"Besides the fact that there is a human explanation for every single incidence."
How have you come to believe that every single crop circle created is actually a human made formation? I would say that that’s kind of a decisive statement. Personally, my curiosity ensures I don’t come to such a conclusion too quickly. The opposite being true also.
What about looking at the geometry and the manner in which some of these crop circles may have been constructed? Most of the crop circles appear to have curved structures within which their centers of radii exist outside the circles themselves. I find this intriguing, as it places their centers into pristine crop that do not coincide with any foot prints or tram lines.
Most also have been known to appear overnight or within a window of several hours.
In general, their overall placements are usually asymmetrical to any tram lines and have no relationship to them. In my view, this would make some patterns very difficult to construct using a plank and string. In fact, it would be outright impossible to do the huge ones within one night.
The other interesting point is that they appear in numbers and locations where no one stakes claim to them. Some are in hard to reach areas. I know this, because I’ve been to England’s countryside and have seen some of these formations. They are amazing. Like something huge stamped into the hillside.
When people do stake a claim to having formed one, they don’t provide any proof for their claims. That’s disturbing. It says something about our propensity towards deception. Some people have even attempted to construct complex formations, and I applaud them. Apparently, they come out bewildered at the massively complex ones. Some of these people have apparently thrown up their hands and genuinely now think that there’s something odd going on.
Have you seen any of the stalks within any of the crop circles? It is as some have described it to be. That’s fascinating also. The stalks are actually bent! In some cases, they bend sharply at nodes along the stalk. These nodes look like they have been heated quickly and had actually popped open, forcing the stalk to bend in the opposite direction.
How would one explain the burnt nodes? The bent stalks? I can’t. And I’m and engineer. The best I’ve come with is the possibility of exposure to high energy microwaves. That could superheat the air in the nodes and pop them. But then another problem arises. How would one control the microwaves such as to have only one side of an array of stems bend in a predetermined direction, in the same direction?
There’s also the peculiar weave and swirling ‘signatures’ I associate with original formations. In some cases, at the center of a swirl, a handful of stalk remain standing. Unaffected. What would be the purpose of that? Why would anybody care to leave five to ten strand still standing, consistently in various formations?
Those are the kind of questions I ask myself. I’ve asked others, but have taken a lot of time before jumping to any conclusions. And still, the alien hypothesis can’t be discounted. Occam’s razor will not be an excuse for me to turn away from the questions and the details. I really wanted to know what was going on.
I have asked many questions over the years.
One that has nagged me is: Why is it that we “believe” everything has to be proven physically? Where does this belief stem from? A scientific method that predates Newton? What about EPR and Bell’s Theorem? What do they imply about the non-local nature of matter? How is it that this has not caused a tremendous stir in science? Could it be that we simply got things a little backwards and never asked why? Could the Copenhagen interpretation be a misinterpretation? Rather than having the observer be part of the experiment, could the observer’s observation effect the outcome of the experiment? Would that not be psychokinetic? Spookiness’ at a distance? What’s wrong with accepting that?
And so if we need physical proof, then how has it come to be that we do not continue to seek physical proof for phenomenon we can barely measure in the lab? Could it be that we simply do not have the instrumentation that can measure beyond our ‘model’ of matter based on the ‘electron’, at this time? Is not our technology, or specifically, “electronics” our only saving grace? Providing us with a temporary and shaky sense of understanding of structures that are limited only to electro-chemical boundaries? Safely keeping us within Newtonian causality?
Does our need for proof only stem from a safe, but fragile, Victorian air of reality and common sense? Is that all?
"We also find that the very FIRST ever reported was clearly revealed to be a hoax."
Really? How many hundreds of years ago was that?
Certainly, today, many people have shown to be able to construct some reasonably complex circle-based patterns, but I have not seen anyone able to create curvatures and structures with the precision of some of the most complex crop circles while providing reliable proof in the form of un-doctored video tapes from various simultaneous vantage points. Even if one would use military precision GPS equipment, the resolution of the swirls and curves, along with their placement, far exceeds it’s accuracy of a meter.
To date, the most complex formations built still require us to access the farmer’s fields using tram lines. We can create a moderately complex structure out of circles but they have to be multiples or sub-multiples of the distance between tram lines. The standards used in some of the more ‘genuine’ formations appear to be higher than what we can practically implement.
Does this not make you wonder what can really be going on? Should not one be asking such questions in one’s search for scientific answers? I care & I’m fascinated.
"Now honestly, what are the chances of an alien race creating an identical phenomenon to one that had already been created by a bunch of drunken men?"
Perhaps it’s the other way around.
What are the chances a bunch of drunken men would be imitating the original formation makers? Would not those probabilities be higher? Again, Occam’s razor would have you go for the simplest explanation, but at what cost?
