshire for a summer or three has come to know all of these things intimately. If we could just let go of the idea that it all comes from 'outside' then we could change our understanding of the extraordinary power our minds have on the external world. Sadly, it often feels more like Jonestown than it does the New Jerusalem, and I gave up drinking the Kool aid a while back. Food for thought for truth seekers. The pictogram that appeared below the White Horse in Pewsey that was harvested that morning, if you look at the picture you can see a faint line running through the ring of surrounding circles. It is the primary construction ring. The pilot who managed to photograph it so fortuitously appears to be Matthew Williams, a well known bete noire to croppies. Coincidence? hmmmm. Please understand my motives are not a delight in debunking, I just think that at this juncture of history we need genuinely open minded guides to lead us into any new paradigms, not to be blindly led by wishful thinking. Aliens aren't going to save us, nor Gaia, The Rapture, balls of light, or inter dimensional beings. It's just got to be us people, still the most interesting thing in the cosmos. * Login or register to post comments It is nice to meet the real Ru Submitted by Brian George on Mon, 08/09/2010 - 15:44. Hi Ru, You wrote, *"I am British, and therefore slightly more abrasive. As you know, our first words are usually sarcastic, so please don't read too much into it, but I have an instinctive, perhaps even cultural dislike of the kind of self-important rubbish brought to the table by someone like BG. * *"There are many, many interesting people who use Reality Sandwich with much to say, but in my humble opinion, BG is not one of them. I find his onanistic noodling almost as dull as the hijacking of interpretations of this years circles by fundamentalist Christians." * I am always amazed when people say something like, “I don’t mean to be offensive, but”—and then go on to be as offensive as is possible. “Self-important rubbish” and “Onanistic noodling” do not open up the discussion. They also do not “clear the air,” but simply expel more toxins into it. In any event, it is unfortunate that you begin this current comment with such an all out attack on my person, my work, and what you imagine to be my attitudes, since you have said any number of things here with which I might—provisionally—agree. Also, it is great to hear you speak so energetically about your own experience, since this allows us to see the origin of your passion for this subject. The “Brian George” that you have met in the exchanges on these crop circle forums was, in fact, a deliberate literary device—designed to challenge what I saw as the self-deception and arrogance and lack of curiosity and mechanistic reflex that so easily attaches itself to a discussion of this type. If I might be permitted to make an observation?: Your diet does seem to be "irony deficient." More irony-rich organ meats, with a metaphorical salad on the side! Some portion of what I have presented on these forums could certainly be described as "concepts." As regards these, rest assured that they have not been predetermined by some program at the "Reich New Age Bureau of Occult Affairs." There are other portions of my comments, however, that we would do better to describe as "jokes" or "provocations." The "pulling of the leg" and the "throwing of the gauntlet" are several of the gestures that you seem to have misinterpreted. Sad to say, much humor is unfunny. To each his own. Just to clarify: I do not see myself as in any way a "New Age" writer; "New Age"--yet another insult that pretends to be a description. On this, we will have to "agree to disagree," nor will I provide you with an alternate cliche with which to pigeonhole my work. There is one key issue on which our attitudes do overlap: I do share your distrust of any and every form of institutionalized "common wisdom." Ru, you are clearly an "outsider," and imagine that there must be some international conspiracy of "insiders." But we "insiders" are "outsiders" too! "Opposition is true friendship”—one of my favorite Blake quotes. In person, I suspect that we would agree on far more than you think. For a more systematic presentation of my thoughts on this subject, see “On the Dangerousness of the Zero,” an essay that I posted last February on RS. * Login or register to post comments 'If we could just let go of Submitted by ada on Mon, 08/09/2010 - 18:24. 'If we could just let go of the idea that it all comes from 'outside' then we could change our understanding of the extraordinary power our minds have on the external world.' Good point, and from a non-dual perspective, what is inside is me but what is outside is also me, in terms of a Universal Self, which seems like a so much more empowering point of view to have in terms of trying to influence the external world.