Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 8
laver

Crop Circles just one sign of Revelation

1,975 posts in this topic

i've read his website thoroughly, but even at a glance, even anyone with a rudimentary understanding of statistical probability and geometry can spot the holes and errors from five ft away. if you're going to use markers for a ley, ancient markers, then you don't use markers of a relatively young age and then assume they're sited on top of ancient sites on the basis of a few lumps of stone found in the foundations, it's just not how accuracy works, and when you remove these sites, you're left with no more than two sites per ring, and he'd have gotten more if he'd have gone for straight lines, after all, you can't shake a stick on the marlborough downs without hitting some kind of (authentic) antiquity. also, did you notice the amount of number-fudging he came up with to make his pyramid geometry work? rounding numbers up everywhere, trying to make his pyramid fit into his circles by placing it off-centre because it's too small, and even trying to use '666' into his calculations, when the truth is, the original number in the bible was 616, not 666 (it was changed MUCH later to appear more 'mystical'), and that's even assuming the ancient egyptians found it of significance nearly three millennia before the gospels of st john were written.

if you want to know about archeoastronomy, or the relationships of megalithic sites and their landscapes, you'd be far better of reading alexander thom, or aubrey burl, who have both spent decades out in the field, taking meticulous measurements, than some guy who uses flawed data & assumptions in the hope of persuading people to buy his ley-line maps at £25 a pop.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i've read his website thoroughly, but even at a glance, even anyone with a rudimentary understanding of statistical probability and geometry can spot the holes and errors from five ft away. if you're going to use markers for a ley, ancient markers, then you don't use markers of a relatively young age and then assume they're sited on top of ancient sites on the basis of a few lumps of stone found in the foundations, it's just not how accuracy works, and when you remove these sites, you're left with no more than two sites per ring, and he'd have gotten more if he'd have gone for straight lines, after all, you can't shake a stick on the marlborough downs without hitting some kind of (authentic) antiquity. also, did you notice the amount of number-fudging he came up with to make his pyramid geometry work? rounding numbers up everywhere, trying to make his pyramid fit into his circles by placing it off-centre because it's too small, and even trying to use '666' into his calculations, when the truth is, the original number in the bible was 616, not 666 (it was changed MUCH later to appear more 'mystical'), and that's even assuming the ancient egyptians found it of significance nearly three millennia before the gospels of st john were written.

if you want to know about archeoastronomy, or the relationships of megalithic sites and their landscapes, you'd be far better of reading alexander thom, or aubrey burl, who have both spent decades out in the field, taking meticulous measurements, than some guy who uses flawed data & assumptions in the hope of persuading people to buy his ley-line maps at £25 a pop.....

David Furlong wrote about what he had actually found on the Marlborough Downs. You cannot say that some church sites were not based on preChristian sacred sites i.e very ancient Holy ground as it is clear that the early Christian church recommended this practice. Whether the early church was aware that these sacred sites had a geometrical significance is another matter... but they do.

Using links to the Great Pyramid David Furlong identified a focal point, Temple Farm near Marlborough, and further investigation by others shows quite clearly that this focal point is geometrically linked to many sites that align in the Holy Land and to churches or locations chosen by Jesus for messages in the first 3 Chapters of the Book of Revelations. All that is factual information the implications of which require careful and level headed consideration.

Your dismissive anger at these suggestions indicates that these ideas and proposals somehow challenge your view of the world, the past and religion which is unfortunate for you because the geometry is telling us the truth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

What I would like to see is a "reverse crop circle" where the ETs make the crops Longer/Taller and make a symbol that way rather then ruining perfectly good crops with their inane picture puzzles.

I'd like to see them do something really eye catching and impossible by modern techniques.

Edited by DieChecker
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

is there any law or statute by which these crop circle making "aliens" can be fined/sued??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I would like to see is a "reverse crop circle" where the ETs make the crops Longer/Taller and make a symbol that way rather then ruining perfectly good crops with their inane picture puzzles.

I'd like to see them do something really eye catching and impossible by modern techniques.

Who knows what may be next ...?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

is there any law or statute by which these crop circle making "aliens" can be fined/sued??

The circle makers,of human ones, leave no address or contact details and as for the others the crops are not broken so continue to grow...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your dismissive anger at these suggestions indicates that these ideas and proposals somehow challenge your view of the world, the past and religion which is unfortunate for you because the geometry is telling us the truth.

.

*sigh*

'anger'?

'challenging my worldview'?

