Crop Circles

Ok, but until you show me that personal reason, can anything really be said?

Think about it. "Well it's personal raesons", what reasons would they be? "I don't know, I just know they are personal raesons".

I don't call that hard evidence. I call that asserations based on common skepticism. You tell me I need proof, well then I say you need proof of their reasons.

Show me proof of their reasons and I will show you apsolute proof of an ET's visit here.

Can't? Of course you can't, nor can I. If individuals choices are not up to you to explain, why should I explain an ET's motivation for making a crop circle?

As for the probability, I'm not exactly a scientists so you have me there. But with the life giving properies of our Earth, and how it came to be (asteroids hitting the earth, vabor creaing organisms), these asteroids and a proper planet to give this kind of life isn't something rare to come by Oli.

I may not have a true probability, but it's a wild assumption that there's only ONE set of these kind of life giving properties. The Earth didn't just come to be on it's own.
 
You tell me I need proof, well then I say you need proof of their reasons.
Click to expand...
Then interview them. ALL of them, including the dead ones. I was pointing out that you can't ascribe motive to individuals that you don't know. As I said, I can't even understand why someone would waste time watching football...
why should I explain an ET's motivation for making a crop circle?
Click to expand...
But you cannot pove that ETs exist or that if they did that they created crop circles - that's worse than me assigning "reasons" for humans making crop circles it's pure speculation. But at least we know for certain that humans do irrational things for their own amusement or whatever other reason they want. You're arguing backwards from "I don't believe all crop circles were created by humans" to "therefore someone else must have" to "therefore there are ETs that visit us".
Simply put:
fact: humans do weird things for one reason or another
fact: humans have proved that one of the weird things they do is make crop circles
speculation: aliens exist
speculation aliens (that speculatively exist) make crop circles
The Earth didn't just come to be on it's own.
Click to expand...
Correct and how it came to be is largely known. But:
it's a wild assumption that there's only ONE set of these kind of life giving properties
Click to expand...
and it's an equally wild assumption to say (without hard evidence) that there's other sets. We can, and do, speculate, but we have NO evidence whatsoever that there are intelligent ETs.
 
Indeed, speculation.... but I do not however deny the logic behind them. Though there is no proof, I do not ignore the logic behind those speculations, and logic is important.

So I suppose it ends with this Oli.

But, I do not, however change my view on Crop Circles, I do happen to think that some are real, and some are fake, though no hard evidence, the logic behind it seems clear enough.

Though not proven, I still stick to that logic. But my question to you is this... what are your thoughts Oli? Do you believe that there is NO such thing as an ET, or do you believen it, even if the evidence is not shown but on the basis of the logic itself, as well as crop circles.

I was argueing with you before, on the grounds that I thought that you thought all crop circles were fake. If I am incorrect about that then I apologize for debating with for no reason at all.

I agree, I don't doubt I have no hard evidence or proof, though I don't doubt the logic.
 
Last edited:
Hmmm.
Okay. I believe most crop circles are fake, I vaguely remember reading about microburst weather patterns or something. I am utterly convinced that NONE are made by aliens because there is no evidence for aliens of any sort, let alone ones who come here merely to cause farmers grief.
The bit that I have "problems" with is
I do happen to think that some are real, and some are fake, though no hard evidence, the logic behind it seems clear enough
Click to expand...
Yup, the logic is clear enough, but the premise behind that logic is flawed...
And don't apologise, a good argument/ debate can be fun and if nothing else improve skills and neither of us (well I know you haven't and I hope I haven't either) have descended to the level that some posters here achieve (names withheld :D ) In fact I recently took a new look at a previous "opponent" and he's stepped up a notch or two in my estimation for one of his remarks - I think it takes a while to see the other party as rounded human rather than a point of view (or is that just me?)
 
