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 0
laver

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

349 posts in this topic

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?

The focal point of crop design activity is the county of Wiltshire in southern Britain which is also the center of the most important prehistoric sites in the country. This by comparison to say States in the US of A is a tiny plot of land. One design that appeared in broad daylight next to Stonehenge caused a traffic jam with people stopping to look. A plane flying over the area confirmed the area was clear just prior to the appearance of the design and people at Stonehenge, including guards, saw no human activity in the field when the design appeared. Stonehenge like Avebury are ancient sites where crop designs often appear. If these crop designs are indeed messages linked to our distant past they may be positioned to show us just that.

It would take only one well recorded piece of evidence, maybe on live TV, to prove that we are dealing with a phenomena that in some cases is not of human origin.

If something like this happens it would have very profound implications and the evidence is mounting every year

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

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?

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.

The fossil record is not at all complete and new proposals are constantly being proposed for our origins.

I would have thought you would have been aware that WMD were used at the end of the WW2 and have now spread and are hugely more powerful.

It has been said that human population increase is an even bigger threat than global warming.

There are many grave issues that face us at this time and will have to be faced by our children and grandchildren

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
One design that appeared in broad daylight next to Stonehenge caused a traffic jam with people stopping to look. A plane flying over the area confirmed the area was clear just prior to the appearance of the design and people at Stonehenge, including guards, saw no human activity in the field when the design appeared. Stonehenge like Avebury are ancient sites where crop designs often appear. If these crop designs are indeed messages linked to our distant past they may be positioned to show us just that.
You have, of course, evidence of this, and it's not just made up bull**** we have to take for granted? :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The focal point of crop design activity is the county of Wiltshire in southern Britain which is also the center of the most important prehistoric sites in the country.

About 2/3rds if my sources are right? How does that not indicate a fabricated source? Again, why that point? If it is a message nobody has picked up on it for three hundred years. It seems a bit stupid to keep trying the same method that does not work.

This by comparison to say States in the US of A is a tiny plot of land. One design that appeared in broad daylight next to Stonehenge caused a traffic jam with people stopping to look. A plane flying over the area confirmed the area was clear just prior to the appearance of the design and people at Stonehenge, including guards, saw no human activity in the field when the design appeared. Stonehenge like Avebury are ancient sites where crop designs often appear. If these crop designs are indeed messages linked to our distant past they may be positioned to show us just that.

Overnight I was lead to believe, and who saw it "appear" or do you mean when people "noticed" it? Did anyone so much as claim to see the process of the creation of the thing unfold? What about satellite Any proof this instantly appeared? It's quite a claim to make without any backup, and a big ask to believe at face value.

It would take only one well recorded piece of evidence, maybe on live TV, to prove that we are dealing with a phenomena that in some cases is not of human origin.

If something like this happens it would have very profound implications and the evidence is mounting every year

Yes it would, and with 250 examples a year, it seems inconceivable that such has not been forthcoming in the history of the claim. However, men have managed to create such designs in one night, as is suggested is impossible. That is Occams Razor being applied. Can you do this? Why yes I can, just watch me.

I do not understand why people find the ideal so perplexing, after a quick read, I feel I could make my own Crop Circle in one night. It's all method.

Edited by psyche101

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[/background][/size][/font][/color]You have, of course, evidence of this, and it's not just made up bull**** we have to take for granted? :)

Yup, Stonehenge 1996 called the Julia Set lovely photo and details on the Lucy Pringle site but other records on the internet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The fossil record is not at all complete and new proposals are constantly being proposed for our origins.

New species are added to a known tree. The record is not re-written regularly. There is not a hole for Aliens, or indeed, even a totally new type of species to exist. We all have common ancestors.

