813 lines
46 KiB
Plaintext
813 lines
46 KiB
Plaintext
SUBJECT: THE SWAMP GAS JOURNAL Vol. 6 #4 FILE: UFO2607
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MUFONET COMMUNICATIONS GROUP
|
|
ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ
|
|
ASTRONET BBS NETWORK - MUFONET BBS NETWORK
|
|
ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ
|
|
|
|
[Note: The following article is provided to the MufoNet-BBS Network by
|
|
Chris Rutkowski, Editor.]
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
Volume 6 The SWAMP GAS JOURNAL ISSN 0707-7106
|
|
Number 4 ********************* September 1993
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, since I've received a great many inquiries about a new SGJ, I
|
|
thought I'd gather more information to bring readers up to date on the
|
|
ufology/Forteana scene.
|
|
|
|
Putting Out Fires
|
|
|
|
By now, many of you will have seen the movie FIRE IN THE SKY, which
|
|
chronicles the story of Travis Walton and his UFO abduction experience in
|
|
1975. Even back then, his story generated a great deal of controversy, and
|
|
the renewed interest has created another phenomenon unto itself.
|
|
Just before it was released, I received a phone call from a Paramount
|
|
Pictures representive, who asked if I wanted any promotional materials and
|
|
passes to the local premiere. They had got my name and number from their
|
|
ufology contacts elsewhere in Canada. I took several passes, and called up
|
|
the motley members of UFOROM and NAICCR in Winnipeg. Our entourage went to
|
|
the screening, full of eager expectation.
|
|
I had spoken to Tracy Torme, the film's producer, several years ago when
|
|
he was working on other UFO-type projects and was involved in Star Trek
|
|
episodes. He was quite knowledgable on the subject, having done a lot of
|
|
reading about UFOs and the ETH, and I recall sending him some of my
|
|
writings back then. I had enjoyed his work on INTRUDERS, the abduction TV
|
|
movie of a few years ago, and I looked forward to his treatment of Walton's
|
|
experience.
|
|
Halfway through FIRE IN THE SKY, some of my companions were rolling their
|
|
eyes and groaning. During the climax, when Walton was immersed in brown
|
|
goo, they were getting apopleptic. After the movie, we congregated outside
|
|
and discussed the film in detail. While we all generally liked the
|
|
unfolding of the investigation and story, and the setting of the background
|
|
and personal lives of the witnesses, something went awry during the
|
|
abduction sequence. Unfortunately, it was that short sequence that made or
|
|
broke the movie, depending on your opinion.
|
|
What was incredible was the number of good reviews the movie received
|
|
from ufologists, despite the flaws our group felt were overwhelming. In
|
|
addition, I noted that some skeptics were lamenting that PR for the movie
|
|
was going to create something akin to mass hysteria, and poison the
|
|
public's mind. These and other observations prompted me to post the
|
|
following review in the sci.skeptic INTERNET newsgroup:
|
|
======================================================================
|
|
From sci.skeptic Fri Mar 12 14:11:25 1993
|
|
From: rutkows@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Chris Rutkowski)
|
|
Subject: MIS-Fire in the Sky
|
|
|
|
I saw FIRE IN THE SKY at a preview last night. There was mixed
|
|
reaction from the audience. First of all, the movie does not resemble
|
|
Walton's book in the least. I thought his ghostwritten version of what he
|
|
claimed was bizarre enough withough Tracy Torme's "artistic licence". If
|
|
you like movies with lots of gore, shock effects and gallons of brown goo,
|
|
this is the one for you. Walton's original claim of a sterile, antiseptic
|
|
alien spaceship and operating room has given way to an interior that
|
|
attempts to outdo the ALIEN series of flicks. Membraneous pods, ET-like
|
|
aliens and slimy honeycombs populate the ship's interior. Good news for
|
|
horror buffs: the audience liked that stuff. What was odd was the complete
|
|
contrast with the rest of the movie, in which crusty James Garner grilled
|
|
the other work crew about their apparent murder of Walton. Garner's
|
|
character, the sheriff, didn't believe a word of the abduction story, and
|
|
kept trying to trip them up through his investigation. That part of the
|
|
movie, including the social and public effects of an alleged UFO on a
|
|
community, was actually very good.
|
|
In essence, it's not necessary to debunk the movie because it bears
|
|
no resemblance to even the original story. I'm amazed that MUFON devoted
|
|
half of its most recent issue to a preview of the movie, including a new
|
|
article by Walton. In the movie, APRO investigators, with the group name
|
|
changed to AFAR, are portrayed as complete geeks with absolutely no
|
|
scientific credibility. Why a UFO organization would want to be associated
|
|
with such a portrayal is beyond me. Walton is said to be rewriting his
|
|
book, THE WALTON EXPERIENCE, to be released with the movie title. A much
|
|
more interesting book about the case is Bill Barry's ULTIMATE ENCOUNTER
|
|
(Pocket Books, 1978), which gives more background and includes skeptics'
|
|
comments. I doubt if that book will become available again.
|
|
In summary, FIRE IN THE SKY is a misfire. Although the
|
|
investigation process is fairly well detailed and the dynamics of the
|
|
characters is acceptably portrayed, the movie skews badly after Walton
|
|
is found, degenerating into a slimy horror flick with no resemblance to
|
|
the original account, however truthful it was in the first place. Skeptics
|
|
don't really need to bother with the movie. It should be forgotten soon.
|
|
======================================================================
|
|
The review was met with general agreement among the readers of the
|
|
newsgroup, and some readers of UFO newsgroups also agreed with my view.
|
|
Others called the movie a "must see" and a "milestone". There the matter
|
|
rested, so I thought. As the saying goes: "Everyone is entitled to an
|
|
opinion, no matter how wrong it is." But then, I received some email from
|
|
various people, saying that Tracy Torme wanted to get in touch with me by
|
|
phone. I passed along my number, thinking that Tracy wanted to have
|
|
another amiable chat about some aspect of ufology for his next movie. Not.
