[Momaw Nadon]

I saw the program also.

You are correct that the evidence was presented by mostly, if not all, "true believers." I wish that the skeptical point of view had also been presented.

I suspect that the film of the light crossing the field was an abberation of the camera, since I did not see it passing behind any trees in the region. It seemed to just go in front of all the trees. However, I don't believe that the light was ball lightning since the film did not appear to have been taken during stormy weather.

It would be interesting to find out if any of the "old" crop circles were as complex and intricate as the ones that have appeared during the past few years. The crop circle in Australia that those two British gentlemen were referring to did seem rather simple and crude compared to more modern circles.

I hope that the program on The History Channel tommorrow will present a more even-handed treatment of the subject.

[Lx]

I just saw this program as well. Didn't the hoaxer mention when he was talking about the floating lights that there was a lot of RC activity in the area?

One interesting thing a 'researcher' mentioned was that all of the seed pods inside the circle were barren. I don't know if he checked plants outside the circle to compare--kind of like a control maybe?

Another interesting thing was the part of the plants that looked like they were 'blow out' from the inside. Again, of course they didn't mention any control and the 'believer's' explanation about it needing a high amount of energy to accomplish it left a little thing like a reasonable scientific explanation out or even an unreasonable one. I'm surprised at that since no theory is too unbelievable to them.

I don't remember what they said exactly but I think they said that their 'theory' of the circles' creation was that it was by an electrical energy field???

I was similarly unimpressed with the crop circle music. What did they do, assign a note in the scale to a shape? Then, of course, the music wasn't something you'd listen to.
Maybe because it sounds like a random scale?

Sorry if I remain completely unimpressed. What exactly was the new geometrical theory?

[balrog666]

I hope that the program on The History Channel tommorrow will present a more even-handed treatment of the subject.

Yes, it was a much more balanced presentation including short interviews with believers, multiple circle makers, a book-selling author, and multiple researchers.

One standout impression was that it's the smaller, old-type, totally-round crop circles that seem to be unexplained (and may be a real natural phenomenon). One researcher claimed that at least 80% of the complex ones are human made, begging the question of whether any of the complex ones are not.

Another was the illustration of the idea that believers think that "Doug and Dave" were the only hoaxers from 1978 to 1991 which we already know isn't true.

Also amusing was the believer idea that people seeking fame (as makers) would admit which ones were theirs. While from the other side, a prolific circle maker said "It's problematic. If we admit it's ours, we destroy it (as art)."

Yesterday's show was designed for maximum sensationalism as part of "The Unexplained" TV series. I forgot to catch who made this one, but it's worth watching.