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 2
Still Waters

Crop circles are not the work of hoaxers

163 posts in this topic

Maybe you haven't seen just how technical some of the more elaborate 'circles' are, they're not all circles btw...

Really? Thanks!

Like I said Ive never made one so dont know how easy they are to make...

Neither have I, but I know geometry pretty well, am quite good at solving puzzles and thinking laterally to achieve goals, and ... I've even owned a spirograph!

Have you visited any of the sites owned by those who do actually create them?

(When you get down to my challenge below, I'd strongly advise you to have done that first or an embarrassing gaffe may occur.. Here's an easily findable example of stuff you *really* need to read, but there are a lot more that are not quite so easy to find. Good Luck!)

I'm guessing you have for you to comment on the process...

These are just shapes created by crops/plants being flattened - what sort of knowledge requirements would make you guess that I must have made one?

please post pics of the circles you have made for us to compare to the ones found in England

I'm not making the claim that they can't be done/must be of alien origin, so here's my challenge - why don't you post the one you think couldn't be made with relatively simple methods, and I'll happily have a good think about it and post my comments here. I'm game, are you?

As for the rest of your comment lmao....

?? Perhaps I need to clarify - I live in Australia where it *is* possible to get an awful long way from any airport.. but right now I'm near three and a major freeway, so I see a chopper every hour or two (so I better go look for the circles, I guess..) But I digress - rather than losing your backside by excessive laughing, perhaps you can instead show us the evidence that helicopter activity is increased near crop circle sites (beyond that which might be expected from news choppers getting their story..). That would be an addition to the thread content - give it a shot!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I once sat on the west kennet avenue at amesbury watching a guy making a crop circle in the field opposite, in broad daylight, about half-way through, he knocked off and went for a pint at the red lion before coming back half an hour later and resuming. we watched him (along with hundreds of other people) for a couple of hours, where he completed a circle of around 100ft diameter.

so somewhere, there must be pics of it half-completed, as I remember people taking pics when he'd slipped off for a pint!

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really? Thanks!

Neither have I, but I know geometry pretty well, am quite good at solving puzzles and thinking laterally to achieve goals, and ... I've even owned a spirograph!

Have you visited any of the sites owned by those who do actually create them?

(When you get down to my challenge below, I'd strongly advise you to have done that first or an embarrassing gaffe may occur.. Here's an easily findable example of stuff you *really* need to read, but there are a lot more that are not quite so easy to find. Good Luck!)

These are just shapes created by crops/plants being flattened - what sort of knowledge requirements would make you guess that I must have made one?

I'm not making the claim that they can't be done/must be of alien origin, so here's my challenge - why don't you post the one you think couldn't be made with relatively simple methods, and I'll happily have a good think about it and post my comments here. I'm game, are you?

?? Perhaps I need to clarify - I live in Australia where it *is* possible to get an awful long way from any airport.. but right now I'm near three and a major freeway, so I see a chopper every hour or two (so I better go look for the circles, I guess..) But I digress - rather than losing your backside by excessive laughing, perhaps you can instead show us the evidence that helicopter activity is increased near crop circle sites (beyond that which might be expected from news choppers getting their story..). That would be an addition to the thread content - give it a shot!

Geez, lol.... good for you, you can solve puzzles and like playing with spirographs, you seem to have got carried away with yourself in trying to prove how they are made, I never stated that they couldn't be made with the blue peter approach, string and planks of wood, I just found it hard to believe they were made in pitch dark in a short space of time and to a complexity that needs some serious planning, and apparently lots of people have witnessed balls of light in and around crop circles and circle formation

The link you provided does provide some evidence about some of the 'circles' and upon viewing a youtube about one made in New Zealand at night does go some way to answering my initial query, but its not really at night the video is either moon lit or has a spotlight or something illuminating the area, apparently there are differences in circles, label distinction 'man made and real'

"In real crop circle formations the stems are not broken but are bent at 90° angles about an inch off the ground, at the plant's first node. The plants are subjected to a short and intense burst of heat or energy that softens the stems or stalks allowing them to be folded over onto the ground at a 90° angle. When the stems or stalks re-harden into their new position, the plants and crop are not damaged and continue to grow. This is the method used to identify a real crop circle formation (agriglyph). The canola oil plant has a structure like celery. If the stalk is bent more than about 45°, the stalk will break. When crop circles are found in canola fields, the stalks are bent 90°. Research and laboratory tests suggest that microwave or ultrasound may be the only method capable of producing this effect, but plant biologists are still baffled by this phenomenon"

http://cropcirclefacts.com/

The more I read into this the more it becomes apparent that some crop circles are more than just crops that have been trodden on to create an image, as for your challenge lol really ?...I suppose then any that has an unexplained altered chemistry like described in the above quote, can or have the hoaxers created a circle that incorporates all the known facts found in what are described as real in the above link, I think until the hoaxers make a circle that has all the same elements as this type of circle then I think I'll continue to keep an open mind on them

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These things are the best example I can think of that there always exist people willing and eager to be fools.

