Decoding the Mystery of Crop Circles: A Look at the Skeptics and Real Phenomenon

  • Thread starter Ivan Seeking
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Circles
In summary: In summary, the phenomenon of crop circles goes back centuries. Some years ago, a documentary showed that meteorologists in the US studied this phenomenon as early as the 1940s. Some people believe that the circles are created by wind, earthlights, or some other unknown process. Skeptics can only speculate about the source of the evidence. The earliest accounts of crop circles date back to the 1800s.
  • #71
I posted two more dust devil links while you were writing in big red letters.I wonder how long that bucket would stay charged like that. I'f I'd have known about this when I lived in New England I could have played some interesting tricks on people during maple syrup season.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #72
Ivan, I don't see how your bucket experiment has anything to do with potential difference with height. Rather I would say the drops are being ionized by the friction as they pass through the hole, while the height just serves to insulate this process from the ground.
 
  • #73
Originally posted by selfAdjoint
Ivan, I don't see how your bucket experiment has anything to do with potential difference with height. Rather I would say the drops are being ionized by the friction as they pass through the hole, while the height just serves to insulate this process from the ground.

Being a conductor, the bucket will seek the local potential. The water carries charge away until this is acheived. This is considered one way to measure this potential. I learned all of this from Feynman. Unless it's out of date...I just checked and this is the explanation given.
 
  • #74
Originally posted by zoobyshoe
I posted two more dust devil links while you were writing in big red letters.


I wonder how long that bucket would stay charged like that. I'f I'd have known about this when I lived in New England I could have played some interesting tricks on people during maple syrup season.

It's people like you [and me] that cause me to use big red letters.
 
  • #75
Historical references citing crop circles

I am new to this forum and thread, but I would first like to commend Ivan for tackling such a contoversial subject. It would seem though, that Ivan, and many of you responding to Ivan's posts are having difficulty establishing with any certainty that not all 'crop circles' are mechanically-made by people (i.e. hoaxes). Ivan's attempts at providing historical examples and context dating back to a time before anyone has claimed making crop circle hoaxes are a sound and reasonable basis for establishing that not all crop circles have had a human origin.

Let me add to Ivan's previously reported 1880 "Nature" citation with a few additional historical references:
The Natural History of Stafford-Shire
By Robert Plot, LLD
Keeper of the Ashmolean Museum
And Professor of Chemistry in the University of Oxford
M.DC.LXXXVI [1686]

1686 - Robert Plot, a chemistry professor from Oxford University, in his words 'excavated' over 50 crop circle sites from southern England, and uncovered about 50 more historical reports from other observers and farmers (the earliest dating to 1590). He noted simple circles, circle rings, circle spirals, circles with SQUARES, and arrangements of flattened lines in both cereal crops and field grasses. Plot did the first soil sample testing where he compared soil from the center of circles to soil from the inside edges to soil from outside of the circles (as a control). Plot noted that soil from inside the circles was much more dehydrated, and found 'white, sulfurous residues'. Plot noted that crop yields increased by about 30% in the successive season in the areas where crop circles were found. He made several diagrams of examples of the crop circles he visited, and were included in this book. Plot suggested that perhaps 'hollow thunderbolts' were responsible for the crop circles - indicating he believed there may have been an electrical component involved in the physical mechanism for flattening the crop circles. Plot spent about 20 years collecting information about crop circles until his death in the 1690's.

1790-1793 Gentlemen's Magazine

The 'Time Magazine' of its day, "Gentleman's Magazine" reported on current events worldwide. Over a three-year period, "Gentlemen's Magazine" published several articles and readers' letters discussing the origin of 'fairy rings' [now called crop circles]. Diagrams of several crop circle formations were included. One of the letters references a Royal Society paper which discusses the mechanism for the creation of crop circles (also electrical in nature). The discussion is dominated by two camps: one which is clearly discussing crop circles as being flattened, swirled circles of wheat and grasses; and the second is a group which discusses modern-day 'fairy rings'as being caused by a fungus, or the fungus rings which we all know are now well-understood.

