Crop Circle Research               

  
 
Search CCR  

Enigma Issue 21: 80% Controversy, 20% Mystery

Paul Vigay considers the implications of Colins statement | Septemer 2000

Research Trailindexindex Next Previous

Probably the most controversial topic of crop circle research during the 2000 season was Colin Andrews statement that he believes 80% of crop circles are hoaxed.

Of course, as usual the media took this out of context and reported on the numerical value of his comment, rather than focusing on the genuine mystery surrounding the 20% of 'unexplained' formations.

So what of these 'human' values; 80 and 20. By arguing about whether it should be 70/30, 60/40 or even 20/80 - with only 20% of formations being hoaxed, we are missing the fundamental point - that a genuine mystery continues to exist.

As researchers countered the Doug and Dave argument, back in 1991, just because you can forge 20 notes, doesn't mean they're all hoaxed. Indeed, you only need a single, genuine formation for there to be something worthy of continued research and investigations.

As far as I'm concerned, just a single, non man-made formation has incredible implications for mankind. And if we consider that just one, single, lonely crop circle, somewhere from all the years of reported crop circles is a genuine event then, considering that I currently have in excess of 2000 recorded formations in my database (see http://ccdb.cropcircleresearch.com/database/), that makes for a percentage genuine of only 0.05% - that's half of one percent.

I personally believe that the percentage is a lot larger than this, but by arguing figures and percentages, we're completely missing the point - but hoaxers and the media would probably prefer researchers to be arguing about semantics rather than the implications of those 20% of formations.

After all, hoaxers and sceptics fear things they can't understand and explain away!

Of course, 2000 was a year in which anyone even vaguely researching the subject can't possibly have missed the politics and petty arguing going on around the fringes of research - not that I would see egos and politics being even remotely relevant to research.

Unfortunately, as with any controversial subject, there are those who have a vested interest in keeping the subject alive and a mystery - those making a living from selling merchandise and not even bothering to find out about real research - that of what causes the real crop circles, or what their meaning is.

It's a sad fact, but one I think needs airing, that many so-called researchers are no more than charlatans or 'evangelical preachers' indoctrinating their 'followers' with false evidence and pseudo research. Indeed, some 'believers' are so deluded that they fail to even realise that any hoaxing goes on at all, instantly denouncing anyone who dares to even refer to the 'H' word.
Sadly, I see this type of person as more dangerous to the serious, scientific research of the subject than those who are out and out sceptics.

By evangelizing about how genuine, even the most dubious of formations is, they are not only alienating the subject in the eyes of the general public, but also making a mockery of genuine research when interviewed on television and given the media treatment of "Here's another NewAge nutcase who believes in genuine crop circles", then cutting to a rational, logical thinking but sceptical "scientist". The public are sub-consciously being programmed to associate any claim of genuineness as coming from some 'New Age evangelist'.

Until the media portray circle researchers as scientific and rational people, then public opinion won't be swayed from the "Oh it's all a hoax" way of thinking.

Until some researchers can stop sticking their heads in the sand to avoid listening to evidence that may destroy their own 'pet theory', and actually INVESTIGATE the subject, we will never move forward in our understanding of the subject.

For this reason I admire Colin Andrews honesty in announcing what he predicted would cause a storm. Whilst I don't necessarily agree with all of his findings or even his 80:20 conclusions, he is one of the few people who has actually done lengthy, painstaking ground research into the subject. He has spent almost 20 years trying to seek the truth and meaning behind the crop formations.

In 1989 he and Pat Delgado published the first detailed investigative book on the subject. Entitled "Circular Evidence", it soon reached the best sellers list and with it, the responsibility of being an 'expert' on the subject - first port of call for newspaper editors and TV producers seeking that perennial 'silly season' story.

It would also not have escaped the eyes of the British Intelligence services, especially as the army has always shown an interest in the subject - even if only demonstrating their involvement by spending tax payers money on carrying out numerous helicopter reconnaissance flights over crop formations and public land.
In fact, someone ought to carry out an enquiry into the safety aspect of low level flying and manoeuvring over and around public highways, as I have in my possession a video tape of a very near accident involving the harassment of a circle watcher by a military helicopter.

In the echelons of power there are those who deem anything which could cause a threat to 'established thinking' and 'orthodox science' to be off-limits - something that needs to be suppressed and covered up. Of course, if something is so obvious, so public, that you can't cover it up, the only remaining option is to ridicule it or to manipulate public opinion into thinking it's irrelevant to their everyday lives.

