Occum's Razor = some Crop Circles are 'real'

[laver]

Where does slight leave off and substantial begin? A judgement call, I suppose. If you prefer slight, please substitute that for substantial. Also a matter a of judgement about how much ellipticity can be ascribed to error in a formation with a certain level of precision. I have no one source for what I said about the ellipticity of many crop circles. It comes from studying the measured diagrams of quite a few. I realize that drawing an ellipse is not particularly difficult. I am not aware of any indications that this was done intentionally by human crop circle makers. As the departure from round is not readily apparent, their reason for doing so escapes me.

Some people see planetary messages in the designs. The planets go round the sun but this is not a true circular path but an ellipse which might possibly have some relevance?

[bison]

In those cases where planetary orbits seem to be depicted by crop formations, their ellipticity could be an accurate portrayal of reality. Other slightly elliptical crop circles do not appear to be about planetary orbits. Ellipses may be considered more esthetically appropriate than circles by their makers. A circle is a special case of an ellipse, geometrically speaking. A circle is rather static, an ellipse lively. Consider-- the rim of a bell that is silent is circular, at least by design, if not in fact. A ringing bell has a rim that approximates a series of ever-changing ellipses.

[Oppono Astos]

The precise circularity, or otherwise, is usually down to the lie of the land; it had always been noted that natural circle formations on sloping ground were less exact and often had elliptical shapes rather than circular.

[bison]

That, too, is a reasonable possibility, where the terrain admits of such an explanation.

[laver]

That, too, is a reasonable possibility, where the terrain admits of such an explanation.

Terrain seems a very likely explanation. If the control point for the circle formation is from above then what appears round from there would in fact not be on the ground

if the site has a slope

[psyche101]

The circular-appearing parts of many crop circle formations are substantially oval or elliptical. This is generally not apparent to casual inspection of photographs, but careful measurements have shown this again and again. The degree of departure from circularity is often greater than would be expected, given the otherwise high level of precision in some formations.

Many or the majority?

Is there a correlations, or are the happenings random? I must ask for your further experience here, I am unaware of oval crop circles being significant in both number and interest in general.

[psyche101]

So some people knowingly created and submitted fraudulent evidence, allowing it to be believed that it was from a phenomenon with an unknown cause. I wouldn't expect BLT research to be infallible in their determinations. This is on the cutting edge of science. The best scientific minds have been taken in by hoaxes at times. The Piltdown man hoax is a good example of this. Shall we dismiss anthropologists and paleontologists as mad scientists, too?

BLT are not infallible, nobody is, nor am I painting them with a broad brush, the article specifically states the people at the very institute involved with this particular study fabricated evidence, and then claimed it was actual evidence.

It's pretty straight forward really.

He claims to have filmed proof that circle plants Levengood said showed good evidence of the genuine

"crop circle making energy" were in fact from a fake circle made by Nancy's own plant samplers.

Do you feel there is an excuse for such underhanded behaviour?

Edited January 14, 2013 by psyche101

[psyche101]

Some people see planetary messages in the designs. The planets go round the sun but this is not a true circular path but an ellipse which might possibly have some relevance?

Is it conceivable that such intricate designs would be made to convey such cryptic messages?

It does not seem all that "intelligent"?

[Abramelin]

Is it conceivable that such intricate designs would be made to convey such cryptic messages?

It does not seem all that "intelligent"?

They're getting smarter:

Edited January 14, 2013 by Abramelin

[S2F]

Is it conceivable that such intricate designs would be made to convey such cryptic messages?

It does not seem all that "intelligent"?

Conspiracy theory time!

Some crop circles are 'real' in that they are made by aliens, in an effort to communicate. The human made crop circles are actually an effort to communicate back and the tales of mischief and fakery are just a cover! The first steps to overcome communication barriers often involves mimicry.

Seriously though, I'm surprised to see that theory hasn't been put forth before, it does make a certain kind of sense even if it is totally unfounded.

