Cropcircles

[Alexandra Cole]

I've always assumed those circles were created by artists, but I found the whole "blown node" thing interesting because it sounds like radiation. Seems like it would be good to know if we're getting Chernobyl grain in our muesli.

I did a quick pass through a database and read the Levengood/Talbott/Haselhoff articles:

Anatomical anomalies in crop formation plants. (1994)
Dispersion of energies in worldwide crop formations.(1999)
Opinions and comments on 'Dispersion of energies in worldwide crop formations.' (2001)

Then I read a tag-team takedown of the above:

Balls of Light: The questionable science of crop circles. (2005)

Abstract:
"Three papers published by W. C. Levengood (1994), W. C. Levengood and N. P. Talbott (1999) and by E. H. Haselhoff (2001) suggested the involvement of some kind of electromagnetic radiation during the creation of crop circles. Here we discuss the methods and conclusions of the three articles, pointing out the misrepresentation of the experimental protocols, the misleading application of statistical procedures, the arbitrary discarding of unwanted results and the weakness of the proposed physical model to the suggested hypothesis. In particular, we show that Haselhoff's conclusions are unsubstantiated and do not prove the involvement of an electromagnetic radiation source in the creation event."

The last sentence: "The total evidence discussed in this critical review demonstrates nothing but a mere difference in the stem elongation between the flattened plants lying inside the circles and those standing outside it, as we should expect when whatever kind of mechanical force flattens the plants, rope and wood plank included. "


So now I feel okay about eating cereal again. And I still think it's done by artists.


As a side-note, here's a creepy anecdote involving Haselhoff:

"The three cereologists went to the new circle and noticed that it was still warm. Haselhoff wanted to take a picture, but the battery of his digital camera had suddenly become empty. Boerman and Haselhoff then experienced a distinct pain in their limbs. Using his dowsing rod, Bobbink sensed that the ninth circle was not yet finished. The researchers ran away in terror. It took them half an hour to regain their courage and return. When journalist Roel Toering arrived, the battery of his digital camera failed as well (Toering 2001b). Once he had returned home, Haselhoff found that all of his photo files were corrupted, except for one photo that he had made outside the crop circle." [From an article in 'Reframing Dutch Culture.' 2007]

The next morning, there were all found dead.

Just kidding.

 

[PunkInDrublic]

After that he explains what a "selective skeptic" is and I gotta say it reminded me of the actions by people like punkindrublic

It also reminds me of the actions of the greatest scientists in the world, minus the douchebag approach. Not sure why I'm bothering after reading this line

Also, the scientific community, as with many other things, has a mainstream which is influenced by society and its taboos and corruption (think Tesla and cold fusion for example). Therefore not to be fully trusted when it comes to being unbiased in their choice of which subjects to highlight/research/promote.

We have a completely different understanding of the scientific community. No bias or corruption in the scientific community that I follow, unlike dudes that fake their credentials.

 

[weirdbr]

Maya, I should point out that the links you are pointing to are highly questionable in quality in my opinion. Articles based on research done by individuals that use dowsing rods on their 'research' to me scream bad science, as dowsing rods have been proven scientifically by multiple researchers/research groups via multiple methods to be no more reliable than random chance. That http://www.greatdreams.com site as well - personally I couldn't find any background information on the author; the main page of that site makes me feel this person is has a lot of interests/opinions that are 'interesting': a lot of GMO conspiracy, "TERRIBLE WEATHER - ICE, FLOODS, AND MORE THEN: AN ASTEROID IS GOING TO HIT AFRICA", "THE RAINS HAVE COME PREDICTED BY THE BIBLE AND A DREAM"..

To me, good evidence would be:
- biochemical analysis showing for example a higher incidence in the plants of minerals or elements not present in the soil (for example, if they had Carbon or Hydrogen isotopes in amounts that are out of the ordinary. Or if the DNA sequencing showed differences between plants from the circle and from the outside.
- for claims of radioactivity/electromagnetic - good measurements using scientifically proven methods/tools - geiger counters, magnetometers, any other method that has been reliably proven to more reliable than rolling dice.
- and more importantly - that this evidence is peer-reviewed and the analysis is replicated by multiple groups/individuals.

 

[Jillybean]

A guy with a PhD thinks dowsing rods are scientific? :crybaby: This literally pains me.

 

[PunkInDrublic]

Science teachers worldwide all wept when she posted that link calling it a good base to do your own research.