There are not new proposals for our origins, additional concepts such as Panspermia have been postulated, but do not support any Aliens Hypothesis, nor the AA nonsense. They offer an alternative ideal for that initial spark. Genetic manipulation offers a recognisable leap, as we have noted with our own efforts to alter things like Plants - notably corn. Such does not exist in he fossil record, and with what we have, there is no room nor need for such a hypothetical leap that is imagined "might have happened". What is wrong with what we know? Why make stuff up and hope it might be true?

I would have thought you would have been aware that WMD were used at the end of the WW2 and have now spread and are hugely more powerful.

When was that? The Early 40's. What does that have to do with the long history of UFO's? UFO reports predate this. And there is no specific interest in military sites. They get visited as often as a farmer is, probably less if I look closely at the statistics. So we saw UFO's long before, and after the Atomic tests and usage, but they are related? How so?

It has been said that human population increase is an even bigger threat than global warming.

Agreed, Australia is seriously considering throwing ou the model of a "Big Australia" and staying near our curent population count to maintain a certain level of lifestyle. What on earth does our economics have to do with Aliens?

There are many grave issues that face us at this time and will have to be faced by our children and grandchildren

Indeed, and we are trying to fix things before they all break. As I said, Solar, Wind, Hydro, Geo, Helium, all of them are on the books, and have been for decades. Again, what has that to do with Aliens?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

About 2/3rds if my sources are right? How does that not indicate a fabricated source? Again, why that point? If it is a message nobody has picked up on it for three hundred years. It seems a bit stupid to keep trying the same method that does not work.

Overnight I was lead to believe, and who saw it "appear" or do you mean when people "noticed" it? Did anyone so much as claim to see the process of the creation of the thing unfold? What about satellite Any proof this instantly appeared? It's quite a claim to make without any backup, and a big ask to believe at face value.

Yes it would, and with 250 examples a year, it seems inconceivable that such has not been forthcoming in the history of the claim. However, men have managed to create such designs in one night, as is suggested is impossible. That is Occams Razor being applied. Can you do this? Why yes I can, just watch me.

I do not understand why people find the ideal so perplexing, after a quick read, I feel I could make my own Crop Circle in one night. It's all method.

Stonehenge 1996 called the Julia Set lovely photo and details on the Lucy Pringle site but other records on the internet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why make stuff up and hope it might be true?

Oooh! Oooh! I can answer that one!

Buuuuut I won't. There have been too many whiny martyrs around here lately as it is.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stonehenge 1996 called the Julia Set lovely photo and details on the Lucy Pringle site but other records on the internet

There are quite a few modeled on the Julia set, thank you for the date, that narrows down your example. A larger Julia Set was found some weeks later, but not discussed as much as this one, I assume because of the Doctors statement. That seems to be what everyone is hanging their hat on. Circle makers however not only have replicated it, but claim they know who made that one, and state that the pilot and doctor are most definitely wrong about it's sudden appearance. And considering they were flying uneven terrain later in the day, that seems really quite possible.

I pointed out that the Stonehenge Julia Set had evidently appeared in broad daylight, in a span of perhaps 45 minutes.

RD: "That isn't true," Rod insisted. "It was made the previous night, by three people, in about two and three-quarters hours, starting around 2:45 am (on Sunday morning, July 7). It was there all that day. When that doctor flew over, he just didn't see it the first time. That happens a lot. His report was wrong. He just didn't see it."

ML: "You mean, it sat there next to that highway all day, and no one saw it? Are you kidding?"

RD: "If you went there, you'd see how the field slopes down and away from the road. The formation was in a kind of bowl, below the level of the road. Going by in a car, you couldn't see it. You would have to get out and walk toward it and look down into that bowl-shaped area to see it."

ML: "But there is a lot of air traffic in that area. Planes must have flown over it many times that day."

RD: "Sure, but lots of them just didn't see it, and the rest didn't think to report it, until that doctor reported it in the evening. I know this can happen, because I've made quite a few big formations and then waited for a day, even several days, before they're discovered."

ML: "OK, so you say that the Stonehenge Julia Set was created in less than three hours, in pitch darkness, by three people, and you know who they are...