[psyche101]

They're getting smarter:

Now really, that just does not seem to much to ask of a supposedly advanced species! Nah, we will drill a hole in a rock, they will figure it out!

Sounds like a far side cartoon.....

[psyche101]

Conspiracy theory time!

Some crop circles are 'real' in that they are made by aliens, in an effort to communicate. The human made crop circles are actually an effort to communicate back and the tales of mischief and fakery are just a cover! The first steps to overcome communication barriers often involves mimicry.

Seriously though, I'm surprised to see that theory hasn't been put forth before, it does make a certain kind of sense even if it is totally unfounded.

Wont the ones made as jokes that the "communicators" do not have control over throw a spanner in the works?

Maybe that is why the pagans got so upset when they saw this?

It's not the Government after all. It's them witches!

Edited January 14, 2013 by psyche101

[bison]

BLT are not infallible, nobody is, nor am I painting them with a broad brush, the article specifically states the people at the very institute involved with this particular study fabricated evidence, and then claimed it was actual evidence.

It's pretty straight forward really.

Do you feel there is an excuse for such underhanded behaviour?

It's unfortunate and wrong if some people working on behalf of BLT research submitted fraudulent evidence. Science tends to work on the 'honor system', trusting, or hoping that all its workers will be scrupulously honest. This system is known to have broken down in many instances, across a wide swath of scientific specialities.

It's not at all clear how closely those who gathered the specimens in this case were associated with BLT research. Volunteers living in the areas where the crop circles occur submit samples, I believe.

[laver]

It's unfortunate and wrong if some people working on behalf of BLT research submitted fraudulent evidence. Science tends to work on the 'honor system', trusting, or hoping that all its workers will be scrupulously honest. This system is known to have broken down in many instances, across a wide swath of scientific specialities.

It's not at all clear how closely those who gathered the specimens in this case were associated with BLT research. Volunteers living in the areas where the crop circles occur submit samples, I believe.

The big danger is that having taken sides on an issue people can loose sight of the fact that what we should all be seeking is the truth not only bits of the truth that suits our particular side of the argument. It should not be an argument, particularly on an issue like crop circles which with one infallible piece of evidence could change the course of human existence

[bison]

Many or the majority?

Is there a correlations, or are the happenings random? I must ask for your further experience here, I am unaware of oval crop circles being significant in both number and interest in general.

I said many. I couldn't say if they amount to a majority. The general perception appears to be that they are more likely to occur on sloped ground. A slightly elliptical crop circle might be taken for round, until or unless thorough measurements were made. Even if this were done, it might not be widely known. Link: http://www.cropcircleconnector.com/anasazi/CropCirclesAnEllipticalView99.html

[bison]

Conspiracy theory time!

Some crop circles are 'real' in that they are made by aliens, in an effort to communicate. The human made crop circles are actually an effort to communicate back and the tales of mischief and fakery are just a cover! The first steps to overcome communication barriers often involves mimicry.

Seriously though, I'm surprised to see that theory hasn't been put forth before, it does make a certain kind of sense even if it is totally unfounded.

Some crop circles have been made openly by humans as an attempt to communicate with the supposed non-human makers of other crop circles. This is a matter of record, not a theory. There have also been other kinds of attempts at such communications: Bright lights aimed up into the night sky; mental requests and images, even radio transmissions of images, responsive to certain crop circles. Edited January 14, 2013 by bison

[laver]

Some crop circles have been made openly by humans as an attempt to communicate with the supposed non-human makers of other crop circles. This is a matter of record, not a theory. There have also been other kinds of attempts at such communications: Bright lights aimed up into the night sky; mental requests and images, even radio transmissions of images, responsive to certain crop circles.

Maybe we are on a learning curve, because the social shock of learning that there is another dimension to life which is alien/divine would be too great without some sort of lead in? This could explain why there have been well recorded reports of 'strange' objects in the sky? It might be an attempt to open up our minds to new and very different ideas....gently?

