V-shaped UFOs in NM photos

When did you acquire the

very hazardous habit

of walling off huge great spheres of reality

as nonreality?

Not very scientific.

Not very good for maximum alertness and survivability.

Not even very smart.

Pretty dumb, actually.

Of course, one must learn to sift and sort and throw out the chaff . . .

But I thought 2 year olds were already learning to do that.

Amazing.

OH, I GET IT!

Y'ALL HAVE NOW ELEVATED

IGNORANT 100%-COMPREHENSIVE BLACKWASHING BLIND RIDICULE

into being an indispensible component of the SCIENTIFIC METHOD!

OF COURSE!

How could I have missed that! [slaps head]

“you know, there’s nothing we have that can stop and go backwards like that.”

Another wonderful story we have to believe because this couple says they saw it. No chance they are pulling a hoax, of course.

Yes, of course, drawings of the craft. Now there is solid evidence.

“I have cited the archeological dig which produced solid evidence.”

You can site anything you want. If you can’t produce any photos or evidence of the actual dig other than someone claiming they did the dig, then it remains unproven. Likely a hoax.

“I have cited implants.”

Let’s see some pictures of these implants.

“I have cited more than 3,000 trace landing site cases wherein there was tangible, solid evidence on the ground and on vegetation in addition to witnesses narratives.”

Wintnesses, huh? What about evidence? 3 thousand cases and not one shred of evidence that has reached the news media or other reliable scientific journals.

“I have cited the scientific peer reviewed journal articles about the differences in plants, dryness of the soil and micro-fine iron particles within the crop circles and not outside of them.”

Peer reviewed by whom? Other true believers? Any of these so called provable events would be the stuff of front page articles in major scientific news periodicals. Interesting how they don’t seem to be interested.

Once again, not one bit of evidence you can point to except for the writings of other people. They write it, produce no solid evidence, but you believe it.

Once again, not one bit of evidence you can point to except for the writings of other people. They write it, produce no solid evidence, but you believe it.

Perhaps you believe in electrons in much the same way.

If you think that the proability is 100% that they are part of a hoax, then your “fair-mindedness,” “objectivity” and “scientific analysis”

are near 100% bogus.

And your psychological assessment skills would appear to be nil.

More hypocritical nonsense.

Did you distrust any drawings of any ‘bear attack on the tent’ and therefore trashed the report of your relatives or friends?

How about of the auto accident?

Or the train-wreck of a drunken brawl between spouse and relative or buddy? Of course you didn’t believe that either because there were merely witnesses and no protruding broken bones and black and blue bruises . . . and the broken tooth was rationalized away just as easily.

Or how about the teen kids of relatives. You obviously didn’t believe they were on drugs either. No, siree—you’d have had to see them taking them right in front of your face to believe that!

I’d guess you don’t even believe OThuga’s a Marxist because you didn’t see him write the Communist Manifesto update personally, yourself, at YOUR kitchen table!

You probably don’t believe OThuga was born in Kenya either because you weren’t the midwife at the birth!

Sooooooooooooooooo impressive.

YUP, super rationalist, objectivist, ONLY-SEEING-IN-MY-LAP-CASTRATING-MY-GONADS-TIL-I-NEAR-BLEED-TO-DEATH-REALITY-ASSESSOR yazoo!

Such tough objectivity is sooooooooooooooooooooooo impressive.

/s

You’re wrong.

The crop circle peer reviewed journal articles were reviewed by agriculturalists not at all believing in the crop circle phenomena.

I may even dig up a reference before bed, if I feel extra motivated.

YOU ARE 100% WRONG AS CAN BE ON THAT SCORE.

UNINFORMED Cluelessness about the phenomena dressed a pink tutu bounces on the stage of utter ignorance yet again!

The photos of the implants and I think even some of the metalurgical analysis has been posted or at linked to hereon before.

The naysayers, as usual, still found idiotic reasons to rationalize it away . . . CLEARLY proving for the many hundredth time that they have

absolutely NO interest in true FACTS and true REALITY.

Naw,

naysayers don’t believe in electrons because they can’t fondle them and get a tingle by their orbits.

