Crop Circles are Man Made, and here is why!

reply to post by Orkojoker


People have been explaining all the things you point out in your posts.

It is just that people don't want to hear it when it is as mundane as Humans making them.


Thanks for the link.

reply to post by atlasastro


Ockham's require that we make as FEW assumptions as possible.
So lets apply Ockham's to our debate.
Me: Man as cause- not assumed as we can show man.
Man making circles- not assumed as we can show men making circles.
Result-Men make all crop circles as a hypothesis or theory.
-By Alasatro.
FLAWED Assumption by itself!

Let me rephrase it using Ockham
Alas: Man as cause- not assumed as we can show man.
Man making circles- not assumed as we can show men making circles.
Alas: Man making eg; Butterflyman crop-circle - ASSUMPTION if not impossible under the same time and labour/equipment condition
Result-Manmade crop circles are hypothesis, but not accountable for ALL of them.

Now look at the alien comparison using Ockham
Me: Alien as cause - not assumed as Aliens exists - hundreds of thousand witnesses. Only you had not met one yet.
Me: Alien making circles: not assumed, even though we cannot show aliens making circles, but we can show the technology they possess - eyewitness accounts of incredible flight crafts - masters of tech we dont have. If they can fly such crafts man cannot build, why then are they incapable of crop circles?
Me: Alien making circles eg Butterflyman: not assumed as the motive for CCs are replies in similar form from our Arecibo message.
Result: Alien made crop circles are a logical hypothesis.

i only used what you used. But please do not see it as a challenge. I will not force anyone to belief what they wish not to. You have that right to hide in blanket to cover your fears for comfort and solace, while the rest of us will pursue for greater recognition of the truth.
Cheers.

Originally posted by SeekerofTruth101
reply to post by atlasastro

 

Ockham's require that we make as FEW assumptions as possible.
So lets apply Ockham's to our debate.
Me: Man as cause- not assumed as we can show man.
Man making circles- not assumed as we can show men making circles.
Result-Men make all crop circles as a hypothesis or theory.
-By Alasatro.
FLAWED Assumption by itself!

How is it a flawed assumption when I clearly state that using Ockhams, my hypothesis is not based on assumptions.

My hypothesis makes assumptions, I admit that, but the hypothesis is based on FACTS. Remember Ockham's looks at the hypothesis with the LEAST assumptions.

Let me rephrase it using Ockham
Alas: Man as cause- not assumed as we can show man.
Man making circles- not assumed as we can show men making circles.
Alas: Man making eg; Butterflyman crop-circle - ASSUMPTION if not impossible under the same time and labour/equipment condition

Result-Manmade crop circles are hypothesis, but not accountable for ALL of them.

My hypothesis does not claim to account for them all. I don't have to as Ockham's logic supports my Hypothesis in it being based on the least assumptions.
CHAOS, who I was responding to used Ockham's as the logic that we should apply.
Having an assumption, that the Butterfly crop circle was made by man, is logical to my hypothesis. It does not defy logic.
To use an analogy, if I throw 10 apples into the air, all apples that are thrown in the air fall due to gravity. If an apple after that is thrown in the air, I can assume gravity has made it fall.
You are free to claim aliens made the apple fall.
It is possible aliens made the apple fall.
Please show me aliens making the apple fall.

Now look at the alien comparison using Ockham

Yes, lets look at all the assumptions you make, and then compare it to all the assumption I make.

Me: Alien as cause - not assumed as Aliens exists - hundreds of thousand witnesses. Only you had not met one yet.

Just show me one witness of an alien creating crop circles, because there is not one. Not one. only BOL(balls of light)
But using your rationale, there are two auumptions 1 being aliens exists, 2 witness testimony is to be taken as absolute fact. Assumptions. Score Update:Me 1, You 2
Using eyewitness accounts any of these could be responsible for crop circles
Big Foot
The Lochness Monster.
Elvis is still alive, it could be him.
Visions of Mary and Jesus are all true, they may be making circles.
Ghosts, they usually come out a night, and so do crop circles.
Angels, it may be messages from angels.
Demons, perhaps they are possessing the crops......should I keep going with the witness testimony?