[bison]

Maybe we are on a learning curve, because the social shock of learning that there is another dimension to life which is alien/divine would be too great without some sort of lead in? This could explain why there have been well recorded reports of 'strange' objects in the sky? It might be an attempt to open up our minds to new and very different ideas....gently?

I'm inclined to think that is correct. Much has been written about the destructive effects of contact between a technically sophisticated culture and another, less so. We have many examples of this from our own history.

It looks as if we could, sooner or later, start moving out into the galaxy. Given our current attitudes and tendencies, this could be concerning to our stellar neighbors.

So, how could they introduce us to the ways and rules of galactic civilization, without bringing about the collapse of our civilization? Very carefully and very gradually, it seems.

Even today, after decades of what can be interpreted to be fairly intense displays of their existence, some are still able to deny that any such thing has happened. That could be a sign of a remarkable subtlety on the part of those supposed 'others'. Our cultures are now saturated with the idea of outer space visitors, yet those who find it necessary to do so can reject the very idea that we are visited.

[laver]

I'm inclined to think that is correct. Much has been written about the destructive effects of contact between a technically sophisticated culture and another, less so. We have many examples of this from our own history.

It looks as if we could, sooner or later, start moving out into the galaxy. Given our current attitudes and tendencies, this could be concerning to our stellar neighbors.

So, how could they introduce us to the ways and rules of galactic civilization, without bringing about the collapse of our civilization? Very carefully and very gradually, it seems.

Even today, after decades of what can be interpreted to be fairly intense displays of their existence, some are still able to deny that any such thing has happened. That could be a sign of a remarkable subtlety on the part of those supposed 'others'. Our cultures are now saturated with the idea of outer space visitors, yet those who find it necessary to do so can reject the very idea that we are visited.

It would also seem very likely that this is not the first time our planet has been visit from outside, elsewhere or another dimension. It would also seem likely that previous visitations affected the developement of humankind in many ways possiby including by genetic means.

It could be said that our present course of developement is unsustainable in the rate at which we will use up the Earths resources, cause damage to our planet, expand our population and develope and use weapons of mass destruction against each other. So it would appear that something has to change as we seem to be 'on the road to nowhere at the moment'. This is a situation that may have been anticipated by our visitors and they left evidence of their influence in some of the ancient monuments we can still see today.

Many here would seem to be in denial at present and not really considering the evidence in an objective and unbiased way

[psyche101]

It's unfortunate and wrong if some people working on behalf of BLT research submitted fraudulent evidence. Science tends to work on the 'honor system', trusting, or hoping that all its workers will be scrupulously honest. This system is known to have broken down in many instances, across a wide swath of scientific specialities.

I would have to disagree, peer review takes the dishonesty and personal bias out of the equation. There is no maybe's fraudulent evidence was submitted, and I do not feel that the possibility that a volunteer was acting alone and in a dishonest fashion negates the conclusions put forward, as those people witnessed the unsavoury activity.

He claims to have filmed proof that circle plants Levengood said showed good evidence of the genuine

"crop circle making energy" were in fact from a fake circle made by Nancy's own plant samplers.

Maybe Nancy has not yet seen this video, but I find that even worse. If an observer can pick up more information than the project manager I find it hard to put much faith n the project manager.

I just think the field is under a microscope as it is, and has not room for such loose and faulty assumptions. I think there are people that can do much better, It is a shame that funding stands in the way of progress in this instance.

It's not at all clear how closely those who gathered the specimens in this case were associated with BLT research. Volunteers living in the areas where the crop circles occur submit samples, I believe.

I do not feel that a team leader can negate responsibility with the excuse of shifting responsibility. With the above film available I am not sure how they could be unaware of the dubious shenanigans. Failing to provide an honest test is not a mark of confidence I find.