 

[Alexandra Cole]

To me, good evidence would be:
- biochemical analysis showing for example a higher incidence in the plants of minerals or elements not present in the soil (for example, if they had Carbon or Hydrogen isotopes in amounts that are out of the ordinary. Or if the DNA sequencing showed differences between plants from the circle and from the outside.
- for claims of radioactivity/electromagnetic - good measurements using scientifically proven methods/tools - geiger counters, magnetometers, any other method that has been reliably proven to more reliable than rolling dice.
- and more importantly - that this evidence is peer-reviewed and the analysis is replicated by multiple groups/individuals.

To be fair, it looks like some of it was published in a peer-reviewed journal (linked above), which is probably why it got so much traction. It was only when the analysis was replicated that it turned out to be a trainwreck (also linked above). It's kind of an interesting academic slapfight.

 

[PunkInDrublic]

Some of the more amusing quotes from that link in case anyone isn't positive that it is just conspiracy theory bs. Besides the fact the it contains the same "be skeptic of the skeptical" and "don't be fooled" garbage that the tinfoil crowd is always mumbling to themselves about.

Seriously, not even joking, this is the first line.

Most serious crop circle researchers agree that a majority of the formations are not being made by the human specie, and seem to be symbolic messages from an unknown, high intelligence.

Our research indicates that dreams are related to crop circles. Dreams are sometimes predictive of crop circles. I wrote an article about this for the Dream Network Journal in 1992

Site also has a bunch of pseudo science links. Hasn't been updated since 2007, dude probably got abducted by aliens. I'm all for keeping an open mind but at some point it can be harmful and counterproductive.


Edited because I make English teachers cry

 

[MayaEden]

We have a completely different understanding of the scientific community. No bias or corruption in the scientific community that I follow, unlike dudes that fake their credentials.

Im not sure what you mean by this. I don't follow either one? I simply "look". Really not getting where you're getting at.
Indeed most serious cropcircle researchers think it's possible that they're symbolic messages from beings from outside of earth. How is that "garbage that the tinfoil crowd is always mumbling to themselves about"? It's a theory. Just that. The patterns and the way they're formed are enough to ponder on something other than a human born on earth with public 21st century technology. It's not "insane" to wonder about that. There are millions and millions of planets out there, it seems selfish, arrogant and statistically incorrect of me to assume that all that there is "right now" is primitive organisms in the rest of the universe. I think it's highly likely that, logically, there are other beings out there. Some primitive, others like us, others highly advanced. Taking into account the high possibility of highly advanced "people", it becomes very tricky to formulate a theory on why they would do cropcircles, IF they even actually do them. Because we simply aren't nearly advanced ourselves to fully comprehend the extent of possible evolution and technology, let alone their way of thinking, their intents, their consciousness, etc.


weirdbr, im well aware of the suspicious credibility, the tacky appearence and the subjective interpretations of the website I linked to. I never claimed anything contrary to that. I even said that I hadn't finished article when I posted. I agree with you. It looks like crap and like MFC had a hollywood blockbuster baby with how the stereotype of "conspiracy theorists" looks like.


I just found and interesting article, that didn't seem like total trash and that had a very different perspective from other articles posted. I didn't focus much on unnecessary things like mocking and demeaning something because it's different from what I believe/think and seems like "tinfoil crowd" wacko conspiracy mumbo jumbo. Plus I never claimed it to be any more/less than it is. Especially because I still haven't even finished it and I'm not really hurried to make my mind up on whether it's total truth or total crap. Also, faulty things in an article don't automatically invalidate the "good" or "better" parts. Sometimes they do, sometimes they kinda do (read it with a grain of salt kinda thing), and sometimes they don't. Just thought I should clarify that there's more than just extremes.
Plus this is a thread about crop circles, it's only fair the spectrum of "positions"/beliefs/thoughts/ponderings on the subject is treated objectively for each one, without resorting to your own culture/beliefs/thoughts bias as influence in how you react to it. Kind of like instead of mocking and demeaning.

It's also important to take into account the possibility of mainstream/respectable/famous scientists avoiding or even not declaring/publishing/agreeing with evidence/proof/progress/whatever about taboo subjects like cropcircles. That simply is a very high possiblity. It has happened before even with things like weed for example, which isn't nearly as taboo as cropcircles and all things related to advanced/non-human technology. Therefore how far someone would go to keep that taboo as taboo (or twisted truth) would be even harder to measure. This possibility can't really be ignored and when you think about the implications it could be manifesting right now in the real world and how information is spread, analyzed and published, you gotta really sit down for a sec and scratch your brain wrinkles. Even then you'll probably be very confused and unclarified.