It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

MI5 Agents Make Crop Circles~Claims Documentary

page: 2
6
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 22 2009 @ 06:11 AM
link   
I like the two old guys, they make a good team. I have never even heard of the farmer reporting the black pipe appearing out of the sky before and the physicists analysis was very interesting.

The whole MI5 thing is kind of obvious, I'm not so sure the cropcirclemakers.org guy are MI5 but I'm sure they are given a hand to keep doing their stuff. Teaching people how to make crop circles spreads skepticism world wide about every CC that appears. I think it's all to prevent serious, well funded and open investigations into the CC phenomena.

Sad that people are so easily manipulated.




posted on Dec, 22 2009 @ 08:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by Izarith


You have a very perverse understanding of the meaning of shortsightedness my blabbering long winded friend.
Myopia. It means you can't focus properly at length, or on far away objects. In other words, CC believers only focus on what is put in front of them that supports their belief, rather than looking at length at ALL the evidence and then forming a belief.

No point explaining it to you, I doubt you have the focus.


I wish you would take the time to read your posts and see the lack of substance and logic that your misleading and corruptive agenda voices as if from a bull horn.

Dribble. My agenda, yeah whatever.



I mean you have twisted the meaning of the term "short sited" to the brink of making a two year old child yell foul. Your derogatory tenacity is so obvious that it makes me blush.
I can see that I make the two year old cry.


What happened to you my friend? tell us... Who hurt you? It's ok... It's not your fault....
I think this will explain the above to you. And probably this is involved in YOUR statement regarding me.




It's not, your fault.....

It's not your fault....

It's not, your fault....

It's not.....that's it, let the tears come freely. Let the wound bleed. Better now?
Thanks for the support but I was good before, I know where the fault is.
I mean read this:

I wish you would take the time to read your posts and see the lack of substance and logic that your misleading and corruptive agenda voices as if from a bull horn.
When I read people expressing false beliefs and presenting feelings like these above that YOU posted, that are not based in any reality, it reminds me of this.



OK now let me give you a better understanding of what "short sited" really means and how it applies to the topic at hand.
It means myopia. That is where the term comes from. Also see nearsightedness or shortsightedness. It also means a lack of caution in practical affairs. So are you saying that people who are cautious in the practical affairs of evidence, particularly a cautious approach towards the acceptance of the ET hypothesis(considering the lack of practical evidence relating to Et's and crop circles) are short sighted?





First of all, the only reason anyone who does not believe that some CC are possibly made by ET has the ability to use evidence and testimony of people who have actually made CC with their own hands and use this to construct a short sited theory is because there is little evidence that ETs have made them themselves.
How terribly short sighted, actually basing a belief on evidence from actual evidence. This is by far the dumbest thing I have read, ever.
You actually accuse people of believing CC are man made because they have evidence of CC being made by Man.

And the only reason why people believe ET's make them is? Do tell?
Is it because you think they are not short sighted?
Is that your evidence?

It is not a short sited theory. It is one supported by evidence. Try and Focus on that. Focus. Evidence. Real.
The whole picture that you see. Not a possible bit of the picture, the whole picture. People do not dismiss or ignore evidence of alternative explanations. There simply is no evidence to support them as happening regardless of what is possible.
So how can you be short sighted in relation to something that no one can see, show or point out.

There is no evidence that ET's make them, only claims. Mostly claims that Some crop Circles are impossible for humans to make. They are claims. That is it. That is all you have. There is nothing to see as a real alternative to the man made theory.
If there is Show me, so I can see it. People who ONLY FOCUS on the IDEA that crop circles are POSSIBLY made by ET's do so due to an Inability to FOCUS on all the Evidence that supports the Man Made theory whilst creating a straw-man arguments that some circles are impossible for man to make. Making these claims is short sighted in that YOU only FOCUS on a claim of incredulity regarding certain characteristics of Crop Circles as an argument to support an alternative you have absolutely no evidence for.


Despite the fact that there is a small amount of evidence like radiative reading and testimonies of people describing ET/UFO having anything to do with CC there are still many CC that fall under the category of inconclusive as to what or who they were made by.
Do you know where that small amount of "evidence" comes from? Because I do.
It comes from BLT research. Burke, Levengood and Talbot. Dude, I actually took the time and effort to research the claims and beliefs being thrown about this phenomena. I am not new too this.
I suggest, that instead of acting and pretending like you have an open and informed mind, and Instead of spouting paranoid delusions relating to an imagined agenda you accuse me of having, that you focus on the big picture and look at who makes these claims.
How they arrived at these claims. Does the method support the claims?
BLT fail. Big Time. They only published 3 papers. And they have been heavily criticized by Paranormal as well as mainstream scientists. www.bltresearch.com...


This inconclusiveness is just that inconclusive. Meaning there is a possibility that they were made by ET/UFO.
It may be possible for ET's to make them, but then it is also possible that Jesus is making them, that Big Foot makes them, or that reptilian shape shifters from under the ground do. There is just as much evidence to support all these making them as ET. So yeah, its possible. Focusing on what is possible is incredibly short sighted given you do not see the large amount of evidence showing HUMANS actually making circles, and that this evidence is surrounding what you can only refer to as a possibility.

This is kind of logic is exactly what creationists do with evolution.



Now you strongly believe that CC are all man made, you clearly express this by yet again subverted belittling statements against another thread author because she made an obvious observation based on the evidence of your post.
What have I subverted?

I think the problem is you just probably feel belittled by everything. It has nothing to do with me at all.


You disregard the meaning of "Short sited" and mutilated it to deceitfully fit her under your category of "Short sited" and also implied that she did not actually read the information on the link she herself provided. Not only is this just ungentlemanly like it is also down right against the ATS T/C rules IMO.
Here is the meaning again. www.thefreedictionary.com...
More dribble.