[psyche101]

The big danger is that having taken sides on an issue people can loose sight of the fact that what we should all be seeking is the truth not only bits of the truth that suits our particular side of the argument. It should not be an argument, particularly on an issue like crop circles which with one infallible piece of evidence could change the course of human existence

In agree, however, with incompetent researchers being caught out with their own evidence, sides are a natural eventuality. Unless the process is 100% honest, it is useless and will eventuate in sides. I also think that if the claim has an ounce of credibility, that if the original people leave the findings behind, someone will pick that torch up, like with Plasma research. Empirical Evidence also will not be refuted.

Occam's Razor would indicate that Crop Circles will not change humanity as a whole. Is there any reason to believe that Man is completely blameless in some structures? Rather than some anecdote, has a satellite or aircraft ever spotted a crop circles say in an African Savannah or Jungle clearing or mountain top, some place inaccessible to men generally as opposed to a farmers field?

[psyche101]

I said many. I couldn't say if they amount to a majority. The general perception appears to be that they are more likely to occur on sloped ground. A slightly elliptical crop circle might be taken for round, until or unless thorough measurements were made. Even if this were done, it might not be widely known. Link: http://www.cropcircl...icalView99.html

I have a felling that it is the minority. I am not sure that this qualifies as unusual though, with sloping hillsides, if one was to use a level, an elipse would be the expected outcome. There seems to be no specific correlation between oval formations, like a repeated symbol or a specific size. I would thinks if they are from the same sourve, we would likely see something like this, particularly a repeated symbol if this was communications of some kind.

It appears to be too random to be any sort of specific effort.

[psyche101]

I'm inclined to think that is correct. Much has been written about the destructive effects of contact between a technically sophisticated culture and another, less so. We have many examples of this from our own history.

It looks as if we could, sooner or later, start moving out into the galaxy. Given our current attitudes and tendencies, this could be concerning to our stellar neighbors.

Are you not painting the human races as the "savages" though? Savages do not generally get the upper hand, with perhaps the exception New Zealands Maori people.

And if advanced from us, as is suggested in order to maintain the proposed stealth, would our weapons not look like pop guns? People claim these visitors come here and disable our Nukes, and then say in the same breath the aliens must be afraid of said Nukes?

With a moon base still over a decade away at best, and no plans to visit Europa, or another attempt to traverse interstellar space in the pipeline, and Mars taking current focus, I do not hink we are going any place anytime soon.

So, how could they introduce us to the ways and rules of galactic civilization, without bringing about the collapse of our civilization? Very carefully and very gradually, it seems.

Why bother if an advanced species? If a federation is in place, Earth is more than up to speed on democratic processes, and would have to understand the decisions made. We have been toying with democracy since the days of the Romans. We are not an unreasonable species, well most of us anyway.

Even today, after decades of what can be interpreted to be fairly intense displays of their existence, some are still able to deny that any such thing has happened.

That is purely in the eye of the beholder. It pays to note that with al these anecdotes, not one person has ever provided physical proof. No ET display has ever been made, people have witnessed events and conjured up ET. Not one report ever has been tracked as leaving or entering the solar system, and without doubt, we more than have the means to know if such has happened. It seems to be just basic logic that if we are dealing with spaceships, then really, they ought to be coming from space.

I see dimensions mentioned, but in the Sci Fi sense. Shame that. A great subject that everyone talks about, and nobody understands.

That could be a sign of a remarkable subtlety on the part of those supposed 'others'. Our cultures are now saturated with the idea of outer space visitors, yet those who find it necessary to do so can reject the very idea that we are visited.

We saturated ourselves though. Pop culture. There is no denying that. It's an exciting and grandiose concept. What event could be bigger than knowing others are out there? People want this because it sounds amazing and very cool. Such tends to make one turn a blind eye to evidence that negates an interpretation, and that is where the whole deal falls down I think. We should not even listen to people who start out with "I saw a spacecraft" we should start with people that say something more like "I saw something amazing, and I have no idea what it is". Because that is the truth. Even if there really was a visitation, nobody on earth is qualified to recognise that at a glance. And most sightings are indeed a meere glance.