|
|
Tracy was not pleased with my pan of his work. He had several arguments in
|
|
particular. First, he disagreed that the movie bore no resemblance to the
|
|
original story. It was still about Walton, was set in Arizona, and
|
|
involved an abduction. It was only the comparatively short abduction
|
|
sequence that strayed from reality. I argued that that short sequence WAS
|
|
the story, and that was what I meant. I pointed out that my review did
|
|
praise the investigation and character development parts of the screenplay.
|
|
But "bore no resemblance"? Indeed. Tracy further explained that the
|
|
original screenplay was relatively straight and didn't include the fantasy
|
|
sequence that ended up in the movie. It seems that Paramount execs got
|
|
upset when Indruders and other similar ventures were promoted, showing
|
|
classic abduction sequences. They wanted something DIFFERENT, so they
|
|
rewrote the script ending to include the "goo" scenes. The "goo" was
|
|
another sore point. "There's hardly any in the movie at all," Tracy
|
|
argued, "so how could you call it a 'goo-fest'?" Well, admittedly, there
|
|
was no goo in the larger part of the movie, so whitewashing (or, rather,
|
|
goo-splattering) the entire movie was not accurate. But again, I'd note
|
|
that it's the effect of the fantasy sequence upon the rest of the film that
|
|
sticks in peoples minds. Tracy was upset by a small number in the ufology
|
|
community who condemned the entire movie because of the flawed abduction
|
|
sequence. Even Travis Walton seemed to endorse the movie version by noting
|
|
it portrayed his sense of bewilderment and terror during his experience,
|
|
even if the visual scenes were embellished. I was one of the handful of
|
|
purists (for lack of a better word) who thought the scenes detracted from
|
|
the account. By the end of our conversation, Tracy had cooled down and I
|
|
had agreed the problem wasn't his original script. We're still friends (I
|
|
think). In fact, he called me a few months later when he was getting ready
|
|
to travel to Saskatchewan for an HBO movie western. He wanted to know if
|
|
there were any Fortean locations in the filming area. I put him onto the
|
|
medicine wheels there and the Taber spooklights. He told me that after the
|
|
western, he'd do a movie about MIBs, then back out of ufology for a while.
|
|
I think Tracy has done a good job of working with the material he has been
|
|
given by myself and others, and he has honestly tried to present UFO
|
|
information to the public by telling stories about actual cases. Tracy had
|
|
his secretary send me a bound book (!) containing a large collection of
|
|
reviews of Fire in the Sky, mostly from newspapers but also from other
|
|
strange sources. One weird one was a favourable review published in what
|
|
appears to be a newsletter circulated within the Pentagon. FITS was
|
|
moderately successful at the box office, so I'm told, but the negative
|
|
publicity it received from some of the reviews probably squashed its
|
|
attempt to break records. For what it's worth, I still think that the
|
|
Walton screenplay could have been lifted right out of Walton's first book
|
|
and still sell well. I was quite surprised that virtually no one cited
|
|
Bill Barry's book on the case, which gave many details and covered some of
|
|
the skeptics' objections as well. Well, that's showbiz.
|
|
|
|
Crop Circling Again
|
|
|
|
Well, it's no secret that cerealogy isn't what it used to be in Britain
|
|
these days. It seems that the top "experts" such as Meaden and Andrews are
|
|
very hesitant to proclaim new formations "genuine", because of the
|
|
predominance of hoaxing.
|
|
Nevertheless, there are many cerealogists, particularly some who are doing
|
|
well on the lecture circuits right now, who are adamantly refusing to
|
|
concede their trade is full of problems. Paul Fuller in England is always
|
|
under attack from someone or another, because of his dogged determination
|
|
to publicize details that suggest certain formations are actually hoaxes.
|
|
This, despite the fact that there is ample evidence to show that the
|
|
various collections of crop circle data jealously guarded by some British
|
|
groups are absolutely rife with contaminated data. Indeed, if there
|
|
actually IS a "real" crop circle phenomenon, it is buried hopelessy under a
|
|
flood of hoaxes and poor investigations.
|
|
However, this is not the opinion of all researchers or interested readers.
|
|
For example, the following post appeared in the alt.alien.vistors
|
|
newsgroup:
|
|
|
|
"From: esc@festival.ed.ac.uk (Clinton Dopgposture)
|
|
Date: Fri, 27 Aug 1993 10:31:02 GMT
|
|
I can't believe people are still doing research
|
|
into crop circles. Are you listening ? They
|
|
are a hoax. A recent Fortean Times issue
|
|
documented at least 15 hoaxers and the type of
|
|
circles they made,size etc. and there were
|
|
hundreds more groups they could have mentioned.
|
|
On some 'supernatural' topics I've got an open
|
|
mind but crop circles - NO NO NO NO !!!"
|
|
|
|
This cleverly-named debunker obviously had some disagreement with
|
|
cerealogical endeavours. Certainly an open mind isn't something to have
|
|
with regards to all fields of study as it would lead to objectivity. He
|
|
(or she) further described his (or her) position in a response to another
|
|
poster's reaction: (spelling and grammatical errors are in the original)
|
|
|
|
"From: esc@festival.ed.ac.uk (Clinton Dogposture)
|
|
Date: Mon, 30 Aug 1993 11:27:12 GMT
|
|
Initially all early circles were of very simple
|
|
nature. When the hoaxers got bored with this they decided to
|
|
build more and complex patterns and sure the patterns take some
|
|
planning but nothing that a fairly intelligent person couldn't do.
|
|
The more complex the formation the more likely it is to be
|
|
hoaxed. The complete asymmetry in some of the really complex
|
|
circles is totally unnatural - thats because they are.