Its foolish to dismiss these without fully understanding how they are made sure some are man made but some who study them are baffled by how certain aspect appear...the hoaxers seem all too proud to tell the world they are hoaxed, surely they can let the world know how they managed to achieve some of the other anomalies found within the circles. ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You say, "some who study them are baffled." That's funny: some who study them are fools, some who study them are airheads, some who study them want to be baffled. There are plenty of people who study them who are not baffled.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You say, "some who study them are baffled." That's funny: some who study them are fools, some who study them are airheads, some who study them want to be baffled. There are plenty of people who study them who are not baffled.

please before your lips start flapping follow the link, the quote is taken from a site concerned with facts about crop circle,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's funny: some who study them are fools, some who study them are airheads, some who study them want to be baffled.

I hope it makes you feel better to repeatedly point this out to us all. How about explaining why to the person you're talking to, before they get offended. Or is that what you were aiming for?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My word I struck a raw nerve with two different people. That is counterproductive, since all I want to do is get some thinking going, and it seems I failed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ciriuslea (and _Only, and anyone else who wishes to help), it's time for you to put up or .. You have again made claims that lack support - what "research and laboratory tests suggest that microwave or ultrasound may be the only method"? And didn't you notice the words "suggest" and "may"?? It's a load of pretentious made-up rubbish - I've looked into this claim before, and found (owatasuprise) there was absolutely NO, ZERO, NADA scientific evidence or credible analysis. If you are suggesting that has changed, please supply links to *that* rather than links to sites making more claims...

I'm gunna take a wild guess that if I go visit that website, not one of the many links it may contain is to any sort of real analysis. Am I right, Ciriuslea? Feel free to embarrass me by contradicting that... And if you can't, what would you infer from that strange omission?

I'd be delighted to address any real evidence. I'd be delighted to look at any circle designs that are claimed to be 'too difficult' for humans.. But that offer/request seems to have been ignored in favour of more handwaving and complaints about alleged insults. Which seems like a very convenient way of avoiding the request that claimants actually support their claims. How about supplying evidence and analysis instead of trying to avoid those topics?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whether Humans or ET's are making them (Personally I hope the latter) I believe that the ones with increased radiation levels are the ones we need to focus on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ciriuslea (and _Only, and anyone else who wishes to help), it's time for you to put up or .. You have again made claims that lack support - what "research and laboratory tests suggest that microwave or ultrasound may be the only method"? And didn't you notice the words "suggest" and "may"?? It's a load of pretentious made-up rubbish - I've looked into this claim before, and found (owatasuprise) there was absolutely NO, ZERO, NADA scientific evidence or credible analysis. If you are suggesting that has changed, please supply links to *that* rather than links to sites making more claims...

I'm gunna take a wild guess that if I go visit that website, not one of the many links it may contain is to any sort of real analysis. Am I right, Ciriuslea? Feel free to embarrass me by contradicting that... And if you can't, what would you infer from that strange omission?

I'd be delighted to address any real evidence. I'd be delighted to look at any circle designs that are claimed to be 'too difficult' for humans.. But that offer/request seems to have been ignored in favour of more handwaving and complaints about alleged insults. Which seems like a very convenient way of avoiding the request that claimants actually support their claims. How about supplying evidence and analysis instead of trying to avoid those topics?

You seem to have got carried away with trying to debunk all claims that you don't agree with, we can all provide links to sites saying all kinds of stuff, you have a link to a site that claims all circles are done by hoaxers, I found one that says they can determined those that have different characteristics to those known to be hoaxed, I don't know who makes them, you seem to so then I guess that's the end of the issue.

Whats with all the sarcasm and stuff do you have somekind of online ego to stroke or are you showing off to merton?,

I have no intention of embarrassing anyone funny you should say something like that after jumping all over my initial comment and by the manner of your replies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You seem to have got carried away with trying to debunk all claims that you don't agree with

Maybe that's because they deserve debunking - being full of, you know, bunk.