'my view of the past'?

thing is laver, i've spent 30yrs travelling the country, going to these places, from the orkneys to cornwall, spending time at them, being there, investigating them, seeing their relationships with the land and the skies around them, whereas you've read 'a book'.

and a very poor one at that.

you really know nothing of the places you're speaking of, yet you consider yourself an 'expert' because you honestly believe the fallacies you've been told about by 'a book'

you offer no credible evidence or explanation other than meaningless assumptions, quoted over & over again, from 'a book'.

belief isn't fact, but when YOUR beliefs are challenged by facts, you simply quote the same passages ad nauseum from 'a book'. not even several books either, just one.

it isn't MY worldview that's being challenged here laver, i've spent more years than you've been alive at these places, I know all about them, from having viewed them in the world, but rather it's your belief in 'a book' that's being challenged, but as usual when a 'belief' is challenged by a 'fact' the belief will always close up shop saying 'you're wrong, my book says so', without offering a single, reputable piece of evidence or proof in it's defence.

and as for 'angry', well, that's something else you're way off the mark with too, so I really wouldn't try playing that little game if I was you, as it shows more than a little immaturity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

.

*sigh*

'anger'?

'challenging my worldview'?

'my view of the past'?

thing is laver, i've spent 30yrs travelling the country, going to these places, from the orkneys to cornwall, spending time at them, being there, investigating them, seeing their relationships with the land and the skies around them, whereas you've read 'a book'.

and a very poor one at that.

you really know nothing of the places you're speaking of, yet you consider yourself an 'expert' because you honestly believe the fallacies you've been told about by 'a book'

you offer no credible evidence or explanation other than meaningless assumptions, quoted over & over again, from 'a book'.

belief isn't fact, but when YOUR beliefs are challenged by facts, you simply quote the same passages ad nauseum from 'a book'. not even several books either, just one.

it isn't MY worldview that's being challenged here laver, i've spent more years than you've been alive at these places, I know all about them, from having viewed them in the world, but rather it's your belief in 'a book' that's being challenged, but as usual when a 'belief' is challenged by a 'fact' the belief will always close up shop saying 'you're wrong, my book says so', without offering a single, reputable piece of evidence or proof in it's defence.

and as for 'angry', well, that's something else you're way off the mark with too, so I really wouldn't try playing that little game if I was you, as it shows more than a little immaturity.

Very sorry for you that in your obviously extensive look at ancient sites you missed the point. David Furlong's important book is just one part of the story but very significant because it gives us the focal point for a very ancient design of landscape geometry which was clearly marked out over great distances and related to the Holy Land from long before the time of Abraham. It also seems to have been clearly linked to the New Testament stories of Jesus much of which has been covered up for a very long time. But truth will out as I expect you will soon see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is still Trespass, isn't it? You can't just walk onto anyones land and start stomping out circles and squares.... Unless the UK is that much different from the US?

Suppose putting bear traps out in the fields would be against the law also??? You'd only need 3 or 4. Once someone steps in one, they'll not be back to your fields....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is still Trespass, isn't it? You can't just walk onto anyones land and start stomping out circles and squares.... Unless the UK is that much different from the US?

oh of course, yes, but the "Cereologists", as they pretentiously call themselves, aren't othered about that, if they can show the world how clever they are and have a good laugh at how they get all the gullbile people talking about ETs and Revelation. Like with all vandals.

Suppose putting bear traps out in the fields would be against the law also??? You'd only need 3 or 4. Once someone steps in one, they'll not be back to your fields....

I recommend anti-personnel mines.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is still Trespass, isn't it? You can't just walk onto anyones land and start stomping out circles and squares.... Unless the UK is that much different from the US?

Suppose putting bear traps out in the fields would be against the law also??? You'd only need 3 or 4. Once someone steps in one, they'll not be back to your fields....

There has been one person I believe who was taken to court and fined

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

oh of course, yes, but the "Cereologists", as they pretentiously call themselves, aren't othered about that, if they can show the world how clever they are and have a good laugh at how they get all the gullbile people talking about ETs and Revelation. Like with all vandals.

I recommend anti-personnel mines.

This would all depend on how many are manmade and how many may not be, there are lots of signs of that !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Very sorry for you that in your obviously extensive look at ancient sites you missed the point. David Furlong's important book is just one part of the story but very significant because it gives us the focal point for a very ancient design of landscape geometry which was clearly marked out over great distances and related to the Holy Land from long before the time of Abraham. It also seems to have been clearly linked to the New Testament stories of Jesus much of which has been covered up for a very long time. But truth will out as I expect you will soon see.

.

missed the point?

how on earth do you come to that conclusion??