I've always said that the best way of hiding the truth is to conceal it between two lies. Confusion and arguing will ensure that people miss the real point. Crop circle research demonstrates this theory admirably.
Evangelical believers immediately criticized Colin for announcing the extent of hoaxing without giving any irrefutable evidence, let alone actually giving numbers and percentages. People who actually examined the evidence agreed that a percentage of formations were indeed hoaxed - but argued about the numbers, whilst hard-core sceptics still denounced him as a believer because he hadn't said that all crop circles were hoaxed.

One important aspect that many people overlooked, during the confusion and arguing was that Colin's announcement only applied to crop circles investigated during 1999 and 2000 - not all crop circles since their origins. In this sense, I conclude from my own personal research projects that Colins conclusion is pretty accurate - even if 'believers' don't wish to face the evidence.

However, I don't believe that we can extrapolate from this percentage that the same percentage applies to formations before 1999, or indeed any formations which may appear in the future. Again, from my personal investigations I believe that the actual ratio of hoaxed formations to genuine formations fluctuates from year to year, probably determined by media/general public interest. During years of little publicity, research projects have continued to find anomalies linked to crop circles. This, coupled with the fact crop circles continue to appear - despite statements from hoaxers saying they are giving up or retiring from making them - re-arouses public interest every few years. As public interest and curiosity rises (is there still a mystery?), so hoaxers or disinformation merchants have to come forward and be seen to either make claims or to stage reconstructions for TV etc.
This goes on, almost following a predictable cycle - public loses interest but research continues, research yields more anomalies, public starts becoming intrigued again, hoaxers have to dampen public opinion etc.
Don't forget that the government would rather you worry yourself with what people are getting up to in the latest soap opera than to actually examine things going on in the world around you, let alone question what you've been taught or conditioned to believe by 'society'.

The year 2000 was also the year that we started to see numerous errors in construction (see fig.1, below). The hoaxers appeared to be getting sloppy, or perhaps even bored of having to go out every year. This is further evidence pointing to the extent of hoaxing.

fig1a fig1b
fig1c fig1d
Fig.1 - Errors and Mistakes

Of course, some people observed that some of the alleged mistakes were so obvious, that they were perhaps riddles by the genuine circle makers. Again, I tend to think that this is fanciful thinking. I remain convinced that there is so much elegant and sacred geometry embedded within the genuine ones, that such obvious mistakes would only occur in amateurish hoaxed formations.

But what of the genuine anomalies?
Colin claims to have found magnetic anomalies within a number of formations. Again, the media muddied the waters here, to ensure that no one really knew what these magnetic anomalies were. In fact, from a personal viewpoint I found this the most interesting part of his whole announcement, as I myself have been researching the electromagnetic and radio frequency (RF) anomalies found in and around crop circles since 1991.

According to Colin, the results of his four-year study of the Earth's Magnetic field indicated that the magnetic field pattern has rotated in relation to the crop circle design (fig.2). The amount by which the field seems to rotate usually seems to be around 2.5° to 3° about the centre point of the formation.

fig2
Fig.2 - Colins interpretation

Some TV stations even got this wrong, and reported it as rotating relative to some external origin (fig.3) which would yield completely different results and lead to a different conclusion as to the cause of this anomaly. Indeed, this latter conclusion wouldn't make sense as far as my own research goes, as there would be no way of detecting where the actual origin was, or the significance of it.

fig3
Fig.3 - wrong interpretation given by the media.

However, Colin's own diagram interested me because it ties in with a number of my own findings, both using electronic measuring equipment and by carrying out dowsing experiments with researchers such as Freddy Silva.

My own experiments carried out over the past few years in conjunction with Freddy Silva indicate a scientific backup for dowsing, in that when we've taken careful measurements of the electromagnetic field across a field, a momentary increase in the background frequency exactly mirrors a reaction in the dowsing rods. Freddy and I usually walk into a field, each using a parallel tramline. Just as Freddy's rods swing outwards, I get an increased reading of around 200-300MHz, relative to the background readings, on my electronic detector (an Opto Electronics Scout RF detector).

Indeed, by careful measurements we can detect many rings surrounding a formation - not just the obvious radii of the component circles and elements making the design (fig.4).

fig4
Fig.4 - A single circle showing the dowsable rings around it (shown in grey).

