informis/textfiles
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity
278a90f7ce
textfiles/ufo/UFOBBS/1000/1233.ufo

3377 lines
145 KiB
Plaintext
Raw Normal View History

Initial commit
2021-04-15 11:31:59 -07:00
SUBJECT: FRACTALS & CROP CIRCLES FILE: UFO1233
Article 9253 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!ge-dab!crdgw1!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!unix.cis.pitt.edu!gvlf3.gvl.unisys.com!tredysvr!cellar!revpk
From: revpk@cellar.UUCP (Brian 'Rev P-K' Siano)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Fractals & Crop Circles
Message-ID: <sNH283w164w@cellar.UUCP>
Date: 10 Sep 91 03:46:15 GMT
References: <1991Sep8.202245.27765@bradley.bradley.edu>
Sender: bbs@cellar.UUCP (The Cellar BBS)
Organization: The Cellar BBS and public access system
Lines: 59
pwh@bradley.bradley.edu (Pete Hartman) writes:
> In <ZsVV810w164w@cellar.UUCP> revpk@cellar.UUCP (Brian 'Rev P-K' Siano) write
> >stanley@verga.enet.dec.com writes:
> >> If a mandelbrot set appeared on something like a Mayan bas-relief, we woul
> >> say that the Mayans did it and wonder at how little we know about an india
> >> culture that was so obviously advanced in certain areas... some of us woul
> >> claim they were like ' idiot savants ' ...others would just chalk it up
> >> to coincidence.
> > Nope, not likely at all. To generate a Mandelbrot Set requires not
> >only using math that uses the imaginary value i (the square root of -1), but
> >iterating the same equation roughly 200 times for every pioint on the grid
> >that the set is beiong plotted on.
>
> And building a large pyramind requires lots of man-hours or intense labor.
> As does (presumably) building Stonehenge and other such interesting things.
>
> > One could, concievably, do the math
> >without a computer-- sure, if you want to spend a lifetime doing thousands o
> >mathematical equations on a project whose significance isn't likely to be
> >apparent.
>
> Similar things have been said about the great monoliths. Sure, you can do
> it without modern machinery, but it would take forever, and why do it?
>
> Why ask why? :) Obviously someone did some of these things anyway...
> --
> -----
> Pete Hartman Bradley University pwh@bradley.bradley.edu
> jello is cheaper than horses!
Pete, you've obviously missed the difference betweebn the Pyramids,
Stonehenge, and the like. What was required to build those structurew was
well within the capabilities of the societies that built them. Similarly, any
significance they had was evident both in the cultural records available (in
the caes of the Pyramids) or directly relevant to their survival (i.e., some
theories re Stonehenge's use as a calendar to determine agricultural cycles).
But in order to develop the Mandelbrot Set, as I'd said, doesn't just require
technological advancement: it requires a very substantial body of
mathematical work behind it. (The ancients were advanced in mathematics,
obviously, but I don't see any evidence that they were aware of such things
as the square root of negative 1.) Similarly, one would have to be willing to
expend considerable energies performing lengthy, repetitive calculations on
values incorporating the value i, _and_ plot them on a grid in the apropriate
manner.
We have a pretty good understanding of how the Egyptians built the Pyramids,
and what's more, we also have a very good understanding of _why_ they built
them. (And I must remind you that the idea of finding a Mandelbrot Set in
some ancient carvings was hypothetical to begin with-- which makes your
original point seem even more nonsensical. Just what were you objecting to?)
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Brian Siano, Delaware Valley Skeptics
Rev. Philosopher-King of The First Church of the Divine Otis Redding
revpk@Cellar.UUCP "Ecrasez l'enfame!" - Voltaire
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Article 9214 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!ge-dab!crdgw1!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!sdd.hp.com!think.com!news.bbn.com!bbn.com!ncramer
From: ncramer@bbn.com (Nichael Cramer)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Executive Summary [was: Fractals...]
Message-ID: <66199@bbn.BBN.COM>
Date: 10 Sep 91 00:24:28 GMT
References: <1991Sep9.162645.6370@engage.pko.dec.com>
Sender: news@bbn.com
Reply-To: ncramer@labs-n.bbn.com (Nichael Cramer)
Lines: 20
stanley@verga.enet.dec.com writes:
>ncramer@bbn.com (Nichael Cramer) writes:
> [Maryquote#1 deleted]
>>Isn't this beautiful?
Then, it just keeps getting better...
> ... crop symbols were the hard evidence you keep saying you require.
...and better.
>None are so blind are those who WILL NOT see.
Can't argue with that.
Keep it up Mary. A few more of these and you'll render sci.skeptic --or
any overt defense of rational thought-- wholly superfluous.
N
Article 9230 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!ge-dab!crdgw1!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!att!news.cs.indiana.edu!lynx!triton.unm.edu!ee5391aa
From: ee5391aa@triton.unm.edu (Duke McMullan n5gax)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Halftime Show! Was: Executive Summary [was: Fractals...]
Message-ID: <a#0b#9_@lynx.unm.edu>
Date: 10 Sep 91 02:56:17 GMT
References: <1991Sep9.162645.6370@engage.pko.dec.com>
Organization: University of New Mexico, Albuquerque
Lines: 215
In article <1991Sep9.162645.6370@engage.pko.dec.com>
stanley@verga.enet.dec.com writes:
>You know what? I don't think you really want hard evidence because you
>DON'T WANT proof that psi exists. It's your ego that drives you... not
>your intellect.
I rather suspect, Mary, that _all_ of us are driven in various degrees by
both ego and intellect. Witness the frequent emotional outbursts (such as
yours, above...but by no means limited to the pro-psi side of the stadium)
on this newsgroup as an example.
A proof is a very personal thing, and what constitutes a proof to you
likely will fail as sufficient evidence to another. E.g., this stuff on
crop circles. You remain unconvinced that the mundane answer is true...or,
at least, so I seem to read in your postings. You defend it on the basis
that the declamation of these two fellows doesn't _prove_ that _some_ of the
cc's weren't made by extraterrestials...which, of course, it doesn't. How-
ever, absence of proof does not constitute disproof, neither does absence of
disproof constitute proof...for some people.
The arguments here make me think of children playing games. With the rules
set, most will get along pretty well. When the rules are somewhat nebulous,
or when various kids have different ideas of the rules, watch out! The fur's
gonna fly!
We have here people programmed to various different sets of rules for "prov-
ing" the "reality" of various matters. Mucho years ago, it was proven that
it is _impossible_ to trisect an angle, in the plane, using only the compass
and straightedge. The proof is group-theoretic, requiring essentially grad-
uate-school standing in mathematics (in most curricula) to find oneself in
a class where such proofs are expounded. Most people with less preparation
would be completely bewildered by the proof; it would be beyond their com-
prehension and they would be unimpressed by it. The compass and straight-
edge, however, are simple to use, and methods of using them are taught in
every decent (note that qualifier ;^) high school in the country. Consequen-
tly, many people can understand the nature of the problem of how to trisect
an angle. Many try. Many fail, and admit it. A few, by way either of er-
ror or simple misunderstanding, arrive at what appears to be a trisection, and
then become very, very annoyed when math types won't take it seriously.
This last is where ego comes into it...perhaps from both sides.
I see no particular reason to believe in anything except mundane explanations
for crop circles, although I should point out explicitly that I've not inves-
tigated the matter. Nor will I.
Why not?
Why am I unwilling to investigate this matter? Ego?
One might call it that, but I perceive it differently. I, like yourself and
everyone else, have only a certain amount of time and energy to do the things
I want to accomplish. If I wished to make money gambling, I wouldn't play the
slots, neither would I bet two dollars to your one on a coin coming up heads
or tails. "Gamblers believe in probability; suckers belive in luck."
If one investigates the various areas of pseudoscience, certain repeated pat-
terns emerge. _All_ of the popular (personal opinion:) fuzzy-headednesses of
this day, including Ancient Astronauts (in the style of Von Daineken (sp?)),
Crystal Power, (ahem) Crop Circles, Channeling, and, yes, _every_ case of
parapsychological testing that I've been able to examine (twenty years back, I
was _very_ interested in this stuff) have displayed those characteristics.
(I should point out that _reproducibility_ was the most common problem here.
All these things fail to be reproducible...if watched too closely, or tested
in ways which are objectively verifiable. Such was, and is, my experience.)
Certainly, this does not constitute _proof_ that these fields/phenomena are
baloney, but it does suggest that the probability is rather higher than other-
wise might be assumed.
In my undergraduate days, I invested a good deal of time reading about various
"paranormal" stuff, attempting various experiments in various fields of psi,
attended a number of lectures on such topics as "energy healing", dowsing,
"free energy", and a few et ceteras, took several courses purported to in-
crease psychic abilities, began studying aikido (trying to understand the
principles of "ki"), and...well, the list goes on.
I discovered an interesting mixture. I also developed (EGO WARNING) a bet-
ter-than-average bullshit filter. There were certain truths here...and cer-
tain untruths. Many things simply were unverifiable. Great claims were
made...and very little in the way of convincing (to me) demonstration was man-
ifested.
After a while, this stuff ceased to entertain me. My interest lagged. I was
not content to "know about" this stuff...I wanted to _do_ it. I concluded
that there was nothing mystical about "ki" as used in martial arts. Bluntly,
I started applying a set of "scientific" (read: objective) criteria to these
hobby studies, as well as my scholastic work. I discovered that I could know
a lot about this, but I couldn't do any of it. Neither could anyone else.
I found I had a good deal of "faith" (probability that this will work for me:
pretty high) in engineering, math, physics, chemistry, aikijutsu, etc. My
"faith" (probability that will work for me: pretty low) in parastuff faded
away. I was no longer impressed, for a number of reasons, by the "catch-22"
that you have to believe in paranormal phenomena for them to manifest.
Why? Because I couldn't separate the real from the unreal, whether that lat-
ter be a fraud, or simply my perception. You see, another of my hobbies is
magic, with an emphasis on mentalism. I bamboozle people as a hobby. I
_know_ how easy it is (and how much fun it is) to be fooled.
I've never encountered a "believer" in parapsi who wouldn't admit that there
were frauds out there, and most would point to entire areas which they regar-
ded as fallacious.
At this point, I can't resist quoting Martin Gardner. He wrote a book called
_Fads_and_Fallacies_ (In the Name of Science), and this paragraph he wrote as
the beginning of the preface to the second edition:
The first edition of this book prompted many curious letters
from irate readers. The most violent letters came from Reichians,
furious because the book considered orgonomy alongside such (to
them) outlandish cults as dianetics. Dianeticians, of course, felt
the same about orgonomy. I heard from homeopaths who were insulted
to find themselves in company with such frauds as osteopathy and
chiropractic, and one chiropractor in Kentucky "pitied" me because
I had turned my spine on God's greatest gift to suffering humanity.
Several admirers of Dr. Bates favored me with letters so badly typed
that I suspect the writers were in urgent need of strong spectacles.
Oddly enough, most of these correspondents objected to one chapter
only, thinking all the others excellent.
Until a good filter is devised which will separate fraud from fair in these
matters, skeptical persons will not be convinced.
For myself, I admit the _possibility_ of almost any of these strange things.
That doesn't mean I _believe_ in them, and THAT doesn't mean I _disbelieve_
in them. I remain simply unconvinced. There's a difference, although many
won't accept that.
It's been said many times before, and I'll repeat it: "Extraordinary matters
require extraordinary proof." There's a problem there...it's simply not true.
"Extraordinary matters" of the sort we're describing don't require extraordin-
ary proofs at all; they require only very ordinary, everyday proofs of the
sort we use to demonstrate the existence of, say, magnetism, solid objects, or
communication by verbal interchange. The trouble is, these simple, straight-
forward proof don't seem to be there.
"Ordinary proof" shouldn't be particularly hard to come by..._if_ the pheno-
mena under consideration are real. If they're not...if they're not, then they
should behave exactly as they seem to under serious and detailed examination.
I.e., they fail to manifest.
Yes, I'll grant the possibility of "shyness effects", "skeptic neutralizing",
or whatever the current buzzword is for "real" psi phenomena failing when ex-
amined by a skeptic. I'll grant the possibility, but not the reality. I find
it...let's just say...less than convincing. It removes our only mechanism for
differentiating the genuine from the phoney. And there are _always_ phoneys.
Even in the "hard" sciences, there are phoneys. They embarrass their col-
legues. There are mechanisms in place (and, to be certain, they don't always
work) to reduce this sort of thing, but still, some always seem to get through.
Now, let's land on that question: WHY won't I examine, fairly and in detail,
the evidence for/against E.T. causes of crap, excuse me, crop circles?
Because it manifests so many of the characteristics of crackpot foolishness.
_Many_ things manifest those characteristics, and why should I choose cc's
over, say, Bigfoot or the Marfa Lights?
It seems likely to me that _all_ of these fields of endeavor have very, very
small probabilities of turning out to be anything other than the proverbial
wild goose chase. There might be, among them, one or two which hide some
mighty, world-shaking matter, and would be well worth the pursuit. But which
one? Why should I choose cc's over Bigfoot or the Marfa Lights?
At least, the Marfa Lights allegedly manifest a single (long) day's drive from
Albuquerque. I might be able to do some real investigations there. But,
again, time and money...and always energy. Note that's just to investigate
_one_ of these mysteries, and the nearest one that I mentioned, at that. I
cannot practically investigate _all_ of these in any useful manner, even if
I could afford it. As for just one...no, I'll not play the slot machines.
Neither will I bet two-to-one on the side of the coin that comes up next.
Neither will I invest my time in studying the Marfa Lights. Or Bigfoot. Or
crop circles. If it pleases you to do so, then have at it, with my blessings.
I'll stick with aikijutsu, cave exploring, conjuring, and other "mundane"
matters.
I'll bet I come out ahead, too.
>None are so blind are those who WILL NOT see.
Nice rhetoric. Here's the response:
"Those who believe illusion, and accept as truth their own vain imaginings,
perceive less that those entirely bereft of eyes."
Pretty snappy, huh? I just coined it myself. And, like your statement above,
it establishes nothing useful.
Like the pro/anti firearm matter bouncing across this group, the argument lies
with ideology. Most discussions quickly degenerate into name calling, on
_both_ sides, establishing that ego indeed is an active principle. There is
intellect, too, which is why I haven't long since unsubscribed to this group.
Well, the halftime show's over, and the band (that's I) is returning to the
bleachers to watch the rest of the game.
Here come the teams; I'm outta here....
d
--
"The French driver's infantile recklessness often annoyed him, but not so much
as did the typical Italian driver's use of the automobile as an extension of
his penis, or the British driver's use of it as a substitute." -- Trevanian
Duke McMullan n5gax nss13429r phon505-255-4642 ee5391aa@triton.cirt.unm.edu
Article 9243 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!ge-dab!crdgw1!rpi!usc!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!mips!ptimtc!nntp-server.caltech.edu!sol1.gps.caltech.edu!CARL
From: carl@sol1.gps.caltech.edu (Carl J Lydick)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Executive Summary [was: Fractals...]
Message-ID: <1991Sep10.044919.20694@cco.caltech.edu>
Date: 10 Sep 91 04:49:19 GMT
References: <1991Sep9.162645.6370@engage.pko.dec.com>
Sender: news@cco.caltech.edu
Reply-To: carl@sol1.gps.caltech.edu
Organization: HST Wide Field/Planetary Camera
Lines: 27
Nntp-Posting-Host: sol1.gps.caltech.edu
In article <1991Sep9.162645.6370@engage.pko.dec.com>, stanley@verga.enet.dec.com writes:
>>Pity all those poor, silly "hard-science, types" and their misguided
>>insistence on "repeatable experiments"...
>>Thank you, Mary.
>>
>>You've made our case far more succinctly, far more clearly than we could
>>ever hope to do.
>
>Do you mean that you don't really want a "repeatable experiment"? That
>you'd prefer not to have proof to deal with? That all the talk was just
>that... talk?
>
>I didn't insult you. I merely said that the crop symbols were the hard
>evidence you keep saying you require. No talk of "pity"... no mention of
>"silly"... nothing said of "misguided insistence" at all.
They're hard evidence that crop symbols exist. By what incredibly unfathomable
process did you come to the conclusion that they're hard evidence of PSI and
not of somebody dragging a board around a field?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carl J Lydick | INTERnet: CARL@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU | NSI/HEPnet: SOL1::CARL
Disclaimer: Hey, I understand VAXes and VMS. That's what I get paid for. My
understanding of astronomy is purely at the amateur level (or below). So
unless what I'm saying is directly related to VAX/VMS, don't hold me or my
organization responsible for it. If it IS related to VAX/VMS, you can try to
hold me responsible for it, but my organization had nothing to do with it.
Article 9220 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!ge-dab!crdgw1!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!utgpu!cunews!software.mitel.com!meier
From: meier@Software.Mitel.COM (Rolf Meier)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Fractals & Crop Circles
Message-ID: <9251@augustus>
Date: 9 Sep 91 16:36:55 GMT
References: <1991Sep6.172310.11183@engage.pko.dec.com> <1991Sep7.235155.26995@javelin.sim.es.com>
Organization: Mitel. Kanata (Ontario). Canada.
Lines: 16
In article <1991Sep7.235155.26995@javelin.sim.es.com> pashdown@javelin.sim.es.com (Pete Ashdown) writes:
>stanley@verga.enet.dec.com writes:
>> Now it's your turn. What symbol would YOU like to see written in
>> the fields?