Naw,

naysayers don’t believe in electrons because they can’t fondle them and get a tingle by their orbits.

Here’s a fun story by a couple of hunters.

Maybe it will give the naysayers some fun frothing at the mouth incredulously.

From:

http://www.earthfiles.com/news.php?ID=1483&category=Environment

Excerpts . . . photos etc. of significant interest to me are at the link

. . .

Stan Gordon, UFO and Cryptozoology Investigator and Video Producer, UFO Crash Kecksburg: The Untold Story, Greensburg, Pennsylvania: “It was about 4:45 AM in the morning. It had been raining in the area and these two hunters were going out into the wooded area. As they walked further into the woods, they began to hear a coyote howling. It was not long after that the two hunters started hearing coyotes from all around that wooded area. It gave the impression that there were three groups of coyotes out there making a tremendous amount of noise with their howling. In fact, the two men even had trouble communicating at times because the howling was so loud.

As the one man told me, ‘I have never heard so many coyotes howling like that ever before, even though I’m in the woods quite a bit.’

They are proceeding down into the woods and their only light is one Mini-Mag flashlight and a hat with built-inlight.

. . .

At about 150 to 200 yards ahead of them on the other side of the field, the two hunters see two, dim, glowing lights. It was described to me by the eyewitnesses as about the size of a baseball, about two feet apart and about fifteen feet off the ground. The lights were giving off a glow that they said was similar to the Indigo glow of a watch or speedometer. Kind of a greenish Indigo color he has seen shine from a watch. They thought it was odd, but might be other hunters, even though they didn’t see signs of other hunters. They didn’t see other vehicles when they went into the woods.

. . .

As they are watching these beams of light, all of a sudden their attention is drawn to what appears to be a glowing, human-like figure that appears right in the area where the beams had originated.

One of the hunters mentioned that one of the beams actually seemed to lead the glowing figure out into the field. The figure moved out about 20 feet into the field of grass that was about six inches tall. As the two hunters are watching the moving figure move pretty steadily and quick, suddenly all those other beams of light in the woods vanished. They just disappeared.

Lime Green, Glowing Humanoid

What was described to me was that the humanoid-shaped being looked like the silhouette of a person, but was glowing a light, lime green color. The witness said to me that the best way to describe the entity was if you got glow-in-the-dark paint and put it all over your body. He said that’s what the thing looked like. He said it was about three feet tall. The arms were hanging down to the sides and appeared to be longer than arms of a human being. The legs were not very clear. The hunter said the glowing around this entity was kind of blocking out the shape, so it was hard to see the figure. The color, he said, was a light green lime color. He said he and his other hunter friend were walking through the woods at a pretty fast pace, and yet the way the entity was moving about twice as fast as they were and it gave the impression that it was actually gliding, rather than walking – gliding above the grassy field and there was no sound they could hear.

At that point, they were both pretty shook up and one eyewitness was becoming nervous, not sure what was going on, and began to whistle out loud. When he whistled, he said, the glowing figure moving steadily across the grassy field suddenly stopped abruptly, ‘like stopping on a dime.’ The hunter said the green, glowing entity remained motionless for about 30 seconds. Then it began moving again about 20 feet deeper into the field and then suddenly vanished from sight. It disappeared and they never did see it again.

Interestingly, he said about two minutes later after the entity in the field vanished, all the coyotes stopped howling. The coyotes had been howling the entire time.

He did tell me later that day, as they kept trying to figure out what they had seen, they went back to the location to search for any footprints or evidence and found nothing. And they were very reluctant to tell anybody. One of the hunters told some people close to him and they made fun of him, so he said he just kept his mouth shut.

IN ALL YOUR PENNSYLVANIA INVESTIGATIONS, HAVE YOU EVER HAD A CASE IN WHICH THERE WAS A HUMANOID FIGURE THAT APPEARED TO GLOW A LIME GREEN AND FLOAT OVER THE GROUND?

I know I’ve had instances of entities in peoples’ homes that floated. In some cases, the people could not see the legs of the entities – the legs were not clear – but the entities were able to float around in the house. I can’t say in all cases, the entities glowed, but I have heard similar reports going back many years.