Anyway how can you claim that Eevee a person who believes that CC are man made, as her videos are attempting to show, (that M-I5 possibly is linked to the making of CC) but also believes that some could be made by ET based on the inconclusive evidence that suggest other possibilities is "Short Sited"!?!?!
Point out where I make that claim.
Show me that claim where I say" Eevee, you are short sighted because there is inconclusive evidence relating to ET and CC.
Don't dribble on about what you think my post means.
Just show me where I say that.
YOU ARE SEEING THINGS THAT ARE NOT THERE!

But anyway, there is no evidence for ET's creating CC. So how can NO EVIDENCE be inconclusive on anything.




Seriously man, who hurt you? Let the anger go. Or at the very least don't take it out on a nice girl trying to show her thoughts and theories on AST

It seems that you are the one that has the problem.
Not me.
Especially the way you imagine lots of things, that are all in your head ,about other members.



We talked about this on another thread remember? Being a troll is not cool. It's so 2006 man.

TA!

Izarith.
Yes, and it seems I cut you pretty deep dude. You have injected yourself twice now into my posts that were not even remotely directed at you, and you seem to have taken them personally.
But like you mention about me above I do have a habit of

making a two year old child yell foul.

I'll leave you to the yelling.

Don't bother replying dude.
Just ignore me like you probably ignore evidence of man made circles.
I'll leave you to ponder the possibility that what you think is right, because you could possibly be right, but there is no real evidence that supports that possibility.




[edit on 22/12/09 by atlasastro]



posted on Dec, 22 2009 @ 10:39 AM
link   
It was pointed out to the two guys in the first two clips what was causing the marks on the crops, it was shown to them on the spot, but they still say they are board marks? what BS.

In 2004 near the end of the year if I remember right, they turned up at a circle, doing their thing. then started showing people that it was fake etc, using the board marks.

Then a small team from a University study group who where taking readings, went over and showed them, the board marks could just as easily have been made by someone standing on that spot, and that was why the board marks where only 5, 6 ,7 stems wide, rather than ever being the size or close to the size of the boards supposedly used, they even came back the next day to learn what others where doing to analyze the circle for anomalies.

If you notice in their video where they point out the marks, some of them do not line up with the others, where as you would expect them to be in a straight line if a board was used, the differences in the alignment was caused by the footwear the person wore when standing at the spot, heavy boots left marks like someone had hit the area with a meat tenderizer, and trainers the marks they had shown, the only way found to leave no marks at all where to put something over your footwear with a flat bottom.

From what I know for certain they where shown, they can not possibly determine from marks alone which are real and which are not.



posted on Dec, 22 2009 @ 11:33 AM
link   
These crop circles are made to confuse people and to pull their beliefs hard to the right or to the left. Some people stay in the middle and do not know what to make of them. As one commenter recently said about the possebillity that the twin towers were made with the plan to be 'pulled' with people in it, it can also be that these crop-circles are also part of a bigger plan and are meant to condition people.

It is mostly circles that are made which made me think of a rotating machine that made them. I presume that a machine and its operator would be caught by the police the first night out, so if it isn't UFO's that made them, it probably must have been some other kind of machine.

Back to the early planning idea. In relation to ET, cropcircles and NWO, I can only think of the period when Ronald Reagan was talking about other civilasations visiting Earth and what we were going to do about it as an united people and planet.
On an other occasion he started talking about his project to shoot missiles down from out of space. What if everything is related and part of a big master plan to create confusion and to sent the conditioned people into the wrong direction when the # hits the fan? What if these circles were made by some rotating exotic particle beam directed on the crops from outer space?

Some of these cropcircles are mathematical exact and such basis and other drawings are pieces of art and perfectly excecuted. It is practically impossible that some secret group of crop-specialists have made these works of art with a plank and rope.

To me a sound explanation can be that these designs are pre-programmed with a computer in some office somewhere and uploaded to a satelite which can focus a particle beam precisely on the ground (crops).

If I am correct an electromagnetic energy is measured in the circles which is different than the surroundings outside the circles. This can only mean that something funky has been going on and not some guy with a board and a rope had been jumpnig around.

Ronald Reagan was part of these NWO sociopaths and it would not surprise me if he stood on the beginning of the development of a satelite capable of doing these circles. Everything with the intension to prepare the people for things that will come.....maybe a fake (or real!!) visitation or invasion of ET.

That is what I think about cropcircles. Interesting documentary tho.



posted on Dec, 22 2009 @ 11:54 AM
link   
Real crop circles are made by G O D

Every other explanation IS disinformation




posted on Dec, 23 2009 @ 04:33 AM
link   
reply to post by atlasastro
 


MY GOD!!

Who gave you so much post character allowance?

Like I said My Aborigines Friend, Your post lack substance and are comprised of corrupted, agenda driven information. You lack manners when talking to women which stems from, I believe, a bad childhood upbringing.

Your long winded blabbering could have very easily bin wrap up and very much shortened by saying......

"I know you are, but what am I?"

But hey what ever makes your posts seem like they actually say something is what counts right.


You could have at the very least watched the Documentary that the OP posted. It was very informative and did show some very interesting ideas about how MI5 could have very well bin involved in the making of CC with the purpose of disinformation.



posted on Apr, 10 2010 @ 05:25 AM
link   
reply to post by atlasastro
 


I just love what I found in your link to Circle Makers:


Subsequent daylight checks revealed no evidence of the light's existence. That year also saw a large increase in the number of luminosities reported around circle sites. Did we witness a naturally occurring phenomenon - or were we really being scanned by the genuine circlemakers?



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 1   >>

log in

join