RD: "Yes"

ML: "Can you tell me how this was done? This wasn't a free-hand glyph. They must have had a diagram or something..."

RD: "Yes, they had a diagram."

ML: "It has a very precise geometry, following a Fibonacci series..."

RD: "Well, for the first three-quarters of its arc, it does follow a Fibonacci series,* but the last quarter doesn't. It just becomes a circular arc."

That stopped me for a moment, because it was such a precise bit of information, so confidently delivered. Sensing my interest, he asked for a piece of paper from my note pad and drew a rough sketch.

RD: "Even if I didn't know who did this, I would have guessed it was made by people because of how they did it," he explained. "You start with the large central circle, which is placed right next to a tram line. People asked why it had the large central circle, which is a little out of place in a Julia Set. Simple. To avoid damaging surrounding crop, you have to have a large central area already layed down, from which you can measure out diameters to other parts of the formation. After making the first circle, they measured out a work line for the rest of the formation. This is how the spiral was made, drawing portions of the arc from different center points inside that first circle, using a tape measure." He continued making his sketch as he spoke. "You keep moving the center point around that first circle, and lengthen the tape for each new part of the arc. You make the work line by just stepping down the grain with your feet, just a thin line. All the centers of all the main circles in the formation are along that line."

I began to realize that he was describing a perfectly feasible way to create such a complex formation. Looking at a good photo of the Stonehenge Julia Set after our discussion, I could clearly see what appeared to be the work line along the spine of the formation. Why would a paranormal force -- or an alien -- need such a line? Still, even for seasoned circle makers, the Julia Sets would be a major challenge (if they're really man-made). But Rod assured me that he and the others had had plenty of practice.

RD: "I can definitely account for most of the major pictograms [in England] from 1991 on," he said. "I myself made several dozen of them, although only a handful this year."

LINK

However, lets say the circle-makers are way of the mark this time, and he is making this up, and has not clue at all. Lets say the witnesses were right on the money, and for fun, lets say a video existed that corroborated what they saw, and it happened just how they describe it.

That still sounds like natural phenomena, and nothing at all like Aliens, or an Alien influence. And considering the long history, Aliens or communications seem less likely all the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are quite a few modeled on the Julia set, thank you for the date, that narrows down your example. A larger Julia Set was found some weeks later, but not discussed as much as this one, I assume because of the Doctors statement. That seems to be what everyone is hanging their hat on. Circle makers however not only have replicated it, but claim they know who made that one, and state that the pilot and doctor are most definitely wrong about it's sudden appearance. And considering they were flying uneven terrain later in the day, that seems really quite possible.

LINK

However, lets say the circle-makers are way of the mark this time, and he is making this up, and has not clue at all. Lets say the witnesses were right on the money, and for fun, lets say a video existed that corroborated what they saw, and it happened just how they describe it.

That still sounds like natural phenomena, and nothing at all like Aliens, or an Alien influence. And considering the long history, Aliens or communications seem less likely all the time.

It really is take your pick time on that one, lots of witnesses against one who said he did not make but knew who did?

Not sure what you mean by 'natural phenomena' are you saying it was created by wind, some vortex or other?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It really is take your pick time on that one, lots of witnesses against one who said he did not make but knew who did?

Mots of anonymous witnesses I find the same as no witnesses. The main one being the doctor, who gets the attention of the recollections. All in all, two witnesses came forth, one who siad it was not there and then it was, and one who said she saw it happen.

As described earlier, the terrain possibly can account for this. It seems worthwhile considering this. Not the first time that field has had a prank played in it either.

1996-035-StrawhengeCuttingC-572x305.jpg

Not sure what you mean by 'natural phenomena' are you saying it was created by wind, some vortex or other?

What is the description? Wind and mist swirling.