THE GLIDING, FLOATING, HAS BEEN REPORTED OFF AND ON OVER AT LEAST HALF A CENTURY AND IMPLIES THAT WHATEVER WE’RE DEALING WITH, SOME OF THESE ENTITIES – ASSUMING IT’S A TECHNOLOGY – THEY HAVE THE TECHNOLOGY TO LITERALLY FLOAT ABOVE THE GROUND.

Yes, not just here in Pennsylvania, but we’ve heard that historically from around the country and the world. In this particular case of August 3, 2000, around 10 PM, outside of Uniontown, Fayette County, Pennsylvania, where there were five witnesses and those people described seeing out in a rural area a being that they described as about 5 feet tall, human-like, very long, slender extremities, carrying a brown staff about five feet long. The eyewitnesses observed the entity from about 250 feet away, and there was no apparent ground disturbance, but they said this thing appeared to be gliding about 6 inches above the ground. They all got a pretty good look at the entity.

Fayette County has a long history of all kinds of phenomena. One of the areas in Pennsylvania that has re-occurring reports of all kinds of phenomena is along the Chestnut Ridge. That mountain ridge runs from Preston County, West Virginia, through Indiana County in southwestern Pennsylvania. And year after year, we hear reports of strange animal sightings, UFOs, we have all kinds of unexplained booms and sounds along the ridge at times and all kinds of strange things that have been reported.

. . .

continued at the link.

Not very scientific.

You heard it here first, folks. Art Bell's show is a bona fide science program!

Roll in yer grave, Don Herbert (Mr. Wizard).

Here’s another experience of some family members seeing a cow rise into a craft in a beam of light.

Of course, since the omnicient naysayers have said that this is 100% absolutely no doubt impossible . . . they will have no trouble rationalizing it away and frothing at the mouth that anyone could believe it to be true.

From

http://www.earthfiles.com/news.php?ID=1481&category=Environment

excerpts:

Mother and Son Watched Cow Rise In
Golden-Orange Beam to Disc

“Paul Bennewitz wondered if the underground military governmental complex was hiding information in league with the bad E. T.s who mutilated animals and abducted the mother and son in the beam of light.”
- Leo Sprinkle, Ph.D., Prof. Emeritus, Psychology

Colorado Grazing Association’s mutilated cow found on July 26, 1977, with jaw stripped as thousands have been on cattle, horses, goats, sheep, deer and other animals around the world since the 1960s and before. Photograph by the Logan County Sheriff’s Office, Sterling, Colorado.

October 3, 2008 Laramie, Wyoming - My investigations of the worldwide bloodless animal deaths - that law enforcement has long called “mutilations” - began in September 1979, almost thirty years ago. I was Director of Special Projects in the Denver, Colorado, CBS affiliate, that was then KMGH-TV. For nine months, eighteen hours a day without stop, I tried to get to the bottom of what was causing the animal mutilation mystery. My greatest surprises were the law enforcement who told me they knew we were dealing with “creatures from outer space,” as they put it, because of the aerial discs, beams of light and even non-human creatures encountered by eyewitnesses in pastures where mutilated animals were found.

. . .

Three such dramatic cases of eyewitnesses seeing discs and beams of light - and even animals rising in beams of light - came to me from Leo Sprinkle, Ph.D., then Professor of Psychology and Director of Counseling and Testing at the University of Wyoming in Laramie.

[ Editor’s Note: Pat McGuire cattle mutilations and disc encounters in Bosler, Wyoming; Judy Doraty and her teenage daughter, Cindy, watched calf rise in beam of light outside Houston, Texas, and then was surgically cut inside disc; mother and young son watched cow rise in orange light beam and encountered variety of non-human entities in underground cavern. All three cases are included in my books An Alien Harvest and Glimpses of Other Realities, Vol. 1: Facts & Eyewitnesses and my documentaries A Strange Harvest and Strange Harvests 1993. Please see Earthfiles Shop.]

Dr. Sprinkle received his Ph.D. in Counseling Psychology from the University of Missouri in 1961. He went to work at the University of Wyoming and was one of the first professionals to help people who described close encounters with non-human entities. Eventually the phenomenon would come to be called the “UFO human abduction syndrome.”