Me: Alien making circles: not assumed, even though we cannot show aliens making circles, but we can show the technology they possess

Show the technology then. Assumption Score update Me:1 You 3

- eyewitness accounts of incredible flight crafts - masters of tech we dont have.

Assumption that 1: the technology is alien, and 2:that humans are not responsible.Score Update Me 1 and You 5

If they can fly such crafts man cannot build, why then are they incapable of crop circles?

Assumptions. Me 1 and you 6.

Me: Alien making circles eg Butterflyman: not assumed as the motive for CCs are replies in similar form from our Arecibo message.

Assumptions. That Arecibo message was a reply by aliens, and that it was made by aliens. Me 1 still! and You 7.

Result: Alien made crop circles are a logical hypothesis.

yes it is logical when you believe it. Sure.

I only used what you used.

Actually, you did not. So you are a liar. You actually quote two specific crop circles when my belief is based on the phenomena. My assumption is that all crop circle are man made. It is an assumption based on observed facts that men exists and men make crop circles.

But please do not see it as a challenge.

I did not see it as a challenge but a poor application of logic and reason.

I will not force anyone to belief what they wish not to. You have that right to hide in blanket to cover your fears for comfort and solace, while the rest of us will pursue for greater recognition of the truth.
Cheers.

More assumptions. Look at this one here.

You have that right to hide in blanket to cover your fears for comfort and solace

Assumptions that my discussion is an attempt to hide. Ok, score check Me 1, You 8
And another

while the rest of us will pursue for greater recognition of the truth.

You assume that I am not pursuing the truth. Me 1, you 9...9

And that raps it up folks.
Me 1 You 9.
And how do the judges score the debate:

Occam's razor states that the explanation of any phenomenon should make as few assumptions as possible, eliminating those that make no difference in the observable predictions of the explanatory hypothesis or theory.

ME 1 and YOU 9, NINE. 8 more than me. I make 8 less assumptions than you. You make 9, I make 1. My hypothesis makes the assumption. You need to assume your evidence and your hypothesis. In fact that is all you have. Assumptions. 9 assumptions to be precise.

So I guess we know how to score it.


I guess I will seek comfort and solace in logic rather than you and the ramblings of Alien religious propaganda.





[edit on 24/12/09 by atlasastro]

Originally posted by CHA0S

Then...we have you come along telling us something we already knew...but then making outrages claims..."Look...see this...some people make crop circles...therefore I must conclude ALL crop circles are man-made"...your claims are rediculous and unfounded.

Read what you just wrote.
Thanks for the laugh dude.
I had to create a whole post just for this.
It is the funniest post I have ever seen on ATS.
Ever.

I am the one making outrageous claims.
The outrage!
Men are making crop circles. How outrageous a claim, it is clearly aliens, how can it be humans. OH! The Outrage!
Blaspheme! Blaspheme!

And yes, my claims are totally ridiculous and unfounded.
After all you guys just keep hammering me with all the evidence showing aliens making crop circles......(what! sorry, what do mean you don't have any, you mean you don't have any at all, none. No evidence showing aliens making circles....what......no its ok your claim is totally founded and not ridiculous, I mean after all I have heaps and heaps and heaps of evidence but who cares about the evidence hey!)

Merry Xmas CHAOS, thanks for spreading the cheer bro.

reply to post by atlasastro


Utterly hilarious. So be it that Occam's razor be your comfort and solace. Just for your knowledge, be aware that Occam's razor had never been considered scientific result or an irrefutable principle of logic

What you had done has nothing to do with logic. You are merely twisting and manipulating the english language to support your own fears, using pride to boost your ego in order to be considered right, even in the face of errors you made.

