Censorship in Science

[rprosser]

TL;DR Summary: Hard evidence about 'crop circles' is being ignored

Recently I made a point here about there being hard evidence to justify proper investigation of 'crop circles'. There are differences between seeds from the flattened areas compared to the standing ones, with white papers having been published. Also 'ghost circles' appear year after year, after the original pattern had been ploughed over and resown. These phenomena occur worldwide, not just in Wiltshire.

My post was initially derided in a condescending manner, then deleted.

Does this forum support censorship now? Why do scientists ignore the evidence?


Thanks,

Richard

 

[Ibix]

Two points occur to me. First, are the publications you refer to in reputable peer-reviewed journals? Second, is there likely to be much discussion generated beyond argument over whether there's really any evidence of anything unusual?

PF aims to be about mainstream science. It has certainly deleted fringe topics (including arguably legit physical theories, not just possible woo) because it doesn't fit with that mission. I guess you can try to make the case that study of crop circles is mainstream, but I suspect it would be quite a challenge.

 

[Hornbein]

Does this forum support censorship now?

I hope so.

 

[Borg]

Recently I made a point here about there being hard evidence to justify proper investigation of 'crop circles'.
...
Why do scientists ignore the evidence?

In science, there's a difference between saying that you have evidence and actually providing said evidence. And no, linking to an opinion piece that someone posted on the internet isn't evidence.

 

[Dale]

Why do scientists ignore the evidence?

One thing that scientists are aware of, more than most other people, is the importance of the quality of the evidence. Rumors and testimonials are low quality evidence. On this forum the requirement is that all posts must be consistent with the professional scientific literature.

Don’t blame us for the fact that your evidence doesn’t meet even this weak standard.

 

[jackjack2025]

One thing that scientists are aware of, more than most other people, is the importance of the quality of the evidence. Rumors and testimonials are low quality evidence. On this forum the requirement is that all posts must be consistent with the professional scientific literature.

Don’t blame us for the fact that your evidence doesn’t meet even this weak standard.

And yet String theory continues...


rprosser you mention the phenomena occurs outside Wiltshire. How many crop circles occur in China for example? What is the distribution?

 

[Dale]

And yet String theory continues...

… to be an unproven class of theories

 

[haushofer]

… to be an unproven class of theories

Thanks. You just shattered my worldview.

 

[Rive]

… to be an unproven class of theories

...but still on scientific basis. On the other hand:

Why do scientists ignore the evidence?

A while back, starting from ~ the 70's there was a big boom around all these kind of 'stuff': UFOs, crop circles, telepathy, parapsychology, ESP, telekinesis, spirit mediums and such. (Most of them explicitly stated as not-to-be-brought-here in the guidelines.)
To study them at scientific level, even university groups/institutes were founded.

Now, the result was a really big pile of scientific nothing.

Some of the related institutes still exist, for the sole purpose to properly maintain that big pile of nothing.

If you have evidence then you are free to contact these institutes. Not really hard to find them, but be warned: you will be against a really big pile of documented nothing. You'll definitely need a really solid pile of something.

But as it was said already, the purpose of this site/forum is not to be a battlefield, so crop circle wars will not be hosted.

 

[jackjack2025]

...but still on scientific basis. On the other hand:


A while back, starting from ~ the 70's there was a big boom around all these kind of 'stuff': UFOs, crop circles, telepathy, parapsychology, ESP, telekinesis, spirit mediums and such. (Most of them explicitly stated as not-to-be-brought-here in the guidelines.)
To study them at scientific level, even university groups/institutes were founded.

Now, the result was a really big pile of scientific nothing.

Some of the related institutes still exist, for the sole purpose to properly maintain that big pile of nothing.

If you have evidence then you are free to contact these institutes. Not really hard to find them, but be warned: you will be against a really big pile of documented nothing. You'll definitely need a really solid pile of something.

But as it was said already, the purpose of this site/forum is not to be a battlefield, so crop circle wars will not be hosted.

The thread will get shut now I guess :)

UFOs are a real thing, it doesn't mean aliens are flying them.

I think remote viewing was studied and used. A little bit dodgy maybe, but I wouldn't say a pile of nothing.

 

[Rive]

I think remote viewing was studied and used.

You should check out the movie 'The Men Who Stare at Goats' to have an idea how much was studied - and that why I refer to it as 'nothing' ;)

The proper methods were established to study these: that's something worth preserving.
But then what they actually found is really a 'big pile of nothing'.

The thread will get shut now I guess :)

That's the usual end of these and it's proper.

But still, I think it's kind of important to mention somewhere along the story that these topics are not exactly some 'forbidden knowledge' or whatever, but already excessively documented and studied utter failures.

Quite a difference.

 

[Dale]

these topics are not exactly some 'forbidden knowledge' or whatever, but already excessively documented and studied utter failures

That is a good point. I think it is the difference between “nothing” and your “really big pile of documented nothing”. These things have been studied.

 

[DaveC426913]

My post was initially derided in a condescending manner, then deleted.

Fora can't be all things to all people.

PF is about mainstream science. Crop circles are not really their thing. They have every right to control what topics get airplay.

That being said, there are other science sites where such things are discussed; let me know if you are interested.

 

[jackjack2025]

You should check out the movie 'The Men Who Stare at Goats' to have an idea how much was studied - and that why I refer to it as 'nothing' ;)

The proper methods were established to study these: that's something worth preserving.
But then what they actually found is really a 'big pile of nothing'.


That's the usual end of these and it's proper.

But still, I think it's kind of important to mention somewhere along the story that these topics are not exactly some 'forbidden knowledge' or whatever, but already excessively documented and studied utter failures.

Quite a difference.

I have seen the film.

If you can't remote view and you have never experienced anything beyond a big pile of nothing, then fair enough.

 

[jackjack2025]

Fora can't be all things to all people.

PF is about mainstream science. Crop circles are not really their thing. They have every right to control what topics get airplay.

That being said, there are other science sites where such things are discussed; let me know if you are interested.

A lot of sites have a specific focus (like here), but also allow a certain amount of off-topic chat.

Before the thread gets deleted, did you have some good evidence on crop circles?

 

[Dale]

did you have some good evidence on crop circles?

This is a forum for discussing the rules, not for circumventing them.

 

[PeroK]

A lot of sites have a specific focus (like here), but also allow a certain amount of off-topic chat.

Before the thread gets deleted, did you have some good evidence on crop circles?

Here's my take on this. Recently, a village in Switzerland was buried by a landslide. See here:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-c7f929de-96a9-45e5-b1bb-31de82fce72d

As you can read in that article, the landslide was predicted by geologists who study such things and the village had been evacuated as a precautionary measure.

The problem is that if some people were in charge, we'd be spending our limited scientific resources on crop circles or UFOs or creationist theories of geology or investigating whether Swiss mountain villages were built by aliens. And landslides would be predicted by astrology or casting runes or studying the entrails of chickens.

Why not study crop circles? Because there are many far better things to study. Things that are based on real evidence of real phenomena - like landslides - and not fake evidence of hoaxes.

 

[Dale]

And it isn't like those things haven't been studied. They have been given their fair shot. They came up short. When they were actually unknown, they were worth studying. Now they are known to be nothing, so further study is not productive.