Dr. Sprinkle worked with me on my TV documentary, A Strange Harvest, and before its May 1980 broadcast, Leo received a phone call from scientist Paul Bennewitz, who owned the Thunder Mountain Laboratory near Kirtland AFB in Albuquerque, New Mexico. Paul Bennewitz was investigating an abduction case northeast of Santa Fe in Cimarron for the Aerial Phenomenon Research Organization (APRO), then run by Coral and Jim Lorenzen, now deceased.

Dr. Sprinkle’s original notes of the phone call are dated Tuesday, May 6, 1980:

. . .

Some how she and her son were transported, perhaps by the orange beam as the cow was. From the air, the mother recognized a mesa she associated with the Roswell, New Mexico, area. Near there, she and her son were taken into an underground cavern. Her 6-year-old son was taken from her and she was frantic to be with him, but non-humans surrounded her on a table. She fought, called them obscenities, screamed for her son and described the beings around her as “their eyes fill more than one-half of their face, like empty holes.”

Finally, a different being showed up and restored order. The mother said, “Here’s one dressed in white. Very brisk! Long fingers, real long fingers. By God! He is kind of greenish colored, too. The one in white is very brisk, calm. Seems to be the only one who knows what the hell is going on. He said, ‘Take her back now! You shouldn’t have done that’ – addressing the smaller beings with huge, black eyes.

The original 32-page typed hypnosis transcript is in my first book, An Alien Harvest. [ See: Earthfiles Shop.] The transcript includes the mother’s recollection of various types of beings in the underground cavern and one particular pool of water that seemed to contain blood and organs. In that pool, she could see a humanoid-shape floating, but did not understand if it were an experiment or nutrition or what.

This year of 2008 has had an upsurge in small and large animal mutilation reports all over the world. Recently, I called Dr. Sprinkle, now 78, to talk with him about his current view of the non-human phenomenon and what it was like for him in May 1980, to have a 6-year-old boy with his mother describing such dramatic events.

. . .

Interview:

Leo Sprinkle, Ph.D., former Director of the Dept. of Counseling and Testing and Prof. Emeritus of Psychology, University of Wyoming, Laramie, Wyoming: “He was a cute little boy. Mother and son white Caucasian. Both attractive and intelligent. Both were frightened at the experience of seeing a calf lifted up in the air in a beam of light into a flying saucer. The hypnosis session with the boy did not reveal much more than what he remembered consciously. But he said there was a cow going up into the craft. He was talking to his mother about it. They were both seeing it. It’s a good case as a double witness.

I REMEMBER YOU AND I TALKING ABOUT THIS AND IF I RECALL CORRECTLY, BACK IN 1980, YOU WERE TELLING ME THAT THE MOTHER GOT SO ENRAGED SEEING TWO HUMANOIDS DOWN WITH THE COW FIRST IN THE PASTURE. SHE PULLED THE CAR OVER TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD AND WAS YELLING AT THEM TO STOP HURTING THE COW.

Yeah, she had a conscious memory of the flying saucer and then the unconscious memory of being onboard and coming back. Then later, during the hypnosis, remembering what happened.

She saw herself having experienced something very unusual, not only the craft and golden-orange light that seemed to be not only something that was alive, but was carrying the young calf up. Both saw the craft and cow. But there was more and as we went through hypnosis with the mother, she felt like she was on board the craft, that she heard her son crying in the distance. She was so angry at the extraterrestrials keeping her separate because she wanted to be with her son. She painted the E. T.s as curious, as efficient, but she was feeling like not only was she being probed and examined, but kept from her son, which was her main concern. The E. T.s kept saying her son would be OK.

. . .

[much more at the link]

Where did you get your training in

wild, off the wall and bizarre extrapolations, inferences, distortions and the like?

an article, peer reviewed etc. re crop circles . . .

I haven’t yet found my reference listing the 3 peer reviewed articles in agricultural scientific journals about crop circles.