I understand such fears, and had tried not to be harsh, but you had to force your hand. It's people like you and your fears that makes Disclosure impossible. So here goes:-

I will now leave my brains at the door and express I know nothing. You claimed Crop circles are made by men. ( don't twist semantics now). Now prove to me that it was men who created the Butterfly Crop circle, with photographic or video evidences on how they did it, or if not, duplicate it onto another field under similar conditions,

Shouldnt be a problem, as you claim it is possible to be made by men with 100% certainty, and deride others who think otherwise.

Can you prove it?

If not, please sit down quietly at the corner and try to learn something.

Originally posted by SeekerofTruth101
reply to post by atlasastro

 

Utterly hilarious.

Yes your posts are utterly hilarious.

So be it that Occam's razor be your comfort and solace. Just for your knowledge, be aware that Occam's razor had never been considered scientific result or an irrefutable principle of logic

Yeah! now that you realize that Ockham's destroys your argument you have to attack it.
You are pathetic.

What you had done has nothing to do with logic. You are merely twisting and manipulating the english language to support your own fears, using pride to boost your ego in order to be considered right, even in the face of errors you made.

You just keep telling yourself, just keep attacking me.
Because that is all you really have.
And you know it.
So you need to get personal, because you are arguing from a personal belief that has nothing to show for it.
I can take the attacks bro.
In fact, I know that when people like you attack me it is because you are afraid.
You are scared. So you have to lash out.
But it won't change the truth.

I understand such fears, and had tried not to be harsh, but you had to force your hand. It's people like you and your fears that makes Disclosure impossible. So here goes:-

So now its my fault your fantasy disclosure won't happen.

I will now leave my brains at the door and express I know nothing.

You claimed Crop circles are made by men. ( don't twist semantics now). Now prove to me that it was men who created the Butterfly Crop circle, with photographic or video evidences on how they did it, or if not, duplicate it onto another field under similar conditions,

I don't have to prove it. ( just wait, I know in your head you are probably foaming at that statement, but keep reading.)
Do men exist? Yes.
Do they make Crop circles? Yes.
Hypothesis Men make crop circles.
Butterfly crop, how was it made. Hypothesis can then make safe assumptions, that it was Man.
So I don't need to prove it.
You prove my assumption is wrong!

And How do you do that?

You need to inject an entity, you need to make it up from a belief. You then build a strawman argument that I must prove that every individual cc was made by man in order to disprove that it was not aliens.
This is INSANE. You cannot even argue against my hypothesis with anything other than a religious belief.

Shouldnt be a problem, as you claim it is possible to be made by men with 100% certainty, and deride others who think otherwise.

I am 100% certain men exist.
I am 100% certain that men make crop circles.
It seems that you like to deride people. In fact the bulk of your post is dedicated to it. Hypocrite.

Can you prove it?

Yes, men exist and men make crop circles.

If not, please sit down quietly at the corner and try to learn something.

How about you teach me about all the evidence you have that show aliens making the Butterfly CC.

But I will show you what that the Butterfly CC was man made and what it actually means and how it is driven by HUMAN imagery, philosophy and religious beliefs.

Here are some photos. The first one shows them making the circle.
cropcircle.bolhuus.nl...
This one has the whole group that made it.
defotograaf.smugmug.com...

Here is a link to the Guy who designs and makes Circles in the Netherlands. He has is Remko Delfgauw and he has designed and made 14 or 15 in 10 years or so.
XL D-sign

XL D-sign gebruikt de natuurlijke omgeving als levend doek voor het in teamverband creëren van schilderijen/beeldmerken op formaat die vooral vanuit de lucht gezien tot de verbeelding spreken.

De creaties zijn per definitie tijdelijk van aard en vormen geen belasting voor het milieu.

Voornaamste materialen waarmee gewerkt wordt is graan (graancirkels) en zand.

Translation
XL D-sign use the natural surroundings as living screen for in team link create of paintings/picture marks on format which especially seen from air to imagination speaking. The creations are by definition temporary of nature and forms no tax for the environment. Main material with which is worked is grain (grain circles) and sand.

On the homes page is a photo catalogue of the Circles. The Butterfly was called Project Atlas.