I understand full well the importance of sacred landscapes & archeoastronomy, and how they relate to each other. for example, spending the last lunar standstill up in aberdeen to watch the moon roll across a stone circle's recumbent stone, and UNDERSTANDING WHY the circle & its recumbent were placed there.

it had nothing to do with being connected to anything else other than the ideal place in the landscape to view the phenomenon.

or watching the previous one at the small stone circle opposite robin hood's stride in derbyshire, and UNDERSTANDING WHY the circle was placed where it was, not because it was connected by leys to machu picchu, but as a gathering point for the local tribe to watch the local shaman, framed between the two natural rock pillars of the stride, as the moon set precisely where he said it would, behind him, before it started its 9yr journey back the other way.

you see laver, I UNDERSTAND the purpose of a sacred landscape, and why it's there, what it meant to the people who built it, and it has nothing to do with space aliens telling the egyptians where to put the pyramids so they could play a global game of join-the-dots with a farm(??) in wiltshire (as opposed to the dozens of megalithic sites in the area), so I don't think i've missed the point.

at all.

far from it in fact.

rather, I think you've been misled into putting all your faith into a book written by a charlatan who's sole motive is profiteering.

'very clearly marked out'??

'it would seem'??

again, you offer nothing more than proofless conjecture & maybe's.

somehow, I don't think i'm the one who's 'missed the point'.

and as for the truth willing out, I hope you brought a good (ie-different) book with you, as it seems you're in for a very long wait.....

Edited by shrooma

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

.

missed the point?

how on earth do you come to that conclusion??

I understand full well the importance of sacred landscapes & archeoastronomy, and how they relate to each other. for example, spending the last lunar standstill up in aberdeen to watch the moon roll across a stone circle's recumbent stone, and UNDERSTANDING WHY the circle & its recumbent were placed there.

it had nothing to do with being connected to anything else other than the ideal place in the landscape to view the phenomenon.

or watching the previous one at the small stone circle opposite robin hood's stride in derbyshire, and UNDERSTANDING WHY the circle was placed where it was, not because it was connected by leys to machu picchu, but as a gathering point for the local tribe to watch the local shaman, framed between the two natural rock pillars of the stride, as the moon set precisely where he said it would, behind him, before it started its 9yr journey back the other way.

you see laver, I UNDERSTAND the purpose of a sacred landscape, and why it's there, what it meant to the people who built it, and it has nothing to do with space aliens telling the egyptians where to put the pyramids so they could play a global game of join-the-dots with a farm(??) in wiltshire (as opposed to the dozens of megalithic sites in the area), so I don't think i've missed the point.

at all.

far from it in fact.

rather, I think you've been misled into putting all your faith into a book written by a charlatan who's sole motive is profiteering.

'very clearly marked out'??

'it would seem'??

again, you offer nothing more than proofless conjecture & maybe's.

somehow, I don't think i'm the one who's 'missed the point'.

and as for the truth willing out, I hope you brought a good (ie-different) book with you, as it seems you're in for a very long wait.....

There is really no justification for calling David Furlong the author of The Keys to the Temple a 'charlatan' because you do not agree with his geometric discoveries and also inferring on another thread that I started about a book by Professor Richard Dawkins ' The God Delusion' that I had not even read it and was misquoting from Google.

I think the anger you express will tell many readers of your posts much about how you try to personalise discussions and insult and displays your basic insecurities and weaknesses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is really no justification for calling David Furlong the author of The Keys to the Temple a 'charlatan' because you do not agree with his geometric discoveries and also inferring on another thread that I started about a book by Professor Richard Dawkins ' The God Delusion' that I had not even read it and was misquoting from Google.

I think the anger you express will tell many readers of your posts much about how you try to personalise discussions and insult and displays your basic insecurities and weaknesses.

So basically, reading something in a Book trumps first-hand experience and research any day, then. Have you researched Professor David Furlong's qualifications and his experience at studying this subject, so you're satisfied that he is one of the world's leading authorities on the subject, or do you just believe him because he wrote a best selling Book?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So basically, reading something in a Book trumps first-hand experience and research any day, then. Have you researched Professor David Furlong's qualifications and his experience at studying this subject, so you're satisfied that he is one of the world's leading authorities on the subject, or do you just believe him because he wrote a best selling Book?