I agree, all logic is flawed in one form or another, yours and mine when it comes to these... we've both have that wall that we have not overcome. That one wall that stops logic from breaking thru. something not completely proven. Our logic in a sense on both sides of the arguement have a flaw... and that would be due to an axom that hasn't been uncovered yet, that axom being quantity of crop circles, and the mystery behind the developement.

And I have heard of these microstorms before, though they've happend to crop circles before in the field and nothing else effected, a good quantity, which also leaves a variable I can't deny. That's one thing I also consider, I don't doubt the microstorms either, but I also don't doubt that some are an eventuality of an unknown cause... whatever that cause may be. I am convinced that there are some real.

I have given this some thought of why such a circle would be made... maybe a landing pad or something for the ET to remember where that spot is for whatever reason... still searching for a rational explanation. Maybe it's doing it out if it's own amusement.

I can't be sure.

I suppose you and I have come to some agreement... in our own way. Or maybe agree to disagree.

Or the agression has left.

"And don't apologise, a good argument/ debate can be fun and if nothing else improve skills and neither of us (well I know you haven't and I hope I haven't either) have descended to the level that some posters here achieve (names withheld ) In fact I recently took a new look at a previous "opponent" and he's stepped up a notch or two in my estimation for one of his remarks - I think it takes a while to see the other party as rounded human rather than a point of view (or is that just me?)"

As for debates, sorry, but I don't enjoy them becuz I am always afraid they lead to agression, I don't like rocking the boat, as one would say.... but... if I have to then do.

As for what you said after that, I can confused... what were you saying? :confused:
 
I have a real ligitimate question to ask:

Can testimonies regarding UFO activity by highly credible people be considered evidence?

And also, what about mass UFO sightings -- sightings in which MANY, even thousands of individuals see something in the sky nobody can reasonably explain. Can that be considered evidence?
 
You bring up a good point...

becuz... what is evidence but an ascertation on an observation considered credible enough.

Where does one draw the line between, assumption, and proof?

I myself happen to think that quantity is proof, but... technically I cannot use that as proof. Proof is by definition, something you aspolutely KNOW is true.

Logically speaking that is credible, because of the quantity of it sighting around the world... but, technically, it cannot by standards of proof be considered proof because we don't know who these people are and cannot know their motives.

The only real thing we can do is use probability and logic on these sightings. I myself am a believer though, I can agree on somethings quantity and logic and believen it.
 
Can testimonies regarding UFO activity by highly credible people be considered evidence?
Click to expand...
Define "credible" - we've already been through the (non) reliability of pilots, trained observers etc.
If it's eye-witness testimony only then no, it can't be treated as hard evidence. Eye witness accounts need corroboration and other eye witnesses aren't it.

Regulus
As for debates, sorry, but I don't enjoy them becuz I am always afraid they lead to agression, I don't like rocking the boat, as one would say.... but... if I have to then do.
Click to expand...
Aggression on the net is not permanently damaging :D Go ahead, rock the boat - lots here do, persistently and violently. It's half the fun.
As for what you said after that, I can confused... what were you saying?
Click to expand...
Check your PMs.
 
Oli no, what are you doing lol?! *The boat tips over*

Great, now we're in the water. Heh, actually, that describes it quite well. As it's not damaging, we can always climb back onto the boat.

So... where does this leave my topic? To the dust?

What else is there to descuss? We've pretty much descussed it out Oli. The topic is dried out.
 
The topic is dried out.
Click to expand...
Only this time round. We've had crop circles before, and no doubt they'll come back. (Topic that is).
If you're seriously stumped on this then pick something else and start rocking :D
 
HA HA HA!

I know a topic that would... but I am afraid I'll be eaten alive lol. It's in my head, but releasing it would probably have people tearing me apart.
 
but releasing it would probably have people tearing me apart.
Click to expand...
You think so? I'm still formulating my "cats and quantum theory" post...
 
well, it has something to do with Religion, primarily Christianity, and a fundemental flaw in the belief system.

Can you perhaps tell me where your topic is if you have made it. Though I am not good at quantum physics, though I contemplate such things as time and Universal causality, I might be of some help to you Oli.
 