1847 - "The Magic Circle In The Prairie" by Henry Schoolcraft

Henry Schoolcraft [of which Schoolcraft College was later named for], produced a report for the U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs on Indian Ethnography work he was doing in the U.S. Midwest. Included in his report was a section titled "The Magic Circle In The Prairie" which was a description of a flattened circle of prairie grass, and one Indian's experience surrounding his visiting this site.

These other historical reports (especially Plot's, a respected scientist of his day), when added to J.Rand Capron's (another respected scientist of his day) descriptions in "Nature" in 1880, would seem to establish that crop circles have been at least noted and observed with various levels of detail at least once every hundred years for the past few centuries.

At the risk of including one more reference which may or may not be dubious, Ted Phillips’ PHYSICAL TRACES ASSOCIATED WITH UFO SIGHTINGS (Center for UFO Studies, Evanston, IL, 1975), appeared several years before the earliest date for any crop circle hoax claim. Phillips, of course, was cataloguing what he believed to be physical evidence associated with UFO reports. In his catalogue, he documented dozens of examples of what we would know today as being modern-day crop circles without referring to them as such. Phillips' catalogue included several photographs dating back into the 1960's of these sites. Although one may not agree with Phillip's conclusion as to the origin of these examples, nonetheless, these sites were well-documented in the pre-hoax era, and 8 of the sites were systematically surveyed with soil sample analysis performed in both academic and private laboratories.

Of course, Dr. Terence Meaden's work in the 1980's documenting hundreds of examples of crop circles, and which included many eyewitness examples - is well known. And, "The Journal of Meterology", of which he was the editor of - was (and still is) a very respectable scientific journal. Out of Meaden's research came the first (and only) science conference on crop circles in 1991. There is a record of the conference which collected all the science papers presented there:

Circles from the Sky: Proceedings of the First International Conference On The Circles Effect At Oxford edited by Dr. George Terence Meaden.
Published 1991 by Souvenir Press (Educational & Academic) Ltd., London ISBN 0 285 63036 9

The 1991 conference was sponsored by two organizations: the Tornado and Storm Research Organization (TORRO), and the Circles Effect Research Group (CERES).

Since that time, the science community has mostly shied away from serious academic research, primarily because of the widespread media publication of hoaxing examples and hoaxing claims. However, Ivan has also noted the plant research performed by W.C.Levengood from Pinelandia Labs. Levengood has published 3 papers in the peer-reviewed science journal "Physiologia Plantarum" on the subject of crop circles, but Levengood has also published around 50 other science papers on a variety of topics in peer-reviewed journals such as "Nature" and others dating back to the 1950's.

A 4th paper on crop circles published in "Physiologia Plantarum" was written by a physicist from the Netherlands, Dr. Eltjo Hasselhoff, in 2001.

Those references should help bring everyone up to speed on the historical and current state of crop circle science/research, and help settle some of the questions surrounding "Step 1".

If anyone would like the actual reprints of the above historical reports, feel free to email me.

Keep the dialogue going, it is an interesting discussion!
 
  • #76
jwilson,

That was a really excellent, well researched post! If pre-hoax circles are ever in doubt in a discussion I'm involved with again I know where to link people to. Extremely well done.
Any chance of an equally comprehensive history of reports of whirlwinds being spotted making circles? I was quite persuaded by the two reports at the site Ivan found.

-Zooby
 
  • #77
Originally posted by zoobyshoe
jwilson,

That was a really excellent, well researched post! If pre-hoax circles are ever in doubt in a discussion I'm involved with again I know where to link people to. Extremely well done.

I completely agree!
 
  • #78
Crop circles can easily be seen from space with moderate optics. It would seem that they are some form of communication. Communication from somebody on Earth trying to get a message to someone off earth. This would seem plausible if there were ET’s on Earth that are limited in their technological apparatus or are being prevented from open communications.

Just a thought.

Yes that was a great post jwilson.
 
  • #79
Request for information on eyewitness sightings of crop circle formation

Well, you would think that finding eyewitnesses of crop circle formation (regardless of what the eyewitness reported) would seem to be the answer to 'just exactly how are crop circles formed?', but for a variety of reasons, the roughly 50 or so eyewitness accounts of crop circle formation from around the world have usually been summarily discounted.