Lucy writes, “She mentioned that when people see maybe two cars or more pulled in

and looking down into the field, other cars stop and gradually the traffic builds up

and more and more cars draw in to have a look.” What the group saw is described:

“There was an apparition, an isolated mist over it (the formation) and as the circle

was getting bigger the mist was rising above the circle. As the mist rose it got bigger

and the corn circle got bigger. There was a mist was about 2-3 feet off the ground

and it was sort of spinning around and on the ground a circular shape was

appearing which seemed to get bigger and bigger as simultaneously the mist gets

bigger and bigger and swirled faster. It was gradual and you are standing there and

you are thinking what is going on and everyone is discussing it and more and more

traffic is building up and everything and you just think that all the time you don't

really realise what is happening and then you think then that's it and the thing is

getting bigger and you are thinking of the beginning and end. But you don't realise

what you are looking at. I didn’t understand what was happening.”

LINK

I honestly do not see how the description is indicating anything but natural phenomena.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mots of anonymous witnesses I find the same as no witnesses. The main one being the doctor, who gets the attention of the recollections. All in all, two witnesses came forth, one who siad it was not there and then it was, and one who said she saw it happen.

As described earlier, the terrain possibly can account for this. It seems worthwhile considering this. Not the first time that field has had a prank played in it either.

1996-035-StrawhengeCuttingC-572x305.jpg

What is the description? Wind and mist swirling.

LINK

I honestly do not see how the description is indicating anything but natural phenomena.

Amazing design for 'natural phenomena' without a designer present in some form but like many aspects of crop designs people can look at the evidence and make up their own minds. Of course if there is a 'foreign' designer and creator of some of these designs and there are messages in them, to dismiss them might be a great mistake.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Amazing design for 'natural phenomena' without a designer present in some form but like many aspects of crop designs people can look at the evidence and make up their own minds. Of course if there is a 'foreign' designer and creator of some of these designs and there are messages in them, to dismiss them might be a great mistake.

Design aside, if the witness is telling the truth (and there is only one who has come forward who claimed to the the formation actually happen) and, giving her the benefit of the doubt, despite common sense, what does her description say? Wind and mist. How does one get aliens out of wind and mist?

I am not even giving the complexity a thought just yet, if it is at all possible that what she has witnessed can happen, then I want to know why. And if you can tell me why that train of thought should include aliens, I would be appreciate your thoughts. But not excuses, structured thought as to how you would honestly present this as alien influence.

She does not say it was exhaust from a spaceship, not does she say a spaceship was to be seen, she says:

There was a mist was about 2-3 feet off the ground and it was sort of spinning around and on the ground a circular shape was appearing which seemed to get bigger and bigger as simultaneously the mist gets bigger and bigger and swirled faster.

​Again, this is giving a sole witness the benefit of the doubt. Where is ET? Amazing things happen in nature, have you heard of Min Min Lights? Naga Fireballs? Mammatus Clouds, Red Tides, Penitentes, Sailing Stones, Fire Whirls, Ice Circles or Gravity Whirls?

Nature rocks. Nature is amazing.

Gravity Whirls

a426_gravitywaves.jpg

Fire Tornado

a426_firewhirls.jpg

Supercells

a426_supercells.jpg

Mammatus Clouds

a426_mammatus.jpg

Penitents

a426_penitentes.jpg

As such, maybe a mist as the culprit is possible, I will listen to any decent proposal, but I would like to see some solid proof, not a sole and credulous claim.

Seriously, the world is pretty fascinating without imaginative manipulation.

Edited by psyche101
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Design aside, if the witness is telling the truth (and there is only one who has come forward who claimed to the the formation actually happen) and, giving her the benefit of the doubt, despite common sense, what does her description say? Wind and mist. How does one get aliens out of wind and mist?

I am not even giving the complexity a thought just yet, if it is at all possible that what she has witnessed can happen, then I want to know why. And if you can tell me why that train of thought should include aliens, I would be appreciate your thoughts. But not excuses, structured thought as to how you would honestly present this as alien influence.