|
|
There have been various programmes, magazine articles that have
|
|
documented stories of psyhics,new-agers or whatever walking
|
|
in MAN-MADE circles and declaring allsorts of bullshit -some
|
|
of them even collapsed because of the sheer 'power'
|
|
they felt."
|
|
|
|
This last reference might be to some in the ETH camp, who have claimed to
|
|
have felt "energy" flowing through their bodies when they were inside some
|
|
formations. Of course, some of these sites were later suspected to be
|
|
hoaxes, so the subjective sensations may be of less importance than is
|
|
claimed. Chad Deetken noted that while sleeping overnight in a Canadian
|
|
crop circle, he was overcome by "bad vibes" and was forced to flee. Gord
|
|
Kijek of AUFOSG is plagued by severe migraine headaches, brought upon by
|
|
stress and environmental factors. He visited the same sites as those who
|
|
claimed headaches and vibes inside them, but experienced nothing out of the
|
|
ordinary. The question is, therefore, not what energy is responsible, but
|
|
why are some people more sensitive to things within crop circles?
|
|
Dogposture continued:
|
|
|
|
"The scientist who developed the mini vortex hypothesis was
|
|
set up to examine a circle hoaxed by a television programme
|
|
and he proclaimed it totally genuine and was prattling on about
|
|
how the circle was a classic blah blah..
|
|
When told it was fake he almost broke down .He has now
|
|
given up his work and believes firmly that all circles are faked."
|
|
|
|
"Show me an unexplained crop circle and I'll find you somebody that
|
|
will give you a perfectly good explanation for it. How can you lean
|
|
towards something when there is absolutely no proof? I believe you are
|
|
right when you say that the circles are created by 'some intelligent
|
|
phenomena of nature' - it's called HUMAN INTELLIGENCE. Surely any
|
|
sensible human being must at this time go with the explanation which
|
|
has most evidence supporting it. Why do you believe in something when
|
|
there's no 'proof'?"
|
|
|
|
As I and others pointed out in later posts, Meaden has hardly given up.
|
|
True, he has reconsidered his position on complex formations, but is still
|
|
quite convinced that a vortex mechanism still exists. Other scientists
|
|
such as Ohtsuki and Snow are still working on the idea, too. And Paul
|
|
Devereux is still advocating "earth energy", so the interconnected concept
|
|
of atmospheric energy vortices is not dead in any sense.
|
|
|
|
Of course, one must then define "sensible". His opinion on the "show me"
|
|
approach was interesting. A "perfectly good explanation" for the Alton
|
|
Barnes formation was that it was a hoax, yet there was no "overwhelming"
|
|
evidence as to its creator. The ETH camp would point to the woven nature
|
|
of the crop, the "molecular crystallization" effects and so forth, but
|
|
neither those who believe all are hoaxes nor those who believe them to be
|
|
real are talking about the same kind of "perfectly good explanation".
|
|
|
|
A lengthy rejoinder came from none other than Marshall Dudley, who supplied
|
|
the following critique:
|
|
==========================================================================
|
|
From alt.alien.visitors Tue Aug 31 12:22:09 1993
|
|
From: mdudley@dwbbs.nlbbs.com (Marshall Dudley)
|
|
|
|
How long have you been researching crop circles? how many have you
|
|
personally investigated? What scientific team were you are part of? I
|
|
suspect from your above post that you have looked personally at very few,
|
|
if any circles.
|
|
|
|
I spent 5 weeks in England in July and August of 1992 as part of the Argus
|
|
scientific team investigating crop circles. I can state catagorically that
|
|
the above comments do not fit the data. In fact, I have not found any
|
|
rational explaination that, as yet, fits the data.
|
|
|
|
I was fortunate that the first circles I encountered were all hoaxes,
|
|
created for the hoaxing competition. So I started out knowing exactly what
|
|
a hoaxed circle looked like, and what the hoaxers were capabile of. The
|
|
competition which offered about $6000 as first prize (in pounds of course),
|
|
had a dozen or so competitors. Several surprises came out of this
|
|
competition. First it was obvious that the true circle makers did not
|
|
compete. Some of the things that were to be replicated that show up in
|
|
real circles simply did not appear or were very crude. Secondly, it was
|
|
found that several items previously assumed to be not hoaxable were indeed
|
|
easy for the hoaxers to duplicate. Creating a circle between the tram
|
|
lines with no sign of entry fell into this catagory. Also several items
|
|
which some researchers thought were signs of a hoax, did not show up in the
|
|
hoaxed circles at all (such as "construction lines"). Another interesting
|
|
thing is that although no one was able to create a circle with all the
|
|
specified features, a quite nice pictogram appeared on a hill several miles
|
|
away the night of the competition, which did contain many of these
|
|
features. Whoever (or whatever) created this circle could have easily
|
|
walked away with $6000 and fame, but did not.
|
|
|
|
When I saw the first circle which was thought to be genuine, I immediately
|
|
found two things which seemed to be different than the hoaxed circles. We
|
|
returned to the hoaxed circles to check and found both things consistantly
|
|
showed up in the unexplained circles, and did not show up at all in any of
|
|
the hoaxed circles.
|
|
|
|
The first was the issue of buried grain heads. In all the hoaxed circles
|
|
in the competition, all the investigated circles we felt sure were hoaxed,
|
|
and some of the circles we were were unsure of, there were buried heads of
|
|
grain when you lift the top layer of grain. In none of the circles we
|
|
thought were genuine were there buried heads, except where the heads were
|
|
on immature and short stalks. The explaination for this is quite simple.
|
|
In a hoax the wheat (corn if in England) is pushed down between the
|
|
standing stalks. Then when the standing stalks are pushed down they end up
|
|
on TOP of the previously lodged crop, burying the heads. In a genuine
|
|
circle it happens differently. Either the crop goes down backwards (pulled
|
|
down over previously flattened crop) or it all goes down at the same time.