> Smiley face
etc.
The Mars face. Or maybe the man in the moon.
___________________________________________________________________________
Rolf Meier Mitel Corporation
Article 8892 of sci.skeptic:
Xref: bilver sci.skeptic:8892 alt.paranormal:2538
Path: bilver!tarpit!fang!att!att!linac!uwm.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!wang!news
From: warren@worlds.com (Warren Burstein)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,alt.paranormal
Subject: Re: Physics: Separate Particles Communicate at a Distance
Message-ID: <601@vaccine.UUCP>
Date: 3 Sep 91 21:20:37 GMT
References: <1991Aug23.221620.8570@beta.lanl.gov> <1991Aug28.212833.14211@rosevax.rosemount.com> <1991Aug29.000836.27078@beta.lanl.gov>
Sender: news@wang.com
Followup-To: sci.skeptic
Organization: WorldWide Software
Lines: 13
jlg@cochiti.lanl.gov (Jim Giles) writes:
>EPR means never having to look at your shoes.
When I took a course in QM there were no chairs in the room so we sat
on the floor with our backs to the wall which made it very obvious to
the professor that my socks didn't match. I told him I was
color-coding my feet.
--
/|/-\/-\ The entire world Jerusalem
|__/__/_/ is a very strange carrot
|warren@ But the farmer
/ worlds.COM is not worried at all.
Article 9242 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!ge-dab!crdgw1!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wupost!uunet!bonnie.concordia.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!netnews.upenn.edu!vax1.cc.lehigh.edu!lehigh.bitnet!PML3
From: PML3@NS.CC.LEHIGH.EDU (King of Birds (AKA: Paul Lewis))
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: RE: Crop Circles ... Solved! (??????)
Message-ID: <09099122.25.40PML3@lehigh.bitnet>
Date: 10 Sep 91 03:26:08 GMT
Lines: 14
Whether or not a plasma ball can crush wheat or not, I don't know, but
there's no way in hell that one could create a design like that on
the Led Zeppelin box set cover...
Paul Lewis | 'The love you take is equal to the love you make.' |
| -The Beatles, 'The End' |
Are you | 'Forcing the issue was always worth it.' |
sure that | -Jello Biafra |
Oswald | 'You always said yes. Yes to anyone with a badge or a flag.
killed | -Bruce Wayne to Clark Kent, 'The Dark Knight Returns'
J.F.K.? | 'We turned in horror toward the back of the grassy knoll |
| where it seemed the sounds had originated.' |
___________|_______-Cheryl McKinnon, witness to the murder of J.F.K.___|
Article 9216 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!ge-dab!crdgw1!rpi!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!psych.toronto.edu!daniel
From: daniel@psych.toronto.edu (Daniel Read)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Dates (Re: UFOs and Abductees)
Message-ID: <1991Sep10.010300.20473@psych.toronto.edu>
Date: 10 Sep 91 01:03:00 GMT
References: <l65b3#h@lynx.unm.edu> <1842@tuegate.tue.nl> <1991Sep6.130130.4768@uoft02.utoledo.edu>
Organization: Dept. of Psychology, University of Toronto
Lines: 25
In article <1991Sep6.130130.4768@uoft02.utoledo.edu> grx0435@uoft02.utoledo.edu writes:
>In article <1842@tuegate.tue.nl>, wsadjw@rw7.urc.tue.nl
>
> Might I recommend that you find a good Astronomy 101 textbook
> and read up on Frank Drake's 1961 equation:
>
> N = R * Fp * Ne * Fl * Fi * Fc * L
>
> where N = # of civiliztions in our galaxy that can contact each other.
> R = stellar formation rate of our galaxy
> Fp = fraction of stars with planets
> Ne = avg # planets / solar system with sutable environmental
> conditions.
> Fl = fraction which develop life
> Fi = " " " intellegent life
> Fc = " " heve the ability and *choose* to communicate
> L = the average lifetime of a civiliztion
>
I appreciate this formula being posted, but is it strictly correct? Why
take the product of Fl, Fi and Fc? I think you should use Fl * (Fi|FL) *
(Fc|Fi|Fl) ... otherwise you are erroneously reducing the value of N.
[NB, (Fi|fl) is the fraction of those planets that develop life which also
have intelligent life].
daniel
Article 9149 of sci.skeptic:
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Path: bilver!tarpit!fang!att!att!linac!uwm.edu!cs.utexas.edu!hellgate.utah.edu!lanl!jlg
From: jlg@beta.lanl.gov (Jim Giles)
Subject: Re: UFOs and Abductees
Message-ID: <1991Sep9.180944.24266@beta.lanl.gov>
Organization: Los Alamos National Laboratory
References: <GERRY.91Sep9123814@onion.frc.ri.cmu.edu>
Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1991 18:09:44 GMT
> In article <1991Sep7.053041.5389@ohsu.edu> lawder@ohsu3b2.ohsu.EDU (Kathryn Lawder) writes:
> [...]
> Or maybe they also have advanced ethics on the order of a prime
> directive?
The 'prime directive' is not advanced ethics, it's a blatant sci-fi plot
restriction ploy. It's an unsubtle way of restricting the actions of
the advanced high-tech characters so that low-tech environments can
still be hazardous and uncertain. As a practical matter, there would be
no way for it to work as it does fictionally: how do you land on a
planet and just "blend in" with the culture there when you're an oxygen
breathing, water drinking, carbon-based life form and they're monoxide
breathing, ammonia drinking, silicone-based life forms (with, in
addition, a considerably different appearance from yours)?
J. Giles
Article 9227 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!ge-dab!crdgw1!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!ucsd!nosc!watop!north
From: north@watop.nosc.mil (Mark North)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Crop Circles/Ascended Masters/Sound
Keywords: Imagination is a great thing, it just *may* exceed skepticism!
Message-ID: <north.684469762@watop>
Date: 10 Sep 91 02:29:22 GMT
References: <1991Sep7.193234.743@cbnewsc.cb.att.com>
Sender: nobody@nosc.NOSC.MIL
Distribution: usa
Lines: 13
jtg@cbnewsc.cb.att.com (Redheaded Goddess) writes:
[a bunch of stuff missing a lot of spaces]
I read your post and want to comment on it.
Try hitting your space bar more frequently.
>Note: I am not a frequent reader of this newsgroup, if any one
>wishes to respond to this, please email me privately.
Surely you jest.
Mark
Article 9254 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!ge-dab!crdgw1!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!unix.cis.pitt.edu!gvlf3.gvl.unisys.com!tredysvr!cellar!revpk
From: revpk@cellar.UUCP (Brian 'Rev P-K' Siano)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Crop Circles Solved (per CNN)
Message-ID: <kPH284w164w@cellar.UUCP>
Date: 10 Sep 91 03:47:19 GMT
References: <rdippold.684428876@cancun>
Sender: bbs@cellar.UUCP (The Cellar BBS)
Organization: The Cellar BBS and public access system
Lines: 24
rdippold@cancun.qualcomm.com (Ron Dippold) writes:
> john@anasaz.uucp (John Moore) writes:
> >CNN reported tonight that the mystery of crop circles in England may
> >have been solved. 2 gentlemen in their 60's reportedly demonstrated
> >their method for creating crop circles to a number of reporters. An
> >"expert" on crop circles (unnamed) admitted that the circles that they
> >created appeared genuine.
>
> >Anyone have any more info on this? You guys in the UK have some more
> >data?
>
> Yes, apparently they are aliens.
> --
> Standard disclaimer applies, you legalistic hacks. | Ron Dippold
The current issue of Science has a neat bit on the crop circles, as
well. Joe bob sez check it out.
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Brian Siano, Delaware Valley Skeptics
Rev. Philosopher-King of The First Church of the Divine Otis Redding
revpk@Cellar.UUCP "Ecrasez l'enfame!" - Voltaire
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Article 9207 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!ge-dab!crdgw1!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!cleveland.Freenet.Edu!ai065
From: ai065@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Thomas Hill)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Crop Circles Solved (per CNN)
Message-ID: <1991Sep9.231038.18886@usenet.ins.cwru.edu>
Date: 9 Sep 91 23:10:38 GMT
Sender: news@usenet.ins.cwru.edu
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, (USA)
Lines: 24
Nntp-Posting-Host: cwns1.ins.cwru.edu
The old men demonstrated how they used a board (about the size and shape
of a yardstick) with a single rope that is tied to both ends, looking
something like this:
____
/ \
( ) <---ROPE
======== <---BOARD
They would simply hold the rope in their hand and then walk with the board
under their foot. This quickly squashed large areas of crop. That's good
enough for me, but I still have two questions: What about the crops being
bent but not broke? Can this be done via this method? And, what about the
large areas were no circles were found the night before? Is this method fast
enough to produce large circles?
Tom
--
__ Make no bones about it, I'm an avid promoter of the Amiga computer. If
__/// you resent that because you were ripped off then that is your problem.
\XX/ :') "In every revolution.....there is one man...with a vision!" - Kirk
The Cryptozoology Information Network Want on our Email mailing list?
Article 9225 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!ge-dab!crdgw1!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!swrinde!ucsd!qualcom.qualcomm.com!cancun!rdippold
From: rdippold@cancun.qualcomm.com (Ron Dippold)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Crop Circles Solved (per CNN)
Message-ID: <rdippold.684462827@cancun>
Date: 10 Sep 91 00:33:47 GMT
References: <1991Sep9.231038.18886@usenet.ins.cwru.edu>
Sender: news@qualcomm.com
Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA
Lines: 25
Nntp-Posting-Host: cancun.qualcomm.com
ai065@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Thomas Hill) writes:
> The old men demonstrated how they used a board (about the size and shape
>of a yardstick) with a single rope that is tied to both ends, looking
>something like this:
> ____
> / \
> ( ) <---ROPE
> ======== <---BOARD
> They would simply hold the rope in their hand and then walk with the board
>under their foot. This quickly squashed large areas of crop. That's good
>enough for me, but I still have two questions: What about the crops being
>bent but not broke? Can this be done via this method? And, what about the
>large areas were no circles were found the night before? Is this method fast
>enough to produce large circles?
Yes and yes. The news report I heard today went further into detail.
They bent the crops instead of breaking them so that the farmer would
still be able to harvest the crops. So it wasn't destruction of
property. And yes, apparently with their method you can make the
circle quite big. Obviously, there's a limit, I don't know what it
is, but they had plenty of time to do it.
--
Standard disclaimer applies, you legalistic hacks. | Ron Dippold
Article 9217 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!ge-dab!crdgw1!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!ra!cee1
From: cee1@ra.MsState.Edu (The Chuckmeister)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Crop circles are a hoax.
Message-ID: <cee1.684465711@Ra.MsState.Edu>
Date: 10 Sep 91 01:21:51 GMT
References: <27178@nntpd.lkg.dec.com>
Lines: 30
cook@vcsesu.enet.dec.com (Peter R. Cook) writes:
>In article <1991Sep9.133407.6311@aber.ac.uk>, aro@aber.ac.uk (Andrew Ormsby) writes...
>>Today's "Today" newspaper (a UK national tabloid) exposes corn circles
>>as a hoax. The story is the lead on page 1, and there is accompanying
>>information explaining how the hoax is carried out inside.
> I don't believe it. Explain the circles that have appeared
> in Asia, Canada, and America.
It seems, if these people had done this for _TWENTY_ years, SOMMMMMEONE
would have seen it, with all the hundreds there. ANd what about all the
other shapes Diamonds, antennae, other geometric things.
About other nations with them, maybe toher people 'know' how to do them.
I just don't buy it. They would have been spotted long ago. And what about
the high E-fields in the centers?
This was just on an NBC News-minute thingie. I still am not convinced.
> Peter R. Cook | Disclaimer: "Quoth the Raven, eat my shorts man!"
--
+------------------------------------------\\ -------------
| Internet: cee1@Ra.MsState.Edu \\ --------------------
| Bitnet: cee1@MSSTATE.BITNET >> Jesus Christ is Lord
| Real Identity: Charles Edward Evans // --------------------
+------------------------------------------// --------------
Article 9210 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!ge-dab!crdgw1!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rphroy!caen!spool.mu.edu!munnari.oz.au!yoyo.aarnet.edu.au!sirius.ucs.adelaide.edu.au!chook.cs.adelaide.edu.au!andrewd
From: andrewd@chook.cs.adelaide.edu.au (Andrew Dunstan)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Crop circles are a hoax.
Message-ID: <4521@sirius.ucs.adelaide.edu.au>
Date: 9 Sep 91 23:38:59 GMT
References: <1991Sep9.133407.6311@aber.ac.uk>
Sender: news@ucs.adelaide.edu.au
Reply-To: andrewd@chook.cs.adelaide.edu.au (Andrew Dunstan)
Lines: 19
Nntp-Posting-Host: chook.ua.oz.au
In article <1991Sep9.133407.6311@aber.ac.uk>, aro@aber.ac.uk (Andrew
Ormsby) writes:
|>
|> Further comment seems unecessary.
Not to me! I cannot refrain from gloating. Now, will all those who were
sucked in admit their absurd credulity?
(I bet they won't.)
#######################################################################
# Andrew Dunstan # There's nothing good or bad #
# Department of Computer Science # but thinking makes it so. #
# University of Adelaide # #
# South Australia # - Shakespeare #
# net: andrewd@cs.adelaide.edu.au # #
#######################################################################
Article 9252 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!ge-dab!crdgw1!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!munnari.oz.au!bruce!trlluna!titan!medici!jbm
From: jbm@medici.trl.oz.au (Jacques Guy)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Crop circles are a hoax.
Message-ID: <1991Sep9.234416.15686@trl.oz.au>
Date: 9 Sep 91 23:44:16 GMT
References: <1991Sep9.133407.6311@aber.ac.uk>
Sender: news@trl.oz.au (USENET News System)
Organization: Telecom Research Labs, Melbourne, Australia
Lines: 3
For those of you who read French, crop circles were exposed for the hoax
they are in the October (or November, I'm not sure) 1990 of "Science et Vie".
Article 9241 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!ge-dab!crdgw1!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!unixhub!slacvm!doctorj
From: DOCTORJ@SLACVM.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU (Jon J Thaler)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Crop circles are a hoax.
Message-ID: <91252.212352DOCTORJ@SLACVM.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>
Date: 10 Sep 91 05:23:52 GMT
Organization: Stanford Linear Accelerator Center
Lines: 15
andrewd@chook.cs.adelaide.edu.au (Andrew Dunstan) says:
> aro@aber.ac.uk (Andrew Ormsby) writes:
>> Further comment seems unecessary.
> Not to me! I cannot refrain from gloating. Now, will all those who were
> sucked in admit their absurd credulity?
> (I bet they won't.)
Of course not. They will complain that because *NOT ALL* of the circles
have been proven to be hoaxes, they obviously *MUST* be heralding the
imminent return of the King (I mean Elvis, of course...).
Article 9286 of sci.skeptic:
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Path: bilver!dona
From: dona@bilver.uucp (Don Allen)
Subject: Re: Crop circles are a hoax.
Organization: W. J. Vermillion - Winter Park, FL
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 1991 01:54:31 GMT
Message-ID: <1991Sep12.015431.23621@bilver.uucp>
References: <1991Sep9.133407.6311@aber.ac.uk> <4521@sirius.ucs.adelaide.edu.au>
In article <4521@sirius.ucs.adelaide.edu.au> andrewd@chook.cs.adelaide.edu.au (Andrew Dunstan) writes:
>In article <1991Sep9.133407.6311@aber.ac.uk>, aro@aber.ac.uk (Andrew
>Ormsby) writes:
>
>
>|>
>|> Further comment seems unecessary.
>
>Not to me! I cannot refrain from gloating. Now, will all those who were
>sucked in admit their absurd credulity?
>
>(I bet they won't.)
>
># University of Adelaide # #
># South Australia # - Shakespeare #
># net: andrewd@cs.adelaide.edu.au # #
>#######################################################################
Why that's fine and dandy..but how do you explain and account for all
the circles that have been created in the UK for the last couple of
hundred years? (yes it has gone on that long)..and while you're
working up a "pat" answer for that..how about giving us the benefit
of you accumulated wisdom on explaining all the various crop circles
in other parts of the world.
Before you enjoy your (premature) gloating..best do your homework first.
A number of these circles are created each night..how do you explain the
method that the 2 old geezers use to span the whole of the UK to do _that_.
*plus* leap over to this continent and make circles in Canada and all over
the US.
Please explain to me what the "object" is in plate 50, page 92 of "Circular
Evidence" is to me. It sure *don't* look like 2 old guys with a "board".
Some of these "objects" have been videotaped buzzing over the newly created
circle. In fact, this tape was shown at the MUFON conference at Chicago,
complete with helicopters hovering *over* the object, watching it do it's
"thing".
I have absolutely no doubt that these 2 *could* hoax a credible looking
circle, however to lump the _whole phenomenon_ in with these 2 bozos
and claim that they hoaxed all the circles in the UK is in error.
Here's a simple enough test..the next few that are created in the UK..let's
see if fric and frac are anywhere near..no? they were in a pub the night
that an elaborate one is created? Tsk Tsk...
No doubt that some people are ingenious enough to hoax a circle..but
let's examine closely what _kind_ of circle they do produce and what
the evidence says by looking at all of it..do they press and swirl
the crop with the board and is it uniform with - no - breakage..no
damage,etc.