It may be, perhaps, that because no collection of these reports has been undertaken systematically, that the weight of these people's observations have not been taken seriously. But more than likely, for those objectively evaluating the eyewitnesses claims of seeing a crop circle form, it may have more to do with the lack of an identifiable, consistently-observed process amongst the witnesses. There seems to be a variety of descriptions as to the circumstances of how the crops (or grasses) become flattened, but several clear patterns emerge when comparing the statements.

Dr. Terence Meaden, in his book, The Circles Effect and Its Mysteries [June 1989, Aretech Publishing Co., ISBN 0 9510590 3 3] has contributed the largest and most detailed collection of eyewitness reports. In Meaden's book, several eyewitnesses clearly report all the characteristics of whirlwinds being involved with circle formation, but several others clearly report light effects being involved, and others report hearing only strange acoustical effects. This, of course, led to Meaden's 'synthesis' approach to try and develop a hypothesis which could explain the wide variety of circumstances involved with crop circle formation that the eyewitnesses were reporting - hence, the 'plasma vortex' idea. Interestingly, the majority of the eyewitness reports that have been collected are daytime observations, in contrast with the often-used (by both supporters and critics) myth that ‘crop circles form only at night’.

[As an aside, Meaden also cites G.D. Freier’s work in 1960 on the electric fields of dust devils, which zoobyshoe has mentioned previously in this thread, but Meaden also cites W.E. Bradley and R.G. Semonin for their 1963 work on electrical measurements of dust whirls, and D. Crozier’s 1964 and 1970 work on electric fields of dust devils, as well as many others for helping to form the basis for the plasma vortex hypothesis. Meaden has more than 50 scientific citations listed of related science papers in this book to support his ideas.]

Additional eyewitness reports can be found in a wide variety of literature and media. For instance, Arthur C. Clarke’s “Mysterious Universe” TV show did a half-hour documentary on crop circles in 1995 (which has recently been re-released on DVD as part of a wider collection of shorts from the TV series). In the crop circle segment, three eyewitnesses are interviewed – one from the 1940’s, is clearly of the whirlwind variety of sightings, a second from the 1960’s is associated with luminous phenomenon, and a third contemporary sighting had both luminous and acoustic characteristics. Several other books and periodicals of a wide and diverse array of credibility exist which list eyewitness accounts of crop circle formation.

I should mention that one notable purported eyewitness claim has been discredited. A video tape surfaced in 1996 which seemed to show a crop circle formation forming underneath several 'balls of light' flying in circles above a field at a place called Oliver's Castle in southern England. The video was analyzed and the filmographer scrutinized, and both turned out to be frauds. The video had been doctored on a computer, and the filmographer confessed to fabricating it. It is still being lauded as genuine by some groups, so steer away from that account. However, there does exist at least a dozen filmed examples of these flying 'balls of light' that have been witnessed at crop circle locations - after the crop circles have already formed - that have stood up to scrutiny. There have been dozens more that have been eyewitnessed but not filmed. What the 'balls of light' relationship is to the circles, or what their composition or nature is, at this point is unknown.

I, myself, have interviewed a couple of witnesses to crop circle formations here in the USA in the past year, and both reports consist of completely different observations. The first report – again, a daytime observation – saw no whirlwind action, but described the three-circle complex formation as being flattened in 12-15 seconds. No unusual lights, no unusual sounds, no lightning, no whirlwinds – just the plants wavering back and forth like ‘waves on a lake’, then being flattened, each circle one at a time. For a more detailed report on this incident visit:

http://www.cropcirclenews.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=128

A second report from last summer has come to me just recently, and I have yet to compile a report of the incident, but it was a nighttime observation which involved luminous phenomenon. The reported 'balls of light' seen after the crops had been flattened were photographed in this case.

