Crop Circle - New one is a beauty! 24th July 2009

When crop circles appear on the Sun or the Moon I'll believe that they are made by someone other than humans, until then they are just a unique form of social vandalism.



Area907.com

reply to post by Webmusher


Crop Circles where no crops grow ?
That was an easy out

Here's an interesting site with crop circle reconstructions on the PC. Most of the designs, if not all of them, look very complicated to be made even on a PC software let alone on the field. Most of the times it is necessary to draw circles, pentagons or even heptagons, the latter being quite difficult to be accurately created, that later need to be erased.

Crop circle reconstructions

And here's a characteristic example of how complicated a construction of a crop circle is.

2002 DNA crop circle

Personally, I am convinced the origin and the purpose of these artistic creations is spiritual.

Alexandros

[edit on 31-7-2009 by Alexander1111]

Originally posted by dragonridr
Kill one more thing while I'm here have you ever heard of lodging? This is what its called when wheat is forced down do to wind rain or trampling. Guess what the same things happen to wheat that happen in crop circles such as elongated nodes( the plant attempts to recover from the damage it sustains.Exploded nodes really don't exist what happens is the wheat is damaged it increases its growth rate as most plants do when they are damaged which causes the node to fracture.

For those who are more interested in this try reading about phototropism, etiolation and auxins/expansins.

reply to post by lpowell0627


Glad you liked my "crazy" hypothesis ... but seriously though, it's great to get a little positive feedback for a change instead of instant ridicule and derision. It simply never ceases to amaze me how so many people can instantly accept something as ridiculous and illogical as aliens travelling the many light years to earth simply to do a little doodling or grafiti in a wheat field. And even without a single shred of proof or evidence that aliens are involved, that still doesn't stop them from blindly accepting that "theory" as gospel.
The same also applies to all the adherents to the "rope & plank" theory. I've yet to see even a single one of those believers take the time to also analyze exactly what would be involved in the creation of a crop circle ... the logistics necessary to create some of the more complex and creative CC's just boggles the imagination. And yet, that still doesn't deter them from religiously believing that a handfull of people with rope and planks easily knock them of in just a few short hours. It's easy to sit back in your chair and make these stupid suggestions about the ease of creation ... and a totally different thing to actually being in a field at 2am, in the dark and have to create an incredibly intricate design.

Ok, rant over

Yes, I did read that thread regarding the militarization of microwaves and the potential to be used as a weapon.
I can see how tempting it would be to assume that that may be the "smoking gun" in the creatin of CC's as you and I both believe that some form of energy device OF MANMADE ORIGIN is actually responsible for the CC's. There's no point in deluding ourselves that we (well, the military actually) don't have or haven't been researching/developing energy/particle beam weaponary for many years. Google simply abounds with such articles and a few mins searching can be very rewarding. Coupled with the fact that the military also has superior computing capabilities and easy space access makes our version of CC creation all the more plausible, credible and logical.

The problem I have with microwaves being used is that a sizeable proportion of the beams energy would be lost and dissipated travelling thru the atmosphere. Also, there would be enormous technical difficulties in preventing the beam from being dispersed by the atmosphere and keeping it sharply focused.
Even should these obstacles be overcome, I still fail to see how an energy beam could "physically" apply sufficient force or pressure to push wheat plants completely over ... as well as push them over in a certain direction and not just randomly.
And the same would probably hold true no matter what type of energy the beam was composed of e.g. microwave, infra-red, radio, etc

Because it was obvious that the plants had been physically pushed over by something, i had actually been leaning towards a particle beam rather than an energy beam. Both types have been researched by the military for decades. A particle beam is basically composed of some form of "matter" such as protons, alpha particles, electrons, ions, etc and if a concentrated beam of such particles struck an object, a considerable force could be imparted allowing the stalks to be "pushed" down. But like an energy beam, there is the problem of being able to accurately control the direction that the stalks are pushed down. Irrespective of these difficulties, I still held firm to the belief that some form of directed energy/particle was the technology being used.

But then a possible answer appeared in an article I read the other day that may have a solution to how the stalks could be "pushed" over by some form of military technology.
Here's a link ... news.softpedia.com...

Basically, the military is researching/developing a way to create an explosion at a distance using a laser beam. The device uses a technology known as dynamic pulse detonation (DPD). A short but intense laser pulse creates a ball of plasma and a second laser pulse generates a supersonic shockwave with the plasma to generate a bright flash and a loud bang.

With the above information, let's try to "improve" upon the hypothesis that you and I believe is really responsible for CC creation.

