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

[laver]

.

'clear indications'?

'supported by myth and legend'?

laver, you can't just make statements like that without offering something to back up your claim, without proof, without evidence, you should be aware of that.

what you believe is irrelevant, this is an unexplained mysteries website (the clue is in the name), where people are trying to understand, make sense of, and explain said mysteries, not make wild, unfounded claims on behalf of their belief, this isn't isgodreal.com man, you need to be able to back up your claim or you'll just get laughed off the board i'm afraid!

(also, avebury and stonehenge aren't 'very ancient', they were some of the last monuments built, there are ones far older in cornwall, cumbria, scotland, yorkshire, but they're not what you'd call hotbeds of crop circle activity are they?)

Avebury is the biggest stone age site in the Uk and Stonehenge the most famous it also we now hear may be a much older sacred/ settlement site than was previously thought. Myths and Legends from around the world all tell of external influence in human developement. These are not inaccurate statements but facts.

[Oppono Astos]

Avebury is the biggest stone age site in the Uk and Stonehenge the most famous it also we now hear may be a much older sacred/ settlement site than was previously thought. Myths and Legends from around the world all tell of external influence in human developement. These are not inaccurate statements but facts.

Is there any danger of providing references, links or any other form of evidence for your claims?

[stereologist]

My friend, dont waste your time trying to make a valid point into these people. 90% of the users on this forum are debunkers that dont care if there is something real or not behind the subject. They will just deny it no matter what, they wont even bother to look at the hundreds of facts. They just dont care, they are here to make fun and joke about it.

Im not saying 90% of the people in the world are like that, just 90% of the users who still post here are. Why?, because people who believe or who actually take their time to read and/or investigate about this subject, no longer post here, because this forum has turned into a "lets make fun of the subject and at the opening poster with silly lame jokes and laugh together about it".

I suggest to save your energies on doing more research (like you have) about the subject and share it with people you know or people who might want to know more about it. But this forum has lost its purpose a loooong time ago. I rarely log in anymore, I just check this forum once every 3 or 4 months or so and everytime it gets worse and worse with the debunkers plaguing the forum with lame jokes and nothing interesting.

I always get a good chuckle at reading posts such as this, because it is clear to me that:

1. The accuser has no idea how easy going this group is compared to peers in a science setting

2. The accuser does not have a clear understanding of debunking

3. The accuser thinks that reading and blindly accepting is what research is all about

Look, if the material is being debunked then the issues posted are valid. I think you mean to call the people scoffers. A scoffer does not believe regardless of the evidence. A scoffer is in a way the opposite of a gullible person. A gullible person believes without wanting evidence and a scoffer does not believe without wanting the evidence. In between are people like the posters at UM that ask tough questions. A tough question is a good question.

Research involves discriminating between silliness and fact. Much silliness is posted about crop circles. I've seen nothing to suggest it is anything other than installation art. The designs can be drawn with straightedge and compass. The designs are pretty to see. They are art and often well done art.

You might want to take the easy path and preach to the choir. That is your prerogative. It suggests to me that you are torn between the recognition that crop circles have a mundane explanation and your desire to see something truly fantastic. Well, crop circles are beautiful, but they are mundane. They are made for people for people to enjoy.

[stereologist]

Don't forget the early days of crop circles where the pranksters from the pub would sneak up as close as they dared and make a crop circle close to the "researchers" watching fields at night. Then the researchers would see the nearby crop circles adn think they were almost right. It made the news as these "researchers" brought out more and more gear to catch the crop circle being made. The pranksters must have been laughing insanely hard. I certainly would have had I been in on it.

[shrooma]

Avebury is the biggest stone age site in the Uk and Stonehenge the most famous it also we now hear may be a much older sacred/ settlement site than was previously thought. Myths and Legends from around the world all tell of external influence in human developement. These are not inaccurate statements but facts.