|
|
This results in all the heads laying on top of the stalks, with no heads
|
|
buried except for the few on immature short stalks. Absolutely NONE of the
|
|
hoaxed circles showed this very consistant charateristic of genuine
|
|
circles.
|
|
|
|
The second thing found unique with the genuine circles was that the stalks
|
|
are bent to follow the flow. Thus a circle (or actually a swirl) is
|
|
smooth. In ALL the hoaxed circles from the competition the crop was
|
|
straight, but laid in a polygon approximating a circle or swirl. This
|
|
characteristic continued in the genuine circles until later in the season
|
|
when the crop became brittle and begun breaking.
|
|
|
|
Several things that Stanly Morcom has found also differentiate the hoaxes
|
|
from the genuine. One is that of defect amplification. If you look for
|
|
standing stalks or a group of standing stalks in a circle you will find
|
|
they virtually always are associated with some type of defect in the wheat.
|
|
A missing drill line can result in a series of standing stalks on the
|
|
"upwind" side of the missing line. A group of standing stalks will
|
|
surround a patch where no wheat grew (usually from a fertilizer spill).
|
|
Discontinuities in the wheat result in what appears to be a change from a
|
|
laminar flow to chaotic flow characteristics of whatever force pushes the
|
|
wheat down. Although these were consistantly found in genuine circles,
|
|
they were never found in ANY of the known hoaxed circles. Finding defects
|
|
in the distribution density of standing wheat is difficult in broad
|
|
daylight, and virtually impossible at night.
|
|
|
|
[Editor's note: Dudley uses the word "genuine" a bit liberally. While even
|
|
he in an upcoming paragraph acknowledges that some circles are hoaxes, he,
|
|
like some others, insists that he can tell the difference between a "real"
|
|
circle and a "fake" one. This may or may not be true, depending on who you
|
|
listen to.]
|
|
|
|
Also the East field of Alton Barnes was being watched all night long by
|
|
over a dozen "crop watchers", and the field was being walked by one
|
|
individual. One watcher was using an infrared nightscope, which could spot
|
|
rabbits in the field on moonless nights. It was being photographed every
|
|
10 minutes with 10 minute exposures all night. During this time the huge
|
|
"snail" formation formed. The field walker had walked throught the area
|
|
where the snail was, and found nothing only 10 ot 15 minutes before dawn,
|
|
only to be amazed by the formation when the sun came up. Nothing was seen
|
|
by anyone, and nothing unusual showed up on the film or the sniperscope.
|
|
|
|
One formation (the Milk Hill #2 also known as Gods's telephone), which I
|
|
have a video tape of our team being the first in was under watch by about
|
|
30-40 people who were staying the night as part of Steven Greer's CSETI
|
|
experiment. They reported seeing an orange ball floating over this field
|
|
just before dawn in what appears to be exactly the same spot where the
|
|
formation was later found. This formation is especially intriguing because
|
|
it started with what was undeniably normal wind generated lodging, which
|
|
then went on out and swirled two circles connnected by a straight run.
|
|
Both circles were clockwise, and the shaft between them had wheat from each
|
|
circle coming into it, and piling up where they ran together. The
|
|
formation has construction lines, making any natural explaination extremely
|
|
difficult. The crop was bent over at about 6 inches off the ground, and
|
|
there was no sign of foot prints or any damage. I have a video showing
|
|
that the first person into the formation destroyed it, since the wheat, and
|
|
entire formation was about 6" off the ground. One walk throught the
|
|
formation left a trail like walking on new fallen snow. This as well as
|
|
the circle being formed at exactly the same time, and as an extension of,
|
|
wind damage tend to discount the possibility of human hoaxers. I consider
|
|
the source of this circle as unexplained, having characteristics of both
|
|
naturally and intelligently guided formation.
|
|
|
|
> I think its fair to ridicule when all the evidence (so far), and
|
|
> the evidence is overwhelming , points towards a perfectly reasonable
|
|
> explanation for the formation of all circles.
|
|
|
|
Hows that again? That is not how scientific investigation is done.
|
|
Evidence is collected and analyzed. Possible explainations are formed and
|
|
checked against the evidence to see if they fit. Ridicule does nothing to
|
|
further understanding. I am am not aware of any overwhelming evidence that
|
|
these are ALL hoaxes. I know that some are hoaxes. What is the evidence,
|
|
and where is it? Why did you not present it to any of the scientific
|
|
groups who are still head scratching? Ridicule is typically used by
|
|
uninformed debunkers when they find they are not on solid ground.
|
|
=========================================================================
|
|
Dudley also wrote a paper last year which he claims shows to a very high
|
|
degree of statistical accuracy that hoaxes and genuine circles are two very
|
|
different sets. The paper follows:
|
|
=========================================================================
|
|
An analysis of the hoax theory using dates of the formations.
|
|
by Marshall Dudley
|
|
|
|
World attention was focused on England last year when a pair of elderly
|
|
men claimed they had hoaxed many of the formations over the last 14 years.
|
|
A question arises whether this theory can stand up to a statistical
|
|
analysis.
|
|
|
|
If one assumes that most hoaxing is done by students or employed persons
|
|
then a logical assumption is that most hoaxes would be done during times
|
|
when one could stay out late. Thus one would expect that there should be
|
|
statistically more hoaxes done on Friday and Saturday than on other days
|
|
of the week.
|
|
|
|
Crop circles are generally not found until the next morning at the
|
|
earliest. Since several researchers such as Jurgen Kronig, Busty Taylor
|
|
John Macnish and George Wingfield overfly the most active areas several
|
|
times a week, it is unlikely a significant formation will go unnoticed for
|
|
more than a couple of days. Thus if the majority of crop circles are
|
|
hoaxes, one would expect to find a significant number of them on Saturday,
|
|
and Sunday. The least likely day of the week to find a hoax would
|
|
therefore be on a Friday.