A military satellite containing this type of technology is launched into low earth orbit. This weaponary is controlled and directed by sophisticated computer software that is capable of targetting an area of ground extremely accurately and precisely guiding the laser beam in any desired direction. Now based on the information contained in the article, an initial laser pulse is directed onto a target ... in this case a wheat field ... creating a ball of plasma (ionised air) directly above a patch of wheat. A second laser pulse is then used to "detonate" this plasma ball resulting in a pressure wave being directed towards the ground .. and the wheat. This pressure wave could be sufficiently powerful to physically "bend" the stalks over.

The article also states the following interesting points:

"It uses a programmed pattern of rapid plasma events" ... in other words, COMPUTER controlled and directed !

"The maximum range of the system at around a hundred meters." ... now, how big are some of the more complex designs ?

"This type of capability is at the core of what we eventually expect from the technology."

So basically, this technology is designed to use an energy device (a laser) to rapidly heat a volume of air and turn it into a plasma. This plasma is then almost instantaneously "detonated" by a second laser pulse. Would anyone be prepared to state categorically that the military doesn't have incredibly powerful lasers at their disposal ? Not me !
And depending on the frequency of the laser, it could pass thru the atmosphere with very little reduction in power or dispersal.
The controlling software could easily be programmed to create a design of any shape or complexity simply by creating plasma balls at the right spot and detonating it, resulting in the wheat directly below being crushed by the pressure wave.

And because a plasma ball glows, this could so easily explain how many people have stated that they've seen glowing energy balls where a CC is later found !

Open your eyes people ... the technology to create cc's EXISTS!

reply to post by jfj123


Viewing them from distances will not allow one to ascertain whether or not a circle is perfect at all.

However, I should think that of all of the researchers/scientists/croppies that go in and MEASURE THEM and post their findings, actually do know.

If you at all read anything about crop circles, you will see that they when they post their findings, they are VERY quick to point out which ones are symmetrical, which ones are close, which ones "stink" and so on.

I think you're forgetting that there are a whole bunch of people - professionals with credentials on the line - that report on crop circles.

I'm not, nor are they, looking at a computer screen and coming to a conclusion.

reply to post by jfj123


1. A visitor was shot at -- not the maker(s). The circle was already there.

2. I have said this a thousand times: I believe people make circles. Remotely. For a purpose. With technology.

3. The cops (military?) are circling the fields from 9 PM - 6AM nightly. Since the farmers have really started complaining because of the sheer number this year, and as I said one took it so far as to hire a watcher with a gun -- they have beefed up efforts to find the makers.

4. The circles have continued -- without a break. There was no "waiting until the cops left" as was my point. When they are flying in helicopters over the fields -- and a circle STILL appears in those very fields (the next circle was less than 1/2 mile from the one where the guy shot at someone) -- that's when I start to say: Hmmmm....that's some risk all in the name of art.

Originally posted by lpowell0627
reply to post by jfj123

 

Viewing them from distances will not allow one to ascertain whether or not a circle is perfect at all.

However, I should think that of all of the researchers/scientists/croppies that go in and MEASURE THEM and post their findings, actually do know.

You might THINK that but you don't KNOW that. Until an actual scientific team comes in and measures them out properly, NOBODY can call them "PERFECT".

If you at all read anything about crop circles, you will see that they when they post their findings, they are VERY quick to point out which ones are symmetrical, which ones are close, which ones "stink" and so on.

And what protocols, tools, etc.. do they use to determine this? Or, as I suspect, is it based soley on visual observation?

Originally posted by lpowell0627


2. I have said this a thousand times: I believe people make circles. Remotely. For a purpose. With technology.

Yes I know this but you've provided ZERO evidence to suggest this is the case or even possible.
I might as well say that Giant, invisible, flying, purple Wombats make crops circles. I have just as much evidence for my hypothesis as you do for yours. In other words, if you can't post evidence, it's pointless to the extreme.

3. The cops (military?) are circling the fields from 9 PM - 6AM nightly.

Prove it.

Since the farmers have really started complaining because of the sheer number this year, and as I said one took it so far as to hire a watcher with a gun -- they have beefed up efforts to find the makers.

In spite of law enforcements best efforts, they can't find all the bad guys.

4. The circles have continued -- without a break.

Without a break? Prove it !

There was no "waiting until the cops left" as was my point. When they are flying in helicopters over the fields -- and a circle STILL appears in those very fields (the next circle was less than 1/2 mile from the one where the guy shot at someone) -- that's when I start to say: Hmmmm....that's some risk all in the name of art.