.

it's pretty clear that you don't really know much about stonehenge & its environs laver. the stonehenge you see and refer to was built between 2750-2500bc, the 'much more ancient' part refers to the wooden construction, the remains of which, painted circular markers in the carpark, are some distance from the monument. size, and age, nor indeed fame, have no bearing on your argument of the formation of crop circles. long meg & her daughters in cumbria is only slightly smaller than avebury, much older, and in much better condition, but the aliens seem to overlook it when choosing somewhere to doodle in the bushes.

also, referring to 'myths and legends' as 'facts' is beyond absurd. myths and legends are just that, myths. and legends.

would you call the myth of noah, building an ark and populating it with two of every animal on earth a 'fact'? or how about the legend of sleepy hollow? would you say that a deranged horseman with the head of a pumpkin was an undeniable truth?

there's a world of difference between open-mindedness and gulliability dude, not a fine line.

Edited May 2, 2013 by shrooma

[laver]

.

it's pretty clear that you don't really know much about stonehenge & its environs laver. the stonehenge you see and refer to was built between 2750-2500bc, the 'much more ancient' part refers to the wooden construction, the remains of which, painted circular markers in the carpark, are some distance from the monument. size, and age, nor indeed fame, have no bearing on your argument of the formation of crop circles. long meg & her daughters in cumbria is only slightly smaller than avebury, much older, and in much better condition, but the aliens seem to overlook it when choosing somewhere to doodle in the bushes.

also, referring to 'myths and legends' as 'facts' is beyond absurd. myths and legends are just that, myths. and legends.

would you call the myth of noah, building an ark and populating it with two of every animal on earth a 'fact'? or how about the legend of sleepy hollow? would you say that a deranged horseman with the head of a pumpkin was an undeniable truth?

there's a world of difference between open-mindedness and gulliability dude, not a fine line.

You clearly did not understand...it is a fact that myths and legends from around the world tell of external influence in the developement of mankind... that is not saying that these myths and legends are facts. That should have been obvious.

[shrooma]

Myths and Legends from around the world all tell of external influence in human developement. These are not inaccurate statements but facts.

.

about as clear as mud laver.

albeit mud with backtrack marks in.....

;-)

[Arpee]

Occam's Razor would say crop circles are real, but the real question is "how do they come to exist"?

Occam's Razor does not answer that question, it just does logically deduction in order to reach a simple answer.

Considering the fact that the crop circles show formation and heals the plants, the logical answer would be this:

The crop circles are from through controlled radiation (since it is healthy for plants and form complex patterns).

Since it is CONTROLLED radiation forming complex patterns, we can come to two conclusions:

1) Either nature is some how forming these complex patterns

2) And / Or an intelligent life form is artificially creating it. [Whether it is human or not is undetermined]

There is no proof that these designs were formed by aliens but here's an argument that it could be:

1) This crop circle is gigantic with accurate binary code and detail for the picture of this alien...

2) This formed over-night and it has perfect detail...

3) It's not likely that nature would form a gigantic detailed picture of a Gray Alien with a message to humanity.

(Yes, Nature forms advanced patterns but it never leaves messages in a computer code like this).

4) Humanity doesn't have the technology make this with such accuracy and detail over one night.

Edited May 3, 2013 by Arpee

[S2F]

4) Humanity doesn't have the technology make this with such accuracy and detail over one night.

[laver]

There are many crop designs where this method just could not produce the detail present

[S2F]

There are many crop designs where this method just could not produce the detail present

Okay, I'll bite. Can you show me specifically why without resorting to 'it can't because I say it can't'?

[shrooma]

Okay, I'll bite. Can you show me specifically why without resorting to 'it can't because I say it can't'?

.

laver, I respect your tenacity in the face of adversity, I really do, but come on man, this is dragging it out so much, you're flogging the proverbial dead horse.

can you not gracefully admit defeat in the face of adversity? hmm?

i'd be more than willing to meet you for a few beers at the red lion in avebury so I could show you around and you could laugh at what's happening, then we'd bugger off down to the stonehenge party, where you'd meet the people who make crop circles, the people who are playing tricks on you, and we can all have a laugh about it as we watch the solstice sunrise at stonehenge? would you be open to accept something like that happening? hmm?