Coupled with some of the RF anomalies I've been detecting over the years, I believe that whatever creates the crop circles is creating a temporary vortex in the localized space/time continuum in the vicinity of the crop circle.

Although this sounds complicated, it can be imagined if you visualize water spiralling down a plug hole, rotating as it does. Another analogy would be the wake left behind as a speed boat travels through the water - only instead of leaving a two dimensional pattern eminating from the hull of the boat, we can imagine a three dimensional vortex passing through our dimension.

If any of you have seen the popular TV series Stargate SG1, then you can imagine the ripples spiralling round when they activate the stargate.

I'm excited by Colin's findings because they back up my own theory of 'something' spiralling through our three dimensional space, but out of view to our ordinary senses. The physical by-product of this event is the crop circle design left behind in the field, which I speculated was based on a higher dimensional shape back in 1992 (issue 1).

Indeed, this is not so far removed from Terence Meaden's vortex theory, which he publicized in 1991 (Circles From The Sky, ISBN 0 285 63036 9), although my own thoughts are that it's some kind of hyper-dimensional vortex created by some unknown entity, rather than a meteorological event.
The BLT Research Team Inc. also believe that crop formations are the result of some hitherto unknown vortex effect. I hope to share results and ideas with them over the coming months.

If we look back to figure 4, showing additional invisible rings around a simple circle, we can also look on these dowsable energy ripples as harmonics from some form of electromagnetic resonance vibrating out from the actual crop formation. It is my personal view that everything in the universe is linked via harmonic resonances and vibrations.

Each one of us also has our own harmonic field, which some people refer to as our 'aura'. Indeed, a few people even claim to be able to see these aura patterns around others - of course we are all capable of seeing auras, simply by conditioning our own senses and vibrational levels to resonate with the auras around us and other people.

Because everything in the universe has it's own harmonic signature, we get interactions when we come into contact with other vibrational energies - which explains why we can feel certain vibes in certain places, or immediately feel attraction or 'bad vibes' towards others.
I believe that this can help to explain the human effects that have been reported when visiting crop formations, and currently being investigated by researcher, Lucy Pringle.

There is no such thing as a positive or negative crop circle, in the same way there is no such thing as a good or bad person. All we are feeling is the interaction of external harmonics in relation to our own vibrational level.
You can imagine this by playing a note on a piano - any note. Pick one at random.
If someone else now plays a second, random, note even though you may not know what note is being played, you can immediately tell if it's higher or lower than the note you originally played.

Now imagine that high notes give you a headache and low notes make you feel relaxed.... When you hear the second note, you'll immediately feel a reaction, either good or bad. Now, do you understand there is nothing inherently good or bad about any of the notes, yet you're feeling a reaction.
Someone else may have picked a different initial note to play (imagine that's their own personal frequency) and if the second note played was the same note played as before, there will be a different relationship between them and the second note and yourself and the second note.

If you now elevate this scenario to imagine all the component waveforms and harmonics in your complete being, you can start to imagine when you visit a crop formation and feel elated or lively, someone else may have a completely different reaction. This is not caused by the crop circle itself being positive or negative, but rather the relationship between your own harmonics and the crop circle and someone else's harmonics and the crop circle.

Our reaction to harmonics and subtle energy fields around us, can have all manner of effects on our mind and body. even to the extent of causing physical illness or disease. It's my belief that by understanding the reaction between different energy frequencies and harmonics we may learn to cure and heal illness and disease. Indeed, this is the topic of my current and ongoing research projects - not only investigating sound and vibration for healing purposes, but also trying to analyse the varying magnetic and electromagnetic anomalies found in the crop fields.

To this end, I applaud Colin's research into magnetic fields around crop circles. I just wish he hadn't mentioned percentages, which would have prevented the media arguing over numbers instead of seeing the underlying theories and benefits of continued research into this mystery.

Research Trailindexindex Next Previous
---
">Back Top 
Valid HTML 4.01!
Valid CSS
Powered by Sun Microsystems 

PHORM PROHIBITED
The contents of this site, and communications between this site and its users, are protected by database right, copyright, confidentiality and the right not to be intercepted conferred by section 1(3) of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000. The use of those contents and communications by Internet Service Providers or others to profile or classify users of this site for advertising or other purposes is strictly forbidden.