Sorry, but I just don't buy the explanation that's been given thus
far in all of this thread. Flimsy, verrryy flimsy.A Joke :-)
Don
--
-* Don Allen *- InterNet: dona@bilver.UUCP // Amiga..for the best of us.
USnail: 1818G Landing Dr, Sanford Fl 32771 \X/ Why use anything else? :-)
UUCP: ..uunet!tarpit!bilver!vicstoy!dona KING George Bush?? Just say NO!
UFO's in commercials....is the GOVT getting us ready for OCTOBER of 1992?
Article 9296 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!ge-dab!crdgw1!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!sdd.hp.com!mips!cs.uoregon.edu!ogicse!zephyr.ens.tek.com!uw-beaver!micro-heart-of-gold.mit.edu!xn.ll.mit.edu!xn!olson
From: olson@juliet.ll.mit.edu ( Steve Olson)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Crop Circles ... Solved! (??????)
Message-ID: <OLSON.91Sep10145740@goneril.juliet.ll.mit.edu>
Date: 10 Sep 91 21:57:40 GMT
References: <09099122.25.40PML3@lehigh.bitnet>
Sender: usenet@xn.ll.mit.edu
Organization: M.I.T. Lincoln Lab - Group 43
Lines: 35
In-Reply-To: PML3@NS.CC.LEHIGH.EDU's message of 10 Sep 91 03:26:08 GMT
In article <09099122.25.40PML3@lehigh.bitnet> PML3@NS.CC.LEHIGH.EDU (King of Birds (AKA: Paul Lewis)) writes:
> Whether or not a plasma ball can crush wheat or not, I don't know, but
> there's no way in hell that one could create a design like that on
> the Led Zeppelin box set cover...
>
> Paul Lewis | 'The love you take is equal to the love you make.' |
You're almost certainly correct on that score, the hoax explaination accounts
for both the very complex shapes and the concentration of the circles
in England. Another problem with the plasma ball hypothesis is that it
didn't explain why so many circles were in southern England.
I'm a bit puzzled, though, about the non-English circles. We are somewhat
at the mercy of the qualilty, or the lack thereof, of the reports on
non-English circles. Did they all have the bent-but-not-broken effect?
If so, how come everybody who guesses the secret immediately goes and and
hoaxes a circle himself instead of announcing his discovery? Its interesting
that some people, Randi comes to mind, came close to the truth without
hitting on the board trick.
I regard that it is possible (OK, slightly possible - OK, *very* slightly
possible) that a few of the simplest circles might have a natural origin.
After all, even the English hoaxers (BTW, great timing for the _The Economist_
article, huh?) were inspired by earlier incidents. Not that that really
proves anything, of course.
This plasma ball/ball lightning stuff sounds pretty cool, although we still
need an explaination on how these things could be created naturally.
--
-- Steve Olson
-- MIT Lincoln Laboratory
-- olson@juliet.ll.mit.edu
--
Article 9333 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!ge-dab!crdgw1!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!qt.cs.utexas.edu!cs.utexas.edu!asuvax!anasaz!qip!john
From: john@anasaz (John Moore)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Crop circles are a hoax.
Message-ID: <1991Sep10.150517.19086@anasaz>
Date: 10 Sep 91 15:05:17 GMT
References: <27178@nntpd.lkg.dec.com> <rdippold.684452251@cancun>
Organization: Anasazi, Inc. Phoenix, Az
Lines: 20
In article <rdippold.684452251@cancun> rdippold@cancun.qualcomm.com (Ron Dippold) writes:
]But, of course, this doesn't prove that all crop circles were hoaxes.
]After all, one of them _could_ have been done somewhere by an alien,
]that looked just like all the rest. How are you going to prove that
]it wasn't? I expect to see a lot of that argument coming up soon.
If I remember correctly, there is somewhat of a tradition of elegant hoaxes
in England. These gentlemen were continuing in that tradition.
There may also be natural crop circles. A fellow here at the office used to
be a wheat farmer in Kansas. He said that he occasionally would find circles
of downed wheat in his fields. He never thought much of it, since it seemed
to be a natural phenomenon. These observations were in the 50's and 60's in
Kansas.
--
John Moore HAM:NJ7E/CAP:T-Bird 381 ames!ncar!noao!asuvax!anasaz!john
USnail: 7525 Clearwater Pkwy, Scottsdale,AZ 85253 anasaz!john@asuvax.eas.asu.edu
Voice: (602) 951-9326 john@anasaz.UUCP
Opinion: Support ALL of the bill of rights, INCLUDING the 2nd amendment!
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed here are all my fault, and no one elses.
Article 9272 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!ge-dab!crdgw1!rpi!think.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!cis.ohio-state.edu!sei.cmu.edu!fs7.ece.cmu.edu!crabapple.srv.cs.cmu.edu!netnews.srv.cs.cmu.edu!gerry
From: gerry@frc2.frc.ri.cmu.edu (Gerry Roston)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Crop circles are a hoax.
Message-ID: <GERRY.91Sep10111454@onion.frc.ri.cmu.edu>
Date: 10 Sep 91 16:14:54 GMT
References: <27178@nntpd.lkg.dec.com> <cee1.684465711@Ra.MsState.Edu>
Reply-To: gerry@cs.cmu.edu (Gerry Roston)
Organization: Field Robotics Center, CMU
Lines: 20
Nntp-Posting-Host: onion.frc.ri.cmu.edu
In-Reply-To: cee1@ra.MsState.Edu's message of 10 Sep 91 01:21:51 GMT
What I love about believers in the paranormal is that when you slap
them in the face with PROOF that their belief is unfounded, they just
ignore it. If Uri Gellar were to admit publically that he is a fraud,
I bet that there are several readers here who would claim:
-He is lying
-He actually uses PSI without knowing it.
WAKE UP PEOPLE. They admitted that the crop circles were a hoax.
They have shown quite convincingly that they are easy to produce.
This is overwhelming evidence. They is ABSOLUTELY NO evidence to
indicate that they were created otherwise.
--
Gerry Roston (gerry@cs.cmu.edu) | Statues of marble or brass will perish; and
Field Robotics Center, | statues made in imitation of them are not
Carnegie Mellon University | the same statues... But print and reprint a
Pittsburgh, PA, 15213 | thought a thousand times over, and that
(412) 268-6557 | with materials of any kind... the thought
| is eternally and identically the same
| thought in every case. Thomas Paine
Article 9320 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!ge-dab!crdgw1!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!caen!uflorida!terrell
From: terrell@astro (Dirk Terrell)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Crop circles are a hoax.
Message-ID: <31022@uflorida.cis.ufl.EDU>
Date: 10 Sep 91 23:45:39 GMT
References: <cee1.684465711@Ra.MsState.Edu> <GERRY.91Sep10111454@onion.frc.ri.cmu.edu> <12251@bunny.GTE.COM>
Sender: news@uflorida.cis.ufl.EDU
Organization: Dept. of Astronomy, Univ. of Florida
Lines: 26
In article <12251@bunny.GTE.COM> dir2@gte.com (Dean Radin) writes:
>In article <GERRY.91Sep10111454@onion.frc.ri.cmu.edu>
>gerry@frc2.frc.ri.cmu.edu (Gerry Roston) writes:
>> What I love about believers in the paranormal is that when you slap
>> them in the face with PROOF that their belief is unfounded, they just
>> ignore it.
>
>What Gerry (as well as many skeptics) doesn't seem to appreciate is that
>perseverance of belief is a two-edged sword.
>
>Social psychologists have very nicely shown that if you agree with an
>hypothesis, you will see new data that agrees with the hypothesis as
>valid and logical, but if the new data doesn't agree, then you'll see the
>data as wrong, not the hypothesis.
It's been a while since I looked at this, but a study by Glick and Snyder
(_The Humanist_, vol 46 pp. 20-25 (1986) showed that people skeptical of
astrology (I think) when shown data that supported astrology tended become
more receptive to the hypothesis. On the other hand, believers of astrology
when presented with evidence against astrology, did NOT change their
position. Hmmm.....
--
________________________________________________________________________
Dirk Terrell |
Department of Astronomy| "Einstein said there is no such thing as time."
University of Florida | Shirley McClaine
Article 9354 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!ge-dab!crdgw1!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!sdd.hp.com!usc!apple!fernwood!portal!cup.portal.com!Don_-_Showen
From: Don_-_Showen@cup.portal.com
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Crop circles are a hoax.
Message-ID: <46868@cup.portal.com>
Date: 11 Sep 91 06:16:26 GMT
References: <cee1.684465711@Ra.MsState.Edu>
<GERRY.91Sep10111454@onion.frc.ri.cmu.edu> <12251@bunny.GTE.COM>
<31022@uflorida.cis.ufl.EDU>
Organization: The Portal System (TM)
Lines: 9
I find it amusing and disappointing that the new standard of skeptics proof
is a tabloid. Wow! Sounds more like desperation than proof. Maybe it is
possible that two 60 year old men could make over 500 cc in Europe in one
season. Now here is where I would say spacecraft were involved carrying
the men around. But that leaves the fact that the sound above and below
human hearing has been detected and presented. So now skeptics run out
and buy some more tabliods to explain how dragging a board leaves a circle
with measurable sounds in it. Skeptics are a hoax! Tabloids are real.
Don Showen
Article 9338 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!ge-dab!crdgw1!rpi!usc!srhqla!venus!kdq
From: kdq@3D.com (Kevin D. Quitt)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Crop circles are a hoax.
Message-ID: <1991Sep11.001958.26861@3D.com>
Date: 11 Sep 91 00:19:58 GMT
References: <27178@nntpd.lkg.dec.com> <cee1.684465711@Ra.MsState.Edu> <GERRY.91Sep10111454@onion.frc.ri.cmu.edu>
Organization: 3D systems, inc. Valencia CA
Lines: 17
In article <GERRY.91Sep10111454@onion.frc.ri.cmu.edu> gerry@cs.cmu.edu (Gerry Roston) writes:
>What I love about believers in the paranormal is that when you slap
>them in the face with PROOF that their belief is unfounded, they just
>ignore it. If Uri Gellar were to admit publically that he is a fraud,
>I bet that there are several readers here who would claim:
>-He is lying
>-He actually uses PSI without knowing it.
It's worse than that. A channeller was shown to be a fraud, and the
followers said "He's a fraud now, but before it was real". sigh.
--
_
Kevin D. Quitt srhqla!venus!kdq kdq%venus@sr.com
3D systems, inc. 26081 Avenue Hall Valencia, CA 91355
VOICE (805) 295-5600 x430 FAX (805) 257-1200
96.37% of all statistics are made up.
Article 9366 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!ge-dab!crdgw1!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!bronze!venus.iucf.indiana.edu!graham
From: graham@venus.iucf.indiana.edu (JIM GRAHAM)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Crop circles are a hoax.
Message-ID: <1991Sep11.044249.14504@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu>
Date: 11 Sep 91 03:32:40 GMT
References: <27178@nntpd.lkg.dec.com> <cee1.684465711@Ra.MsState.Edu> <GERRY.91Sep10111454@onion.frc.ri.cmu.edu>
Sender: news@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (USENET News System)
Reply-To: graham@venus.iucf.indiana.edu
Distribution: na
Organization: Somewhere in Bloomington, Indiana
Lines: 39
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.3-4
Nntp-Posting-Host: venus.iucf.indiana.edu
In article <GERRY.91Sep10111454@onion.frc.ri.cmu.edu>, gerry@frc2.frc.ri.cmu.edu (Gerry Roston) writes...
>
>WAKE UP PEOPLE. They admitted that the crop circles were a hoax.
No. Two elderly gentlemen _claim_ that they are the culprits.
>They have shown quite convincingly that they are easy to produce.
No. They have shown, quite convincingly that they are perfectly capable of
mashing plants flat to the ground.
>This is overwhelming evidence. They is ABSOLUTELY NO evidence to
>indicate that they were created otherwise.
No. It isn't event close to "overwhelming". It _is_ evidence that
these guys are capable of mashing a bunch of plants to make a poor excuse
of a duplicate of the patterns we've been seeing.
The bottom line? I'm skeptical not only of the claims of those that the
circles are from aliens or from a "plasma vortex", but also of the claims
from ANYONE that they are solely responsible for the patterns created
for the last decade.
Until these guys can show, on demand, that they can just as _accurately_
reproduce one of the _complex_ patterns, I shall remain a skeptic,
believing only that no explanation has yet been found.
>Gerry Roston (gerry@cs.cmu.edu) | Statues of marble or brass will perish; and
Jim Graham
-> ->Disclaimer: I do not speak for my company. <- <-
Neither do they speak for me.
______________________________________________________________________
| Internet: graham@venus.iucf.indiana.edu |
| UUCP: dolmen!graham@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu |
| BBS: The PORTAL DOLMEN BBS/ParaNet ALPHA-GAMMA (sm) (9:1012/13) |
| (812) 334-0418, 24hrs. |
|______________________________________________________________________|
Article 9337 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!ge-dab!crdgw1!rpi!usc!srhqla!venus!kdq
From: kdq@3D.com (Kevin D. Quitt)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Crop circles are a hoax.
Message-ID: <1991Sep11.001816.26771@3D.com>
Date: 11 Sep 91 00:18:16 GMT
References: <27178@nntpd.lkg.dec.com> <cee1.684465711@Ra.MsState.Edu>
Organization: 3D systems, inc. Valencia CA
Lines: 16
In article <cee1.684465711@Ra.MsState.Edu> cee1@ra.MsState.Edu (The Chuckmeister) writes:
> About other nations with them, maybe toher people 'know' how to do them.
> I just don't buy it. They would have been spotted long ago. And what about
> the high E-fields in the centers?
What about them? (First I've heard of it). Are there also high E-fileds
in the center of circles known to be hoaxes?
--
_
Kevin D. Quitt srhqla!venus!kdq kdq%venus@sr.com
3D systems, inc. 26081 Avenue Hall Valencia, CA 91355
VOICE (805) 295-5600 x430 FAX (805) 257-1200
96.37% of all statistics are made up.
Article 9327 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!ge-dab!crdgw1!uunet!mcsun!ukc!edcastle!egnr76
From: egnr76@castle.ed.ac.uk (A Kashko)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Crop circles are a hoax.
Message-ID: <12933@castle.ed.ac.uk>
Date: 10 Sep 91 08:46:34 GMT
References: <27178@nntpd.lkg.dec.com>
Organization: Edinburgh University
Lines: 18
In article <27178@nntpd.lkg.dec.com> cook@vcsesu.enet.dec.com (Peter R. Cook) writes:
>
>In article <1991Sep9.133407.6311@aber.ac.uk>, aro@aber.ac.uk (Andrew Ormsby) writes...
>>Today's "Today" newspaper (a UK national tabloid) exposes corn circles
>>as a hoax. The story is the lead on page 1, and there is accompanying
>>information explaining how the hoax is carried out inside.
>
> I don't believe it. Explain the circles that have appeared
> in Asia, Canada, and America.
There was an article in Fortean Times recently which described apparent
crop circles appearing well before these two hoaxers were born. On the positive side,
revelation of the hoax will allow investigators to determine characteristics of this
type of hoax. However the circles that have appeared in Asia, Canada, and America
could just be explained by copy cat hoaxes (although this seems less likely in Asia)
I'm just keeping an open mind and listening to what goes on right now.
I can't make a final judgment without putting in a lot of work.
Article 9331 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!ge-dab!crdgw1!uunet!mcsun!ukc!icdoc!syma!stevedc
From: stevedc@syma.sussex.ac.uk (Stephen Carter)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Crop circles are a hoax.
Message-ID: <1991Sep10.122024.27230@syma.sussex.ac.uk>
Date: 10 Sep 91 12:20:24 GMT
References: <27178@nntpd.lkg.dec.com>
Organization: University of Sussex
Lines: 23
From article <27178@nntpd.lkg.dec.com>, by cook@vcsesu.enet.dec.com (Peter R. Cook):
>
> In article <1991Sep9.133407.6311@aber.ac.uk>, aro@aber.ac.uk (Andrew Ormsby) writes...
>>Today's "Today" newspaper (a UK national tabloid) exposes corn circles
>>as a hoax. The story is the lead on page 1, and there is accompanying
>>information explaining how the hoax is carried out inside.
>
> I don't believe it. Explain the circles that have appeared
> in Asia, Canada, and America.
>
Agreed.
Nor does it explain how (as reported on this morning's BBC Radio 4 -
ie serious- Farming Today program) up to 20 of this year's reported
300 (!) have happened on the same night.
Stephen Carter, Systems Manager, The Administration,
The University of Sussex, Falmer, Brighton BN1 9RH, UK
Tel: +44 273 678203 Fax: +44 273 678335 JANET: stevedc@uk.ac.sussex.syma
EARN/BITNET : stevedc@syma.sussex.ac.uk UUCP: stevedc@syma.uucp
ARPA/INTERNET: stevedc%syma.sussex.ac.uk@nsfnet-relay.ac.uk
Article 9365 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!ge-dab!crdgw1!uunet!mcsun!cernvax!chx400!ugun2b!ugsc2a!cornell
From: cornell@sc2a.unige.ch
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Crop circles are a hoax.