However, here’s this one

http://www.xs4all.nl/~icircle/dcircles/talbott.htm

Nancy Talbott - Cropformations: A biophysical investigation.
[computer-input and layout by Dirk Wessels]

Nancy Talbott,
BLT Research Team, USA [Spring, 1997]

Since late 1989, when biophysicist Wm. C. Levengood in Grass Lake, Michigan (USA) was first asked to examine wheat and brley plants sampled from two British “crop circles”, intriguing alterations in the plants tissues have been observerd. The plants, collected and shipped to Dr Levengood’s laboratory by Pat Delgado in the hope that analysis might reveal measureable differences between the affected plants inside the formations and their controls taken from elsewhere in the fields, did in fact reveal several anomalies.

Levengood immediately noticed that, although the seed heads and glumes in the formation plants looked normal on the outside, inside they were absolutely devoid of seeds — a highly unusual finding in a crop planted for commercial harvest. The control plants, taken at varying distances outside the formations, where also normal in appearance, but these did not contain seeds, as would normally be expected.

Additionally, Levengood noted what seemed to be alterations in the growth node on the plant stems, as well as cell wall pit prominence in parenchyma cells of thes nodes in plants taken from inside the formations (it was later learned that examination of the cell wall pits in parenchyma was less productive than the same test in bract tissue.) [red: explanation of these words is later in this document ] The number of aberrations noted, and the lack of a ready eplanation for them, and in particular the fact that the energy effect on the formation plants was altering the normal development of embryos, seemed to clearly indicate the involvement of an energy system more subtle ad complex than could be explained by the presence of people stomping about in the fields with planks and rollers. In order to provide a more reasonable explanation, more laboratory and field-work was needed.

By 1991, after examining many plants from British formations in various grain crops shipped to the laboratory by both British and American field investigators, data clearly documenting a number of abnormal alterations in the embryonic tissues of affected samples had been collected. Dr. Levengood had also been able to confirm through microscopic investigation the previously noted enlargement of cell wall pits in bract tissue and the consistent elargement and elongation of the growth nodes in the stems of crop formation plants. It was obvious that something unusual was affecting these plants. The question, of course, was what?

Scientists in varying disciplines have long recognized that alterations in embryonic tissues, the reproductive capacity in all living things, often offer the very first physical evidence that some new, or as yet unknown, situation exists. The inability of fish to reproduce in the polluted lakes of the Adirondack Mountains in the U.S. was one of the first indicators that “acid rain” should be taken seriously, and the discovery that alligator, turtle and other acquatic mammals, as well as bird populations, were declining in the Florida Everglades, was among the warning signs of an unrecognized cause-and-effect relationship between the use of pesticides and hormone production in mammals. The current epidemic of deformities in frog populations around the world is most likely another significant indicator of an as yet unrecognized interrelationship of environmental factors which will eventually impact us all. Any situation which affects the reproductive capability of living organisms needs to be clearly understood, and evaluated.

The BLT (Burke, Levengood, Talbott) Research Team was organised in 1992. By that time word of Dr. Levengood’s preliminary findings had reached many people interested in the crop formation phenomena around the world and Nancy Talbot and John Burke, two interested Americans offering financial and research assistance, joined Dr. Levengood’s ongoing investigation. By now crop formations were being reported in countries around the world, and it was obvious that an organized reporting network and field sampling efford was needed.

BLT’s first effords were directed toward the development of a concise fieldsampling protocol and the establishment of field teams in various countries; a systematic searh of the available scientific literature was also instigated, and various new field experiments intended to evaluate possible electromagnetic components of the phenomenon were begun. Given the substantial data-base already developed on physioligcal alterations to crop fromation plants, and the questions emerging from this data, BLT concentrated its efforts in this area.

Over the next several years a significant number of corp formations (200+) were sampled in great detail, from several countries — the US, Canada, England, Australia and Israel. Events in other countries where field teams were emerging were also being sampled, with new countries joining our efford every year. Thousands of hours of field, library and laboratory work have now been expended and the many physical alterations in crop formation plants around the world have been meticulously documented. The anomalities noted so far are as follows:

On the mircroscopic level, abnormal enlargement of cell wall pits in bract tissue.
This is the thin membrane which surrounds the seed-head and which supplies nutrients to the developing embrio.