She does not say it was exhaust from a spaceship, not does she say a spaceship was to be seen, she says:

There was a mist was about 2-3 feet off the ground and it was sort of spinning around and on the ground a circular shape was appearing which seemed to get bigger and bigger as simultaneously the mist gets bigger and bigger and swirled faster.

​Again, this is giving a sole witness the benefit of the doubt. Where is ET? Amazing things happen in nature, have you heard of Min Min Lights? Naga Fireballs? Mammatus Clouds, Red Tides, Penitentes, Sailing Stones, Fire Whirls, Ice Circles or Gravity Whirls?

Nature rocks. Nature is amazing.

Gravity Whirls

a426_gravitywaves.jpg

Fire Tornado

a426_firewhirls.jpg

Supercells

a426_supercells.jpg

Mammatus Clouds

a426_mammatus.jpg

Penitents

a426_penitentes.jpg

As such, maybe a mist as the culprit is possible, I will listen to any decent proposal, but I would like to see some solid proof, not a sole and credulous claim.

Seriously, the world is pretty fascinating without imaginative manipulation.

A complex design like this one needs a designer, I think most people would agree. As human involvement can be reasonably excluded on the basis of the facts of the case some non human creator is implied. If you think 'nature' as an instrument of a deity I would agee that this is a possibility, some 'foreign' intelligence must have been involved and we do not yet know what that was. This is not a one off as the appearance of these designs is a frequent occurance particularly in the county of Wiltshire in the UK, 69 examples of human and non human crop designs last summer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A complex design like this one needs a designer, I think most people would agree.

I can confidently say "we all agree" on that.

As human involvement can be reasonably excluded on the basis of the facts of the case some non human creator is implied.

I think we can reasonably exclude aliens on the basis of the facts of the case that many humans have admitted to making them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can confidently say "we all agree" on that.

I think we can reasonably exclude aliens on the basis of the facts of the case that many humans have admitted to making them.

Therein lies the rub no?

It doesn't matter one whit if humans did or didn't create any given crop circle or if it could be proven one way or another. If someone claims aliens then that someone needs to prove aliens regardless of human capabilities. It just detracts and distracts from the main argument (the ETH) when one focuses on disproving human involvement. The pro-alien crop circle crowd needs to not worry so much about negative evidence and start to bring some supportive evidence* to the table.

*And by supportive evidence I mean something unquestionably alien, or at least pretty damn close.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can confidently say "we all agree" on that.

I think we can reasonably exclude aliens on the basis of the facts of the case that many humans have admitted to making them.

Regarding the matter of Occum's Razor there are too many unanswered questions if we just said 'all crop designs are designed and made by humans', too many facts about the matter that would not fit this proposal. So it is a matter of each person's individual mind set as to the probabilty either way. Arthur C Clarke said that the chances of Earth having been visited from outside during its long history far outweighed the chances that it had not. So if we have inexplicable signs that we may be getting messages from outside this orb of ours and human creation does not fit the facts of the matter to say that these come from elsewhere is the simplest and most straightforward answer and hence quite in keeping with the principle of Occum's Razor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Therein lies the rub no?

It doesn't matter one whit if humans did or didn't create any given crop circle or if it could be proven one way or another. If someone claims aliens then that someone needs to prove aliens regardless of human capabilities. It just detracts and distracts from the main argument (the ETH) when one focuses on disproving human involvement. The pro-alien crop circle crowd needs to not worry so much about negative evidence and start to bring some supportive evidence* to the table.

*And by supportive evidence I mean something unquestionably alien, or at least pretty damn close.