Message-ID: <1991Sep10.195128.545@sc2a.unige.ch>
Date: 10 Sep 91 17:51:28 GMT
References: <27178@nntpd.lkg.dec.com>
Followup-To: sci.skeptic
Organization: University of Geneva, Switzerland
Lines: 25
In article <27178@nntpd.lkg.dec.com>, cook@vcsesu.enet.dec.com (Peter R. Cook) writes:
>
> In article <1991Sep9.133407.6311@aber.ac.uk>, aro@aber.ac.uk (Andrew Ormsby) writes...
>>Today's "Today" newspaper (a UK national tabloid) exposes corn circles
>>as a hoax. The story is the lead on page 1, and there is accompanying
>>information explaining how the hoax is carried out inside.
>
> I don't believe it. Explain the circles that have appeared
> in Asia, Canada, and America.
These men may well not have been the fakers of ALL the crop circles
worldwide, or even of all the ones they claim, but the fact that they managed
to prepare a crop circle that fooled an expert does prove that fraud is a quite
reasonable explanation of the phenomenon.
>
> Peter R. Cook | Disclaimer: "Quoth the Raven, eat my shorts man!"
> Digital Equip. Corp. +--------------------------------------------------
> Marlboro, MA. | "1984 has past, forget about Big Brother, welcome
> 508-467-6936 | to the 90's where the government's your mother!"
>
> ~ The opinions expressed above are the author's only and do not reflect the ~
> ~ opinions or anything else of Digital Equipment Corporation. ~
Stephen Cornell.
Article 9292 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!ge-dab!crdgw1!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!bu.edu!m2c!wpi.WPI.EDU!drwho
From: drwho@wpi.WPI.EDU (Eric Ant Von Laudermann)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Crop circles are a hoax.
Message-ID: <1991Sep10.193301.29315@wpi.WPI.EDU>
Date: 10 Sep 91 19:33:01 GMT
References: <27178@nntpd.lkg.dec.com>
Organization: Worcester Polytechnic Institute
Lines: 17
In article <27178@nntpd.lkg.dec.com> cook@vcsesu.enet.dec.com (Peter R. Cook) writes:
>
>In article <1991Sep9.133407.6311@aber.ac.uk>, aro@aber.ac.uk (Andrew Ormsby) writes...
>>Today's "Today" newspaper (a UK national tabloid) exposes corn circles
>>as a hoax. The story is the lead on page 1, and there is accompanying
>>information explaining how the hoax is carried out inside.
>
> I don't believe it. Explain the circles that have appeared
> in Asia, Canada, and America.
When skeptics hear about something like this, they often say,
"I bet I could do that."
--E.V.L. (drwho@wpi.wpi.edu) # "I know! You can play with your magic
Disclaimer: "It's all absolutely # nose goblins!"
devastatingly true, except the bits # "I picked them myself..."
that are lies." --Douglas Adams # --Ren & Stimpy
Article 9335 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!peora!masscomp!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!qt.cs.utexas.edu!cs.utexas.edu!asuvax!anasaz!qip!john
From: john@anasaz (John Moore)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Crop circles are a hoax.
Message-ID: <1991Sep11.210014.17234@anasaz>
Date: 11 Sep 91 21:00:14 GMT
References: <27178@nntpd.lkg.dec.com> <1991Sep10.234010.16001@bilver.uucp>
Organization: Anasazi, Inc. Phoenix, Az
Lines: 29
In article <1991Sep10.234010.16001@bilver.uucp> dona@bilver.uucp (Don Allen) writes:
]I also have pictures of a crop ringlet that was created in Arizona..I
]guess Bower and Chorley must also be the MIB to create those as well.
When and where, please? Enquiring Arizona minds want to know :-) Seriously,
I would be interested in hearing/seeing this information.
]While I do not doubt that some circles have been hoaxed, it is absolute
]rubbish to throw the baby out with the bath water, which is being suggested
]here.
It is clearly too soon for skeptics to conclude that the story is over. Anyone
taking this press report and instantly trumpeting a conclusion that all CC's
are hoaxes is making the same sort of illogical leap made by the proponents
of so much UFO/PSI/Conspiracy/??? nonsense. However, it would not surprise
me at all to find:
(1) all elaborate crop "circles" are hoaxes. I have not heard of ANY
non-circular ones before crop circles became a tabloid phenomenon.
(2) many simple crop circles are natural (I know someone who saw them
over 20 years ago in Kansas).
What we desperately need is to hear more details from folks over in
Jolly Old England!
--
John Moore NJ7E, 7525 Clearwater Pkwy, Scottsdale, AZ 85253 (602-951-9326)
ncar!noao!asuvax!anasaz!john john@anasaz.UUCP anasaz!john@asuvax.eas.asu.edu
"It would be thought a hard government that should tax its people one tenth
part..." B. Franklin - Standard Disclaimer Applies -
- - Support ALL of the bill of rights, INCLUDING the 2nd amendment! - -
Article 9332 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!ge-dab!crdgw1!uunet!mcsun!ukc!icdoc!syma!roys
From: roys@syma.sussex.ac.uk (Roy Stead)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Crop circles are a hoax.
Summary: Guardian report
Message-ID: <1991Sep10.125029.28558@syma.sussex.ac.uk>
Date: 10 Sep 91 12:50:29 GMT
References: <1991Sep9.133407.6311@aber.ac.uk>
Organization: University of Sussex
Lines: 50
In article <1991Sep9.133407.6311@aber.ac.uk> aro@aber.ac.uk (Andrew Ormsby) writes:
>Today's "Today" newspaper (a UK national tabloid) exposes corn circles
>as a hoax. The story is the lead on page 1, and there is accompanying
>information explaining how the hoax is carried out inside.
>
>The perpetrators are Doug Bower and Dave Chorley, both in their
>sixties. They've been creating circles for 13 years.
The story is reported in today's _Guardian_ (10/9/91). The _Guardian_ report,
by the way, describes Bower & Chorley as "the Wessex Skeptics, from
Southampton University," which appears to be an actual Skeptics society, since
later the report mentions: "Robin Allan, spokesman for the Wessex Skeptics,
said their circle was made by hand last month in two hours with a garden
roller." (This doesn't seem consistent with the _Today_ report as to how the
circles were made - and certainly doesn't suggest that the stalks would be
unbroken) However, "Experts judged [the circle] a textbook example, and 100
per cent genuine. Dowsers reported strong reactions, and a medium was carried
away complaining of nausea."
"Martin Pitt, the farmer who lent his land to the TV company [before whose
cameras a circle was created], was less certain that the hoax admission has
ended more than a decade of speculation. 'We only set out to prove a circle
could be man-made and the experts couldn'tc really tell one way or the other,
But it does no prove that there are not genuine ones as well,' he said."
"Four days later, another circle appeared on Mr Pitt's land without his
permission or knowledge."
A Mr Colin Andrews, director of field operations at the Centre for Crop Circle
Studies, said of the Wessex Skeptics's circle "Straight away we can see
everything we would expect to see in a hoax. The plants are broken, it is
extremely ragged and obviously a hoax. There is nothing here to impress us
except two very fit 60-year-olds."
"[Mr Andrews] calculated that of 300-plus circles that have appeared this
year, about 70 were hoaxes - but that did not explain how 20 circles a night,
at the season's peak, were appearing.
"Mr [Patrick] Delgado said the confession of the two hoaxers did not explain
what had been happening worldwide.
"'Yesterday there were circles found on a prairie in Canada. Have these two
guys been there with their board?'"
According to the _Guardian_, the TV report will be shown on Channel 4 (UK) as
part of the _Equinox_ series - next month.
All the best,
Roy
Article 9287 of sci.skeptic:
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Path: bilver!dona
From: dona@bilver.uucp (Don Allen)
Subject: Re: Crop circles are a hoax.
Organization: W. J. Vermillion - Winter Park, FL
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 1991 02:02:57 GMT
Message-ID: <1991Sep12.020257.23749@bilver.uucp>
References: <91254.063921DOCTORJ@SLACVM.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>
In article <91254.063921DOCTORJ@SLACVM.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU> DOCTORJ@SLACVM.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU (Jon J Thaler) writes:
>dona@bilver.uucp (Don Allen) says:
>
>> While I do not doubt that some circles have been hoaxed, it is absolute
>> rubbish to throw the baby out with the bath water, which is being suggested
>> here.
>
>I am going to claim my $10,000 from James Randi now. As you netters may
>recall, I predicted the existence of this post about two days ago. A
>clear case of precognition, if there ever was one.
Clearly the award should go to me for *knowing* that you would post
this response. :-)
A Skeptic? Are those the guys that think the world is flat and there
is no such thing as God? :-)
Don
--
-* Don Allen *- InterNet: dona@bilver.UUCP // Amiga..for the best of us.
USnail: 1818G Landing Dr, Sanford Fl 32771 \X/ Why use anything else? :-)
UUCP: ..uunet!tarpit!bilver!vicstoy!dona KING George Bush?? Just say NO!
UFO's in commercials....is the GOVT getting us ready for OCTOBER of 1992?
Article 9311 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!ge-dab!crdgw1!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!icd.ab.com!iccgcc.decnet.ab.com!kambic
From: kambic@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com (George X. Kambic, Allen-Bradley Inc.)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Executive Summary [was: Fractals...]
Message-ID: <1991Sep10.155734.5654@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com>
Date: 10 Sep 91 20:57:34 GMT
References: <1991Sep9.162645.6370@engage.pko.dec.com>
Lines: 33
In article <1991Sep9.162645.6370@engage.pko.dec.com>, stanley@verga.enet.dec.com writes:
>
[...]
>>ever hope to do.
>
> Do you mean that you don't really want a "repeatable experiment"? That
> you'd prefer not to have proof to deal with? That all the talk was just
> that... talk?
>
> I didn't insult you. I merely said that the crop symbols were the hard
> evidence you keep saying you require. No talk of "pity"... no mention of
> "silly"... nothing said of "misguided insistence" at all.
It is your opinion that the crop symbols are hard evidence. Lots of data
have been presented as hard evidence. How the crop circles qualify as hard
evidence is something that you had better make a case for. There are
a lot of arguments about "cannot be done by current technology, can't reach
them from the ground, etc.". All of which is not true for every circle. If
you have a group of circles that defy all current explanations, get the
data up.
>
> You know what? I don't think you really want hard evidence because you
> DON'T WANT proof that psi exists. It's your ego that drives you... not
> your intellect.
>
> None are so blind are those who WILL NOT see.
Whatever in the heck this means?
This is a joke, right? You are really a closet skeptic? (Or skeptical
of closets?)
GXKambic
stamped, flattended, standard disclaimer
Article 9468 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!ge-dab!crdgw1!uunet!wang!news
From: warren@worlds.com (Warren Burstein)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Fractals & Crop Circles
Message-ID: <629@vaccine.UUCP>
Date: 11 Sep 91 13:47:53 GMT
References: <1991Sep6.172310.11183@engage.pko.dec.com>
Sender: news@wang.com
Organization: WorldWide Software
Lines: 15
stanley@verga.enet.dec.com writes:
> Now it's your turn. What symbol would YOU like to see written in the fields?
> You try it now and maybe we can get a repeatable experiment going
> for all of those hard-science types.
A simple circle. As long as James Randi is standing in the center of
it. Just having the symbol show up somewhere and unobserved is an
invitation to fraud.
--
/|/-\/-\ The entire world Jerusalem
|__/__/_/ is a very strange carrot
|warren@ But the farmer
/ worlds.COM is not worried at all.
Article 9432 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!ge-dab!crdgw1!uunet!srg!news
From: akerson@srg.uucp (Akerson)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Crop Circles and space aliens.
Keywords: crop-circles, aliens
Message-ID: <1991Sep11.220901.2238@srg.uucp>
Date: 11 Sep 91 22:09:01 GMT
Expires: 10/01/91
References: <09099122.25.40PML3@lehigh.bitnet>
Sender: akerson
Followup-To: Re: crop-circles
Organization: SRG, Arinc Research Corp., Annapolis, MD
Lines: 27
After reading through the thread on crop circles, a
couple of questions :
Question 1:
There is no parallel discussion of similar supposedly
alien visitations to livestock raising concerns. Presumably
the same space aliens are responsible for both. If so why
do they leave impressions in the soil and kill livestock in
one case, while only flattening plants in the second.
Question 2:
If these circles are some kind of natural phenomenon,
then where are the reports of similar circles found
on moors, swamps, marshes, tundra, snow, parking lots, etc.
If there are not numerous "non-crop" circles, then natural
phenomenon seems to be ruled out.
If space aliens are to blame then there must be more than 1
kind of alien visitation device or species, or whatever.
-Pete
uunet!srg!akerson
akerson%srg@uunet.UUCP
--
- Pete
Article 9372 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!ge-dab!crdgw1!uunet!mcsun!ukc!ox-prg!oxuniv!ameij
From: ameij@vax.oxford.ac.uk
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Crop Circle Requests
Message-ID: <1991Sep10.132836.1767@vax.oxford.ac.uk>
Date: 10 Sep 91 12:28:36 GMT
References: <1991Sep9.163348.6652@engage.pko.dec.com>
Organization: Oxford University VAXcluster
Lines: 8
In article <1991Sep9.163348.6652@engage.pko.dec.com>, stanley@verga.enet.dec.com writes:
>
> Fine! You don't want proof either. I guess you guys already know
> everything there is to know anyway.
>
> Goodbye
Do you have the phrase "The pot calling the kettle black" in the US?
Article 9391 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!ge-dab!crdgw1!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!malgudi!caen!hellgate.utah.edu!lanl!cochiti.lanl.gov!jlg
From: jlg@cochiti.lanl.gov (Jim Giles)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Crop Circle Requests
Message-ID: <1991Sep11.161155.24929@beta.lanl.gov>
Date: 11 Sep 91 16:11:55 GMT
References: <1991Sep9.163348.6652@engage.pko.dec.com> <1991Sep10.132836.1767@vax.oxford.ac.uk>
Sender: news@beta.lanl.gov (Usenet News)
Organization: Los Alamos National Laboratory
Lines: 9
In article <1991Sep10.132836.1767@vax.oxford.ac.uk>, ameij@vax.oxford.ac.uk writes:
|> [...]
|> Do you have the phrase "The pot calling the kettle black" in the US?
Yes, but it's probably grounds for expulsion on many university
campuses - it's not politically correct, you know, to use the word
`black' in a phrase which implies that it's a derogatory term.
J. Giles
Article 9406 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!ge-dab!crdgw1!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!samsung!mips!sdd.hp.com!usc!srhqla!venus!kdq
From: kdq@3D.com (Kevin D. Quitt)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Crop Circle Requests
Message-ID: <1991Sep11.192220.4921@3D.com>
Date: 11 Sep 91 19:22:20 GMT
References: <1991Sep9.163348.6652@engage.pko.dec.com> <1991Sep10.132836.1767@vax.oxford.ac.uk> <1991Sep11.161155.24929@beta.lanl.gov>
Organization: 3D systems, inc. Valencia CA
Lines: 22
In article <1991Sep11.161155.24929@beta.lanl.gov> jlg@cochiti.lanl.gov (Jim Giles) writes:
>In article <1991Sep10.132836.1767@vax.oxford.ac.uk>, ameij@vax.oxford.ac.uk writes:
>|> [...]
>|> Do you have the phrase "The pot calling the kettle black" in the US?
>
>Yes, but it's probably grounds for expulsion on many university
>campuses - it's not politically correct, you know, to use the word
>`black' in a phrase which implies that it's a derogatory term.
Which gives rise to the urban legend (may or may not be true) about
a financial report that was run through a grammar checker that also made
political-correctness corrections; the phrase "in the black" was changed
to "in the afro-american".
--
_
Kevin D. Quitt srhqla!venus!kdq kdq%venus@sr.com
3D systems, inc. 26081 Avenue Hall Valencia, CA 91355
VOICE (805) 295-5600 x430 FAX (805) 257-1200
96.37% of all statistics are made up.
Article 9470 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!ge-dab!crdgw1!uunet!wang!news
From: warren@worlds.com (Warren Burstein)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Crop Circle Requests
Message-ID: <630@vaccine.UUCP>
Date: 11 Sep 91 13:52:25 GMT
References: <X0VV812w164w@cellar.UUCP>
Sender: news@wang.com
Organization: WorldWide Software
Lines: 12
revpk@cellar.UUCP (Brian 'Rev P-K' Siano) writes:
> Any suggestiona?
The Glyph of Bogosity
The Seal of the Suzerain of Good Housekeeping
The Sacred Chao
--
/|/-\/-\ The entire world Jerusalem
|__/__/_/ is a very strange carrot
|warren@ But the farmer
/ worlds.COM is not worried at all.
Article 9383 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!ge-dab!crdgw1!rpi!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!bcm!DINO.QCI.BIOCH.BCM.TMC.EDU!skywalker
From: skywalker@DINO.QCI.BIOCH.BCM.TMC.EDU (Timothy B. Reynolds)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Crop circles
Message-ID: <7480@gazette.bcm.tmc.edu>
Date: 11 Sep 91 14:51:33 GMT
References: <27178@nntpd.lkg.dec.com> <rdippold.684452251@cancun> <1991Sep10.150517.19086@anasaz>
Sender: usenet@bcm.tmc.edu
Organization: X-Ray Crystallography / Howard Hughes Medical Institute
Lines: 14
Nntp-Posting-Host: dino.qci.bioch.bcm.tmc.edu
Someone please answer this for me.