Regulus said:
So all crop circles, even 1000's of years ago were being faked.
Click to expand...

They didn't need to be faked 1000 years ago, imagine all you would need is an old burrow thats ploughed over or an old structure that had long since been brought down to ruins.

Due to those sorts of things being under the soil it would cause poor irrigation and would be seen to be created. What I thinks funny though is that people will declare there is more evidence of crop circles 1000 years ago in comparison to literature, makes you wonder who was actually keeping records and why a crop circle ranks higher than the history of the day.
 
Truthfully you can't even prove history unless you live it. As the old saying goes "what is history but a fable agreed upon"?

But anyway,

There's still the motive variable your missing Stryder.

And I suppose I am wrong to say that all aren't fake indefinately, becuz your right, there is no definite proof.

I apologize for that, but.... what I will say is I don't agree on the fact that all crop circles should be fake, because of the variables still present. No proof, but still variables present.
 
Stryder said:
They didn't need to be faked 1000 years ago, imagine all you would need is an old burrow thats ploughed over or an old structure that had long since been brought down to ruins.

Due to those sorts of things being under the soil it would cause poor irrigation and would be seen to be created. What I thinks funny though is that people will declare there is more evidence of crop circles 1000 years ago in comparison to literature, makes you wonder who was actually keeping records and why a crop circle ranks higher than the history of the day.
Click to expand...

Yup. Ever see that documentary "Digging from the Air'? A team of archaeologists used aerial photography to look for shapes in crops. Just like you said, some crops grow less well where they are over walls, etc, and grow shorter, whereas some grow better over disturbed earth, where channels had been cut to divert water etc. This type of research yielded very positive results, and artefacts were found where such disturbances in crops were seen.

Of course, one of the more popular styles of ancient building was the 'Round House' so older disturbances in crops due to earthwork will be round.
 
ooops forgot this part.

(Quote)
Show me proof of their reasons and I will show you apsolute proof of an ET's visit here.

Can't? Of course you can't, nor can I. If individuals choices are not up to you to explain, why should I explain an ET's motivation for making a crop circle? (Unquote)


The following can be readily deduced by normal human logic. Huminoids would of course have a problem with this.

1. It is being comunicated to someone over head. (Duh?)
2. The applied known technologies being used to produce the "real" ones, we don't have.
3. Obviously it is an attempt in a form of signal to comunicate something.
4. The technology is present to do this, but not to comunicate in forms such as we do.
5. Beyond any doubt, the makers do not want to be discovered by humans.
6. Aparently the messages are being "ignored" by those above ment to see them.

Just a few thoughts.
 
1. It is being comunicated to someone over head. (Duh?)
Click to expand...
Okay, let's grant for the sake of argument, this is true :D
2. The applied known technologies being used to produce the "real" ones, we don't have.
Click to expand...
Define a "real one", presumably you mean one not admitted or proven to be a hoax? PS the term "applied technologies" is a tautology - technology is applied science, therefore if it's a technology it's, by definition, applied. And why use the word "known"? If they're using it then it's obviously known and since you said we don't have it then it's not known to us...
3. Obviously it is an attempt in a form of signal to comunicate something.
Click to expand...
Or it could be the equivalent of graffiti... or caused by a backfire from a faulty drive system, or a concomitant of the propulsion method. Or anything else.
4. The technology is present to do this, but not to comunicate in forms such as we do.
Click to expand...
Why "obviously"? If they're made by aliens then there's nothing obvious about it? You can't impute human logic to aliens.
5. Beyond any doubt, the makers do not want to be discovered by humans.
Click to expand...
Which is why they stick indications of their existence in random cornfields - so we won't see or suspect them.
6. Aparently the messages are being "ignored" by those above ment to see them.
Click to expand...
Why is this apparent? If you get a letter is the fact that it still exists at a later date proof you've ignored it?
Whatever logic you operate on isn't normal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top