Op 07-08-'09 ging XL D-Sign met een team van 60 man het grootste graanveld van de Wilhelminapolder in. Het eindresultaat was 's werelds grootste graancirkel, met een oppervlakte van bijna 25 hectare.

Translation
On 07-08-' 09 XL D-Sign with a team of 60 man entered the largest grain field of the Wilhelminapolder. The final result was ' s worldly largest grain circle, with a surface of almost 25 hectares.
www.xld-sign.com...

Here are some other CC's that XL D-sign did, but I have seen people claim that they are too complex or big for humans so it must have been aliens.
www.xld-sign.com...

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/c8d89c26c46f.png[/atsimg]
www.xld-sign.com...

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/fbba5eedd658.png[/atsimg]
www.xld-sign.com...

Have you ever heard of Homo-luminous?


Here is a book published in 2008, the year before the Butterfly CC that was made, which was 07-08-09.
The Book is called Spontaneous Evolution: Our Positive Future and How To Get There From Here.
Here is the Cover, does it look familiar?
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/4b456e5613aa.jpg[/atsimg]
more info on the book. It has nothing to do with Aliens so you may not like it.
www.youtube.com...

The cover of this Book has the Da Vinci Vitruvian man with what appears to be Mandelbrot set or fractal butterfly wings.

Here is the Da Vinci Vitruvian man and the Butterfly CC.
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/ac1064ac1b43.jpg[/atsimg]
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/5d39ace57d2b.jpg[/atsimg]

The Butterfly CC, like the Book i linked earlier, are about the evolution of man.
The Butterfly is iconic of transformation. The Butterfly is also linked to many myths and cultures. The greeks with Psyche the Goddess of the Soul, psyche originally meant butterfly( psyche, from where we get the term psychology), the Hopi and Mayan cultures as well as many other Native American cultures also have many myths regarding the Butterfly. I mention the Native american Cultures because Mayan and Hopi cultures are currently being UPDATED by new agers around the 2012 phenomena where many new age movements believe we will be making a transformation.


It is what many new agers call the next step in man and many sites use imagery to represent this, and that imagery is what?
The Butterfly gets a call up again. Many sites I have read mention Homo Luminous, Hopi and Mayan prophecy and incorporate butterfly imagery to describe the transformation into a higher evolved human. This Crop Circles is no different.

Many people believe we are on the cusp of an evolution.

Here we have these beliefs transformed by humans into a CC.
Human beliefs, images and philosophies are all intertwined into this Butterfly CC. And it is beautiful.
But!
Everything about it is Human.

Everything about it is Human.
Human beliefs, images and philosophies are all intertwined into this Butterfly Crop Circles and these beliefs, images and philosophies all pre-existed before the butterfly crop circle.
There is nothing alien at all about that CC.


Plus, there are humans that claim they did, show they did it and show they did others, and have pictures that show they did it.
As yet there is no one that can prove otherwise.

Can you prove it?

If not, please sit down quietly at the corner and try to learn something.

That sick feeling in your stomach right now.
That is the truth sinking into the lies you have swallowed.
Don't fight it.

reply to post by atlasastro


Good obedient boy. You do know how to follow instructions.

1. Continue on with your comfort and solace Occam's razor as your principle of logic, even such methods as I had mentioned, are only used in jest and never for serious scientific researchers. I have no wish to break your heart, the way a parent would take away a child's favorite teddy bear.

2. There are other designs that are similar with other crop circles. The circle being the standard design. Can CCs then use such justifications and be proven manmade because circles and such artforms only be created by man? Are dogs, capable of creating circles, running in circles, thus do not exist by such reasoning?

3. As faulty as your logic had been, you relied on COMPLETED PHOTOS as proof that they had done the job??? May you with your brand of logic NEVER get to call for jury duty!!!!!

Sigh...will this gloating foraming in the mouth nightmare of ignorance by you never end?

I firmly believe all "design" CCs are man-made bits of art. In the distant past, there was once a crop circle that was an actual circle, made on a remote farm, not near any roads or towns, which simply irritated the residents. Now THAT is my definition of a realistic crop circle.