If the crop circles are real, why don't we see them in the snow.
Snow would be the perfect medium for circles...
My guess is, because you can't hide footprints in the snow...
But I bet if we talk about enough we will see them this winter :-)
tim
--
Disclaimer: My opinions are my own, not HHMI's or Baylor College of Medicine
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"And we stand and watch the gods and idols fall, as the blameless ones go
blindfold to the wall" Robin Trower....
Article 9399 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!ge-dab!crdgw1!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!samsung!umich!gumby!kzoo!k080093
From: k080093@hobbes.kzoo.edu (Josh N. Vander Berg)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Crop circles
Message-ID: <1991Sep11.165912.1901@hobbes.kzoo.edu>
Date: 11 Sep 91 16:59:12 GMT
References: <rdippold.684452251@cancun> <1991Sep10.150517.19086@anasaz> <7480@gazette.bcm.tmc.edu>
Organization: Kalamazoo College
Lines: 16
In article <7480@gazette.bcm.tmc.edu> skywalker@DINO.QCI.BIOCH.BCM.TMC.EDU (Timothy B. Reynolds) writes:
>Someone please answer this for me.
>
>If the crop circles are real, why don't we see them in the snow.
>Snow would be the perfect medium for circles...
>
>My guess is, because you can't hide footprints in the snow...
>But I bet if we talk about enough we will see them this winter :-)
>tim
Hmmmm... You just don't get it. The hyperdrives of the aliens don't work
in the cold air of the winter. Sheeez! I thought everyone knew this??
Of course, if we talk enough about it we will see some this winter. The
Aliens read this newsgroup, and at this VERY moment, are working feverishly
on a winter-hyperdrive.
Article 9427 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!ge-dab!crdgw1!uunet!stanford.edu!CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU!Neon.Stanford.EDU!amorgan
From: amorgan@Neon.Stanford.EDU (Crunchy Frog)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Crop circles
Message-ID: <1991Sep11.201825.28659@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU>
Date: 11 Sep 91 20:18:25 GMT
References: <1991Sep10.150517.19086@anasaz> <7480@gazette.bcm.tmc.edu> <1991Sep11.165912.1901@hobbes.kzoo.edu>
Sender: news@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University, Ca , USA
Lines: 30
In article <1991Sep11.165912.1901@hobbes.kzoo.edu> k080093@hobbes.kzoo.edu (Josh N. Vander Berg) writes:
>In article <7480@gazette.bcm.tmc.edu> skywalker@DINO.QCI.BIOCH.BCM.TMC.EDU (Timothy B. Reynolds) writes:
>>Someone please answer this for me.
>>
>>If the crop circles are real, why don't we see them in the snow.
>>Snow would be the perfect medium for circles...
>>
>>My guess is, because you can't hide footprints in the snow...
>>But I bet if we talk about enough we will see them this winter :-)
>>tim
>
>Hmmmm... You just don't get it. The hyperdrives of the aliens don't work
>in the cold air of the winter. Sheeez! I thought everyone knew this??
>
>Of course, if we talk enough about it we will see some this winter. The
>Aliens read this newsgroup, and at this VERY moment, are working feverishly
>on a winter-hyperdrive.
Sheesh, you guys are sooooo out of it. EVERYONE knows that the hyperdrives
don't sieze up in cold air because they manage to go through outer space
where it is really cold just fine (and anyone who wishes to point out that
outer space isn't cold, it just makes anything in it cold can go away. Dont
confuse me with reality). The real reason is that the aliens attach religious
significance to the color white and refuse to desecrate it in any way. Which
brings up the following experiment: Get 300 fraternity guys to hold a party
in the snow. They will piss all over it and turn it yellow. THEN the aliens
will be able to create circles in it. See how simple science is when you
approach it in a rational manner?
Why not redirect this to sci.sceptic.stupid?
Article 9397 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!ge-dab!crdgw1!cs.albany.edu!sarah!newserve!bingvaxu.cc.binghamton.edu!kym
From: kym@bingvaxu.cc.binghamton.edu (R. Kym Horsell)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Crop circles
Message-ID: <1991Sep11.172843.29036@newserve.cc.binghamton.edu>
Date: 11 Sep 91 17:28:43 GMT
References: <rdippold.684452251@cancun> <1991Sep10.150517.19086@anasaz> <7480@gazette.bcm.tmc.edu>
Sender: usenet@newserve.cc.binghamton.edu (Mr News)
Organization: State University of New York at Binghamton
Lines: 13
Nntp-Posting-Host: bingvaxu.cc.binghamton.edu
In article <7480@gazette.bcm.tmc.edu> skywalker@DINO.QCI.BIOCH.BCM.TMC.EDU (Timothy B. Reynolds) writes:
>If the crop circles are real, why don't we see them in the snow.
>Snow would be the perfect medium for circles...
>
>My guess is, because you can't hide footprints in the snow...
My guess would be -- because they would be called ``snow circles''
instead. ;-)
Or maybe the weather (snowing, cold, wind, and all that) might alter
whatever conditions might be required for their formation.
-kym
Article 9407 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!ge-dab!crdgw1!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!samsung!mips!sdd.hp.com!usc!srhqla!venus!kdq
From: kdq@3D.com (Kevin D. Quitt)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Crop circles are a hoax.
Message-ID: <1991Sep11.192928.5011@3D.com>
Date: 11 Sep 91 19:29:28 GMT
References: <cee1.684465711@Ra.MsState.Edu> <GERRY.91Sep10111454@onion.frc.ri.cmu.edu> <1991Sep11.044249.14504@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu>
Distribution: na
Organization: 3D systems, inc. Valencia CA
Lines: 35
In article <1991Sep11.044249.14504@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu> graham@venus.iucf.indiana.edu writes:
>In article <GERRY.91Sep10111454@onion.frc.ri.cmu.edu>, gerry@frc2.frc.ri.cmu.edu (Gerry Roston) writes...
>>They have shown quite convincingly that they are easy to produce.
>No. They have shown, quite convincingly that they are perfectly capable of
>mashing plants flat to the ground.
>
>>This is overwhelming evidence. They is ABSOLUTELY NO evidence to
>>indicate that they were created otherwise.
>No. It isn't event close to "overwhelming". It _is_ evidence that
>these guys are capable of mashing a bunch of plants to make a poor excuse
>of a duplicate of the patterns we've been seeing.
A poor excuse of a duplicate of the patterns we've been seeing? Is that
why "Corn circle expert Patrick Delgado [author of 'Circular Evidence' and
'The Latest Evidence'] admitted last night 'We have all been conned.
Thousands of lives are going to be wrecked over this'." ? Your comments
are wishful thinking unless you can prove they're different. The experts
who have seen both types say they're the same - where's *your* evidence?
>Until these guys can show, on demand, that they can just as _accurately_
>reproduce one of the _complex_ patterns, I shall remain a skeptic,
>believing only that no explanation has yet been found.
They did just that, showing how they made straight lines by using
primitive (but effective) surveying tools. Also, they didn't claim they'd
made all of them, just a lot of them.
--
_
Kevin D. Quitt srhqla!venus!kdq kdq%venus@sr.com
3D systems, inc. 26081 Avenue Hall Valencia, CA 91355
VOICE (805) 295-5600 x430 FAX (805) 257-1200
96.37% of all statistics are made up.
Article 9387 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!ge-dab!crdgw1!uunet!mcsun!ukc!dcl-cs!gdt!aber!aberda!aro
From: aro@cs.aber.ac.uk (Andy Ormsby)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Crop circles are a hoax.
Message-ID: <ARO.91Sep11113022@zeus.cs.aber.ac.uk>
Date: 11 Sep 91 11:30:22 GMT
References: <27178@nntpd.lkg.dec.com> <cee1.684465711@Ra.MsState.Edu>
Sender: news@aber.ac.uk (USENET news service)
Reply-To: aro@cs.aber.ac.uk (Andrew Ormsby)
Organization: Computer Science Dept. University College of Wales, Aberystwyth
Lines: 44
In-Reply-To: cee1@ra.MsState.Edu's message of 10 Sep 91 01: 21:51 GMT
Nntp-Posting-Host: zeus
In article <cee1.684465711@Ra.MsState.Edu> cee1@ra.MsState.Edu (The Chuckmeister) writes:
>
> > I don't believe it. Explain the circles that have appeared
> > in Asia, Canada, and America.
>
> It seems, if these people had done this for _TWENTY_ years, SOMMMMMEONE
> would have seen it, with all the hundreds there. ANd what about all the
> other shapes Diamonds, antennae, other geometric things.
As my original posting stated, the British crop-circle creators claim
to have been making circles for thirteen years (13). They started off
by copying Australian circles that farmers over there created (thus
demonstrating the way in which the phenomenon spread from country to
country), but started developing more complex patterns later on. They
made very complex patterns, drawing them out on paper first.
> About other nations with them, maybe toher people 'know' how to do them.
> I just don't buy it. They would have been spotted long ago. And what about
> the high E-fields in the centers?
What high E-fields in the centres? In fact, I'm not sure what your
second paragraph is saying at all. Would you care to clarify?
> This was just on an NBC News-minute thingie. I still am not convinced.
...of what? I'm glad to hear that you are not prepared to believe
everything you hear, but I'd say that the article in Today (and the
one mentioned by another poster in "Science et Vie") seem to provide a
quantity of evidence for the hypothesis that crop circles (or at least
the complex patterns) are a hoax.
There may be other reasons for the appearence of crop circles. Some
might be created by space aliens from the planet Tharg, a few by
plasma and some more by a mystery weapon developed by the CIA and kept
secret as part of the well known worldwide conspiracy. However, I
think Occam's razor should be applied at this point.
What I am surprised not to yet have seen is a claim that the
perpetrators were actually channelers (unconciously, of course) for
someone or other :-) No doubt such a claim will appear here soon.
Without a shred of evidence of any kind, of course. :-(
Andy Ormsby
aro@cs.aber.ac.uk
Article 9408 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!ge-dab!crdgw1!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!samsung!mips!sdd.hp.com!usc!srhqla!venus!kdq
From: kdq@3D.com (Kevin D. Quitt)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Crop circles are a hoax.
Message-ID: <1991Sep11.193141.5099@3D.com>
Date: 11 Sep 91 19:31:41 GMT
References: <27178@nntpd.lkg.dec.com> <12933@castle.ed.ac.uk>
Organization: 3D systems, inc. Valencia CA
Lines: 23
In article <12933@castle.ed.ac.uk> egnr76@castle.ed.ac.uk (A Kashko) writes:
>In article <27178@nntpd.lkg.dec.com> cook@vcsesu.enet.dec.com (Peter R. Cook) writes:
>>
>>In article <1991Sep9.133407.6311@aber.ac.uk>, aro@aber.ac.uk (Andrew Ormsby) writes...
>>>Today's "Today" newspaper (a UK national tabloid) exposes corn circles
>>>as a hoax. The story is the lead on page 1, and there is accompanying
>>>information explaining how the hoax is carried out inside.
>>
>> I don't believe it. Explain the circles that have appeared
>> in Asia, Canada, and America.
>
> There was an article in Fortean Times recently which described apparent
>crop circles appearing well before these two hoaxers were born.
Sure - they *said* they got the idea from Australian farmers who had
done it in the late 50's.
--
_
Kevin D. Quitt srhqla!venus!kdq kdq%venus@sr.com
3D systems, inc. 26081 Avenue Hall Valencia, CA 91355
VOICE (805) 295-5600 x430 FAX (805) 257-1200
96.37% of all statistics are made up.
Article 9464 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!ge-dab!crdgw1!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!sarah!newserve!bingvaxu.cc.binghamton.edu!kym
From: kym@bingvaxu.cc.binghamton.edu (R. Kym Horsell)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Crop circles are a hoax.
Message-ID: <1991Sep11.215438.873@newserve.cc.binghamton.edu>
Date: 11 Sep 91 21:54:38 GMT
References: <27178@nntpd.lkg.dec.com> <12933@castle.ed.ac.uk> <1991Sep11.193141.5099@3D.com>
Sender: usenet@newserve.cc.binghamton.edu (Mr News)
Organization: State University of New York at Binghamton
Lines: 20
Nntp-Posting-Host: bingvaxu.cc.binghamton.edu
In article <1991Sep11.193141.5099@3D.com> kdq@3D.com (Kevin D. Quitt) writes:
>In article <12933@castle.ed.ac.uk> egnr76@castle.ed.ac.uk (A Kashko) writes:
>> There was an article in Fortean Times recently which described apparent
>>crop circles appearing well before these two hoaxers were born.
>
> Sure - they *said* they got the idea from Australian farmers who had
>done it in the late 50's.
_Most_ interesting. I remember seeing such things in the Oz newspapers
some time ago. However, I seem to remember it was during the ***60's***
that the so-called `saucer nests' in Queensland were reported.
(But now that I think about it -- I _think_ there was something
of the same kind reported in or about Adelaide, SA).
Still strange that this could be kept a (relatively) good secret
for so long...
>Kevin D. Quitt srhqla!venus!kdq kdq%venus@sr.com
>3D systems, inc. 26081 Avenue Hall Valencia, CA 91355
>VOICE (805) 295-5600 x430 FAX (805) 257-1200
Article 9392 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!ge-dab!crdgw1!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!ub!rutgers!cmcl2!adm!amsaa-cleo!johnson
From: johnson@amsaa-cleo.brl.mil (Don Johnson)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Crop circles are a hoax.
Message-ID: <4181@amsaa-cleo.brl.mil>
Date: 11 Sep 91 15:14:09 GMT
References: <27178@nntpd.lkg.dec.com> <1991Sep10.122024.27230@syma.sussex.ac.uk>
Organization: AMSAA/GWD, APG, MD 21005
Lines: 16
In article <1991Sep10.122024.27230@syma.sussex.ac.uk> stevedc@syma.sussex.ac.uk (Stephen Carter) writes:
>Nor does it explain how (as reported on this morning's BBC Radio 4 -
>ie serious- Farming Today program) up to 20 of this year's reported
>300 (!) have happened on the same night.
>Stephen Carter, Systems Manager, The Administration,
I find it hard to believe 20 crop circles appeared in one night. Please
list the locations, dates and discoverers.
Or maybe this is an attempt at misdirection?
--
W. Donald Johnson
Article 9415 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!ge-dab!crdgw1!uunet!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!swrinde!mips!samsung!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!bronze!silver!sizemor
From: sizemor@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Jim Sizemore (alias Gunga Jim))
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Crop circles are a hoax.
Message-ID: <1991Sep11.182140.460@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu>
Date: 11 Sep 91 18:21:40 GMT
References: <27178@nntpd.lkg.dec.com>
Sender: news@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (USENET News System)
Organization: Indiana University
Lines: 28
Nntp-Posting-Host: silver.ucs.indiana.edu
In article <27178@nntpd.lkg.dec.com> cook@vcsesu.enet.dec.com (Peter R. Cook) writes:
>
>In article <1991Sep9.133407.6311@aber.ac.uk>, aro@aber.ac.uk (Andrew Ormsby) writes...
>>Today's "Today" newspaper (a UK national tabloid) exposes corn circles
>>as a hoax. The story is the lead on page 1, and there is accompanying
>>information explaining how the hoax is carried out inside.
>
> I don't believe it. Explain the circles that have appeared
> in Asia, Canada, and America.
>
> Peter R. Cook | Disclaimer: "Quoth the Raven, eat my shorts man!"
> Digital Equip. Corp. +--------------------------------------------------
> Marlboro, MA. | "1984 has past, forget about Big Brother, welcome
> 508-467-6936 | to the 90's where the government's your mother!"
>
>~ The opinions expressed above are the author's only and do not reflect the ~
>~ opinions or anything else of Digital Equipment Corporation. ~
How about Asian, Canadian and American pranksters doing the same thing
as two blokes in England?
--
#################################################################
# Gunga Jim # If only that damn buzzing #
# (alias Jim Sizemore) # in my head would stop! #
# Wanted in 6 states, unwanted # _______________ #
# in the other 44. # IU doesn't even know I do this #
# sizemor@ucs.indiana.edu # let alone speak for them. #
#################################################################
Article 9379 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!ge-dab!crdgw1!uunet!ogicse!orstcs!jacobs.CS.ORST.EDU!woodc
From: woodc@jacobs.CS.ORST.EDU (Major Havok)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Crop circles are a hoax.
Message-ID: <1991Sep11.132945.2362@usenet@CS.ORST.EDU>
Date: 11 Sep 91 13:29:45 GMT
References: <1991Sep9.133407.6311@aber.ac.uk>
Sender: @usenet@CS.ORST.EDU
Organization: Oregon State University, CS Dept.
Lines: 26
Nntp-Posting-Host: jacobs.cs.orst.edu
In article <1991Sep9.133407.6311@aber.ac.uk> aro@aber.ac.uk (Andrew Ormsby) writes:
>Today's "Today" newspaper (a UK national tabloid) exposes corn circles
>as a hoax. The story is the lead on page 1, and there is accompanying
>information explaining how the hoax is carried out inside.
>
>The perpetrators are Doug Bower and Dave Chorley, both in their
>sixties. They've been creating circles for 13 years.
I have a hard time believing this for a few reasons...
1) I find it hard to believe that two men in their 60's would be capable
of (or would even want to for that matter) finding the time to make hundreds
or thousands of corn field designs. (Not much of a social life that these
guys have, huh?)