Grossly enlarged (both laterally and longitudinally) plant stem nodes
These are the fibrous “knuckle-like” proturberances technically known as pulvini, found on the outside of the plant stems. Marked bending of the plant stem nodes from as little as 10 degrees to an extreme of 90 degrees
(occasionally even more), occuring at the apical, penultimate or all of the nodes of a stem. The presence of “expulsion” caveties.
(holes blown from the inside-out) in the parenchyma tissue around the nodes. A pertinent characteristic of these expulsion cavities is the release of exudate from the internal plant stem through the hole, upon which mold quickly froms causing blackening on the outside. These expulsion cavities have never been found in control samples examined in the lab. Stunted, malformed see-heads
in which the seeds are, variously, either missing altogether or are severely stunted with lower seed-weight and reduced size. When the seeds are present they are usually significantly smaller, and weight less than control seeds taken from plants outside the formation. Markedly significant alterations in seed germination trials.
Here, seeds taken from formation plants are germinated and followed in the laboratory for up to 14 days, with regular measurements obtained on growth rates and vigor, and this data compared to the germination and growth rates of control seelings. Depending upon the age of the plants at the time a crop formation has occurred, as well as several other variables including the apparent intensity of complexity in the causative energy system involved, the seeds:

1. do no germinate at all,
2. do germinate, but exhibit grossly depressed seed vigor and root and shoot development,
3. do germinate, but exhibit seedling development inconsistent with that typical for the species or variety.
4. not only germinate, but exhibit markedly increased rate and rebustness of seedling growth rate.

It should be noted that the above decribed findings are, in every instance, obtained using controls from each formation field.

These findings thoroughly documented physical changes to crop formation plants are all statistically significant at the 95% level of significance or better — a level of confidence accepted by the scientific community around the world and in all scientific journals.

Several control studies have also been conducted , including “blind” studies (in which the BLT Team was unaware that the samples being submitted from events of man-made origin) and, again, the formation plants were compared to control plants gathered from the same field but varying distances away from the downed crop. In these control studies crop was downed using planks, rollers and human feet, and sampld at various times after being downed througout the growing season, then shipped to the lab in the normal manner. In a few instances very slight node length alterations have been observed in manually flattened crop, however, these changes were not found in conjunction with the other criteria and were not discovered to be statistically significant. [red: underline added] Although human production of these events (at least using planks, rollers and feet) can cause slight alterations to the affected plants, it does not produce cell wall pit enlargement, expulsion caveties, stunted or seedless seed-heads, significantly elongated stem nodes, or gross alteration in germination results.

It should be noted that phototropism (the natural tendency of plants to bend toward or away from a lightsource) does occur in plants downed by any force, causing the plants to bend at the node. This bending will be more pronounced in young crop, occuring within a few days after being downed, but is not cuncurrent with elongation of the node or the presence of expulsion cavities in the same plants. Many factors must be taken into consideration when trying to determine causation in this situation, rather than reliance upon one single finding — the age of the plants at the time they were downed, the amount of time elapsed since the event, the overall prevalence of the bending, the presence of node elongation and expulsion cavities, as well as the results of microscopic examination and germination and growth trials. Judgement based on a single field observation or finding can be misleading. The work of science is not only to explore and document previously unknown aspects of reality, but also to attempt to estabilsh causative models or theories which can eventually be tested in the laboratory. In the case of the crop formation phenomena this is a tall order. It is easy for modern man to forget the decades of pure research which eventually resulted in modern medicine, agriculture and technology, benifits which many of us now take for granted — but a thorough grasp of any new area of investigation takes time, and work, and the effords of many researchers.

Dr. Levengood has, in a 1994 paper published in a peer-reviewed sientific journal (”Anatomical anomalies in crop formation plants”, Physiologia Plantarum 92: 356-363), presented one possible causative meganism for the crop formation process, and the continuing field and laboratory data obtained since that time continue to support this theory. The affected plants reveal evidence of exposure to rapid air movement, unusual electrical fields, very brief exposure to extreme heat, and ionization in a thermodynamically unstable system; one naturally occurring atmospheric force which includes each of these features is a ion plasma vortex — one very “high energy” example of which is a lightning discharge.