As for an alien race, what proof have you that there are no alien races living within, say, 5 lys vicinity, that are more advanced than us? Where is it that one would gain such confidence - in light of our own living, breathing and thinking existence on this planet - that aliens don’t exist, or that they may certainly not be more advanced technologically than us? That perhaps they may have even abandoned the electromagnetic medium for a more practical quantum phenomenon?
Or for that matter, then can you explain why gravity exists? Or how to manipulate it? I certainly can’t. Has someone shown you definitive proof of the fact that aliens may not be visiting this planet? If so, where is it? Even Carl Sagan believed in life existing out there. Unfortunately, I feel he got lost in negativism and believed that the only way to have interplanetary communication would be through the use of EM waves (which may simply be a side product of a deeper non-local process).
And of course, there is the assertion that nothing can travel faster than light. But.. what about Bell’s experiment? The known fact that matter is indeed non-local? Who’s’ asking about those things? Have we explained them away? That’s astonishing! Scientists have literally seen and played with non-local behavior in the lab and no one knows about it’s implications? Where’s the spirit of investigation? What happened to the scientific mind and curiosity?
"Also, if aliens really had a unique, individual interest in our planet for resources or (?breeding?) why would they be so stupid to just land and not do anything else or have people see them?"
Why would any intelligent race want to limit their interests to our fears?
Maybe they truly have come ashore and we just didn’t recognize them or their operations, after all, we don’t even recognize the rights of animals and other living creatures on this planet.
What would be our reaction to seeing them? Would we be able to communicate? What would we use? Words? How would we be able to interface with a race whose minds may have ten times the neural connections our minds have? How would such a race be able to express their ideas without our misunderstanding them? And what happens if they’re just plants? After all, we can’t even understand or communicate effectively with any of the earth’s living creatures without raising their fears. We impose our wills but we are unable to share in their thoughts.
Don’t you use your mind and ask such questions? Why not? Where should you draw the line? Where is it safe and where is it not? Should one only stay within familiar areas? Where does your comfort zone extend to? Why?
"Can’t they just monitor us from earth orbit?"
Yes. But would they necessarily have to achieve orbit if they have mastered gravitation? Think about it.
If thought communications exists deep within matter (not at a chemical level), then they could monitor us without being anywhere near our planet. They would hear our very thoughts. We would likely come across as being thoughtless and crude. Very noisy indeed.
"Actually they can’t be since we don’t pick up their ships on our radar. "
What is radar? Is radar the only means? Besides, radar only works well if you point it in the right direction. And how would we be able to discern between orbital junk and an alien craft? Do you think a people that may have mastered space travel would find it hard to avoid detection from our technology? And if we did spot the location of one of their ships, what would we do with this information? What is our current protocol in such situations? Shoot, then investigate? Keep it a secret? Tell everyone? Would it prove anything? Would our healthy skepticism far exceed our needed curiosity? And why have we learnt to be so skeptical in the first place? Could it be a result of the human condition? Greed? Lack of honesty? Lack of truth?
"And if you say they are invisible, psychic, remotely viewing us, or using spiritual methods to prevent evidence from being collected, .."
That was a reasonable observation of the few words I typed up. I didn’t quite say that they would be using their PSI abilities to prevent evidence from being collected. They may simply be providing evidence to us, but not in the form we would like it to be. They may simply want us to pursue the evidence, presented in a format we are not familiar with, simply to move us toward to possibility that new formats are real and they do exist. And that may simply be for the purpose of teaching us or preparing us to communicate with them by other means. Means that do not require proof like we are used to, means that may require experiential learning.
What I am saying is that if an advanced race is in fact interacting with us, the communication barrier would be great because of our limited understanding of matter, how our minds are wired up and our poor track record of effective communication. (Recall the animals of the earth & the disruptive military approach between nations.)
The only way “they” would be able to prove anything for us is if we find it out for ourselves. In other words, we have to get to the point where we can "see" them first before they can effectively communicate back to us. Everything else would likely fail, as it probably has over the last ten thousand years (since the last ice age).
".. are making things up to try to give a basis for a totally groundless debate."
If it’s groundless, then I guess I would have a complete understanding of matter and of the mysteries in life. Such a life would be very simple and somewhat unchallenging.
Differing opinions are the spice of life and the spark of creativity.
Personally I think we are being challenged to think beyond the boundaries set by our scientists. That we have to. How else would we advance further? And we have to use our minds to explore physics beyond our use of limited instrumentation. Maybe we should use our minds' ability to “see”, to "view" structures within matter, instead of using recreational drugs and loosing our minds.
Maybe everything is physical, even the “metaphysics” we can’t touch or measure.
Maybe our minds are a quantum machine.
As for making things up - I think it’s called using my mind the best I can. And if thinking is unreal, what would then be the point of it?
Most importantly, though, wouldn’t one have to retain a sense of humor? Perhaps that’s what the circle makers want us to learn first when looking at their circles, be they human or truly alien in origin.
Gotta put on a 3-eyed smileyface.. and think purple for goodness sakes!
- sunbinder –