2) Even if they could produce that many designs, I find it hard to belief
no one has caught them in the act.
3) This still doesn't explain the mysterious high pitched noise when you
take a microphone just inside of the crop circles and how the sound
disapears immediately after you step outside of the circle.
--
+---------------------------+----------------------------------------------+
| Chris Wood | "If you can't convince them, confuse them." |
| woodc@jacobs.cs.orst.edu | -unknown |
+---------------------------+----------------------------------------------+
Article 9398 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!ge-dab!crdgw1!cs.albany.edu!sarah!newserve!bingvaxu.cc.binghamton.edu!kym
From: kym@bingvaxu.cc.binghamton.edu (R. Kym Horsell)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Crop circles are a hoax.
Message-ID: <1991Sep11.173304.29118@newserve.cc.binghamton.edu>
Date: 11 Sep 91 17:33:04 GMT
References: <1991Sep9.133407.6311@aber.ac.uk> <1991Sep11.132945.2362@usenet@CS.ORST.EDU> <GERRY.91Sep11121525@onion.frc.ri.cmu.edu>
Sender: usenet@newserve.cc.binghamton.edu (Mr News)
Organization: State University of New York at Binghamton
Lines: 16
Nntp-Posting-Host: bingvaxu.cc.binghamton.edu
In article <GERRY.91Sep11121525@onion.frc.ri.cmu.edu> gerry@cs.cmu.edu (Gerry Roston) writes:
>The point is this, these guys showed a technique they claim to have
>been using for many years to create these circles. Now, does anyone
>honestly think that they are the only two people on the entire Earth
>who are capable of concocting this scheme? Has noone else ever heard
>of copy-cats?
Yes, I guess I have.
During the early part of this century various people tried to pass
off all sorts of stuff as dinosaur remains. Kinda got in the way
of serious research.
Just that good ol' human lust for notoriety, I guess.
-kym
Article 9410 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!ge-dab!crdgw1!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!samsung!mips!sdd.hp.com!usc!srhqla!venus!kdq
From: kdq@3D.com (Kevin D. Quitt)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Crop circles are a hoax.
Message-ID: <1991Sep11.193953.5294@3D.com>
Date: 11 Sep 91 19:39:53 GMT
References: <1991Sep9.133407.6311@aber.ac.uk> <1991Sep11.132945.2362@usenet@CS.ORST.EDU>
Organization: 3D systems, inc. Valencia CA
Lines: 29
In article <1991Sep11.132945.2362@usenet@CS.ORST.EDU> woodc@jacobs.CS.ORST.EDU (Major Havok) writes:
>1) I find it hard to believe that two men in their 60's would be capable
>of (or would even want to for that matter) finding the time to make hundreds
>or thousands of corn field designs. (Not much of a social life that these
>guys have, huh?)
Once again, they didn't claim they'd made all of them, just that *they
as a team* had been doing it for 13 years.
>2) Even if they could produce that many designs, I find it hard to belief
>no one has caught them in the act.
Why? Who watches a corn field?
>3) This still doesn't explain the mysterious high pitched noise when you
>take a microphone just inside of the crop circles and how the sound
>disapears immediately after you step outside of the circle.
It doesn't have to. Do you get the same effect from the circles
that these guys made?
--
_
Kevin D. Quitt srhqla!venus!kdq kdq%venus@sr.com
3D systems, inc. 26081 Avenue Hall Valencia, CA 91355
VOICE (805) 295-5600 x430 FAX (805) 257-1200
96.37% of all statistics are made up.
Article 9440 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!ge-dab!crdgw1!uunet!convex!quattro
From: quattro@convex.com (Marc Quattromani)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Crop circles are a hoax.
Message-ID: <1991Sep11.222627.27338@convex.com>
Date: 11 Sep 91 22:26:27 GMT
References: <1991Sep9.133407.6311@aber.ac.uk> <1991Sep11.132945.2362@usenet@CS.ORST.EDU> <1991Sep11.193953.5294@3D.com>
Sender: usenet@convex.com (news access account)
Organization: CONVEX Computer Corporation, Richardson, Tx., USA
Lines: 20
Nntp-Posting-Host: neptune.convex.com
In article <1991Sep11.193953.5294@3D.com> kdq@3D.com (Kevin D. Quitt) writes:
>In article <1991Sep11.132945.2362@usenet@CS.ORST.EDU> woodc@jacobs.CS.ORST.EDU (Major Havok) writes:
>>2) Even if they could produce that many designs, I find it hard to belief
>>no one has caught them in the act.
>
> Why? Who watches a corn field?
This whole crop circle thing is fairly new to me but one has to
wonder, if it was so hard for two men to do the hoax unobserved, why
is it so easy for aliens to create the circles unobserved.
One could argue that the men would take much longer to create such
circles and therefore have more opportunity to be observed. On the
otherhand, one could argue that alien spacecraft ought to be easier to
spot and more noticeable than two hum-drum earthlings.
--
Marc Quattromani Convex Computer Corporation
Richardson, Texas
quattro@convex.COM
Article 9431 of sci.skeptic:
Xref: bilver sci.skeptic:9431 alt.paranormal:2756 alt.alien.visitors:1641
Path: bilver!tarpit!ge-dab!crdgw1!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!qt.cs.utexas.edu!cs.utexas.edu!ut-emx!ibmchs!auschs!awdprime!woofer.austin.ibm.com!craigb
From: craigb@woofer.austin.ibm.com (Craig Becker)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,alt.paranormal,alt.alien.visitors
Subject: Re: Crop circles are a hoax.
Message-ID: <10939@awdprime.UUCP>
Date: 11 Sep 91 17:16:51 GMT
References: <1991Sep11.064510.20415@newshost.anu.edu.au> <1991Sep9.133407.6311@aber.ac.uk>
Sender: news@awdprime.UUCP
Reply-To: craigb@ot.austin.ibm.com
Followup-To: sci.skeptic
Organization: IBM Object Technology Products
Lines: 17
Well, this may be rather naive of me, but if these two guys have confessed to
being the culprits, and assuming that they aren't going to do it anymore, I'd
think that there number of crop circle incidents in the area would take a
nosedive...granted, others might attempt to 'take over the mantle', as it
were, but I kinda get the idea these jokers were fanatics.
Craig
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-- "I mean, foreign agent or no, Craig Becker, Object Technology Products --
-- I've done good work for the Internet: craigb@ot.vnet.ibm.com --
-- city. I never compromised my Austin: craigb@ot.austin.ibm.com --
-- integrity, except a few times." VNET: CRAIGB at AUSVM1 --
---------------------- Lt. Okking -------------------------------------------
-- off 808/1K-020 zip 3008 ph (512) 823-1756 tl 793-1756 hm (512) 346-5397 --
-- IBM Personal Systems Programming, 11400 Burnet Road, Austin, TX, 78759 --
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Article 9423 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!ge-dab!crdgw1!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!dali.cs.montana.edu!caen!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!bronze!venus.iucf.indiana.edu!graham
From: graham@venus.iucf.indiana.edu (JIM GRAHAM)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Crop circles are a hoax.
Message-ID: <1991Sep11.195234.5799@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu>
Date: 11 Sep 91 18:49:06 GMT
References: <91254.063921DOCTORJ@SLACVM.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>
Sender: news@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (USENET News System)
Reply-To: graham@venus.iucf.indiana.edu
Distribution: na
Organization: Somewhere in Bloomington, Indiana
Lines: 24
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.3-4
Nntp-Posting-Host: venus.iucf.indiana.edu
In article <91254.063921DOCTORJ@SLACVM.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>, DOCTORJ@SLACVM.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU (Jon J Thaler) writes...
>dona@bilver.uucp (Don Allen) says:
>
>> While I do not doubt that some circles have been hoaxed, it is absolute
>> rubbish to throw the baby out with the bath water, which is being suggested
>> here.
>
>I am going to claim my $10,000 from James Randi now. As you netters may
>recall, I predicted the existence of this post about two days ago. A
>clear case of precognition, if there ever was one.
Yes, but, is it true?
Jim
-> ->Disclaimer: I do not speak for my company. <- <-
Neither do they speak for me.
______________________________________________________________________
| Internet: graham@venus.iucf.indiana.edu |
| UUCP: dolmen!graham@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu |
| BBS: The PORTAL DOLMEN BBS/ParaNet ALPHA-GAMMA (sm) (9:1012/13) |
| (812) 334-0418, 24hrs. |
|______________________________________________________________________|
Article 9448 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!ge-dab!crdgw1!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!cleveland.Freenet.Edu!ai065
From: ai065@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Thomas Hill)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Crop circles are a hoax.
Message-ID: <1991Sep12.041631.11276@usenet.ins.cwru.edu>
Date: 12 Sep 91 04:16:31 GMT
Sender: news@usenet.ins.cwru.edu
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, (USA)
Lines: 29
Nntp-Posting-Host: cwns2.ins.cwru.edu
Many of the "skeptics" on this SIG are too quick to debunk crop circles.
There are several questions that still need to be met.
1- Is this method fast enough to create crop circles over night? If so, how
many people will it take to produce some of the "unhoaxed" circles?
[Above should read- how many people will it take to produce one of these
"unhoaxed" circles in one night?]
2- Has the "bending but not breaking" effect been proven to exist in crop
circles? If so, is the method able to produce such an effect?
3- Based on the amount of people needed to produce your average size crop
circle, how many people would it take to produce the amount of circles made
in one month or year?
4- Are there any other characteristics of crop circles that this method is
unable to produce? If so, are there any other known methods which can?
If your simply going to reach a conclusion without putting the "solution" to
a few tests then your no longer a skeptic...
Tom
--
__ Make no bones about it, I'm an avid promoter of the Amiga computer. If
__/// you resent that because you were ripped off then that is your problem.
\XX/ :') "In every revolution.....there is one man...with a vision!" - Kirk
The Cryptozoology Information Network Want on our Email mailing list?
Article 9433 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!peora!masscomp!rpi!usc!srhqla!venus!kdq
From: kdq@3D.com (Kevin D. Quitt)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Crop circles are a hoax.
Message-ID: <1991Sep12.212757.18818@3D.com>
Date: 12 Sep 91 21:27:57 GMT
References: <1991Sep12.041631.11276@usenet.ins.cwru.edu>
Organization: 3D systems, inc. Valencia CA
Lines: 42
In article <1991Sep12.041631.11276@usenet.ins.cwru.edu> ai065@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Thomas Hill) writes:
>
> Many of the "skeptics" on this SIG are too quick to debunk crop circles.
>There are several questions that still need to be met.
>
>1- Is this method fast enough to create crop circles over night? If so, how
>many people will it take to produce some of the "unhoaxed" circles?
>[Above should read- how many people will it take to produce one of these
>"unhoaxed" circles in one night?]
Depends on the size of the circle, but based on some of my
experiments (based on the reports) I could make a 40' circle in about an
hour. I've also designed a widget that would let me fold down the crops
as fast as I could walk.
>2- Has the "bending but not breaking" effect been proven to exist in crop
>circles? If so, is the method able to produce such an effect?
Just depends on hjow much weight is applied and how high up on the plant.
>3- Based on the amount of people needed to produce your average size crop
>circle, how many people would it take to produce the amount of circles made
>in one month or year?
("number", "not amount"). I suspect I could do three of four a night
without sweating.
>4- Are there any other characteristics of crop circles that this method is
>unable to produce? If so, are there any other known methods which can?
Well, it was apparently announced as genuine by a "crop-circle
expert". What characteristics do the mysterious crop circles have?
--
_
Kevin D. Quitt srhqla!venus!kdq kdq%venus@sr.com
3D systems, inc. 26081 Avenue Hall Valencia, CA 91355
VOICE (805) 295-5600 x430 FAX (805) 257-1200
96.37% of all statistics are made up.
Article 9456 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!ge-dab!crdgw1!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!cleveland.Freenet.Edu!ai065
From: ai065@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Thomas Hill)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Crop circles are a hoax.
Message-ID: <1991Sep12.044438.14371@usenet.ins.cwru.edu>
Date: 12 Sep 91 04:44:38 GMT
Sender: news@usenet.ins.cwru.edu
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, (USA)
Lines: 13
Nntp-Posting-Host: cwns1.ins.cwru.edu
Just a small observation...If you are a "skeptic", shouldn't you be a bit
skeptical about a board and a rope being the answer to a mystery that has
been on a good many "experts" minds? I only ask that we submit this "answer"
to the same thought process that made some of us skeptics in the fist place.
Tom
--
__ Make no bones about it, I'm an avid promoter of the Amiga computer. If
__/// you resent that because you were ripped off then that is your problem.
\XX/ :') "In every revolution.....there is one man...with a vision!" - Kirk
The Cryptozoology Information Network Want on our Email mailing list?
Article 9491 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!ge-dab!crdgw1!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!ogicse!ucsd!qualcom.qualcomm.com!cancun!rdippold
From: rdippold@cancun.qualcomm.com (Ron Dippold)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: crop circle confession a hoax?
Message-ID: <rdippold.684617529@cancun>
Date: 11 Sep 91 19:32:09 GMT
References: <jms.6233@vanth.UUCP>
Sender: news@qualcomm.com
Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA
Lines: 23
Nntp-Posting-Host: cancun.qualcomm.com
jms@vanth.UUCP (Jim Shaffer) writes:
>However, this is where any resemblance to sanity ends, in my opinion. The
>article also says that the hoaxers "gave detailed information about how
>they planned and executed each design since the late 1970s." Either they
>only meant the most elaborate and sensational designs and neglected to say
>so, or the claim is stretching credibility. We're talking about a *lot* of
>circles for men in their 60s. Furthermore, the newspaper makes the claim
The important thing is not that we have two people who have been doing
this... they obviously could not have done them all. The important
thing is that we have shown that there is a perfectly normal
explaination for crop circles. The claims we've had are that such
things are too round, symetrical, too big, etc. to be made by humans,
and that the crop circle experts would be able to tell if it was made
by humans.
To which this proves: Bullshit! The crop circle experts are just as
easily hoaxed as the next person. People can make the crop circles
attributed to aliens. There is no need to involve a mysterious
unknown outside source to account for them.
--
Standard disclaimer applies, you legalistic hacks. | Ron Dippold
Article 9441 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!ge-dab!crdgw1!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!cleveland.Freenet.Edu!al463
From: al463@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Christopher A. Joseph)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Dave and Doug's crop circle hoax
Message-ID: <1991Sep11.230937.3041@usenet.ins.cwru.edu>
Date: 11 Sep 91 23:09:37 GMT
Sender: news@usenet.ins.cwru.edu
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, (USA)
Lines: 18
Nntp-Posting-Host: cwns1.ins.cwru.edu
This is REALLY unrelated to anything resembling seriousness but,
wouldnt it be cool if Frank Bartyles and Ed James made a commercial
for their most excellent wine coolers, and in it they were making a
crop circle? Just a silly thought. :-)
That is about as much credibility as I give to Dave and Doug. All you
skeptics ACCEPTED their story TOO EASILY. Until I've done a circle
myself, I believe no one. Nuff said.
Chris
--
Christopher A. Joseph (Chris)|"You can go wrong by being too skeptical
al463@cleveland.freenet.edu |as readily as by being too trusting"L.L.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"!ELUR sebboH dna nivlaC" << Subliminal Message | FNORD!| Praise "Bob"
Article 9511 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!peora!masscomp!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!van-bc!ubc-cs!mprgate.mpr.ca!mprgate.mpr.ca!spani
From: spani@mprgate.mpr.ca (Leonard Spani)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Fractals & Crop Circles
Message-ID: <1991Sep13.213205.12963@mprgate.mpr.ca>
Date: 13 Sep 91 21:32:05 GMT
References: <1991Sep6.172310.11183@engage.pko.dec.com> <629@vaccine.UUCP>
Sender: news@mprgate.mpr.ca
Followup-To: sci.skeptic
Organization: MPR Teltech Ltd., Burnaby, B.C., Canada
Lines: 28
In article <629@vaccine.UUCP>, warren@worlds.com (Warren Burstein) writes:
|> stanley@verga.enet.dec.com writes:
|>
|> > Now it's your turn. What symbol would YOU like to see written in the fields?
|>
|> > You try it now and maybe we can get a repeatable experiment going
|> > for all of those hard-science types.
|>
|> A simple circle. As long as James Randi is standing in the center of
|> it. Just having the symbol show up somewhere and unobserved is an
|> invitation to fraud.
|> --
I've got it.
I would like to a 100 foot wheat field representation of James
Randi's face. Sticking his tongue out.
That would get both "sides" nervous.
--
***********************************************************************
| Leonard E. Spani | //!?\\ | (disclaimer-p) |
| spani@tartarus.mpr.ca | \\?!// | t |
***********************************************************************
Article 9497 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!fang!att!att!news.cs.indiana.edu!spool.mu.edu!uunet!mcsun!ukc!pyrltd!root44!steve
From: steve@root.co.uk (Steve Ratcliffe)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Crop Circles ... Solved! (??????)
Message-ID: <3073@root44.co.uk>
Date: 10 Sep 91 19:43:06 GMT
Article-I.D.: root44.3073
References: <1991Sep6.230553.23359@3D.com> <1991Sep9.123055.20860@syma.sussex.ac.uk>
Distribution: sci
Organization: UniSoft Ltd., London, England
Lines: 42
In <1991Sep9.123055.20860@syma.sussex.ac.uk> stevedc@syma.sussex.ac.uk (Stephen Carter) writes:
>I pass on what I heard on the radio (BBC Radio 4) this morning (9th
>Sept). Others may have better accounts...