|
|
|
|
Last year two men, commonly refered to now as "Doug and Dave," were filmed
|
|
inside a circle with Pat Delgado. Pat pronounced the circle genuine, and
|
|
Doug and Dave then claimed they had made the circle. That a claimed hoax
|
|
is accepted as such without any supporting evidence is itself disturbing,
|
|
but the entire setup, co-ordinated by the Today Newspaper, stinks of
|
|
sensationalism. Speaking with several people in England, I am led to
|
|
believe it is fairly widely believed that the circle that Pat was
|
|
"trapped" with was indeed genuine. When one compares pictures of this
|
|
circle with the one created the following day within the view of
|
|
television cameras, one is struck by the differences in appearence. It is
|
|
interesting that they can supposedly make a quite impressive circle in
|
|
total darkness, but only able to create a messy approximation during the
|
|
day. But of course this does not yield any good statistical evidence, so
|
|
let us proceed.
|
|
|
|
In the issue 5 of the Cereologist magazine, George Wingfield wrote an
|
|
article about the hoax in which he commented about Ms. Bower that "She
|
|
must be the doziest person in the world if it took six years to notice his
|
|
nightly absences." The large number of circles claimed by them would
|
|
indicate they would have to be working at least several night a week on
|
|
them so George's viewpoint is not hard to understand. Doug's wife
|
|
responded with a letter to the editor in the following issue, in which she
|
|
demanded an apology with the explanation that they were gone usually on
|
|
Friday nights 'not weekly'. This falls into the pattern we previously
|
|
proposed, and since most crop circle dates of discovery are recorded, this
|
|
is easily analyzed. For instance, taking a list titled "Famous Crop
|
|
Circle Hoaxes" compiled in May of 1992 by Jenny Randles, Paul Fuller and
|
|
Terence Meaden (the group which is attempting to prove that crop circles
|
|
are caused by an elusive ionized plazma vortex), we find that the second
|
|
entry, HO2, is a formation found on July 4th, which is claimed to have
|
|
been hoaxed by Doug and Dave. (Note that England does not celebrate July
|
|
4th as we do in the US). This was a Wednesday. Thus it is highly unikely
|
|
this was hoaxed by Doug and Dave if we are to believe Doug's wife, that
|
|
they did their hoaxing on Friday nights.
|
|
|
|
This study is not totally inclusive. The analysis is performed using 2
|
|
documents, one published by the CCCS of crop circles compiled by Stanley
|
|
Morcom, and the second one the aforementioned paper "Famous Crop Circle
|
|
Hoaxes". These references are used in total without any additional
|
|
selections, so there can be no possibility of any bias added by this
|
|
author. Formations without a day given are simply omitted. It is
|
|
understood that there may be several hoaxes which have found their way
|
|
into the CCCS document and several formations identified in the "Famous
|
|
Crop Circle Hoaxes" paper may well be legitimate. However, for this
|
|
statistical analysis we only require that a larger percentage of hoaxes
|
|
are properly identified in the hoax paper than are found in the CCCS
|
|
document. The better the identification the more definite the study will
|
|
be, but 100% accuracy is not expected or required.
|
|
|
|
(note the following table is 139 characters long and may wrap on your
|
|
viewer)
|
|
|
|
THE DATA
|
|
|
|
TOTALS (AVERAGE per day)
|
|
STANDARD DEVS
|
|
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
|
|
overall weekday weekend expected
|
|
actual
|
|
|
|
CCCS formations -
|
|
Wiltshire formations: 0 0% 1 3% 5 14% 6 17% 6 16% 11 31% 7
|
|
19% 36 (5.14) 29 (5.8) 81% 7 (3.5) 19% 2.26
|
|
3.71
|
|
Hamphire formations: 1 8% 0 0% 2 15% 0 0% 1 8% 7 53% 2
|
|
15% 13 (1.85) 10 (2) 77% 3 (1.5) 23% 1.36
|
|
2.41
|
|
Total: 1 2% 1 2% 7 14% 6 12% 7 14% 18 37% 9
|
|
18% 49 (7) 39 (7.8) 80% 10 (5) 20% 2.65
|
|
5.74
|
|
|
|
Hoaxes 8 35% 1 4% 3 13% 2 9% 2 9% 2 9% 5
|
|
22% 23 (3.3) 10 (2) 43% 13 (6.5) 56% 1.81
|
|
2.43
|
|
|
|
The Hampshire data is broken out because of the claims by Doug and Dave
|
|
that they made most of them. The trend however is better correlated
|
|
with the Wiltshire data than the "hoax" data.
|
|
|
|
It can be seen that there is a significant divergence of the data. For
|
|
instance, two days, Saturday and Sunday, account for well over half of
|
|
the hoaxes, yet in the CCCS tabulation, the total for these two days
|
|
are significantly below the number found on Friday alone, both for the
|
|
Wiltshire and Hampshire formations. The hoax document has over 3 times
|
|
as many formations per day during the weekend than during the weekday.
|
|
The CCCS data shows there to be slightly more formed during the
|
|
weekdays. One would expect essentually the same rates for weekdays as
|
|
weekends if the phenominea is not from human actions. Thus it can be
|
|
argued that whatever selection criteria was used to differentiate
|
|
between hoax and real phenomena seperates data so that the
|
|
aforementioned theory is confirmed. One curious aspect is the lack of
|
|
formations found on Monday in both papers. The large number of
|
|
formations found on Friday is totally unexpected, and it almost appears
|
|
that the phenomenon is purposefully avoiding the weekends! However,
|
|
part of this clustering on Fridays can be attributed to the fact that
|
|
some of the pilots do more overflying on Fridays (and Saturdays) than
|
|
other other days of the week.
|
|
CONCLUSION
|
|
|
|
The obvious conclusion is that although there are certainly hoaxes, there
|
|
is also another catagory of events which can be shown to be statistically
|
|
independent of the hoaxes.