I don't even know if you live in britain, your profile gives nothing away, but if you do, then the first pint's on me, ok?

[laver]

Okay, I'll bite. Can you show me specifically why without resorting to 'it can't because I say it can't'?

The post by Arpee explains it, the detail is too great to be created by such a crude tool which is the case for some other designs, particularly binary and say the Pi circle etc

[laver]

.

laver, I respect your tenacity in the face of adversity, I really do, but come on man, this is dragging it out so much, you're flogging the proverbial dead horse.

can you not gracefully admit defeat in the face of adversity? hmm?

i'd be more than willing to meet you for a few beers at the red lion in avebury so I could show you around and you could laugh at what's happening, then we'd bugger off down to the stonehenge party, where you'd meet the people who make crop circles, the people who are playing tricks on you, and we can all have a laugh about it as we watch the solstice sunrise at stonehenge? would you be open to accept something like that happening? hmm?

I don't even know if you live in britain, your profile gives nothing away, but if you do, then the first pint's on me, ok?

There are clearly folk making crop circles but that is not to say that they are making ALL crop circles as the evidence would suggest this is not the case.

Thank you for your kind offer but I live far away..... Cloud Cuckoo Land according to many posters on UM....!

[S2F]

I for one, would like to see some actual measured data to confirm the so-called 'perfect' accuracy and detail of some of these crop circles. Surely it can't be from just looking at a picture of a crop circle taken from a few hundred feet in the air, right? That's no way to assess perfection is it? What is the margin of error on the very best crop circle out there?

*Edit to add: If the margin of error is say, a few inches (which would be very impressive, given the scale) then why couldn't someone bending crops with a plank of wood simply use their hand or foot for the more intricate parts? That's not really too much of a leap now is it?

Edited May 4, 2013 by Slave2Fate

[theSOURCE]

I for one, would like to see some actual measured data to confirm the so-called 'perfect' accuracy and detail of some of these crop circles. Surely it can't be from just looking at a picture of a crop circle taken from a few hundred feet in the air, right? That's no way to assess perfection is it? What is the margin of error on the very best crop circle out there?

*Edit to add: If the margin of error is say, a few inches (which would be very impressive, given the scale) then why couldn't someone bending crops with a plank of wood simply use their hand or foot for the more intricate parts? That's not really too much of a leap now is it?

Actually, the accuracy of crap circles is quite easy to determine. Take the distance of the observer and multiply that by the believer squared. Divide that by the square root of gullibility, then factor in the need to express the need to display ignorance.

And don't forget to carry the 2.

[S2F]

Actually, the accuracy of crap circles is quite easy to determine. Take the distance of the observer and multiply that by the believer squared. Divide that by the square root of gullibility, then factor in the need to express the need to display ignorance.

And don't forget to carry the 2.

Hopefully that 2 isn't heavy, I don't want to carry it too far.

[theSOURCE]

Hopefully that 2 isn't heavy, I don't want to carry it too far.

Me so very buzzed now.

Hell, p*ss a circle in the snow and tell me that alienz did it and I just might believe you.

That is, until tomorrow's hangover.

[Doctor manhattan]

1) This crop circle is gigantic with accurate binary code and detail for the picture of this alien...

do you what the exact measurements are? Gigantic isn't very presice. How do you know the picture of the alien is accurate? Have you seen an alien before?

[Oppono Astos]

The post by Arpee explains it, the detail is too great to be created by such a crude tool which is the case for some other designs, particularly binary and say the Pi circle etc

Did you observe or investigate the formation in the field? If not you are merely making the assumptions of a believer.

[laver]

Did you observe or investigate the formation in the field? If not you are merely making the assumptions of a believer.

Not a believer.. a double skeptic, who finds the idea of crop designs being made by a foreign (to Earth) agency hard to accept but looking at all aspects of this phenomena cannot accept either that humans are making all these designs for many reasons. People who believe these designs are all manmade are the believers in this because they did not see them all created.