>A UK tabloid (Today?) has been running the story that two oldish
>blokes have owned up to creating all of the Crop Circles. Apparently
>they claim to have used boards on ropes (hence the bending at ground
>level).
Douglas Bower and David Chorley, both in their 60s.
Yes, the story appeared in "Today" on 9 Sept, with a followup article
today (10th). The equipment they claim to have used was a piece of
wood 4ft long with rope reins. You hold the reins and put one foot on
the stick and push down on the corn.
They claim to have started making the circles in the summer of
1978.
>They 'created' a Circle to order, and the newspaper then got it looked
>at by an 'expert' who apparently verified that it could not have been
>made by man-made means.
I'll try to describe the demonstration "circle" that they made for the
paper: Two large filled circles with a (8ft wide) line joining them.
The connecting line forms the diameter of two concentric rings. From
the smaller filled circle there are two "antennae" (a line jutting out
of the circle with a small circle on the end) From the other circle
there is a "ladder" and there is a semi-circlular ring with the ladder
as its diagonal (roughly).
The 'expert' was Pat Delgado (author of "Circular Evidence") who is reported
as saying: "In no way could this have been a hoax".
>So, who is hoaxing who? Are these two hoaxing the Circle students, or
>is the report that that they are, itself a hoax. :-)
>I attach NO value judgement to this report.
There were few details in the report so it is difficult to judge the
claims. I may followup with some opinions when I have the time.
Article 9517 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!peora!masscomp!rpi!usc!cs.utexas.edu!asuvax!hrc!gtx!al
From: al@gtx.com (Alan Filipski)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Crop circles are a hoax.
Message-ID: <1625@gtx.com>
Date: 11 Sep 91 21:15:08 GMT
References: <cee1.684465711@Ra.MsState.Edu> <GERRY.91Sep10111454@onion.frc.ri.cmu.edu> <12251@bunny.GTE.COM> <31022@uflorida.cis.ufl.EDU> <46868@cup.portal.com>
Reply-To: al@gtx.UUCP (Alan Filipski)
Organization: GTX Corporation, Phoenix
Lines: 19
In article <46868@cup.portal.com> Don_-_Showen@cup.portal.com writes:
>I find it amusing and disappointing that the new standard of skeptics proof
>is a tabloid. Wow! Sounds more like desperation than proof. Maybe it is
Again, the two guys are *proof* of nothing, except that the circles
are easily hoaxed and that the self-appointed "experts" are fools.
This makes the hoax hypothesis much more plausible than some
unspecified bullshit about UFO's.
If anyone said (which I doubt) that all crop circles were made by these
two, or there is *proof* that they are all hoaxes, then they spoke
incorrectly
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
( Alan Filipski, GTX Corp, 8836 N. 23rd Avenue, Phoenix, Arizona 85021, USA )
( {decvax,hplabs,uunet!amdahl,nsc}!sun!sunburn!gtx!al (602)870-1696 )
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Article 9495 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!peora!masscomp!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!samsung!uunet!mcsun!ukc!pyrltd!root44!steve
From: steve@root.co.uk (Steve Ratcliffe)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Crop circles are a hoax.
Message-ID: <3103@root44.co.uk>
Date: 13 Sep 91 15:26:18 GMT
References: <27178@nntpd.lkg.dec.com> <1991Sep10.122024.27230@syma.sussex.ac.uk> <1991Sep12.182906.2086@morgan.ucs.mun.ca>
Organization: UniSoft Ltd., London, England
Lines: 15
In <1991Sep12.182906.2086@morgan.ucs.mun.ca> bmason@morgan.ucs.mun.ca (Bruce Mason) writes:
)coincides with the postulated movements of the two hoaxers. The earliest
)published photo of an English crop circle is, I believe, in _Circular Evidence_
)from 1976. So, we can truthfully say that the hoaxers' accounts match the
They claimed to have started in 1978, so this point is not consistent.
)hoax theory. There are, however, some things I would like to see. A
)photograph of the circle they made in Australia, ditto Canada and the rest
They have not to my knowledge claimed to have constructed a circle in
Australia, only that they got the idea from there (They said that some
farmers put cicles in their fields as a joke).
Article 9409 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!ge-dab!crdgw1!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!samsung!mips!sdd.hp.com!usc!srhqla!venus!kdq
From: kdq@3D.com (Kevin D. Quitt)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Crop circles are a hoax.
Message-ID: <1991Sep11.193550.5191@3D.com>
Date: 11 Sep 91 19:35:50 GMT
References: <27178@nntpd.lkg.dec.com> <1991Sep10.234010.16001@bilver.uucp>
Organization: 3D systems, inc. Valencia CA
Lines: 35
In article <1991Sep10.234010.16001@bilver.uucp> dona@bilver.uucp (Don Allen) writes:
>Indeed! Also, let's hear the *official* dis-information on how Bower and
>Chorley managed to create circles in the UK since *medieval times*.
They stated they got the idea from people who had done it decades
before. Also what is the quality of the evidence from "*medieval
times*"? Photos? Exact measurements?
>I also have pictures of a crop ringlet that was created in Arizona..I
>guess Bower and Chorley must also be the MIB to create those as well.
They didn't claim they'd made them all. It's obviously very simple
to duplicate.
>I wonder whose GOVT is repressing the VIDEO TAPE taken of objects that
>have created the circle (this was featured at a recent MUFON conference),
>in the UK.
>
>While I do not doubt that some circles have been hoaxed, it is absolute
>rubbish to throw the baby out with the bath water, which is being suggested
>here.
What do you think the odds are that a couple of guys walking on boards
would generate *exactly* the same pattern as that made by a spaceship?
--
_
Kevin D. Quitt srhqla!venus!kdq kdq%venus@sr.com
3D systems, inc. 26081 Avenue Hall Valencia, CA 91355
VOICE (805) 295-5600 x430 FAX (805) 257-1200
96.37% of all statistics are made up.
Article 9530 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!peora!masscomp!dali.cs.montana.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!samsung!uunet!mcsun!ukc!pyrltd!root44!steve
From: steve@root.co.uk (Steve Ratcliffe)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Crop circles are a hoax.
Message-ID: <3104@root44.co.uk>
Date: 13 Sep 91 17:56:43 GMT
References: <27178@nntpd.lkg.dec.com> <1991Sep10.234010.16001@bilver.uucp> <1991Sep11.210014.17234@anasaz>
Organization: UniSoft Ltd., London, England
Lines: 57
It is reasonable to believe that Bower and Chorley hoaxed some or most
of the complex 'pictogram' designs. However others in the past have
hoaxed some circles and then claimed in addition to be responsible for
starting it all off -- just continuing the hoax really. Therefore we
need to apply caution and check whether the story they give makes
sense.
Given only the information in "Today" I am not at all convinced. Most
of the problems with the story listed below are a lack of detail which
prevent any definite conclusions from being drawn either way, but there
are several suspicious elements as well.
-- They claim to have been the ones to have started the circles in England
in 1978. However there were reports of circles before that time in
local newspapers. In particular there were several in 1977. It is
difficult to tell whether the historical reports refer to the same
phenomenon due to the lack of the important details in the reports.
However people have been finding circles that they can't explain for
much longer than 13 years.
-- They claim that no one noticed the circles for three years. They say
that the first mention of the circles that they saw in the local
papers was the 1981 event that Delgado first publicised. Would they
have missed the local coverage given to a circle appearing the
previous year, when they were so eagerly awaiting for someone to
discover them?
The 1980 circle appeared in the newspaper, was investigated by a local
ufo group (who said it appeared that it was caused by downward air-pressure
or similar), and had been investigated by meteorologist Terence Meaden.
So the circles were well known before the hoaxers realised that they
had been discovered.
-- (I have not personally checked this yet) Delgado was apparently
not aware of the 1980 circle, when he wrote his best selling book,
although it appears (with photograph) in other less well known later
books.
-- No demonstration of making circles without walking down the tramlines
was given.
-- The reliance of "Today" on Delgado as the foremost 'expert'. I would
have thought that a proponent of the meteorological explanation
would have taken one look at the silly design and said that it was
someone taking the piss. Of course, had that happened, there
would have been no story.
-- There were no details about whether the circles had the layering
and banding effects that are features of 'real' circles.
-- They claim to have made ~ 200 circles since 1978. "Today" made some
comment about these including the very ones that Delgado had found to
be the most unexplicable(?).
Meaden has collected reports of about 800+ circles.
That seems like a lot of copycat hoaxing going on, especially as there
would be no reason to think that all their claimed hoaxes were discovered.
There was no indication of whether the hoaxers records included impressive
circles that had not been discovered.
Article 9503 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!peora!masscomp!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!munnari.oz.au!bruce!monu0.cc.monash.edu.au!monu6!minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au!s851867
From: s851867@minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au (Paul Stephen Holt)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Crop circles are a hoax.
Message-ID: <1991Sep12.140045.24728@minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au>
Date: 12 Sep 91 14:00:45 GMT
References: <27178@nntpd.lkg.dec.com>
Organization: RMIT Computer Centre, Melbourne Australia.
Lines: 25
cook@vcsesu.enet.dec.com (Peter R. Cook) writes:
> I don't believe it. Explain the circles that have appeared
> in Asia, Canada, and America.
Perhaps those are:
1. Only anecdotal
2. Done by copycat circle makers (I know _I_'ve been tempted...)
3. Real
Of all these three explanations, two have no necessity for an
extraterrestrial or supernatural explanation, and the other reason
is highly unlikely.
I repeat myself many times, but I'll say it one more time:
HOW can you non-critical observers (i.e. people who declare that
UFOs ARE real, that crystals DO work, that tarot cards MUST be
valid predictors of the future) accuse the scientific community of
not having an open mind, when you yourselves refuse to believe a
set of perfectly reasonable explanations?
Paul Holt (student)
--
Hydrogen (n) [Hy'.drow.jen] A colourless, odourless gas which given time
turns into people.
Article 9393 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!ge-dab!crdgw1!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!samsung!mips!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!asuvax!ukma!rutgers!rochester!pt.cs.cmu.edu!crabapple.srv.cs.cmu.edu!netnews.srv.cs.cmu.edu!gerry
From: gerry@frc2.frc.ri.cmu.edu (Gerry Roston)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Crop circles are a hoax.
Message-ID: <GERRY.91Sep11121525@onion.frc.ri.cmu.edu>
Date: 11 Sep 91 17:15:25 GMT
References: <1991Sep9.133407.6311@aber.ac.uk> <1991Sep11.132945.2362@usenet@CS.ORST.EDU>
Reply-To: gerry@cs.cmu.edu (Gerry Roston)
Organization: Field Robotics Center, CMU
Lines: 29
Nntp-Posting-Host: onion.frc.ri.cmu.edu
In-Reply-To: woodc@jacobs.CS.ORST.EDU's message of 11 Sep 91 13:29:45 GMT
The more posts I read by believers, the more certain I become that
they lack certain mental facilities. This crop circle thing is a good
example. Several posters have said (paraphrased) "How can two old men
make all of these circles?"
THIS IS NOT THE ISSUE!
The point is this, these guys showed a technique they claim to have
been using for many years to create these circles. Now, does anyone
honestly think that they are the only two people on the entire Earth
who are capable of concocting this scheme? Has noone else ever heard
of copy-cats?
The point is that a repeatable explination for these circles has been
provided and demonstrated. This explination should be accepted as the
methodology behind the creation of all crop circles until another
repeatable, demonstratable explination is put forth.
--
Gerry Roston (gerry@cs.cmu.edu) | The most detestable wickedness, the most
Field Robotics Center, | horrid cruelties, and the greatest miseries
Carnegie Mellon University | that have afflicted the human race have had
Pittsburgh, PA, 15213 | their origin in this thing called
(412) 268-6557 | revelation, or revealed religion. It has
| been the most dishonorable belief against
| the character of the Divinity, the most
| destructive to morality and the peace and
| happiness of man that ever was propagated
| since man began to exist. Thomas Paine
Article 9519 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!peora!masscomp!rpi!usc!cs.utexas.edu!asuvax!ncar!unidata.ucar.edu!steve
From: steve@unidata.ucar.edu (Steve Emmerson)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: What we know about crop circles
Message-ID: <steve.684817705@unidata.ucar.edu>
Date: 14 Sep 91 03:08:25 GMT
References: <1991Sep11.171106.19062@galileo.cc.rochester.edu>
Sender: news@ncar.ucar.edu
Distribution: na
Organization: University Corporation for Atmospheric Research (UCAR)
Lines: 17
esot@troi.cc.rochester.edu (Eric Sotnak) writes:
> It is certainly too strong a claim to say that we now KNOW that all
>crop circles are a hoax. What we do know is that (a) it is possible to
>create crop circles by normal means, and (b) at least some crop circles
>have been made by normal means.
No, we don't know that -- not in the scientific sense. We know that
two men made something, that the "something" was said to be authentic
by Delgado, and that the men claimed to have made others.
How authentic was the something?
What are Delgado's credentials?
--
Steve Emmerson steve@unidata.ucar.edu ...!ncar!unidata!steve
Article 9498 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!peora!masscomp!rpi!batcomputer!caen!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wupost!uunet!mcsun!ukc!edcastle!dcl-cs!gdt!aber!aberda!aro
From: aro@cs.aber.ac.uk (Andy Ormsby)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Crop circles are a hoax.
Message-ID: <ARO.91Sep13175109@zeus.cs.aber.ac.uk>
Date: 13 Sep 91 17:51:09 GMT
References: <1991Sep12.041631.11276@usenet.ins.cwru.edu>
Sender: news@aber.ac.uk (USENET news service)
Reply-To: aro@cs.aber.ac.uk (Andrew Ormsby)
Organization: Computer Science Dept. University College of Wales, Aberystwyth
Lines: 46
In-Reply-To: ai065@cleveland.Freenet.Edu's message of 12 Sep 91 04: 16:31 GMT
Nntp-Posting-Host: zeus
In article <1991Sep12.041631.11276@usenet.ins.cwru.edu> ai065@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Thomas Hill) writes:
> 1- Is this method fast enough to create crop circles over night? If so, how
> many people will it take to produce some of the "unhoaxed" circles?
> [Above should read- how many people will it take to produce one of these
> "unhoaxed" circles in one night?]
The method appears to be reasonably fast.
> 2- Has the "bending but not breaking" effect been proven to exist in crop
> circles? If so, is the method able to produce such an effect?
Yes, they do the "bending not breaking" stuff.
> 3- Based on the amount of people needed to produce your average size crop
> circle, how many people would it take to produce the amount of circles made
> in one month or year?
I don't know. How many crop circles are there? What is the average
size? Why do the appear in southern England but not here in Wales?
How many aliens (or whatever) would it take to produce them? If so
many, how come we don't seem to have seen any yet? Obviously any
decent explanation must account for the number of circles that are
observed.
> 4- Are there any other characteristics of crop circles that this method is
> unable to produce? If so, are there any other known methods which can?
What characteristics? The method demonstrated by the British hoaxers
fooled one of the "experts". Of course, the expert may have been a
pretty poor expert. If there is some clear way of distinguishing hoax
circles from some "other" kind of circle, then that would be
interesting. Of course, it presupposes that there is an "other" kind
of circle.
> If your simply going to reach a conclusion without putting the "solution" to
> a few tests then your no longer a skeptic...
The evidence supporting the hypothesis (and it is only a hypothesis)
that the circles (at least the complex patterns) are produced by
hoaxers seems stronger than the evidence for any other explanation. If
you can come up with a better explanation, then I am sure we would all
like to hear it.
Andy
aro@cs.aber.ac.uk
Article 9507 of sci.skeptic:
Xref: bilver alt.alien.visitors:1648 alt.paranormal:2769 sci.skeptic:9507
Path: bilver!tarpit!peora!masscomp!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!qt.cs.utexas.edu!cs.utexas.edu!asuvax!hrc!gtephx!forda
From: forda@gtephx.UUCP (Andrew Ford)
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors,alt.paranormal,sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Dave and Doug's crop circle hoax
Message-ID: <1991Sep11.201717.25579@gtephx.UUCP>
Date: 11 Sep 91 20:17:17 GMT
References: <91253.195627JPST55@LIVERPOOL.AC.UK>
Organization: gte
Lines: 19
Did ever occur to _any_ of you skeptics that D&D claimed to
have put up a hoax because they just can't accept any other
explanation? NOT that I believe, or ever did believe, that
the circles were evidence of anything.
Its just that a lot of you have been blasting "psi believers"
because "we believe what we want to believe."
I am just wondering if any skeptics have given any thought
to the possibility that the hoax is a hoax?
Set Sarcasm EXTREME:
Now why would anyone want to get famous as the guys who fooled
the world?!?!?!?