People take risks all the time. Extreme skiing is life and death risk yet people do it all the time.

Originally posted by lpowell0627
reply to post by jfj123

 

4. The circles have continued -- without a break. There was no "waiting until the cops left" as was my point. When they are flying in helicopters over the fields -- and a circle STILL appears in those very fields (the next circle was less than 1/2 mile from the one where the guy shot at someone) -- that's when I start to say: Hmmmm....that's some risk all in the name of art.

LOL, you have never been to Los Angeles California and it's surrounding area have you?

Graffiti "artists" have to worry about Police 24/7, including multiple helicopters and vehicle units. They risk going to jail for destruction of property. Also, if these graffiti "artists" try to paint over someone else's graffiti, they risk getting shot and killed by the other artists, because that's what gangs do. It's a way to mark their territory, and compete with other gangs.

You still don't get the point either. Some farmers have been AGREEING to have crop circles put on their field, as long as they get paid. That means they don't have to worry about police or getting shot. Why do you keep ignoring that FACT?

Originally posted by ALLis0NE
You still don't get the point either. Some farmers have been AGREEING to have crop circles put on their field, as long as they get paid. That means they don't have to worry about police or getting shot. Why do you keep ignoring that FACT?

Where is your proof this is fact?

You have no proof anybody is 'in on it'. Circles showing up in the same field is not proof, only an alternative possibility.

Just because you've convinced yourself, and some other closed minded posters, doesn't make it true.

There's still a lot of anomalies you haven't explained. You haven't even shown how the 'real' circles are made, only the ones that are obviously man-made, and are recognized as so by researchers fairly quickly.

reply to post by Webmusher


just curious, but would it be more believable for you if an entire multi-acre field of wheat was turned into blue poppies or any other crop overnight...this of course would have to be verifiable...what would you do next after becoming a BELIEVER? peace

reply to post by Wally Hope


You are the one who's being closed minded. If I had a crop field I would defenetly "hire" the circlemakers to make a crop circle onto my field. Then I'd charge believers for visiting the circle.
What anomalies are still unexplained?

The circles aren't made by microwaves or aliens.
Just because you've convinced yourself, and some other closed minded posters, doesn't make it true.

Open minded does not stand for believing that aliens or teh government are behind everything.

[edit on 1/8/2009 by DGFenrir]

reply to post by jfj123


At what point can we stop having conspiracy theory upon conspiracy theory.

I don't know that there are actually scientists studying crop circles?

That's like saying i didn't see the CNN reporter in Afganistan, so I don't know if he's really there!?

At some point, when people write research papers, claim credentials, and post their findings in numerous science journals, i tend to believe that they really ARE scientists.

They measure them. They study them. They report their findings. They get published. They run studies on the soil. They set up cameras. They take pictures.

To say that all of these people may not have really done the above simply because I/we didn't SEE them, is ridiculous.

reply to post by ALLis0NE


You're right -- Los Angeles is EXACTLY the same as the countryside of England.

I can see YOU'VE never been to England.

And a gang logo painted on the side of an overpass is EXACTLY like a 1500 foot long crop circle.

You're beginning to reach.

Originally posted by lpowell0627
reply to post by jfj123

 

At what point can we stop having conspiracy theory upon conspiracy theory.

I don't know that there are actually scientists studying crop circles?

That's like saying i didn't see the CNN reporter in Afganistan, so I don't know if he's really there!?

At some point, when people write research papers, claim credentials, and post their findings in numerous science journals, i tend to believe that they really ARE scientists.

They measure them. They study them. They report their findings. They get published. They run studies on the soil. They set up cameras. They take pictures.

To say that all of these people may not have really done the above simply because I/we didn't SEE them, is ridiculous.

The problem is they have the wrong scientists looking into crop circles no crop physiologists,plant pathologists or even an anthologist!Who do they find people that happen to be a scientist in a totally unrelated Field who knows nothing about crops.And by the way try to find a scientific paper published in a scientific journal.Its easy to find where they put information up on a web site or some obscure fringe journal but qualified scientists wont touch crop circles with a 10 foot pole.Heres a challenge find just 1 scientist qualified to study plants that believes crop circles are anything but trampled wheat.

reply to post by dragonridr


Ummmm....OK:

BUDINGER, Phyllis .................................................. Analytical Chemist
M.S. in Organic Chemistry, Miami University--1964
Research Scientist for BP/Amoco Oil Company (previously Standard Oil) for 35 years, with specialized experience in petroleum, chemical & polymer analyses using spectroscopic techniques (IR, NMR).
Working knowledge of most other analytical techniques.
Currently: Technical Director, Frontier Analysis, Ltd. Laboratory --
Chagrin Falls, Ohio.