[Sheep Smart]

The criteria for real or fake (according to this site., http://www.aquiziam.com/crop-circles-2011-2012.html )

crop circle experts have recognised and accepted that at least a proportion of formations are being made by humans and have identified a number of criteria to distinguish between the real (unexplained) and the fake (manmade).

Real

The formations will appear within hours, sometimes even minutes.

There is a lack of tracks leading to the crop circle

The true circles are very slightly elliptical

The stalks of the crops are bent not broken - as if they'd been heated by microwave radiation until flexible. In younger plants the stems nodes are often swollen - as if steam has expanded and caused the cellulose to elongate and balloon outwards. In older plants where the stem material is more rigid and brittle the internal pressure causes the nodes to explode creating a node hole.

Some superficial charring may be noticed as if the plant stems had been exposed very briefly to an intense heat source. Soil is correspondingly dry except in the centre of each circle where it may still be moist.

There is a disruption of the plant's crystalline structure at a microscopic level.

Background levels of electromagnetism are higher than normal.

Circles investigated within six hours of formation often interfere with electronic equipment.

Newly created circles are occasionally reported to have background harmonics that fade away over a 24 -48 hour period

The crops are laid along the ground in neat patterns with precision alignment. Sometimes these stems appear interwoven or even plaited.

The plants are generally undamaged and will continue to grow even though they are now flattened.

The design of the crop formation makes use of sophisticated geometry often incorporating five-sided shapes such as pentagons and pentagrams although these are rarely used as shapes themselves.

The presence of short-lived radioactive isotopes.

Higher than average localised infrared readings.

A researcher examining an occurrence will use the presence of these factors to confirm that a crop formation is an unexplained phenomena. However, there is only one factor that is specifically used to suggest that a circle is manmade.

Fake

Broken Stems

[laver]

The criteria for real or fake (according to this site., http://www.aquiziam.com/crop-circles-2011-2012.html )

crop circle experts have recognised and accepted that at least a proportion of formations are being made by humans and have identified a number of criteria to distinguish between the real (unexplained) and the fake (manmade).

Real

The formations will appear within hours, sometimes even minutes.

There is a lack of tracks leading to the crop circle

The true circles are very slightly elliptical

The stalks of the crops are bent not broken - as if they'd been heated by microwave radiation until flexible. In younger plants the stems nodes are often swollen - as if steam has expanded and caused the cellulose to elongate and balloon outwards. In older plants where the stem material is more rigid and brittle the internal pressure causes the nodes to explode creating a node hole.

Some superficial charring may be noticed as if the plant stems had been exposed very briefly to an intense heat source. Soil is correspondingly dry except in the centre of each circle where it may still be moist.

There is a disruption of the plant's crystalline structure at a microscopic level.

Background levels of electromagnetism are higher than normal.

Circles investigated within six hours of formation often interfere with electronic equipment.

Newly created circles are occasionally reported to have background harmonics that fade away over a 24 -48 hour period

The crops are laid along the ground in neat patterns with precision alignment. Sometimes these stems appear interwoven or even plaited.

The plants are generally undamaged and will continue to grow even though they are now flattened.

The design of the crop formation makes use of sophisticated geometry often incorporating five-sided shapes such as pentagons and pentagrams although these are rarely used as shapes themselves.

The presence of short-lived radioactive isotopes.

Higher than average localised infrared readings.

A researcher examining an occurrence will use the presence of these factors to confirm that a crop formation is an unexplained phenomena. However, there is only one factor that is specifically used to suggest that a circle is manmade.

Fake

Broken Stems

Some very interesting observations. It may or may not be relevant but we are near the middle of May and so far there have been no crop designs recorded this year in the UK which is unusual. Are we in for a special season of this phenomena?

[laver]

Some very interesting observations. It may or may not be relevant but we are near the middle of May and so far there have been no crop designs recorded this year in the UK which is unusual. Are we in for a special season of this phenomena?

Please note that due to the weather in the UK spring is also very late this year. This could be a factor??