Regarding the matter of Occum's Razor there are too many unanswered questions if we just said 'all crop designs are designed and made by humans', too many facts about the matter that would not fit this proposal. So it is a matter of each person's individual mind set as to the probabilty either way. Arthur C Clarke said that the chances of Earth having been visited from outside during its long history far outweighed the chances that it had not. So if we have inexplicable signs that we may be getting messages from outside this orb of ours and human creation does not fit the facts of the matter to say that these come from elsewhere is the simplest and most straightforward answer and hence quite in keeping with the principle of Occum's Razor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding the matter of Occum's Razor there are too many unanswered questions if we just said 'all crop designs are designed and made by humans', too many facts about the matter that would not fit this proposal. So it is a matter of each person's individual mind set as to the probabilty either way. Arthur C Clarke said that the chances of Earth having been visited from outside during its long history far outweighed the chances that it had not. So if we have inexplicable signs that we may be getting messages from outside this orb of ours and human creation does not fit the facts of the matter to say that these come from elsewhere is the simplest and most straightforward answer and hence quite in keeping with the principle of Occum's Razor.

Occam's Razor is "whatever takes the least number of assumptions".

Man did it:

Assumption: all of them done by men.

One Assumption.

Aliens did it:

Assumption: aliens exist.

Assumption: aliens have come, and are coming, here.

Assumption: aliens are writing messages on our wheat.

Three assumptions.

I wonder which one is Occam's Razor here....

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

too many facts about the matter that would not fit this proposal.

what facts?

So it is a matter of each person's individual mind set as to the probabilty either way. Arthur C Clarke said that the chances of Earth having been visited from outside during its long history far outweighed the chances that it had not.

While I have full respect for Arthur as a author.. you need to remember.. he writes science fiction.. and its all based around aliens visiting us.. so of course he would have that opinion..

So if we have inexplicable signs that we may be getting messages from outside this orb of ours

no we dont.. what we have is people making the circles and you guys just cannot believe it..

and human creation does not fit the facts of the matter to say that these come from elsewhere is the simplest and most straightforward answer and hence quite in keeping with the principle of Occum's Razor.

No.. Occum's Razor actually shows that it is man made not the other way around..

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what facts?

While I have full respect for Arthur as a author.. you need to remember.. he writes science fiction.. and its all based around aliens visiting us.. so of course he would have that opinion..

no we dont.. what we have is people making the circles and you guys just cannot believe it..

No.. Occum's Razor actually shows that it is man made not the other way around..

Arthur C Clarke was much more than just a writer of Science Fiction and that was his, no doubt well considered, opinion.

Look at it another way.... man in court accused of criminal damage by creating a crop circle. He could raise all the issues that have been mentioned to prove that he did not do it, could not have done it, and a jury would no doubt find him not guilty. The result would be that the court would conclude that it was done by 'person' or 'persons unknown'. Since humans cannot replicate all the factors that occur in some crop designs we must conclude that some are created by non human 'person' or 'persons unknown'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you know I can see the circle maker crowd will make a circle that you guys will (again) say alien etc.. but they wont come out for a few months.. so when all the crop circle experts come out with the 'this is proof its not done by humans' etc.. the way the crop has laid over.. the maths inside the circle design.. so on and so forth..

they will release the video of them making it..

I just hope they do it right and get it time stamped properly this time..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A complex design like this one needs a designer,

Maybe it does, maybe it does not. It would certainly appear so, but that does not make it so. I could say the same thing about the Ant Nebulae or the Helix Nebulae.

I think most people would agree.

But would they be right? It would seem so, but like I say, one could say the same thing about many natural structures, and quite often do. Look at the nonsense of the Bosnian Pyramid.

As human involvement can be reasonably excluded on the basis of the facts of the case some non human creator is implied.

Not reasonably, not at all. One needs a very biased outlook to exclude human intervention. You have one witness that claims a process that sounds like natural phenomena happened, I have one witness that says he knows who did this, when, and pointed out a flaw most seem to have missed. Would an intelligent designer make a flaw, or would a prankster make a flaw? What is more likely?

If you think 'nature' as an instrument of a deity I would agee that this is a possibility, some 'foreign' intelligence must have been involved and we do not yet know what that was.