CONRAD, Diane L. ................................................................ Geologist
M.S. in Geological Sciences and Clay Chemistry,State University
of New York (SUNY)--1984
State Geologist at the Vermont Agency of Natural Resources, 1991-1995; Director of Environmental Programs for Salt Lake Organizing Committee, Olympic Winter Games, 2002.
Currently: President, Maka Cante Associates -- Tucson, Arizona.





IYENGAR, Dr. Sampath S. .............................. Geochemist/Mineralogist
Ph.D in Materials Chemistry/Mineralogy, VA Tech--1980
M.S. in Soil Physical Chemistry, VA Tech--1972
Materials Science specialist, with strong background in the analytical characterization of materials. Developed XRD method for characterization and analysis of pharmaceutical compounds in multi-component mixtures.
Currently: Analytical Manager, Technology of Materials Laboratory --
Wildomar, California.





KASHER, Dr. John C. (Jack) ..................................................... Physicist
Ph.D in Physics, Boston College -1970
M.S. in Physics, Boston College -1967
Physics Faculty, University of Nebraska at Omaha, 1969-2001
Peter Kiewit Distinguished Professor, 1981-1987
Excellence in Teaching Award, 1985
Burlington Northern Foundation Faculty Achievement Award, 1986
Consultant and Summer Employee, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory,1975-1992, specializing in electromagnetic theory, EMP, microwave radiation, electron beams.
Worked on the Star Wars Defense System.
NASA’s Jove Initiative Program, 1991-1998, specializing in supergranules
on the surface of the sun.
Currently: Professor Emeritus of Physics, University of Nebraska at Omaha




RAGHAVAN, Dr. Ravi ............................ Chemical Engineer/Statistician
Ph.D in Chemical Engineering,Purdue University--1978
(specializing in Mathematical Modeling and Computer Simulation of Processes)
Leader of Unit Operations, Project "Aspen," M.I.T., 1979
Senior Systems Engineer, BF Goodrich, 1980 - 1997
Extensive training (Black Belt Six Sigma) in Applied Statistics.
Currently: President, Raghavan & Associates, Inc. -- Cleveland, Ohio.





REITER, Nicholas A. ........................................... SEM/EDS Technician
Associate Degree (2-yr.) in Applied Sciences--1983
(Terra Technical College, Fremont, Ohio)
Since1984 has worked in fields of engineering technology, vacuum technology, thin films and high-temperature semiconductor chemistry. Also works on research projects in association with the McMaster Foundation for Gravity Research.
Currently:Scientist, First Solar LLC -- Toledo, Ohio.





ROLL, Dr. William ..................................................... Parapsychologist
Ph.D, Parapsychology, Lund University (Sweden)--1989
M.Litt, Oxford University (England)--1957
B.A., University of California at Berkeley--1949
Roll joined the staff of the Parapsychology Laboratory at Duke University in 1957, working under Dr. J.B. Rhine until 1964. He has authored more than 100 scientific papers, edited eleven volumes of Research in Para-psychology, and written three books. In 1996 he received the "Distinguished Career in Parapsychology" award from the Parapsychological Association and in 2002 was awarded the "Dinsdale Memorial Award" for his investigations of R.S.P.K.
Currently: Adjunct Professor of Parapsychology, State University of West Georgia -- Carrollton, GA.



SCHILD, Dr.Rudolph E. ................................. Astronomer/Astrophysicist
PhD in Astrophysics, University of Chicago--1966
M.S. in Physics, University of Chicago--1963

Previous positions include: Research Fellow, Mt. Wilson/Palomar
Observatories; Scientific Director, 60" Telescope Program, Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory; Lecturer , Harvard University.
Professional Societies: American Astronomical Society (1965)
and the International Astronomical Union (1969 ), where he
is a member of Commission 29 (Stellar Spectra), Commission
45 (Stellar Classification), and Commission 51 (Bioastronomy:
Search for Extraterrestrial Life).
Currently: Astronomer, Harvard-Smithsonian Center for
Astrophysics, Cambridge, Massachusetts USA.