|
|
<end of included article>
|
|
==========================================================================
|
|
While I don't necessarily agree with Dudley, it is clear that the
|
|
skeptics and the believers are not communicating effectively with one
|
|
another. I think that much of what is perceived to be mysterious or
|
|
anomalous could be linked to what can be called "the investigator
|
|
effect" in many instances.
|
|
|
|
The Investigator Effect
|
|
|
|
In a recent letter to me from a well-known researcher (whom I
|
|
will not identify here), the investigator effect is described most
|
|
succinctly:
|
|
|
|
"... it's time everyone stood back and took a good, long hard look at
|
|
what can only be called the investigator effect, the tendency to
|
|
believe that, if you're out looking for crop circles, absolutely
|
|
everything else that happens from the time you leave home until you
|
|
return in the morning is somehow intimately connected to an anomalous
|
|
phenomenon, from flat tires and military helicopters, to grasshopper
|
|
warblers, drained batteries, camera failure, men in black, including
|
|
government and papal conspiracies, visitors from another planet and so
|
|
on."
|
|
Frankly, I think the effect is running rampant in both ufology
|
|
and cerealogy. It's very easy to invoke a conspiracy when one is
|
|
confronted with conflicting data and faced with an affront on one's
|
|
beliefs. In phone conversations I have had with some researchers,
|
|
every click, whoosh and static was a catalyst for a paranoid claim that
|
|
"they" were listening. This, even given the fact that such noises are
|
|
not in evidence for modern surveillance thechniques. As for camera
|
|
malfunctions and beeping noises, if one counted the times when such
|
|
noises were absent versus their presence, there would not be any
|
|
question that the sounds are spurious. There was a cerealogist who was
|
|
convinced that insects were absent from crop formations and that this
|
|
indicated the presence of a fourth-dimensional space insect. When I
|
|
pointed out that I had seen many dragonflies, mosquitoes and
|
|
butterflies at the sites I had examined, there was a long silence at
|
|
the other end of the line. Then: "So it's changed its characteristics,
|
|
has it?"
|
|
This is all the more relevant when applied to some of the crop
|
|
circle research that is done (or claimed). This includes the "squashed
|
|
porcupines" that were found inside some Saskatchewan circles and
|
|
described at length by Chad Deetken in his authoritative report on
|
|
Canadian formations. What isn't emphasized is that neither of the two
|
|
carcases were examined by veterinary pathologists, and even Deetken
|
|
admits he saw neither of them. Yet the squashing of animals by
|
|
vortices or aliens is accepted without much quibble, despite the fact
|
|
that the physical evidence is completely absent. Are we reading too
|
|
much into synchronous events, or is Jung's spirit at work in the
|
|
circles?
|
|
Problems in Britain
|
|
|
|
As many of you will know, on July 28, 1993, Doug Bower
|
|
gave a lecture and "came clean" about his crop circle hoaxing
|
|
endeavours. According to one of my correspondents who was there, some
|
|
of the revelations were shocking, to say the least.
|
|
One of the major revelations was that Bower made the 1980
|
|
Westbury circles, "the very first ones that Terence Meaden ever saw."
|
|
Evidence was presented which convinced even some of the doubters that
|
|
Bower did indeed fake those formations. The implication of this is
|
|
that since Meaden began developing his vortex theory as a result of
|
|
these circles, the vortex theory itself is on some shaky ground.
|
|
Another disturbing piece of information came from Matthew
|
|
Lawrence, who was instrumental in relaying discoveries to Colin Andrews
|
|
and Pat Delgado. Lawrence gave an "unrehearsed statement" about the
|
|
circles at Cheesefoot Head. To whit: "Lawrence stated that in every
|
|
case he either found footprints underneath the crop, damaged crop, mud
|
|
on top of the crop or broken heads. This evidence never appeared in
|
|
Circular Evidence." In other words, many "genuine" formations had
|
|
obvious signs of human intervention.
|
|
Then there's the people who proclaim that they know how the
|
|
circles were created, hoaxed or otherwise, but won't tell you how they
|
|
did it! Viz:
|
|
|
|
From alt.alien.visitors Thu Dec 10 09:19:05 1992
|
|
From: darkshot@rock.concert.net (Michael B Garrett -- Chudys)
|
|
Subject: Crop circles- a scientific approach
|
|
In the course of a long and touchy life, I have had to deal with a few
|
|
things that were not explainable. I had, of course, relegated the idea
|
|
of "crop circles" and such to this category, and waited for more data.
|
|
It was not forthcoming. One day my wife, having seen some damned tabloid-
|
|
tv-style show feature on the things, asked me what I thought of them.
|
|
Like Twain, I was gratified to be able to answer promptly, so I did.
|
|
I said I didn't know.
|
|
She followed up her earlier query with this bombshell, which is indicative
|
|
of why she's my wife- "Well, if somebody wanted to hoax people with such,
|
|
how would they go about doing it?"
|
|
This led to what we called "Project Flying Deer"- an attempt to re-create
|
|
these phenomenae. It was entirely successful. I solved the basic problem
|
|
in just about 20 minutes- and it was all downhill from there. I can, by
|
|
myself, make crop circles matching anything yet found in less than 1 hour-
|
|
and entirely silently. The technique can even be done in broad daylight
|
|
without arousing suspicion. As a final test of the "technology", I even
|
|
signed my name across 2 acres of wheat belonging to an uncle of mine-
|
|
and out of sight of most air routes. I stood in one spot the whole time;
|
|
it took 23 minutes. Nobody else was needed.
|
|
My question: If someone is seriously researching this stuff, I think
|
|
they should be aware of this technique so as to know when it has been
|
|
used. Admittedly, we're no dummies- but if we could think of it, so could
|
|
someone else- and I think it casts enough of a doubt on the studies done
|
|
thus far to be worthy of thought/consideration. Don't you think so?
