Posted on 10/16/2009 2:58:58 PM PDT by JoeProBono
In July of 1996 one of the most complex and spectacular crop circle designs ever seen appeared in a field opposite Stonehenge. The design became known as “The Julia Set” because it resembled the mathematical fractal called by that name. The formation was remarkable not only because of its complexity and beauty but also due to several anomalies associated with its discovery....
The formation was first spotted from an aircraft at 6:15 PM. The pilot crossed over the field with a passenger (a medical doctor taking pictures) at 5:30 PM and both reported that there was no formation in the field at that time. This is corroborated by the security guards at Stonehenge who claimed the formation was not in the field earlier in the day. The pilot landed his plane at the nearest airfield, the passenger disembarked, and the pilot refuelled for another flight. The pilot took off again and crossed the field at 6:15 when he saw the Julia Set formation in the field. At about the same time (6:30) his previous passenger drove past Stonehenge to see cars pulled off the side of the busy road. These cars will prove important to today’s new release.....
What has recently been revealed is that the people in those cars may well have seen the formation forming. According to researcher Lucy Pringle, a woman has come forward to say that a taxi driver and passenger were with the parked vehicles and the occupants could not believe what they witnessed. They stood for 20 minutes witnessing this large design form under a swirling cloud of mist. The full story can be read on Lucy Pringles website at (below).
According to Lucy’s report, she gave a talk in April, 2009 at Alton College in Hampshire. Shortly afterwards a friend telephoned her to say that “a friend of hers had been in a taxi and had mentioned to the taxi driver that she had just been to a fascinating talk on Crop Circles. M, the taxi driver, said: I saw one appear opposite Stonehenge.” Lucy soon realized the formation being discussed was the Julia Set of 1996.
Lucy writes, “She mentioned that when people see maybe two cars or more pulled in and looking down into the field, other cars stop and gradually the traffic builds up and more and more cars draw in to have a look.” What the group saw is described: “There was an apparition, an isolated mist over it (the formation) and as the circle was getting bigger the mist was rising above the circle. As the mist rose it got bigger and the corn circle got bigger. There was a mist was about 2-3 feet off the ground and it was sort of spinning around and on the ground a circular shape was appearing which seemed to get bigger and bigger as simultaneously the mist gets bigger and bigger and swirled faster. It was gradual and you are standing there and you are thinking what is going on and everyone is discussing it and more and more traffic is building up and everything and you just think that all the time you don't really realise what is happening and then you think then that's it and the thing is getting bigger and you are thinking of the beginning and end. But you don't realise what you are looking at. I didn’t understand what was happening......”
Don’t worry, there is something. But you won’t find Him in a spaceship.
ping
Well, I haven’t heard of any graffiti artists painting binary code messages on walls in Chicago!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_KoR2t-iM9k&feature=related
Yes, but surely alien graffiti artists speak in binary code!
Doesn’t everyone?
Which, the clueless, uninformed, the narrow and rigidly biased; those poor in critical thinking and in research; . . . may gullibly go gah gah over.
. . . even though the vast majority of crop formations do not begin to match the descriptors the naysayers are so robotically driven to compulsively & mindlessly spout.
THANKS. A good treatment of a very interesting circle and event.
PING to level 1 of the UFO PING LIST.
Lucy writes, “She mentioned that when people see maybe two cars or more pulled in and looking down into the field, other cars stop and gradually the traffic builds up and more and more cars draw in to have a look.” What the group saw is described: “There was an apparition, an isolated mist over it (the formation) and as the circle was getting bigger the mist was rising above the circle. As the mist rose it got bigger and the corn circle got bigger. There was a mist was about 2-3 feet off the ground and it was sort of spinning around and on the ground a circular shape was appearing which seemed to get bigger and bigger as simultaneously the mist gets bigger and bigger and swirled faster. It was gradual and you are standing there and you are thinking what is going on and everyone is discussing it and more and more traffic is building up and everything and you just think that all the time you don’t really realise what is happening and then you think then that’s it and the thing is getting bigger and you are thinking of the beginning and end. But you don’t realise what you are looking at. I didn’t understand what was happening......”
Doesn’t sound like a couple of drunks with boards on ropes, to me.
DOH!
I gather you never read the post.
I gather you haven’t read much about crop formations at all.
I gather you haven’t talked to any internationially known researchers in the phenomenon face to face at all and certainly not for any length.
I suspect your biases tend to distort your perceptions about more things than just crop formations.
Very impressive.
INDEED.
What is with those folks . . . at this point . . . there’s plenty of data in . . .
The differences between hoaxed formations and authentic formations are huge and scientifically verified in peer reviewed scientific journals.
The naysayers on this topic are clueless idiots . . . and a lot of them evidently rather lazy about research, as well.
...
Just to be clear, I’m not intimidated by your silly posts.
But you’re too boring to engage with.
Get back to me when the “witnesses” pass a polygraph.
Ahhhhhhhhhhhh . . .
yes . . . your criteria is sooooooooo impressive . . .
those things courts usually don’t allow inevidence because they are
soooooooooo chronically sooooooooooooo inaccurate.
Real impressive criteria you have there.
Don’t hold your breath. I haven’t found most naysayers or their arguments the least bit motivating to get back to.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.