[Incidently, I am part of a loose 'team' of independent researchers trying to document the crop circles here in the USA using a scientific framework as the basis for discerning which crop circles are hoaxes mechanically-made by people, and which ones are not. Last year, our team field-investigated 14 reported crop circle sites in 12 weeks in Ohio, Wisconsin, Michigan, and Indiana. Several of those were clear hoax attempts, and we categorized and reported on them as such, whereas others we determined to not have been mechanically-made. We determined this through a variety of field tests. I certainly am interested in feedback on our methodology if anyone would like to comment. For additional details on all of these sites, feel free to read our reports at www.cropcirclenews.com]
 
Last edited:
  • #81
Yes, jwilson, I could not possibly have received a better answer to my question. Your research is extremely impressive, and I very much appreciate you taking the time to post here. I don't know what to make of the luminous phenomena, but it was satisfying to find there were a lot more eyewitness reports of whirlwind-created circles.

Thanks,

Zooby
 
  • #82
Yes whirlwinds can flatten crops and make patterns. They have not ever made any intricate geometric patterns.
 
  • #83
Let's establish some critical thinking rules?

To Norval, Dr. Charles Lietzau, who is also a member of the 'team' of researchers I'm working with, summarized a framework of how we think and operate regarding understanding crop circles. It's worth posting an edited version (in 2 parts) here so people might have a clearer perspective of how ideas about crop circles might be discussed in a scientific forum:

I) DEGREES OF AUTHORITY:
A)"CONCLUSIVE PROOF"
This degree of authority is reserved for the statistically significant results of a properly designed and executed controlled experiment. So long as the experiment is replicable with consistent results, the weight of authority of such results supercedes all other sources.
This highest level has been achieved for the statistical correlation of the presence of verifiable diagnostic criteria in numerous formations that have not been claimed by hoaxers and their complete absence in those that are known to be man made. Even though this specific level is unavailable to direct cause and effect crop circle research, since the source is currently unknown, it has been approached to a level which still demonstrates greater authority than all opposing sources. This has been accomplished by the controlled experiments which conclusively prove that no known hoaxing techniques are able to replicate specific diagnostic phenomena such as elongated node collars, expulsion cavities or fissures, short-term node bending, or accelerated seed germination and vigor, in the field. While our best data, as outlined above, is largely on the secondary rung of this level of proof, no evidence presented by our critics ranks at even this level of authority.

B)"THEORY," (in its most restricted scientific sense).
Being a generalized statement of a successfully tested hypothesis, it is a "fact" that the concept has been proven to be consistent with known cases and predictive when applied to similar cases. A true scientific theory is recognized as having the currently most authoritative experimental foundation, although it still remains open to modification, or rarely, replacement.
In the field of crop formation investigation, the theory has been established through statistical correlation that the diagnostic criteria referred to earlier are only characteristic of authentic formations and not those known to be hoaxed by human techniques. Critics will argue that, in the absence of cause and effect experimentation, this is an example of circular reasoning as the presence of these anomalies is also the criterion by which the circle is judged to be authentic when its actual formation was not determined by known cause and effect mechanisms under experimental conditions. However, such "Natural Experiments" are traditionally accepted in science as a close second when proper precautions have been taken. Until recently, it was not possible to duplicate meteoritic phenomena, yet their existence has long been considered conclusively proven. The same problem confronts the physicists who postulate the existence of the neutrino and black holes. Yet, these phenomena, which not only present the same investigative problems, but are based on far less tangible evidence than the crop circle anomalies, are not only accepted, but taught as essentially fact in most science textbooks.