Which is why I simply asked for evidence - you did after all claim certain things, like humanly-impossible designs, ultrasonics/microwaves.. These things are testable, they involve collecting data in a valid way. If that was done, then it should have been properly documented. I've simply asked you to back that up, but it seems you can't.

And that seems to indicate that such claims are incorrect. They are misleading. They are misinformation. Do you think that is what should be happening at this forum?

we can all provide links to sites saying all kinds of stuff

And IF those links contain easily verifiable and logical information, they should be considered. Agreed? I'm certainly ready and willing to examine any sites that show the non-human designs/technology in a reasonable way... So where are they?

you have a link to a site that claims all circles are done by hoaxers

Don't misrepresent me. I showed links that showed crop circles (not necessarily ALL of them) made by hoaxers/artistes. Others have also provided links including videos of them being made... The point I am making is that UNLESS you dispute those sites and videos (I'm guessing you don't), then it is possible for at least some crop circles to be made by humankind. Agreed?

That being the case, it comes back to you. You have a simple challenge - show us either:

- a crop circle design that could NOT possibly be made by humankind using reasonably available tools and humanpower

- a crop circle that involves traces of some non-human technology (ultrasound/kryptonite..)

Unless you or anyone else can do that, then the KISS and Occam's Razor principles apply - they can be done by humans, so they all probably are...

You claimed those impossible designs and traces of non-human technology. However.. when asked to provide the evidence, you backpedaled furiously and have instead chosen to complain about my tactics.

Whats with all the sarcasm and stuff do you have somekind of online ego to stroke or are you showing off to merton?

Perhaps you should look at your own posts......

You'll note that this post asks for nothing but evidence, and does not directly question your motives/ego...

I'll leave that for the readers. :D

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is simply Occams razor.

The burden of proof is on those who want to tell us that the circles are the work of space aliens, hobgoblins, god, or the ghost of Elvis.

And not the other way around.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I've never tried to 'make' a crop circle, but some of them are so geometrically perfect and of a scale that I find incredible could be hoaxed especially in a few hours in the dark...Is it a coincidence that crop circle areas of Britain we see metallic spheres and military helicopters, or is that all part of the hoax ?

Maybe you haven't seen just how technical some of the more elaborate 'circles' are, they're not all circles btw...Like I said I've never made one so don't know how easy they are to make...

I'm guessing you have for you to comment on the process...please post pics of the circles you have made for us to compare to the ones found in England,

I'm keeping an open mind on the subject what I said was I found it incredible they could be made within a few hours in the dark...not that they couldn't or that spock made them...Id like to see someone who had some knowledge of creating art like this, how they would go about creating one...an elaborate one with some degree of technical challenge let them try it in the dark and see what happens

http://wingnutmodels.../CropCircle.jpg

On a seperate note is there any pics of any half finished or crop circles that went wrong or any suspected circles that went wrong but the whole area was flattened to cover it up ?

Geez, lol.... good for you, you can solve puzzles and like playing with spirographs, you seem to have got carried away with yourself in trying to prove how they are made, I never stated that they couldn't be made with the blue peter approach, string and planks of wood, I just found it hard to believe they were made in pitch dark in a short space of time and to a complexity that needs some serious planning, and apparently lots of people have witnessed balls of light in and around crop circles and circle formation

The link you provided does provide some evidence about some of the 'circles' and upon viewing a youtube about one made in New Zealand at night does go some way to answering my initial query, but its not really at night the video is either moon lit or has a spotlight or something illuminating the area, apparently there are differences in circles, label distinction 'man made and real'

The more I read into this the more it becomes apparent that some crop circles are more than just crops that have been trodden on to create an image, as for your challenge lol really ?...I suppose then any that has an unexplained altered chemistry like described in the above quote, can or have the hoaxers created a circle that incorporates all the known facts found in what are described as real in the above link, I think until the hoaxers make a circle that has all the same elements as this type of circle then I think I'll continue to keep an open mind on them

Its foolish to dismiss these without fully understanding how they are made sure some are man made but some who study them are baffled by how certain aspect appear...the hoaxers seem all too proud to tell the world they are hoaxed, surely they can let the world know how they managed to achieve some of the other anomalies found within the circles. ?

You seem to have got carried away with trying to debunk all claims that you don't agree with, we can all provide links to sites saying all kinds of stuff, you have a link to a site that claims all circles are done by hoaxers, I found one that says they can determined those that have different characteristics to those known to be hoaxed, I don't know who makes them, you seem to so then I guess that's the end of the issue.