No I did not research David Furlong's qualifications; I researched his findings and found some very good geometric reasons why his focal point at Temple Farm was highly significant to great circle bearings to the Holy Land including the churches of Revelation sites chosen by Jesus in what is now Turkey. As the Temple Farm focal point is also at the very heart of crop circle activity in the UK and the world it is a reasonable question to ask .....Crop Circles just one sign of Revelation

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is really no justification for calling David Furlong the author of The Keys to the Temple a 'charlatan' because you do not agree with his geometric discoveries and also inferring on another thread that I started about a book by Professor Richard Dawkins ' The God Delusion' that I had not even read it and was misquoting from Google.

I think the anger you express will tell many readers of your posts much about how you try to personalise discussions and insult and displays your basic insecurities and weaknesses.

.

there you go again with the anger thing. *yawn*

i'm neither insecure, nor weak, and as for insults, please, justify that statement by providing evidence of me insulting you. you can't make accusations of that nature without justification, so try not to take too long about it.

as for the dawkins thing, I accused you of nothing, I asked you a question, a valid question, because the statements you were making bore no relation whatsoever to the book, at least not the copy of it I own and have read several times.

do you understand what the word 'charlatan' means? when a person spouts uninformed, unfounded, baseless untruths purely for financial gain, preying on the ignorance of others, that makes them a charlatan, so I have every right to call him one.

and I really, really wouldn't try playing the 'what other people think of you' card if I were you, as 800 likes from 1000 posts pretty much speaks for itself.

so, when you feel ready to drop the petulance and start answering questions with facts, and proof, not just quoting passages from 'a book', i'll be waiting, that's what discussion forums are about after all.

being able to drive elephants through the holes in your arguments doesn't make me 'angry', it just means your arguments are seriously flawed, and instead of moaning about me doing it, you should be attempting to counter me with solid reasoning, and proofs, not maybe's or seems likes or possibly's, because they just crumble under scrutiny.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I researched his findings and found some very good geometric reasons why his focal point at Temple Farm was highly significant to great circle bearings to the Holy Land

.

please explain these reasons?

with something akin to precision if you would?

kindly explain the geometry please, and feel free to use as much mathematics as you need to convincingly illustrate your points, as I hold a degree in two seperate engineering diciplines, so i'm pretty sure i'll be able to understand them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

.

there you go again with the anger thing. *yawn*

i'm neither insecure, nor weak, and as for insults, please, justify that statement by providing evidence of me insulting you. you can't make accusations of that nature without justification, so try not to take too long about it.

as for the dawkins thing, I accused you of nothing, I asked you a question, a valid question, because the statements you were making bore no relation whatsoever to the book, at least not the copy of it I own and have read several times.

do you understand what the word 'charlatan' means? when a person spouts uninformed, unfounded, baseless untruths purely for financial gain, preying on the ignorance of others, that makes them a charlatan, so I have every right to call him one.

and I really, really wouldn't try playing the 'what other people think of you' card if I were you, as 800 likes from 1000 posts pretty much speaks for itself.

so, when you feel ready to drop the petulance and start answering questions with facts, and proof, not just quoting passages from 'a book', i'll be waiting, that's what discussion forums are about after all.

being able to drive elephants through the holes in your arguments doesn't make me 'angry', it just means your arguments are seriously flawed, and instead of moaning about me doing it, you should be attempting to counter me with solid reasoning, and proofs, not maybe's or seems likes or possibly's, because they just crumble under scrutiny.

Quote

'do you understand what the word 'charlatan' means? when a person spouts uninformed, unfounded, baseless untruths purely for financial gain, preying on the ignorance of others, that makes them a charlatan, so I have every right to call him one.'

Yes I do understand...David Furlong wrote a book that you have not even read but because it challenges your ideas of the ancient world he is a 'charalatan'......I hope any other readers of this post will draw their own conclusions........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Quote

Yes I do understand...David Furlong wrote a book that you have not even read but because it challenges your ideas of the ancient world he is a 'charalatan'......I hope any other readers of this post will draw their own conclusions........

.

really, that's all you can come up with.

1) I read all the relevant 'geometry' of his from the link to his website that you posted, and then proceeded to point out the many flaws & untruths in his argument, which you then didn't even reply to, you just blatently ignored it.

why was that? hmm?

was it because you don't actually understand the subject at hand? and the only response you're capable of giving is by directly quoting the parts of his theory that I showed you to be flawed, which wouldn't work, obviously, so you just ignored the question?

2) I asked you to provide proof of the accusation you made whereby i'd been insulting you, and i'd still like to see your proof if you don't mind.

3) david furlong's book isn't capable of challenging ANYONE'S ideas of the ancient world except those who know nothing whatsoever of it, and unfortunately for him, I do, so no, it doesn't challenge me at all.