No I do not think that. I do not believe in deities. When it comes to scientific explanations, I see deities as nothing more than a cop out. Simply a variation of ET and vice versa.

No I do not think for one second a foreign intelligence was involved, I believe the guy who makes these things on a regular basis, and fools people on a regular basis. If he ever reads this thread, I am sure he would be doubled over laughing at you.

This is not a one off as the appearance of these designs is a frequent occurance particularly in the county of Wiltshire in the UK, 69 examples of human and non human crop designs last summer.

How does that exclude man? It does not at all. How do you prove a circle is non-human? A dodgy witness account? Hrrmzz , very scientific.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Therein lies the rub no?

It doesn't matter one whit if humans did or didn't create any given crop circle or if it could be proven one way or another. If someone claims aliens then that someone needs to prove aliens regardless of human capabilities. It just detracts and distracts from the main argument (the ETH) when one focuses on disproving human involvement. The pro-alien crop circle crowd needs to not worry so much about negative evidence and start to bring some supportive evidence* to the table.

*And by supportive evidence I mean something unquestionably alien, or at least pretty damn close.

Indeed therein lies the rub mate. With regards to this particular crop circle being discussed only one person has come forward who claims to have seen the circle "take shape" and her recollection I do believe might well be why nobody else has come forward. Those who had noticed the design and pulled over for a gander were no doubt scratching their heads at the description, which sounds made up I have to say. I would not be surprised to find the "witness" is a practicing Wiccan or the like. What she claimed was:

There was a mist was about 2-3 feet off the ground and it was sort of spinning around and on the ground a circular shape was appearing which seemed to get bigger and bigger as simultaneously the mist gets bigger and bigger and swirled faster.

She never said it was the exhaust from a spaceship, she did not say a spaceship hovered and somehow created the design, she never mentions aliens. The woo woo crowd seems to have provided that piece of information for her.

The Pilot who supposedly corroborates the story because he did not notice anything the first time he flew over (which circle makers say would be quite right due to terrain) yet even with this dubious verbal, not a spaceship in sight. No Aliens. Again, the woo woo crowd have decided to accomodate that little hole.

Not an alien in the story, no aliens in sight, no ships, not even a light in the sky, but that does not stop the faithful from invoking them.

Edited by psyche101
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding the matter of Occum's Razor there are too many unanswered questions if we just said 'all crop designs are designed and made by humans', too many facts about the matter that would not fit this proposal.

No there is not. The only claim you have come up with is the dodgy microwave musing that comes from Russian Scientists and a person who faked a test result.

The claims have to be valid to be considered to have an impact.

So it is a matter of each person's individual mind set as to the probabilty either way.

Of course, or we would not be subject to Aliens claims when Aliens are nowhere to be seen.

Arthur C Clarke said that the chances of Earth having been visited from outside during its long history far outweighed the chances that it had not. So if we have inexplicable signs that we may be getting messages from outside this orb of ours and human creation does not fit the facts of the matter to say that these come from elsewhere is the simplest and most straightforward answer and hence quite in keeping with the principle of Occum's Razor.

Robert Heinlein did not have that opinion, and he was one of the "Big Three" (comprising of Clarke, Heinlein and Asimov) and when Clarke expressed his views on the strategic defence initiative, he attacked him right in Niven's home. Clarke said they reconciled but they most certainly remained distant until Heinlein's passing. Clarke was a writer who had a fascination with the paranormal. As such, do you really find such a comment a surprise? This is the time when people thought Aliens came from Mars and Venus.

There is no reason at all to believe crop circles are not 100% earthly and you have not supported your claims. You have that fantasy in your head, and you want it to be true. In reality, that is where the buck stops. Have you not noticed you keep trying to push the Occam's Razor ideal, and still not a single person agrees with you?

But I suppose it is not you who is wrong, it's the rest of the world, right?

Edited by psyche101

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.