Aside from the many common reasons these point to being man-made, just consider the design selections. They are all designs that focus on whatever common popular hype is on the hotplate at the moment. Designs that create exactly this sort of controversy.

Knowing what you know here on these ATS boards, if you and a like-minded group of say, 9 other people had the know-how and tools to create these designs, do you think you could create one that really makes people go "omg.. this has DEEP MEANING!" Yes, you could. It's easy to prey upon fancies, theories and paranoia. I've yet to see a single CC that stands out as something a human COULDN'T have done. Even the DNA one, yes. Nothing we've has been ALIEN to us. Nothing we've looked at made us go "Wow.. that's amazing.. what the hell is it?!"

Of course, add in all the other reasons they are probably man-made (including locale, confessions, videos of it being done by people, including larger, more complex designs, etc.), and it's a pretty open and shut case, imo at least.

I'd like to think that if we visit foreign inhabited planets in the future, we would not feel we need to resort to pressing designs in local plants to get a message across. I could see the Star Trek episode now...

"Ensign.. set the ship's phasers for CC. Let's create a cryptic design that they can't really understand about their upcoming doomsday event... see if they can figure it out *snicker."

"Aye Captain!"

reply to post by SeekerofTruth101


There is photo's of them making it. Contact the group, ask them for more info. I bet you don't have the guts to test your faith in your religious belief!

You have been schooled.
And you know it.



Once again all you can do is spew personal attacks.



Just show me a CC made by aliens.
Just one.
With aliens making it.

Hell! Just show me an Aliens website that claims they made it.

Now go be a good puppet and buy a Crop Circle DVD or a calender.

reply to post by fleabit


Thanks for you reply fleabit.

You raise some interesting points.

Of course man is capable of creating complex designs, like you, I don't infer that humans are not capable of crating these designs because we create complex designs in so much of what we do.
Anyone that thinks we cannot transfer this to crops in a field is beyond reason.


Loved the Star Trek joke...set phasers to Crop Circle....

Thanks again for adding to the thread.

reply to post by atlasastro


Personal attacks? No. I did nothing more than what you intended to do to me. You presumed too highly of yourself. Your opinions and mine are but insignificant compared to the opinions of billion others.

I leave you to your fantazies, but i retierate once more - sincerly hope you with your brand of logic will never ever get to perform jury duty. Innocents will only be proven guilty by your logic.

Cheers.

[edit on 25-12-2009 by SeekerofTruth101]

reply to post by SeekerofTruth101

Personal attacks? No. I did nothing more than what you intended to do to me. You presumed too highly of yourself.

So you presumed that I Intended to personally attack you? Well that actually sounds like your logic so whatever dude!

But actually, you are right in a certain way.

I know you have no evidence to support your religious belief in aliens.
So all you can do is make personal attacks.
So in a way it is expected by not intended. I am expressing a belief that men make crop circles.
This is in conflict with your religious beliefs that Aliens are doing it.
As your religious belief is personal and not based on any evidence the simple expression of MY belief(which is supported by evidence, lots and lots of evidence) would seem like a personal attack simple because you have a personal belief that is not based in any reality derived from evidence.
So your whole argument is personal, and any expression that goes against that is a interpreted by you as an personal attack. This is typical of religious fanatics and cult worshippers that have been brainwashed into believing things that are not real.

But what I actually intended was to have intelligent people present their case why aliens are responsible for creating CC's like I present my case that explains my belief that Crop Circles are man made.
Unfortunately you have presented no intelligent discussion. Just religious babble and propaganda.

Just show me the aliens dude.
Making the circles.
That is all you need to do.
But you can not.

Just one.
Just once.

I like how you ignore all the evidence I present.
As I said, your personal attacks are O.K. as I know you have nothing else and the shattering of your religious faith in aliens making the Butterfly crop circles has probably enraged you even more. As you made no effort whatsoever to refute my post except to once again Lie about, and Avoid, the truth whilst making personal attacks.
Pretty pathetic really, but not a surprise given your complete lack of logic, reason or evidence.