C) "SCIENTIFIC HYPOTHESIS"
The foremost criterion of a scientific hypothesis is that it must be falsifiable. That means that it can be tested and proven wrong should that be the case. The chief means by which this is accomplished is by the experimental verification of predictions which follow from the hypothesis. A correct hypothesis is a scientific theory in the making. An incorrect hypothesis is a valuable guide away from a fruitless path of inquiry. The value of a path of inquiry based on specific criteria can only be established by controlled experimentation. Regardless of the current consensus of "experts," the hypothesis cannot be dismissed, "a priori." However, similarly, regardless of the reputation or consensus agreement of the source, one untested hypothesis also cannot be asserted to carry any greater authority than another, in the absence of conclusive experimental evidence.
The chief manner in which our critics misapply the purpose of this step of scientific protocol is to assert that it is only necessary to propose an alternative hypothesis and the proven hypothesis being expressed, actually a theory in the making, is somehow cast into doubt until you make the effort to disprove the challenge. Actually, the challenger has the responsibility to provide evidence for their proposal and to demonstrate how it contradicts the evidence already provided by the first hypothesis. Thus, there has never been a valid scientific challenge to the "theory" that the recognized diagnostic anomalies are characteristic of authentic crop formations. The assertion that this evidence need not be evaluated because "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence," is an artificially imposed barrier invented by the critics to avoid confronting the conclusive nature of our evidence. The highest scientific protocols make the same demands upon everyone. The establishment of verifiable criteria, a cause and effect relationship, or at least a significant and exclusive correlation, and conclusive experimental evidence are the only valid requirements. If the research provides these requirements, academic honesty compels competent critics to either accept the conclusions on a provisional basis, or experimentally prove them wrong.

D)"SPECULATION"
Any explanation or criticism of one that does not meet the requirements of having been experimentally verified to establish it as a valid hypothesis has the same lack of authority as pure, unfounded, speculation. This is true regardless of the reputation of the source, or the degree of consensus.
Contrary to precepts expressed by our critics, each piece of research must stand on its own grounds. The reputation or affiliations of the proponent may predispose others to look into it seriously; however they do not have any weight in validating the authority of the statement. According to the highest scientific protocols, the accuracy of the data is the only conclusive authority, and any credible critic has the obligation to address only the facts, or any criticism is unfounded.
 
  • #84
II) LEVELS OF ANALYSIS: LEVEL/SUBJECT OF EXPERIMENTATION-INVESTIGATION
A) FIRST LEVEL; EVIDENCE OF EXISTENCE OF THE PHENOMENON
This also refers to the formation of, and testing of hypotheses as well as statistical correlation.
This level involves the discovery and documentation of replicable, quantitatively measurable criteria. The primary criteria that have already been established include elongation of node collars, expulsion cavities or fissures, short-term node bending, and germination anomalies. This also includes the presence of first order mathematical correspondences. Examples of such include diatonic ratios, Beer-Lambert distributions, and correlations of measurements with known specific examples. Second order correlations such as Euclidian theorems should be considered as hypotheses which have the capacity to become true theories through rigorous testing. One of our primary goals should be to increase the number of such dependable, diagnostic criteria. A case in point being the current research into the possibility that leaf base necrosis in soybeans may prove to be a dependable diagnostic criterion. Current investigations have strengthened its likelihood, however; further field evidence and investigation are needed to verify its scientific dependability.

B) SECOND LEVEL; IMMEDIATE CAUSE OR MECHANISM
This level builds on the diagnostic criteria discovered in level one and involves testing hypotheses to determine if they are capable of replicating this verifiable data.
Crop circle research has just scratched the surface of this level. The only valid data we actually have involves the replication of elongated node collars and possibly expulsion cavities in the laboratory by exposure to microwave radiation. Other valid avenues of research might involve electrostatic forces, and infra or ultrasound, as well as leaving open the possibility of an as yet unidentified force. More than one mechanism may be at work as well. Good working hypotheses such as the "Plasma Vortex Hypothesis," are currently being developed in an attempt to explain the presumed forces necessary to produce the observed requirements of authentic circles. However, no conclusive field studies or laboratory investigations have been carried out to date to verify whether such forces 1, actually exist; 2, have the organizational capacity; and 3, are capable of affecting plants in the required manner. While this is a crucial step in scientific protocols, all hypotheses at this level of causation still remain to be experimentally verified. Clearly this is a vital area of ongoing effort, however, the unverified nature of such research must be acknowledged and relevant experimentation must be developed. Since conjecture may direct the course of experimentation, everyone who wishes to is encouraged to develop and share ideas for research. However, it must be pointed out that existing patterns and evidence on level one do not allow selecting among competing hypotheses on level two. They must be verified by further experiments with new predictions as appropriate.
WE DO NOT ENDORSE LEVEL TWO EXPLANATIONS BEYOND THE EXTENT OF VERIFIED EXPERIMENTAL DATA.