--
Without either the 1st or 2nd amendment, we would have no liberty: the 1st
allows us to find out whats happening, the 2nd allows us to do something about
it! The 2nd will be taken away first, followed by the 1st and then the rest of
our freedoms. - Andrew Ford INTERNET: gtephx!forda@asuvax.eas.asu.edu
Article 9547 of sci.skeptic:
Xref: bilver alt.alien.visitors:1654 alt.paranormal:2772 sci.skeptic:9547
Path: bilver!tarpit!peora!masscomp!dali.cs.montana.edu!decwrl!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!usc!phad.hsc.usc.edu!dyett
From: dyett@phad.hsc.usc.edu (Donald Yett)
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors,alt.paranormal,sci.skeptic
Subject: Invitation for evidence
Message-ID: <35865@usc.edu>
Date: 14 Sep 91 01:51:12 GMT
References: <91253.195627JPST55@LIVERPOOL.AC.UK> <1991Sep11.201717.25579@gtephx.UUCP>
Sender: news@usc.edu
Followup-To: alt.alien.visitors
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
Lines: 62
Nntp-Posting-Host: phad.hsc.usc.edu
Is the media prejudiced? C'mon guys, If the money for miracles guys, the
real-estate riches guys, the government auction guys, the astrologers, and
the hot air chicks can buy air time, so can organized UFO research..
My wish-list : a syndicated special, pref at least 2 hours long.
Enough SOLID evidence to make a skeptic say "UFOs are around!"
How about that guy with all the CLEAR and (supposedly) irrefutable photo-
graphic evidence showing his stuff.
A brief history on hoaxes.
A history of classic incidents, Roswell, etc... WITH DOCUMENTATION, there
has been talk about government papers being de-classified.
NO BULLSHIT, nothing like the bogus movies/shows of the past, Prove they are
here NOW, nowbody wants to hear about the Nasca lines again, how aliens built
the pyramids, etc...
If solid evidence is presented, and you are able to prove it, then you will
have your hands full with people coming out of the closets with sightings.
If you do not describe any aliens at all within the show(s), these people
coming outta the closet will either confirm or refute the stories about
Grays, if you describe a blue, fat, tall alien, people will start seeing them.
I believe that some of the reports may be true, but most ARE crackpots and
loonies, better yet, let this work for you, describe an outlandish alien and
you can seperate the crackpots this way after the show is over and they start
crawling outta the woodwork reporting aliens.
If the evidence cannot be presented in one show, make a mini-series out of it.
First, will the stations run it? Yes, if they run Robert Tilton, if they
run "The Elvis Files" (a show some weeks ago that tried unsuccessfully to
prove Elvis is alive), then they will run this..
Second, will the advertisers pay? Have you seen the ratings of "The Elvis
Files"?
Third, will the viewers believe? That depends on the evidence. Make it good
because the people who count will be hard to convince.
I would like to see this from professionals in the field, not some
pseudo-scientific presentation. Sources MUST be credible. Radar traces
not FAA certified (and advertized as such) can be created by any hardware
hacker in his/her garage using industrial/government surplus sources.
I know someone who brought this idea up one night when reading this newsgroup.
He would be willing to be an organizer for such a film, financial backing
must come from within the UFO research community. If you expect another
"Chariots of the Gods", then go elsewhere. We are interested in REAL evidence.
Any takers?
Please note this is cross-posted to sci.skeptic
--
+-------------------------+------------------------------------------------
| dyett@phad.hsc.usc.edu | I will not be punched, stamped, filed, indexed,
| Just my opinions! | briefed, debriefed, or numbered! -The Prisoner
+-------------------------+------------------------------------------------
Article 9542 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!peora!masscomp!dali.cs.montana.edu!caen!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!qt.cs.utexas.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!srg!news
From: dpipes@srg.uucp (Dave Pipes)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Aliens and Ignorance
Message-ID: <1991Sep12.133127.10783@srg.uucp>
Date: 12 Sep 91 13:31:27 GMT
Sender: dpipes@srg.uucp
Followup-To: sci.skeptic
Organization: ARINC Research Corporation, Annapolis, MD
Lines: 28
Most of the crop circle discussions lately have devolved into
the argument that these 60 year-old gents couldn't have done
all of them, and we can't account for all of them. Ignoring the
fact that my gradnfather, when sixty, worked 14-16 hour days and
could lift a 500 lb calf to move it, examine the following line of
reasoning:
Assertion: All rockets launched in the USA are launched by aliens.
Response: But NASA launches rockets in the USA.
A: Does NASA launch ALL the rockets in the USA? What about before
it existed?
R: Gee, I don't know who launched rockets before NASA, or who else
launches them now, but I am SURE that it is just people, like NASA.
A: But you CAN'T be sure, until YOU PERSONALLY can account for EVERY
launch that has occured OR been reported to occur. Until you can,
I will assert that some rockets launched in the US were launched by
aliens. In fact, until you can account for every report of events
which RESEMBLE rocket launches, I will assert that you are wrong.
Does it bother anyone to see themselves arguing in this fashion?
David Pipes
...!uunet!srg!spica!dpipes
Article 9549 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!peora!masscomp!dali.cs.montana.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!qt.cs.utexas.edu!cs.utexas.edu!asuvax!ncar!unidata.ucar.edu!steve
From: steve@unidata.ucar.edu (Steve Emmerson)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Crop circles are a hoax.
Message-ID: <steve.684824956@unidata.ucar.edu>
Date: 14 Sep 91 05:09:16 GMT
References: <GERRY.91Sep11121525@onion.frc.ri.cmu.edu>
Sender: news@ncar.ucar.edu
Distribution: na
Organization: University Corporation for Atmospheric Research (UCAR)
Lines: 14
gerry@frc2.frc.ri.cmu.edu (Gerry Roston) writes:
>The point is that a repeatable explination for these circles has been
>provided and demonstrated. This explination should be accepted as the
>methodology behind the creation of all crop circles until another
>repeatable, demonstratable explination is put forth.
Occam's razor? Least objectionable hypothesis?
You got it right except for one thing. We don't know how good their
circle was. Put another way, what are Delgado's credentials?
--
Steve Emmerson steve@unidata.ucar.edu ...!ncar!unidata!steve
Article 9551 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!peora!masscomp!dali.cs.montana.edu!caen!sdd.hp.com!hplabs!hpl-opus!hpcc05!hp-ptp!davew
From: davew@hp-ptp.HP.COM (Dave Waller)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Crop circles are a hoax.
Message-ID: <22080004@hp-ptp.HP.COM>
Date: 13 Sep 91 20:56:49 GMT
References: <1991Sep9.133407.6311@aber.ac.uk>
Organization: HP Pacific Technology Park - Sunnyvale, Ca.
Lines: 36
In sci.skeptic, bmason@morgan.ucs.mun.ca (Bruce Mason) writes:
> Where most circles researchers have problems with the hoax theory is in the
> non-obvious nature of the circles as symbols. For example most circles are
> most definitely non-circular, although often this is not obvious until you
> measure them. Also there are many internal features of circle formations
> that no one has been able to replicate. For example many circle beds have
> different layers of rotation, as if something has pushed/pulled some of the
> corn over in one direction and then gone back in the other direction to lay
> the rest down. Many of the anomalous features of circles are anomalous
> because they seem to make no sense. For example many circles have small
> tufts of untouched corn left at random, circles tend to deform where the
> edge meets tractor lines. There was a swathed circle in Shropshire (I believe)
> that looked a bit like an exploded circle. A very few circles have not been
> fully flattened but habe only been bent over at the top. These and quite a
> few other features are not only very difficult to hoax (though this is not in
> itself a compelling argument) but argue for hoaxes who were amazingly
> resistant to the temptation to provide striking symbols. It has only been
> in the last two years with the terrific media interest that easily
> recognisable symbols, (smiley faces, pop-band logos, Mandlebrot sets etc) have
> become common. (That said in 1985 the letters WEARENOTALONE appeared at a f
> famous site --- a curious thing for aliens to claim...)
Might I point out that, with the exception of the "flattened only at the
top" anomaly, the "problems" described above are _exactly_ what one
might expect from a human created circle with a board?
I am a bit dismayed that non-circularity, reversal of rotational layers,
untouched tufts, deformation near tractor lines are things that seem
contrary to human production of these circles.
Quite the contrary, a perfectly circular circle, 100 yards in radius
with absolutely seamless bending in the same direction all the way
around would be something of a mystery.
Dave Waller
Article 9567 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!peora!masscomp!dali.cs.montana.edu!caen!spool.mu.edu!agate!stanford.edu!eos!data.nas.nasa.gov!mustang!nntp-server.caltech.edu!sol1.gps.caltech.edu!CARL
From: carl@sol1.gps.caltech.edu (Carl J Lydick)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: What we know about crop circles
Message-ID: <1991Sep15.035927.25796@cco.caltech.edu>
Date: 15 Sep 91 03:59:27 GMT
References: <1991Sep14.095811.14605@cco.caltech.edu>,<steve.684900060@unidata.ucar.edu>
Sender: news@cco.caltech.edu
Reply-To: carl@sol1.gps.caltech.edu
Distribution: na
Organization: HST Wide Field/Planetary Camera
Lines: 18
Nntp-Posting-Host: sol1.gps.caltech.edu
In article <steve.684900060@unidata.ucar.edu>, steve@unidata.ucar.edu (Steve Emmerson) writes:
>carl@sol1.gps.caltech.edu (Carl J Lydick) writes:
>
>>Well, if you allow "some" to include "one", trhen we DO know what Eric claims
>>we know.
>
>Not quite. We don't know how good the circle was.
Well, we know that it was good enough to fool the "expert" most often cited by
those who claim the crop circles are NOT hoaxes.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carl J Lydick | INTERnet: CARL@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU | NSI/HEPnet: SOL1::CARL
Disclaimer: Hey, I understand VAXes and VMS. That's what I get paid for. My
understanding of astronomy is purely at the amateur level (or below). So
unless what I'm saying is directly related to VAX/VMS, don't hold me or my
organization responsible for it. If it IS related to VAX/VMS, you can try to
hold me responsible for it, but my organization had nothing to do with it.
Article 9585 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!peora!masscomp!dali.cs.montana.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!sdd.hp.com!cs.utexas.edu!asuvax!ncar!unidata.ucar.edu!steve
From: steve@unidata.ucar.edu (Steve Emmerson)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: What we know about crop circles
Message-ID: <steve.684966649@unidata.ucar.edu>
Date: 15 Sep 91 20:30:49 GMT
References: <1991Sep15.035927.25796@cco.caltech.edu>
Sender: news@ncar.ucar.edu
Distribution: na
Organization: University Corporation for Atmospheric Research (UCAR)
Lines: 11
carl@sol1.gps.caltech.edu (Carl J Lydick) writes:
>Well, we know that it was good enough to fool the "expert" most often cited by
>those who claim the crop circles are NOT hoaxes.
I'm glad to see that you put "expert" in quotes.
Just what are Delgado's credentials?
--
Steve Emmerson steve@unidata.ucar.edu ...!ncar!unidata!steve
Article 9598 of sci.skeptic:
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Path: bilver!tarpit!fang!att!att!linac!uwm.edu!rpi!batcomputer!cornell!rochester!pt.cs.cmu.edu!crabapple.srv.cs.cmu.edu!netnews.srv.cs.cmu.edu!gerry
From: gerry@frc2.frc.ri.cmu.edu (Gerry Roston)
Subject: Re: Dave and Doug's crop circle hoax
Message-ID: <GERRY.91Sep12104330@onion.frc.ri.cmu.edu>
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 91 15:43:30 GMT
Organization: Field Robotics Center, CMU
Nntp-Posting-Host: onion.frc.ri.cmu.edu
In-Reply-To: al463@cleveland.Freenet.Edu's message of 11 Sep 91 23:09:37 GMT
Reply-To: gerry@cs.cmu.edu (Gerry Roston)
References: <1991Sep11.230937.3041@usenet.ins.cwru.edu>
Lines: 30
In article <1991Sep11.230937.3041@usenet.ins.cwru.edu> al463@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Christopher A. Joseph) writes:
That is about as much credibility as I give to Dave and Doug. All you
skeptics ACCEPTED their story TOO EASILY. Until I've done a circle
myself, I believe no one. Nuff said.
This is the weirdest post I have ever read. Why you might ask?
Well, most believers tend to be soemwhat credulous. In his statement,
Chris is insinuating that he believes that PSI, ETs, or some other
unknown explination is required to make crop circles. Why does he
believe this? I don't know; there is no reason to expect that there
is a supernatural explination for these phenomena. Yet, he offers no
proof or support to this insinuation.
Now, two folks come along, demonstrate how this is done, and guess
what!? Chris doesn't believe it until he tries it himself! This is
in direct contradiction to his open accpetance of a supernatural
explination.
Well, I guess we skeptics have never accused believers of being
consistent.
--
Gerry Roston (gerry@cs.cmu.edu) | Some Christians pretend that Christianity
Field Robotics Center, | was not established by the sword; but of
Carnegie Mellon University | what period of time do they speak?
Pittsburgh, PA, 15213 | Thomas Paine
(412) 268-6557 |
Article 9444 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!ge-dab!crdgw1!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!cleveland.Freenet.Edu!al463
From: al463@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Christopher A. Joseph)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Where are the "copy cats"?
Message-ID: <1991Sep11.232527.5378@usenet.ins.cwru.edu>
Date: 11 Sep 91 23:25:27 GMT
Sender: news@usenet.ins.cwru.edu
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, (USA)
Lines: 13
Nntp-Posting-Host: cwns1.ins.cwru.edu
I hear all these references to alleged "copy cats" associated with
the crop circle thread. Where is your proof of their alleged existance?
More circles? Not good enough. I want more substantiated confessions
before the copy-cat theory will carry any weight with me.
Chris
--
Christopher A. Joseph (Chris)|"You can go wrong by being too skeptical
al463@cleveland.freenet.edu |as readily as by being too trusting"L.L.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"!ELUR sebboH dna nivlaC" << Subliminal Message | FNORD!| Praise "Bob"
Article 9466 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!ge-dab!crdgw1!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!mips!public!rah
From: rah@public.BTR.COM (Richard A Hyde rah@btr.com)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Where are the "copy cats"?
Message-ID: <4022@public.BTR.COM>
Date: 12 Sep 91 04:06:45 GMT
References: <1991Sep11.232527.5378@usenet.ins.cwru.edu>
Organization: BTR Public Access UNIX, MtnView CA. Contact: Customer Service cs@BTR.COM
Lines: 26
In article <1991Sep11.232527.5378@usenet.ins.cwru.edu> al463@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Christopher A. Joseph) writes:
|
|I hear all these references to alleged "copy cats" associated with
|the crop circle thread. Where is your proof of their alleged existance?
|More circles? Not good enough. I want more substantiated confessions
|before the copy-cat theory will carry any weight with me.
|
I, myself, many years ago painted a large white circle in the middle of
an intersection. I remember choosing a circle because of it's simple
geometry and the fact that it was more appealing than a triangle or a
square. The circle was inspired by a series of large footprints found
painted down several miles of nearby rural road and reported in the local
press.
Had I been a rural rather than a suburban child, perhaps I would have
tampered with crops instead. So, to all those residents of Lacey, Washington
who have for the last 20 years worried about aliens painting arcane symbols
on public roads... rest easy. It *was* a hoax.
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Richard Hyde | RaH@btr.com | This space intentionally left blank |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Article 9436 of sci.skeptic:
Path: bilver!tarpit!peora!masscomp!rpi!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!thunder.mcrcim.mcgill.edu!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!stanford.edu!eos!data.nas.nasa.gov!mustang!nntp-server.caltech.edu!sol1.gps.caltech.edu!CARL
From: carl@sol1.gps.caltech.edu (Carl J Lydick)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Where are the "copy cats"?
Message-ID: <1991Sep12.174154.9714@cco.caltech.edu>
Date: 12 Sep 91 17:41:54 GMT
References: <1991Sep11.232527.5378@usenet.ins.cwru.edu>
Sender: news@cco.caltech.edu
Reply-To: carl@sol1.gps.caltech.edu
Organization: HST Wide Field/Planetary Camera
Lines: 25
Nntp-Posting-Host: sol1.gps.caltech.edu
In article <1991Sep11.232527.5378@usenet.ins.cwru.edu>, al463@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Christopher A. Joseph) writes:
>
>I hear all these references to alleged "copy cats" associated with
>the crop circle thread. Where is your proof of their alleged existance?
>More circles? Not good enough. I want more substantiated confessions
>before the copy-cat theory will carry any weight with me.
Right. And when you GET more substantiated confessions, you'll then be able to
claim: "But the copycats didn't confess until the technique made world news.
They just heard about how the two Limeys did it, practiced for awhile, and then
made up their confessions." As of a week or so ago, all the PSI, UFO, etc.
advocates were saying "If it's a hoax, show us how it could have been done.
All the experts say there's no way a human being could have done it". Now that
the technique has been demonstrated, they change the standard of proof to
something that, given the publicity, is TRULY impossible. C'MON GUYS: GIVE US
A STANDARD OF PROOF THAT'S AT LEAST THEORETICALLY POSSIBLE TO ACHIEVE, THEN
STICK WITH IT.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carl J Lydick | INTERnet: CARL@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU | NSI/HEPnet: SOL1::CARL
Disclaimer: Hey, I understand VAXes and VMS. That's what I get paid for. My
understanding of astronomy is purely at the amateur level (or below). So
unless what I'm saying is directly related to VAX/VMS, don't hold me or my
organization responsible for it. If it IS related to VAX/VMS, you can try to
hold me responsible for it, but my organization had nothing to do with it.
**********************************************
* THE U.F.O. BBS - http://www.ufobbs.com/ufo *
**********************************************
Reference in New Issue Copy Permalink