STEARMAN, DR. ROBERT O. .............................. Aeronautical Engineer
Ph.D in Aeronautical Engineering, Cal Tech--1961
M.S. in Aeronautical Engineering, Cal Tech--1956
B.S. in Mechanical Engineering, Oklahoma State Univ.--1955
In addition to teaching both graduate and undergraduate courses in reliability, unsteady aerodynamics, random vibrations, aeroelasticity and structural dynamics since 1963, Professor Stearman has worked with the Boeing Co. as an Aerodynamist and as a Senior Analyst in the Mathematics and Physics Division of the Midwest Research Institute. His consulting experience includes work for the Air Force and several D.O.D.-funded programs at wind tunnel research facilities at NASA Ames and NASA Langley and at Air Force-owned AEDC facilities. Most of this work involved research on aeroelastic-related phenomena. Dr. Stearman has published multiple papers in refereed journals and is an active member of several professional societies, including the AIAA, ASA, SAE, ASEE and the EAA.
Currently: Bettie Margaret Smith Professor of Engineering, Aerospace Engineering and Engineering Mechanics Dept., University of Texas at Austin.



Previous Consultants:


LEVENGOOD, W.C. ........................................................... Biophysicist
M.S. in Biophysics, University of Michigan--1970
M.A. in Bioscience, Ball State University--1961
Research physicist at the Institute of Science and Technology and the Department of Natural Resources, University of Michigan, 1961-1970; Director of Biophysical Research for private-sector companies, 1970-1983. Has published 50+ papers, in professional scientific journals, including Nature and Science. Three papers (1994; 1995; 1999) present results of laboratory work on crop circle plants and soils.
Currently: pursuing multiple research interests at Pinelandia Biophysical Laboratory -- Grass Lakes, MI.


REYNOLDS, Dr. Robert C., Jr. .................... Geologist/Clay Mineralogist
Ph.D in Geology, Washington University--1955
B.A. in Geology, Lafayette College--1951
Asc.A. in Chemistry, Keystone Junior College--1949
Roebling Medal Recipient of the Mineralogical Society of America, 2000;
Frederick Hall Chair of Mineralogy, Dartmouth College, 1989-1997;
President, Clay Minerals Society, 1991-1992;
Chairman, Department of Earth Sciences, Dartmouth College, 1983-86;
Currently: Frederick Hall Professor of Geology and Mineralogy, Emeritus, Dartmouth College -- Hanover, NH.
Dr. Reynolds was a world-recognized expert in X-ray diffraction analysis of finely-dispersed layer compounds and, particularly, of clay minerals.

Link: www.bltresearch.com...


You're telling me that NONE of the above people are qualified to run studies on plants and soil?

reply to post by lpowell0627


Thank you for proving my point geologists(studies Rocks not plant), physicists(study physics ill grant this has some bearing however they still dont know whats normal in wheat) and you even put one up from a parapsychologist (studies paranormal need i say more).Find someone who has a scientific degree that pertains to crops and not some scientist who knows find a crop physiologists,plant pathologists or an anthologist these are the people qualified to study wheat and the effects something has on it and don't ever put up proof of a parapsychologist as even being a scientists.

PS the problem isnt finding a scientist somewhere that talks about crop circles the problem is finding someone that knows what hes talking about because crop circles in no way relate to there feild of study.I could be an auto mechanic that doesnt mean i can fix jet engines or even understand them.



[edit on 8/1/09 by dragonridr]

Well done on a very impressive thread watchZEITGEISTnow this crop circle was very hard to get to.

But Gill and I had no computer cropcircleconnector.com aerial images such as the one above by professional aerial photographer and crop formation researcher, Lucy Pringle. In fact, after we found other confused people trying to find the new Ogbourne crop formation without success, we finally encountered some Norwegians who parked and yelled, “Follow us!”

And we took off along a ridgeway – for two miles - before we even came to a place where we could see the amazing pattern down below us, but still very far away.

This is the report done on this circle www.earthfiles.com...
Very interesting not just flatend down so its in the middle of nowhere so why put it where its so hard to get to i dont know but someone is trying to tell us something we just have to work out what it is.

[edit on 113131p://2009-08-01T11:02:55-05:00018 by mars1]

reply to post by dragonridr

There are more similarities among various mechanics than differences.We would be able to assist each other.For instance,when requested to fetch a bolt for a rocket scientist of such a size a bike mechanic would not come back with a 'bolt of fabric'.Regional differences in terminology(Spanner vs. wrench)would hinder more than lack of specialization.

Likewise,the study of these Crop Art pieces requires honesty and ability to observe and what? a camera?Integrity is the main thing,no?A mechanic could be a reliable witness in Court about facts entirely unrelated to his profession if a keen observer.And a fraudster/liar ought not be trusted even when speaking directly to his profession.CC fakers fall into this latter category,even take it a step further.Lie about faking.For profit even?