C) THIRD LEVEL; SOURCE OF CAUSE
Experimentally verifiable, conclusive evidence on level three is not currently available. Conclusively determined criteria from level one are not appropriate for supporting speculation on this level. Remember, that an effective hypothesis is required to predict beyond what is already known, and to produce verifiable experimental data under replicable conditions.
Even with these admonitions, speculation is still acceptable as it may lead to specific avenues of experimental research.

D) FOURTH LEVEL; SIGNIFICANCE
Experimentally verifiable, conclusive evidence on level four is not currently available. Conclusively determined criteria from levels one and two are not appropriate for supporting speculation on this level. An effective hypothesis is required to predict beyond what is already known, and to produce verifiable experimental data under replicable conditions.


As you can see from these two posts (quoting Dr. Charles Lietzau), it is essential to critically review 'the rules of the game' so-to-speak when evaluating what can be said with any certainty about the crop circle phenomenon.

Thanks Ivan Seeking and zoobyshoe for your compliments regarding the information I posted. If anyone has any additonal questions regarding specific information about crop circles, I will try and answer you with the details as best I know them, and as staightforwardly as possible.
 
  • #85
more info about crop circles

I'm new here, and am another person involved with crop circles. I appreciate the excellent posts Jeffrey Wilson has been making! It would be great if some intelligent group picked up on what's really going on, so let me add some things.

I've just put together a booklet, showing why crop circles can't be hoaxed, which is online at http://theconversation.org/booklet2.html. (Free Flash player: www.macromedia.com/flash.) The genuineness of the phenomenon just can't be denied!

And, on my blog, I intersperse progressive political thought with what's happening with the circles, urging attention be paid to them: http://TheConversation.org. Here's the intro to the last post -- of an L.A. Times report about an international conference of scientists that dealt with the possibility of Earth being struck by an asteroid:

"If humanity had its wits about it, the asteroid inquiry is an example of what it would do. There is so much danger on this living planet that we are a primitive species until we turn our collective attention to protecting ourselves from things beyond our control. A shift of mind-set is what it will take to get us to seriously change our ways, and, most logically, this would come from an event that made the possibility of species annihilation real to everyone who was left. All good minds should be turned to how to bring about this shift in another way. My offering is crop circles -- evidence that we're not alone would bring us all together in a vastly different juxtaposition to the universe, plus it would conceivably enroll a greater intelligence than ours in coming to our aid. The pattern so far has been that the incidence and complexity of the crop formations have increased in response to interest that has been shown, and anything that can put crop circles in our landscape conceivably could put an asteroid shield around the earth."

I went on to ask, "Does anyone have another idea for how to bring about a radical change in the way humanity thinks, or are there responses to this one?" I'm posing that question here!

For my idiosyncratic page about my involvement with the phenomenon, with links to my favorite sites: http://mightycompanions.org/cropcircles

Suzanne Taylor
Los Angeles
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #86
Yes, it’s fine for those that follow to stop and smell the roses as they work out all the steps the trailblazers and trackers left for them to follow. If I had heard that what I have accomplished in my life thus far was “impossible”, would I have actually have accomplished the impossible? I did, and have, and continue to do so. What I state is the obvious to any human with the normal cognitive abilities we have.

Crop circles that are not hoaxes can be seen from space easily.
I doubt humans are making the real ones.
What’s the message about?
Why a message?

That there are real non-human made geometrical patterns forming all over the planet is a fact. Get through it, get over it, but hell, at least GET ON WITH IT! Investigate in what ever and however way we can, but keep looking for the CAUSE and REASON of WHY.

But, it’s just a suggestion.
:smile:
 
  • #87
http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/2002/sep/m18-015.shtml

perhaps not a create link, but the source material is sound, I just can't find the site I originally discovered the info.

It would seem that sound has a great deal to do with the circles, unless anyone knows of another way for a geometrical shape to manifest within seconds??