|
|
I AM NOT a professional debunker, nor am I one who doesn't believe that
|
|
alien visitors are possible- on the contrary, I have a lot of evidence
|
|
in the other direction, as well as a wife who swears she has SEEN "greys"
|
|
force me to drink something. This before we had even heard of any of the
|
|
current abduction theories. I just don't think crop circles are valid
|
|
evidence of an intelligence higher than ours (mine, anyway)- and I have
|
|
PROOF.
|
|
|
|
Actual investigators of this can contact me; I won't publish the technique
|
|
here or anywhere for obvious reasons- THAT really WOULD invalidate the
|
|
studies.
|
|
|
|
Of course, he wouldn't tell me, even after I contacted him privately.
|
|
Throw all this in with Jim Schnabel's tell-all book on
|
|
cerealogy, and we have a complete olio of gragantuan proportions. It
|
|
is very plain that what data we have about crop circles is hopelessly
|
|
contaminated with hoaxes. Furthermore, it is likely that the
|
|
proponents of various crop circle theories have been reading far too
|
|
much into the reports and case information.
|
|
|
|
Unnatural History
|
|
|
|
I would be facing the wrath of my publisher if I failed to plug
|
|
my own book. It came out in June 1993, published by Chameleon Book
|
|
Publishers of Winnipeg. It carries a foreword by John Robert Colombo
|
|
that is embarrassingly flattering, and the book has more than 200 pages
|
|
chock full of cases of UFOs, ghosts, abductions, sasquatch and lake
|
|
monsters, all in Manitoba. Its ISBN is 0-9696946-0-1 and you can get
|
|
it from Arcturus Books at 1443 S.E. Port St. Lucie Blvd., Port St.
|
|
Lucie, Florida 34952. It's number 72 in their 1993-8 September
|
|
catalogue and is listed for $16.95.
|
|
The book is semi-autobiographical, and presents my thoughts on
|
|
the cases I investigated and my view of the world scene. It includes
|
|
about 20 photos and drawings, many of which have never been published
|
|
before.
|
|
|
|
A Poem by Pam
|
|
|
|
In one of her letters to me, Pam Thompson sent along her
|
|
thoughts on the circle scene, and some additional thoughts. With her
|
|
permission:
|
|
THE CROP CIRCLES
|
|
|
|
Round and round like a circle,
|
|
but not a circle: a cipher--
|
|
blank, and yet potent with meaning,
|
|
a meaning both universal
|
|
and profoundly personal.
|
|
Each eye that falls on the corn
|
|
sees their own life ripplig
|
|
through the wind in the fields:
|
|
their deceit, the circles deceit;
|
|
their pain, the circles pain;
|
|
their joy, their sorrow,
|
|
their wonder, their fear
|
|
all caught in the circles' round
|
|
and etched in the corn.
|
|
And what is the true meaning
|
|
of the patterns in the corn?
|
|
Only the same meaning
|
|
that each day brings:
|
|
I know that I do not know.
|
|
|
|
"So true of so many things: I know that I do not know. And also so
|
|
true of this kind of phenomenon: people bring their own baggage with
|
|
them every time. Is it any wonder we see the same patterns of function
|
|
and dysfunction repeated in every new phenomena? I'm not saying there
|
|
*isn't* a grand conspiracy (I know that I do not know), but the sheer
|
|
magnitude of the manhours involved in keeping all these conspiracies
|
|
afloat would employ *all* of the unemployed in every country on the
|
|
planet!"
|
|
|
|
Well said, m'dear! xo!
|
|
|
|
Abductees
|
|
|
|
Since the publication of my book, several people have
|
|
approached me privately for assistance in interpreting or unlocking
|
|
hidden memories of what appear to be alien encounters. As some readers
|
|
may know, Roy Bauer and I have worked with abductees since the late
|
|
1980's. One particularly interesting recent case involves two siblings
|
|
who have a shared gap in their memories after a shared UFO encounter.
|
|
After hearing all the brouhaha about "mass abductions" and joint
|
|
abductions by aliens, satanic cultists and the CIA, it will be
|
|
interesting to see if the whole mess can be sorted out, and if the
|
|
field can be tamed. With some of the major figures in this area under
|
|
attack by debunkers and the False Memory Syndrome Foundation raising
|
|
concerns about abduction memories, it was interesting to see the
|
|
following in the a.a.v newsgroup:
|
|
|
|
From: David.Jacobs@p0.f21.n1010.z9.FIDONET.ORG (David Jacobs)
|
|
Date: 28 May 93 05:55:42 GMT
|
|
|
|
This is just a note to follow up on your remarks about John Mack.
|
|
You are quite right to question the expertise of anyone and everyone in
|
|
the abduction area. Everybody and his sister is a self-proclaimed
|
|
expert and the possibility of harm for abductees is ever-present.
|
|
John has steeped himself in abduction research and has done many
|
|
regressions with abductees. Therefore he has engaged himself in
|
|
primary rather than secondary research. This is extremely important
|
|
for any in-depth understanding of the field. UFO research is still in
|
|
its formative stages and as such we are not completely clear about its
|
|
parameters. There is still plenty of room for scholarly disagreement
|
|
and debate. John and I differ in interpretations of the material.
|
|
John tends to see its effects more in spiritual terms and I tend to
|
|
see them more in scientific and empirical terms.
|
|
Budd Hopkins and I also disagree about a variety of abduction
|
|
phenomena. Budd tends to view aliens as more deceptive than I do, for
|
|
example. I think that this will eventually all shake down as more
|
|
information is developed and we are forced to think along the lines
|
|
that the data leads to.
|
|
===========================================================================
|
|
My own interpretation of the abduction phenomenon leads me into
|
|
some other territory. Roy Bauer recently suggested that UFO abduct-
|
|
ions, ritual abuse and past-life regressions may all be cases where memory
|
|
is a poor diagnostic tool. There is no physical evidence for any of
|
|
the three in most cases that are uncovered through hypnotic regression.