4) I asked you to explain the geometrical findings from the book, using precision and mathematics, not direct quotes or conjecture.

i'd still like you to.

5) I asked you to stop being petulant.

i'd still like you to.

6) you really shouldn't try and speculate about what other readers of the board are thinking, you may be upset by your findings.

6) please try to stay on topic instead of moaning about people who are quite reasonably finding fault with your argument.

7) have a nice day.

:-)

Edited by shrooma

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

oh of course, yes, but the "Cereologists", as they pretentiously call themselves, aren't othered about that, if they can show the world how clever they are and have a good laugh at how they get all the gullbile people talking about ETs and Revelation. Like with all vandals.

I recommend anti-personnel mines.

Gosh, if you can start your own field /and/ name it, I want to be a cerealogist. I can write my dissertation on the history of Fruity Marshmallow Krispies!

--Dr. Jaylemurph, Cerealogist

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To date over 10,000 views on this thread and quite a few comments many from debunkers who don't want to believe in the mystery and possible messages in some crop designs or in the idea that there will some time be a Revelation. But despite the flak the question remains.............. are Crop Circles one sign that this is a time of Revelation ? read on... we shall see....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

10,000 views, only 300 comments, half of them by you spamming the same response over & over again, and you STILL refuse to answer the questions I put to you.

speaks volumes does that laver, volumes.

hard to call anyone 'debunkers' when you offer nothing to debunk.

i'm still waiting for your evidence that I was insulting you.

you made the accusation, lie should I say, in a pitiful attempt to garner sympathy for yourself, so I want to see your proof.

or are you just going to ignore the request yet again, until you force me to report you?

or you could always just pack the 'chucking your rattle outta the pram' attitude in and apologise.....

i'm a big boy now laver, and I don't bear grudges, that's something to remember.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

10,000 views was mentioned because it shows considerable interest in crop designs, some of which would seem to be not manmade, and if containing messages may indicate that this is a special period of time, maybe a time of Revelation. Wiltshire is the world centre of crop circle activity. The ancient landscape geometry proposed from Temple Farm in Wiltshire ( Latitude 51 degrees 27 minutes N, Longitude 1 degree 48 minutes W) gives great circle bearing lines that align many ancient sacred sites in the Holy Land and Eastern Mediterranean and identifies, beyond all reasonable doubt, church locations chosen by Jesus for messages as detailed in the first 3 Chapters of the book of Revelations. Chapter 1 verse 20 of Revelations tells us there is a 'secret meaning' in the churches chosen by Christ. This bearing line leaves present day Turkey and crosses the Med to the Holy Land at the Sea of Galilee going to Mount Arbel next to Migdal or Magdala with its close links to Mary Magdalene, Mary of Magdala.

It is Mary who directs the disicples to a mountain in Galilee to meet Jesus, Mount Arbel?, and at this mountain Jesus gives his 'Great Commission' and talks about the 'End of Time' (Matthew 28)

The reference to the 'End of Time' would suggest 'Revelation Time' and Mount Arbel is directly linked by the landscape geometry to the churches noted at the start of the book of Revelations

If you are interested, and many people obviously are, check it out it is all true and worth thinking about

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Hey laver,

My apologies for the late reply.

Your follow up to my prior post is quite interesting. I was not aware of the biblical similarities that you've referenced and the alighnment aspect. Thanks for that.

As for those who imply that such circles as such as the ' binary ' circle were stampeded by men with boards, they obviously have no knowledge if the vast amount of study AND the results which certain universities have put fourth tremendous efforts in scientific research including MIT. Quite impressive no?

The conclusions on this one binary circle in particular among quite a few others are determined to be that which is NOT man made.

In one very interesting case was the biological studies indicating the plant stems were heated in a way which stretched the stems which can only be done with a plasma heat source and we've yet to determine just what. The stretching was at the very base of the stems. Further more studies showed that weeks later the stem still survived. This is implausible and not possible had it been done by men with planks.The other obvious was that the seed heads upon compression were still in tact. This is absolutely impossible had it been pressed with a board as mentioned above. The seeds would have fallen off. The breakage of stems even when done to unripened srems are synonymous with man made circles.There is no explanation for this or as in the case above. Let alone the unexplained radiation presence.

Naturally the same people who cry, wheres the evidence, lack any logic when it comes to doing any study to find the evidence which is clearly quite accessible had they had any interest on thr subject, prior to leaving there 'know it all' contributions to topics in which they're soley speculative of if any aside from having an obvious alterior motive to play out the duty of debunking.

Edited by Sheep Smart

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 8

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.