And by the way, it has been PROVEN that not all circles are 'fakes'. The info from the link above demonstrates changes to the cell structure of the soil and plants in the affected areas that are incapable of being reproduced outside of a laboratory... Except of course, by whatever is creating them.

Incidentally, the infamous 'hoaxers' were once in a Television Interveiw, and when asked by the host how they constructed some of the more complex circles, they were at a loss to explain - some years later, one of them renieged on his confession.

I'm tellin ya, its all in how they sound...
 
  • #88
But how does sound propagate to such an extent that it creates geometrical patterns? Maybe under high energy and through a "filter"? I don't really know very much about this subject but I know sound follows the traditional inverse square law (spherical).

Im not ruling out sound but I am just curious in how sound might be able to do this.
 
  • #89
http://wc0.worldcrossing.com/WebX?14@28.pNvDb73d0fC.0@.1dde8565/15

Enjoy

You might also enjoy the mandala on the main page :smile:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #90
I don't believe any of the highly geometric, "artistic" circles are of non-human origin.
 
  • #91
I believe there is a process here that is very human, in terms of geometrical patterns.

If you can contain information in a pulse, why not a geometrical pattern selective to that pulse? If you could contain information in paradigmal models, then why not information that is structured purely geometrically. What would arise from elemetal considerations on crystaline objects.

Put aside the skepticism for a minute and think about the geometical designs . What is its mathematical basis for consideration.

In that same source of Cymatics, look and do a search on "sonoluminence."

If we were to find a basis of language here and sound was of value, what is sound capable of in terms of its science and applications?

What ever its causes, the circles are interesting from a artistic perspective :smile:

In Cubist Art and the Monte Carlo Effect there is this real desire to explain the nature of gravity.

If you could connect to the very source of energy in the onslaught of fractorial design, what patterns would emerge that would look artistically appealing when seen from a larger perspective?

Such ideas in terms of "first principals" speak to the realization of what math might emerge from a whole sea of energy, and low and behold, we find this sphere is expelled, and sent? :smile:
 
Last edited:
  • #92
Every year two, three or four new programs on TV discuss crop circles. They have interviews with second and third generation hoaxers who demonstrate how they make these elaborate designs in the crops, generally getting their ideas from books of geometric designs. There's no meaning, they just pick the ones that appeal to them. There is usually a time lapse video showing them creating a whole crop formation in a few hours or less.

Before I saw these demonstrations I saw interviews with "believers" who pointed to the elaborate formations and declared it was obvious that two people couldn't create such a perfect design overnight: it was too elaborate and would take days. They were wrong.

So, I expect that the assertion that nothing but microwave radiation can cause the exploding nodes, and all the other assertions of things being not humanly possible, are equally mistaken.
 
  • #93
Imagine http://feynman.physics.lsa.umich.edu/~mduff/talks/1998%20-%20The%20Theory%20Formerly%20Known%20as%20Strings.pdf what next :smile:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #94
Bubbles are appealing. They remind me of breasts.
 
  • #95
zoobyshoe said:
Bubbles are appealing. They remind me of breasts.
Why would that be? Bubbles aren't hairy like zooby boobs... :rofl:
 
  • #96
Tsunami said:
Why would that be? Bubbles aren't hairy like zooby boobs... :rofl:
It's all in the way they undulate.
 
  • #97
I know I can't make anybody believe, nor can I prove it. But there ARE CERTAINLY GENUINE Crop Circles. No doubt.

However, I bet anybody can't prove how to make SOME of these Crop Circle formations, EITHER. It just like the classic pyramid argument. We say, "Oh yeah, we could build them today." However, the FACTS ARE, that we can't even come close.

How any "hoaxter" could come up with diatonic ratio clues, built in, or interdimensional physics, is beyond me...
 
  • #98
Nommos Prime (Dogon) said:
I know I can't make anybody believe, nor can I prove it. But there ARE CERTAINLY GENUINE Crop Circles. No doubt.
Genuine meaning made by extra terrestrials? There is doubt.
However, I bet anybody can't prove how to make SOME of these Crop Circle formations, EITHER. It just like the classic pyramid argument. We say, "Oh yeah, we could build them today." However, the FACTS ARE, that we can't even come close.
Why do you think this when a crop circle is such a rudimentary copying of a pattern into smashed down crops?