Ion plasma vortices probably form in unstapble regions of the upper atmosphere, due to an energy exchange between the ionosphere and electrical storms. Once formed, these highly charged plasmas form into vortrices— rotating, whirlwinding-like systems— which are then drawn to earth and shaped by variations in the Earth’s magnetic field [red: or by conscious?]. And although it is difficult for most people to easily imagine, it is entirely possible for such vortices to produce an enormous array of complex symmetrical patterns upon impact at the Earth’s surface. It should be noted that our research indicates that non -geometric “random downed” areas of crop, sometimes associated with the more symmetrical designs and sometimes found by themselves, exhibit the same alterations to plant tissues as those observed in the more dramatic patterns, suggesting the same causative agency at work. Much what the farmers have called “lodging” in the past, attributing this downed crop to a combination of over-fertilization and subsequent weather damage, is instead an additional aspect of the crop circle phenomenon which is generally unrecognized.

It should also be pointed out that intricate and varied designs are abundant in Nature. They are so common that most of us don’t even notice them; they are also most often observed by people on a relatively small scale. Think for example, of snowflakes [red: stonehenge formation ‘97 ?] — their amazing variety and delicacy of patten. If snowflakes were considerably larger than they are we would surely be as astounded by them as we often are by the crop formations.

Given the accummulated scientific data which currently exists regarding the cropcircle phenomenon we feel that the most logical causative mechanism — the explanation that most closely fits the know “hard” data collected so far — is the theory that highly charged, thermodynamically unstable ion plasma vortices are responsible. Microwave radiation is known to be associated with ionized plasmas and microwaves, of course, emit very intense busrts of heat; and many of the documented physical changes to the formation plants are consistent with this fact. Add tot the presence of microwave radisation the effect of an electro-radiation the effects of an electro-phoretic component functioning within the framework of a kinetic, oscillating system which is also thermodynamically unstable and you have a solidly based description of an energetic system which can account for the documented alterations to crop formation plants, the various design and random patterns, as well as the changes observed in soil samples to data (see Levengood, Wm. C. And Berke, J. , “Semi-molten Meteoric Iron Associated with a Crop Formation,” J.Sci. Exploration (9:2), pp. 191-199 (1995)).

Why and how these turbulent, energetic plasma systems form — what possible modifications, alterations or changes in Earth’s upper atmosphere, or perhaps some triggering mechanism — remains unknown. Perhaps recent loss of ozone, or alterations in the atmosphere caused by air pollution, or even modifications in the environment related to increased technological development and application may eventually be found to be responsible. [red: we ourselves maybe?]

Whatever the originating factor or factors is eventually determined to be, the fact remains that more than 90% of the formations meticulously investigated by the group of researchers reveal anomalies in the affected plants and soil which are consistent with these materials having been exposed to an energetic system as described above. Fewer than 10% of the events studied do not show these changes, and are suspected to be the result of direct human intervention. [red: in noremal speach: 10% are hoaxed]

Readers interested in obtaining copies of the pertinent published scientific material, color photo-sheets of laboratory findings, and other information on this researc should contact:

Nancy Talbott
BLT Research Team
Box 127
Cambridge, MA 02140 (USA)
Phone: 617/492-0415
fax: 617/492-1414

Two more papers are in progress of publication in 1997 and they will also be available through this office once published.

Individuals interested in participating in field-sampling should also contact Nancy Talbott, at the above address. Our spotting and field-sampling network increases each season as the phenomenon continues to expand, and we’re grateful for assistance.

I saw these BLT people in a documentary back in about 2002. They swore it was impossible for a person to have made the crop circles. So, the producers got the two old men who had been making them to come out one night and make them. Then they had these BLT people examine it, after which they pronounced it authentic and not of this world. Some researchers they are. Kind of a laughing stock at the time.

Since the two old men who made the crop circles have admitted to doing it, and showing on camera exactly how they did it with boards and chains there is no longer any dispute about their origins. This article, dating to 1997 was written before the two old guys got the last laugh. Show me something more recent.