And your criteria for believing these “witnesses” other than you just want to ?
Do you think they’d be willing to make a statement under oath ?
Over the years, a number of such witnesses HAVE SIGNED witnessed notorized documents . . . essentially under oath.
Your assumptions ARE WRONG.
This case is impressive enough on it’s own.
As one of many 100’s of impressive cases, it’s more than a little extraordinary.
You clearly are uninformed.
And your biases are screaming much louder and more significantly than the amount of reading and research you seem to have done . . . the biases and assumptions are the size of Pike’s Peak and your researched knowledge appears to equal about a pea, in size.
Real impressive, that.
However,
Linda Moulton Howe’s site
has links to the several peer reviewed articles in scientific journals affirming that nonhoaxed crop formations are unique scientifically unique on at least 7 or so variables.
Linda has done a lot of research and has a lot of witness testimony on her site—much of it behind a subscriber’s only wall.
I’ve talked with her at some length and her objectivity and research thoroughness were impressive, to me.
Clueless naysayers are the opposite of impressive, to me.