I on the other hand, have answered you, always with evidence.

And yes, you can leave me with my fantasy, the one were things are actually real and they exist. Like Humans. Like Humans that make crop circles.
Like the Humans that made the Butterfly Crop Circles.
Butterfly Crop Circle being Made by HUMANS



Just one photo dude, of an alien, making the butterfly circle
Thanks.




[edit on 25/12/09 by atlasastro]

reply to post by InfaRedMan


how about a light aircraft ?

no - i am serious , commercial charter would be prohibitive

but if a owner pilot could be found who had an interest in crop circles - and was prepared to donate his time and plane gratis

that would only leave fuel [ aprox £ 60 ~ 80 / hour ] and a sensible donation towards the cost of the next engine service

helicopters are more thirsty and have higher servicing costs

reply to post by ignorant_ape


Hi Ignorant_ape,
I know your reply was to IRM, but I think your idea is good.
Not many people are aware of the Geographical Information regarding Crop Circles. This reveals that in the UK, the vast majority of CC's appear in two particular areas.
Paul Vigay(who unfortunately died R.I.P) set up a database so that all CC's could be catalogued.

Even though Paul's system only referenced the nearest town or village to the crop circles, England's rather large spread of towns and villages means that on average one can estimate, to within 3 or 4 kilometers, the general location of the Crop Circle catalogued.
In 2002 for example 77 crop circles were made in just 2 regions of the UK.
Where as 19 were made in all other regions. That is 80% of all UK crop circles for that year.

So I think your plan has some merit. Considering a group could trend out the historic occurrences of Crop Circles using Paul Vigay's database you could concentrate on just some areas within these regions.

Further more, by looking at Crop density growing trends in these areas with high concentrations of CC, you could further focus the areas that are likely to have CC's in them.

The two regions with the highest CC occurrences in the UK are actually mixed farming with low levels of crop farming.
Again, this marrows the search for possible sites to monitor.

My plan now would include your suggestion, if I had the time and resources would be to hire a light plane, survey that landscape noting cereal crop sites and marking them as potential CC sites.
I would them see if it was possible to set up long term infra/video sites on time lapse over a summer to see what happens. If a location sees a formation, you have it on camera.

I think this would improve the chance in averages on catching who or what makes these circles.
This is relatively easy to set up. It makes me wonder why crop circles "researchers" or serious UFO/ET "researchers" have not endeavored to pursue something like this.
Considering many Crop Circle "research" groups have many members.

You could even use google earth to survey areas get a rough idea and then do a fly over. This would reduce the flying costs.

I like your idea.




[edit on 26/12/09 by atlasastro]

obviously alot of these are man made but i havent seen any explanation of the crops being bent at right angles and having the bulges in the shafts or the odd properties of the dirt and radiation levels inside some of the circles. And theres always this story that would be the most elaborate hoax in the history of crop circles if it were proven as such.

You can debunk alot of them but theres always the stories that debunkers just brush off with little to disprove they are something unexplainable.

[edit on 26-12-2009 by Shake]

Op you Failed to address the whole issue in your opener, by not even addressing the node factor. The new nuckle is where the bend in the crop is affected, on the crop circles that get studied.
You have failed to prove your point. If crop circles were man made,
we certainly at some point would see a heart shape with possibly
"I love you Sally" with an arrow through the middle. Humans from all walks of life use Graffitti.
I don't know of one that smacks of Graffitti. Ask a forensics officer if humans don't always leave evidence. we should be seeing at least some evidence if they were man made.
To suggest this has been going on with no human factors none of the normal traits of human involvement.
To me Skeptics fail on this one. You have proved not.
I think most of them are not man made by any means.
There is just no human behavior in them.
No errors? Highly improbable.

Why havn't you thought about the possibility that it might be a giant Farmers of England conspiracy. Highly accessible to say the least.
You could go and spy on their 4-H club meetings. Find some evidence they're connected to the Masonic lodge.