I do not understand "subtlety" Many wield it as a disclaimer. I find it makes no sense at all. Particularly where an intelligent species is involved. I have not rejected the idea that we are being visited, but I have seen near every single claim fall apart like wet paper. Very few are actually perplexing I find, and the few that remain I feel a a mystery, not ET. If they are ET, then it is not a mystery.

Edited January 15, 2013 by psyche101

[psyche101]

It would also seem very likely that this is not the first time our planet has been visit from outside, elsewhere or another dimension. It would also seem likely that previous visitations affected the developement of humankind in many ways possiby including by genetic means.

That is not the case at all. The fossil record is proof that we did all this here, and by ourselves. Genetic manipulation would stand out like a sore thumb in the fossil record. Changes were transitional, I can actually pick some evidence up and physically donk you on the head with it!! And then say see - refute this! Something I can hold in my hand, not something I heard on TV. And yes, I do have a small collection of fossils. Almost one myself.

It could be said that our present course of developement is unsustainable in the rate at which we will use up the Earths resources, cause damage to our planet, expand our population and develope and use weapons of mass destruction against each other. So it would appear that something has to change as we seem to be 'on the road to nowhere at the moment'. This is a situation that may have been anticipated by our visitors and they left evidence of their influence in some of the ancient monuments we can still see today.

That road to nowhere is filled with alternate energy proposals. Wind, Solar, water Geo. All becoming more popular. As is the hydrogen engine. Its a step in the natural process that is known as an Industrial Revolution. We are hardly on the road to nowhere, we are on a brink, about to make some major changes to our way of life.

We are not killing each other with weapons of mass destruction, we use them in p***ing contests. What was the last WMD used on civillians, in a war, or at all other than for research and testing?

Anticipated by visitors? Crikey Moses. So they are not only telepathic, dimensional, and highly advanced, they read the future too. Good God man, how do you consider such with a straight face, or do you? You do realise it is painfully obvious that you are making this up as you go along, don't you? You deo realise that some great minds have actually put some structured thought into this conundrum?

And no "visitor" left any sort of evidence fid they? What indicated such any more than a lousy TV show form a presenter with a Ground Hog Bad Hair day? There is no evidence there is some half-assed speculation that quite frankly, I find embarrassing to be coming from grown people. The claims have been proven as lies, or outright fabrications. This is how we are supposed to forge ahead? Lies, outlandish assumptions, and bad guesses?

Many here would seem to be in denial at present and not really considering the evidence in an objective and unbiased way

I consider your approach "denial" funnily enough. I think some people are too scared that they invested so much in what they have come to realise is pure fantasy. Put up some "proof" if you can find any, and debate the point, that is why this place exists, not to whine that skeptics dare challenge your "irrefutable imagination". We already have 2 so lost it really is not funny. For your own sake, please, step up to the plate. Take responsibility don't sit in a corner and whine that someone disagrees with you. Debate. If you have fact, it will stand alone.

Edited January 15, 2013 by psyche101

[JesseCuster]

Some crop circles have been made openly by humans as an attempt to communicate with the supposed non-human makers of other crop circles. This is a matter of record, not a theory. There have also been other kinds of attempts at such communications: Bright lights aimed up into the night sky; mental requests and images, even radio transmissions of images, responsive to certain crop circles.

Some crop circles? How many - 1, 2, 10, 50, 100, 1000, etc.? What fraction of actual crop circles are made openly by humans as an attempt to communicate with the non-human makers of other crop circles? What is your source for this info?

Can you identify specific actual crop circles that were made by humans for the explicit purpose of communicating with the non-human makers of other crop circles, and can you back this up with verifiable fact?

Or is this more idle speculation?