|
|
Furthermore, there can be conflicting evidence found which seems to
|
|
rule against the reality of the recalled event. And all three
|
|
situations can involve screen memories which can block the original
|
|
traumatic event.
|
|
Are they, then, delusions or fantasies? If so, what is the
|
|
trigger which produces the trauma? How can such complicated fantasies
|
|
be woven by otherwise normal human beings? I would tend to think that
|
|
even if UFO abductions do not represent alien intervention, there is
|
|
plently of fuel for psychological and sociological studies, well beyond
|
|
the labeling of such cases as "dangerous".
|
|
|
|
This and That
|
|
|
|
I've just realized that there's no way to include some of the
|
|
information I had intended to publish in this issue, since I'm running
|
|
out of room. I had hoped to give an annotated list of not only the
|
|
large number of zines I have received over the past six months, but
|
|
also comment on some of the books which have found their way to my
|
|
shelves. Because of this, I will only note a few items at the top of
|
|
the pile, and I will devote the next issue of SGJ to reviews and
|
|
letters.
|
|
Among the zines I've received (in no order whatsoever): BILL
|
|
KNELL'S U.F.O. NEWSLETTER, 164-22 77th Road, Flushing, NY 11365 [can't
|
|
say that I agee with him on everything, but he stirs it up, doesn't
|
|
he?]; MUFON UFO JOURNAL, #304, August 1993 [this issue features the
|
|
Project Argus Report]; THE CROP WATCHER, #16,17, 3 Selbourne Court,
|
|
Tavistock Close, ROMSEY, Hampshire SO51 7TY [as usual, Paul Fuller has
|
|
lots of good stuff, exposing hoaxes, silly cerealogists and the like];
|
|
DELVE REPORT, July 1993, 17 Shetland Street, Willowdale, Ontario,
|
|
Canada M2M 1X5 [Gene Duplantier is the "grand elder" of Canadian
|
|
Forteana, and continues to put out interesting collections of strange
|
|
phenomena]; COLORADO MUFON NEWS, #21, May/June 1993, 1550 Violet,
|
|
Boulder, Colorado 80304 [this issue has a feature story about the mass
|
|
abduction of December 1992 and updates on mutes]; THE CEREALOGIST, #9,
|
|
Summer 1993, 11 Powis Gardens, London W11 1JG [they're still not
|
|
accepting the hoaxes and are relying a lot on Hawkins, Greer, etc., but
|
|
the zine is still interesting to read (thanks, Pam!)]; and who could
|
|
forget SAUCER SMEAR?!
|
|
|
|
WAHF and Misc...
|
|
|
|
Paul Fuller writes that he and his colleagues are looking
|
|
closely at my UGM lists, searching for good examples of pre-Bower
|
|
circles; Dennis Stacy (MUFON) is getting some heat for criticizing some
|
|
"mainstream" UFO and circle experts ... I know how he feels; Lindy
|
|
Tucker sent along some articles from the CPR NEWSLETTER about her
|
|
research into beeping sounds and their relationship with UFOs and crop
|
|
circles; Paul Ferrughelli clarified his method for collecting American
|
|
UFO data and suggested we share data and work as a team in our
|
|
analyses. This would be most interesting, since we could then do an
|
|
analysis of ALL North American cases (well, okay, not including
|
|
Mexico). Sounds good, Paul! Now will somebody explain to me why you
|
|
and I are doing all the work and are never invited to present our stuff
|
|
at UFO conferences?; Gale Research Inc. sent me a press release
|
|
announcing the publication of the Encyclopedia of Hoaxes by Dr. Gordon
|
|
Stein. According to their blurb, Elvis is not alive, there is no King
|
|
Tut's curse, articles in the Washington Post have been fabricated, and
|
|
all crop circles are fakes. Sure, and I suppose there's no Tooth
|
|
Fairy, either, huh?; Brian Savage of AUFOSG wrote to tell me of his
|
|
thoughts on the supersecret CSE, memories of Winnipeg and his discovery
|
|
of a tape from an Alberta TV show about UFOs, circa 1975. Sounds like a
|
|
gem, Brian! (I promise to answer your letter soon!); the Long Island
|
|
UFO Network sent me a copy of their press release in advance of their
|
|
public protest at Suffolk County Police Headquarters in Yaphank, New
|
|
York. The protest is spurred by their investigation of a
|
|
crash/retrieval (or two) in late 1992. Accompanying the release was a
|
|
completely indecipherable photo from a video monitor which was: "A
|
|
computer scan of an area on a video tape which was smuggled out of
|
|
federal government custody by a defense dept systems analyst showing
|
|
the bodies of two dead extraterrestrial beings recovered from an area
|
|
east of William Floyd Parkway where their craft crashed close to
|
|
Brookhaven Laboratories on November 24, 1992." The note describes the
|
|
"massive coverup by federal, state and local authorities" and asks for
|
|
anyone who can shed light on the event to come forward and notify:
|
|
LIUFON, P.O. Box 1692, Riverhead, NY 11901.
|
|
======================================================================
|
|
The Swamp Gas Journal is copyright (c) 1993 by Chris A. Rutkowski.
|
|
Mail correspondence to: Box 1918, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada R3C 3R2
|
|
Email correspondence to: rutkows@ccu.umanitoba.ca
|
|
The Swamp Gas Journal, UFOROM and NAICCR are not affiliated with the
|
|
University of Manitoba, and don't represent its ideas, opinions, etc.
|
|
(Standard disclaimer)
|
|
--
|
|
Chris Rutkowski - rutkows@ccu.umanitoba.ca
|
|
University of Manitoba - Winnipeg, Canada
|
|
|
|
=END=
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
**********************************************
|
|
* THE U.F.O. BBS - http://www.ufobbs.com/ufo *
|
|
********************************************** |