[edit on 26-12-2009 by randyvs]

Thanks for your reply Randyvs.

Originally posted by randyvs
Op you Failed to address the whole issue in your opener, by not even addressing the node factor. The new nuckle is where the bend in the crop is affected, on the crop circles that get studied.

The whole issue is:Who makes the circles. It is not about the characteristics of those circles.
My OP does not need to address the node problem. But you are right to raise the issue.
The node claim is made by Levengood et al from BLT.
The studies are flawed.
In Levengood's 3 papers published in the 90's concerning the phenomena, Levengood in his equation for measuring node variation actually starts the node length at 0. Levengood then concludes that any length after that is a variation from the norm. This is flawed. The linear model showing variation across the circles is also flawed as it leaves data out or fails to acknowledge it.

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

www.ecn.org...

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

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

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

Here are example of geotropism on nodes and internodes.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

www.ecn.org...

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

You have failed to prove your point. If crop circles were man made,
we certainly at some point would see a heart shape with possibly
"I love you Sally" with an arrow through the middle. Humans from all walks of life use Graffitti.

There are circles that are obvious, like the ones you mention. These do not get mention like the "symbolic" or "complex" circles on the many Crop Circles websites. These simply don't inspire mystery or awe in believers and they hardly scream "aliens made this so come see our lecture, do the tour, buy the DVD, the calender, subscribe to our website, join our group, listen and believe to our new age religious beliefs".
Here you go, I guess this proves my point and answers your criticism of my OP.
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/addfe9dba9d9.jpg[/atsimg]
How cool is that, and look how complex it is.
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/c44050d5652b.jpeg[/atsimg]
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/6e4e92f825a8.jpeg[/atsimg]
Old School video gamers will be happy.
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/99a368cd9ab3.jpeg[/atsimg]
Firefox logo.
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/ce9cc14ee910.jpeg[/atsimg]
What are aliens saying, Don't smoke?
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/91d9b252259a.jpg[/atsimg]
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/5417a6f39bdd.jpg[/atsimg]

I don't know of one that smacks of Graffitti.

I am not being rude, but your ignorance in relation to frivolous crop circles is not a proof of anything.

Ask a forensics officer if humans don't always leave evidence. we should be seeing at least some evidence if they were man made.

There is evidence. We know humans make circles. We have groups that claim they make circles and show they do. Many of these circles are plastered all over the internet as a mysterious.
Unfortunately forensic teams do not investigate crop circles, only "Crop Circle researchers". Most of which have vested interests in CC's being an unexplained phenomena (read OP there is ample evidence that supports this.)

So tell me, where is the evidence to explain aliens doing it?

To suggest this has been going on with no human factors none of the normal traits of human involvement.

I don't suggest that, anything I say comes with evidence to support it. I clearly show one particular crop circle that contain human beliefs, imagery, philosophy and the makers themselves. This example is a crop circle that has been discussed all over forums as being impossible for humans to do, and shows no human involvement yet everything about it screams human.
Take a look.
post by atlasastro

To me Skeptics fail on this one. You have proved not.
I think most of them are not man made by any means.
There is just no human behavior in them.
No errors? Highly improbable.

You need to appeal to the complexity of crop circles as evidence that they are not man made because there is absolutely no evidence, at all that you can use, that shows something other than man making crop circles.

Thanks.

[edit on 26/12/09 by atlasastro]

Hi Shake,

Originally posted by Shake
obviously alot of these are man made but i havent seen any explanation of the crops being bent at right angles and having the bulges in the shafts or the odd properties of the dirt and radiation levels inside some of the circles.

Read the post above, I hope that answers some of the questions you raise, or at leasts gives you something to consider.

And theres always this story that would be the most elaborate hoax in the history of crop circles if it were proven as such.

What is it an elaborate hoax of exactly?
And what exactly needs to be debunked about it?
They found Gold, Silver and Bronze medallions. They had pictograms on them that matched the CC.
Gold Silver and Bronze all exist on earth. The pictograms are human imagery and crop circles are known to be man made.
We also have a long history of Human hoaxes in a wide variety of situations.
Just because some are expensive does not mean it is not a hoax.