How any "hoaxter" could come up with diatonic ratio clues, built in, or interdimensional physics, is beyond me...
In the show I saw, the hoaxers showed the interviewer a book of patterns they used as models for their work. They don't design them from scratch, themselves. They copy things that have been worked out by mathemeticians according to various ratios and other interesting exercizes in pure math and patterns. The hoaxers just chose ones that appealed to them visually.

Nowadays it would be no problem for any computer/math savvy person to get a PC to generate these sorts of patterns all day long, each and every one of them having some fascinating mathematical ratios to them.
 
  • #99
Yeh mate, but you CAN'T press such patterns so accurately into a crop field/grass! You can't.

Do you know of some special type of lawnmower accurate to fractions of a mm?
 
  • #100
Nommos Prime (Dogon) said:
Yeh mate, but you CAN'T press such patterns so accurately into a crop field/grass! You can't.
Sure you can. The hoaxers on the show I saw demonstrated it for the camera.
Do you know of some special type of lawnmower accurate to fractions of a mm?
ROFL! Where are you getting the notion that anything can be measured in a crop circle to "fractions of a mm"? Crops don't grow that neatly spaced that you could say anything was accurate to fractions of a mm. Or a mm for that matter. You'd be risking it claiming accuracies of a centimeter.
 
  • #101
has anyone mentioned the theory that crop circles are scalaar weapons tests, which can aparently manipulate gravity from a distance?
 
  • #102
Nature just does doesn't create shapes of such perfect symmetry
on a macro scale. I find it assuming that people think its reasonable that some
kind of rouge-wind could create incredible intricate crop circles.
The fact that crop circles have the hand of a sentient creature behind
them is self evident imo. The real questions are who is doing it, how
are they doing it and why? the only evidence I've seen atall that gos anyway towards answering these these questions points towards the military, but its purely circumstatial none has caught them in the act as such.
I'll try and find some links shortly...
 
  • #103
Overdose said:
has anyone mentioned the theory that crop circles are scalaar weapons tests, which can aparently manipulate gravity from a distance?
I don't think you mean "theory". I think you mean speculation. Anyway, this is the first I've heard of it. What is a "scalar" weapon?
 
  • #104
Overdose said:
Nature just does doesn't create shapes of such perfect symmetry
on a macro scale. I find it assuming that people think its reasonable that some
kind of rouge-wind could create incredible intricate crop circles.
Who thinks this? I haven't read anyone make this assertion, or express such a belief.
The fact that crop circles have the hand of a sentient creature behind
them is self evident imo. The real questions are who is doing it, how
are they doing it and why? the only evidence I've seen atall that gos anyway towards answering these these questions points towards the military, but its purely circumstatial none has caught them in the act as such.
I'll try and find some links shortly...
There is, in fact, no evidence pointing toward the military, and a huge amount of evidence pointing at hoaxers.
It strikes me as very backward that you entertain the notion that the military has the technology to create these patterns by manipulating gravity while denying that hoaxers have the technology to copy patterns out of a book with a board and rope, and a measuring tape. Think about it.
 
  • #105
zoobyshoe: "It strikes me as very backward that you entertain the notion that the military has the technology to create these patterns by manipulating gravity while denying that hoaxers have the technology to copy patterns out of a book with a board and rope, and a measuring tape. Think about it."

lol ... True that

Whats intersting is how long have crop circles been around. Where they seem to occur with high frequency, and the interpretations that people come up with. I bet they're connected. There are still people here in the uk who have formed groups around the belief that the Earth is flat, or pentagonal, or hollow, or anything other than a filled sphere-ish shape.

An intersting excercise for the crop-circle-ers [sorry, i don't know the name for people believing in extraordinary origins of the flattenning of plants in patterns esp. circles],
would be to try and debunk UFO guys, hollow/flat Earth guys, and other such people.
No, it would not b intersting, but therepeutic in the sense that they will be faced with a mirror 2 look at themselves with.
 

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top