Whats with all the sarcasm and stuff do you have somekind of online ego to stroke or are you showing off to merton?,

I have no intention of embarrassing anyone funny you should say something like that after jumping all over my initial comment and by the manner of your replies.

Ok now this is basically my presence in this thread, I think if anything the theme is not really knowing who made them and when I did attempt to make any type of claim was that there are differences in what some experts class as hoaxed and lets just say 'others' My initial comment was one of disbelief that some of the more complex circles could be made in pitch dark within a few hours, which are the circumstances in which some appeared, not that they couldn't nor did I ever state any of the circumstances found within a circle couldn't be replicated by man.

But its interesting you comment about other readers, personally I don't care what other readers think, I comment what I feel with the intention of learning, to ask questions, perhaps a little confrontational and perhaps rude sometimes of which I must apologise, its never personal, but when you encounter some users who lets say get carried away with themselves its hard not to be sometimes

I often find that some people like to read into comments far more than what actually exists and then presume to repost from what they believe comments to say when they actually say something completely different.

This statement you made is interesting "I showed links that showed crop circles (not necessarily ALL of them) made by hoaxers/artistes" as its basically mirroring what I initially commented, I added the reasons why I thought some weren't made by hoaxers....but still, hopefully we understand each other at last.

Edited by ciriuslea

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You'll note that this post asks for nothing but evidence, and does not directly question your motives/ego...

That was refreshing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

It is simply Occams razor.

The burden of proof is on those who want to tell us that the circles are the work of space aliens, hobgoblins, god, or the ghost of Elvis.

And not the other way around.

There really is no burden of proof, unless you're just wanting to argue, attack, or defend, as if this was a court of law.

In cases like this, evidence against non human intervention of crops is just as important as evidence for it. This isn't a scenario where 'prove it wasn't a ghost, etc' can't be done.

If everyone decided to adopt your stance of 'it's up to the alien lovers to show us crop circles aren't made by humans', we wouldn't have some of the interesting videos of people showing how crop circles can be made, etc. They wouldn't have to try and figure it out, because the burden of proof is not on them! And a lot more of us would be wondering how it's possible that humans made these. You see what I mean?

Burdens of proof are good in a court room, but not when trying to get to the bottom of something.

Edited by _Only
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There really is no burden of proof

And with that, _Only sweeps away thousands of years of science and logic.

In cases like this, evidence against non human intervention of crops is just as important as evidence for it.

Funny way of putting it - I would have thought that the words PROPER or VERIFIABLE or DOCUMENTED should be placed before evidence.

You'll note that the human intervention stuff has been well-documented and proven. Where is the similar PROPER evidence for the non-human? Ciriuslea has now completely backpedaled away from that, and now you?

It's quite simple - post that evidence. Stop the handwaving and avoidance..

Burdens of proof are good in a court room, but not when trying to get to the bottom of something.

The requirement for proper evidence applies everywhere. Without it you CANNOT 'get to the bottom of something', if that something involves fairies or aliens or anything else for which there is no evidence.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I'll have to stop you right here before you go any further in thinking that I believe or claim crop circles to be anything other than of normal origin. I'm not sure where you got this idea. Maybe since I was bothered of some people's abrasive attitude, as in calling others fools and whatnot (not necessary or helpful) , you assumed I disagreed with their 'side'. I just wanted to clear that up before you attempt to go any further asking me to find any facts corroborating my non existent stance. If you're trying to rope people to divide on sides of a fence, I'm not one of them.

Now re-read my post as if I wasn't trying to defend anything. Feeling another side has to prove something about a subject is useful if you feel like there's nothing to learn. That will keep you thinking you're right, by not seeing any information otherwise. But some people realize this is unfruitful to getting everyone to understand things better, and decide to gather evidence that crop circles can be made by men, giving us methods and videos, which you can use in your online argument here.

If those guys said, 'it's up to you to show that aliens made these' instead, we wouldn't be getting as far in figuring this mystery out, do you agree?

My point was agreeing with your proposed stance that ponders if something other than this world's inhabitants might not be creating these things. Then there would be no way to prove that aliens, or whatever means, made these, because, hypothetically, they didn't. So nothing would be learned. The lack of information doesn't mean that a stance is right, though. Evidence that men do make these is information that makes your stance more strong. So what would you rather do; wait for someone to prove to you that men didn't make circles? Or figure out how men can? Now you see how waiting for someone with a burden of proof to show you the light can be a silly concept here.