It is interesting to note the state of the metals.
Look at these ancient Anglo-Saxon artifacts recently dug up(the pictogrm on the Crop Circle artifacts are Saxon so I think they are relevant), look at the quality and effects time has had on the gold and silver.
news.bbc.co.uk...

The gold, silver and bronze look relatively unaffected in your Crop Circle phenomena. To me that indicates that they had been underground only a relatively short time.
But who put them there and when?
That is hard to answer, almost impossible without being there.

"Plate one (silver color) consisted mainly of quite pure silver (what an understatement!), with an additional ingredient accounting for less than 0.1%. The weight of the plate was 4.98kg (11lbs). Plate two (bronze color) consisted of a copper-tin alloy (of which the tin content amounted to 10%-15%), nickel and traces of iron amounting to less than 0.1%".

As for expensive, the silver plate would have cost $700 U.S at 1991 silver prices of 4.04 an ounce.
Copper was less than $1 US a POUND in 1991 and at 4.98kg that would be 10 pounds of copper at $1 dollar a pound.
Your link does not tell us how much the Gold Plate weighed but if we go by the Silver plates at 4.98kg, it would have been worth around $360 an ounce which makes the Gold plate worth a whopping $63,000.
So that is a pretty expensive hoax, but what are they reported to be sold at?

It is further mentioned of the gold plate, of the finest quality that had been seen by the examiner. The industrialist received about 25,000 Euros for the bronze and silver plate and the gold was worth at least 75,000 Euros.

That is 125,000 Euro's for the three plates. That is double if it is a hoax.
Even if they didn't sell them, they have the metals anyway so there is no loss in the hoax if it is indeed a hoax.

The link you provide makes many claims, but shows no supporting material to justify them.
If you have any further information regarding this I would appreciate it.

It is an interesting incident all the same.
It is a shame no real information on the tests are available on the site. I mean, that was a real opportunity to shut "debunkers up'.

You can debunk a lot of them but theres always the stories that debunkers just brush off with little to disprove they are something unexplainable.

The only reason people seem to use the term "debunk" is because man people already go about making a CLAIM to explain the circles.
If you would care to "debunk" man as a cause for crop circles then go ahead. I would just prefer that you make sure you can show a cause that actually exists.

Unexplained does not imply that men are not responsible for the incident you link. Nor does it mean that Aliens did or did not do it.


Thanks for the link and your thoughts.

Atlasastro....

man o man, I have never in 7 years seen anyone lose an argument and get "owned", the way seekeroftruth did, on this website.

You played him beautifully. To read his attacks which I was waiting for was funny. The link to the guys making the butterfly was awesome! He was on the ropes and you saved the KO blow for the very end. That was blog entertainment at its best. You never waivered from your position, you stated and explained it pefectly and backed it up eloquently and in a solid fashion. The guy kept disagreeing and attacking you though. Kind of like a drunk guy calling Mike Tyson a bitch. Keep up the great work man. This website needs more ppl like yourself. (Men cannot make butterflies in wheat. LMAO)

Im still laughing. The keeping score bit was priceless. I almost felt you shoving the salt in his wound. LOL

[edit on 26-12-2009 by spinalremain]

reply to post by atlasastro


It is not necessary to be a rocket scientist for anyone to realize that all agri-glyphs (crop circles to you tyros) are man/woman-made. Why the 100% certainty? Because at no time has anyone offered irrefutable evidence to the contrary regardless of who says what.

There have been documentaries shown where a complex agri-glyph was shown being made and the fallout later by the "experts" was that it couldn't have been made by man.

Another '90s documentary showed a group of teams who entered an agri-glyph making contest during the night. Some teams were given identical designs. In the morning when the agri-glyphs were visible, the identical designs were perfectly matched.

As with UFOs and aliens, there are too many experts who don't know anything but the gullible believe them.