But I know that's not about debating online. It's more about learning. But it'd be nice to see people happy to just learn some interesting stuff here as opposed to the never ending us vs. them, with snide stabs back and forth, where feelings get hurt, and emotions run higher than necessary.

To each their own, I guess. But I hope I cleared some confusion up before you went further.

Edited by _Only
3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was thinking in the car that the best thing (in my opinion) to show for absolute sure that all crop circles were made by men is to fill in that cloudy area in time where crop circles started appearing, and pinpoint a definitive reason that makes sense for them to have appeared. If we looked at it as a crime, there has to be a motive. What was the motive? So far the only explanations I've seen are someone bored, and looking for some odd type of fame. But I can't be alone in finding these explanations less than satiating. Maybe someone can come up with a more satisfying motive that would help give everyone that aha moment for figuring out why these things could have started appearing. Because it is such an oddball thing that no doubt it's going to be copied once seen, but what would have been the first person's motive to make those shapes in that field?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we are going to form an opinion (and doing so is a natural human thing to do -- we seem wired not to admit to ourselves when we don't know), then we need to be willing to go with the weight of the evidence and not demand proof. A demand for proof can never be satisfied and hence requires we never decide.

In this particular case the weight of the evidence seems to me to be clearly that these things are entirely manmade, end of subject. Demonstration that many of them are manmade is easy, that there is nothing about any of them that could not be manmade is asserted but without convincing evidence, and other than pranksters and artists, they seem to have no purpose -- and these functions are human purposes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seen some, made some, as to who or what made them, I can think of a lot more interesting "paranormal", "supernatural", even Sy-Fy, so I'm lazy, does it really matter, honestly. I guess if I had a farm in Kansas, I'd be interested but I don't, so I won't but I know there will be/are plenty of kind, interesting, folks out there, who do. Blessed Be to all of ya'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, getting back to the topic..

Where is the evidence for 'non-humanly-possible' content in crop circles..?

If the answer is "We have none", then there shouldn't be any shame in saying that. So why doesn't anyone want to answer it?

Could it be because the sites purporting to have such evidence (like the rather tragic example given earlier) actually have none whatsoever, to the embarrassment of their eager readers?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was thinking in the car that the best thing (in my opinion) to show for absolute sure that all crop circles were made by men is to fill in that cloudy area in time where crop circles started appearing, and pinpoint a definitive reason that makes sense for them to have appeared. If we looked at it as a crime, there has to be a motive. What was the motive? So far the only explanations I've seen are someone bored, and looking for some odd type of fame. But I can't be alone in finding these explanations less than satiating. Maybe someone can come up with a more satisfying motive that would help give everyone that aha moment for figuring out why these things could have started appearing. Because it is such an oddball thing that no doubt it's going to be copied once seen, but what would have been the first person's motive to make those shapes in that field?

Not sure when any serious researcher has stated all are man-made? For some reason the believers here don't seem to recognize and acknowledge the natural windborne circles (related to lodging) that have been documented back into the 1800s, known in common lore as devils/witches rings/circles/twists etc. Pictograms have been documented across Europe from the early 1900s, but that doesn't preclude hoaxing even in those times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is the damn trouble with documentation of asserted facts using the web. Web sites can be cited to support any damn thing, and there is no web equivalent of peer review. Even Wiki sometimes has nonsense.

I've gotten to the point where unless it promises entertainment I don't bother with web site citations. Instead I tend to try to stick with what is reasonable and with logical argument and not get into argumnents over the truth or falsehood of assertions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the trouble with the argument, if man can make it then its obviously man made falls short, true no real evidence exists to prove anything other than groups of hoaxers/artists are running around creating pretty pictures in the landscape, so before people bust a vessel lets just make that clear.

(Thinking out loud)

As I understand it the hoaxers haven't managed to show how they created all the differences found within a formation ? they might have described how it could or was done but have they actually had a sample test like an experiment where the hoaxers/artists produced all the same stuff found in formations to compare to formations thought not to have been hoaxed ? (this is a question btw, not a claim so keep it real)

What's interesting is how the word of a hoaxer carries more weight than anyone else, surely by the very nature of being a hoaxer your intention is to deceive, which then brings us to the point, arh but its art...Ok then what is the purpose of the node and germination changes, or any of the little details when small details are not really important to create a large image,

There is something that's bugging me with this line of thought, if its an art installation, the little details are redundant, unless the purpose is to deceive, which then creates the doubt within the claims made by the hoaxers..a paradox?

Can someone explain why the details exist, Im an artist and I know when creating art, features like this must play a serious role otherwise they wouldn't exist

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 2

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.