--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Discussions of these issues just distract attention > > from the real questions. The bottom line is that crop > > circles *are* a mystery, one that those who try to > > explain them away cannot bring themselves to confront. > > I am sympathetic to your claim that these have not been > perfectly explained away in every case. And with all the > mysteries in life I am not adverse to adding another to > the pile.
And I don't include you among those who are unwilling to confront the puzzle, nor among those who don't know what they're talking about. But when I spend time reading that site which > you have brought my attention to before I am stuck mostly > by my inability to evaluate some of the claims. Take the > section on plant abnormalities. A picture is offered of > the altered plant and a "control." They look different. > I have know way of knowing if this is significant. They > mention how certain changes in the plants could come from > over fertilization. Then the make a case why this was not > the cause in these plants. But how do I know what > happens if you spray a section of plants with some type > of fertilizer or chemical? Perfectly reasonable questions. And when they sprinkle their > discussion with terms like "formation energies", I feel as > if I am in the midst of believers making their case with a > bunch of science terms that I am not prepared to follow or > have a chance at contextualizing. Actually, I think "formation energies" is the most generic term they could think of to refer to whatever causes the circles and their attendant phenomena. It's not a "believers" term at all but one that tries to avoid *any* suggestions about the cause. A guy with a board constitutes "formation energy" just as much as do alien woo-woo rays. > So I am left with this. I think cleaver people probably did > this. I don't know how and the people on the site don't know > how. > > What is the most compelling aspect that makes you think that > a persuasive case has been made, in terms that you or I have > the background to evaluate, that people couldn't have made > crop circles with a method yet unknown? I don't have any more background to evaluate the kinds of things they're studying than you do. I have to focus on other aspects, such as the credentials of their consultants, the fact that they make no claims as to ultimate causes, and that just on its face, it seems to me vanishingly unlikely that humans could have made so many circles (the ones the BLT folks have studied) by a method that remains not just unknown but unguessed-at despite all the research on these weird effects. This last is perhaps the most compelling for me. The acknowledged crop-circle hoaxsters don't even hint at being able to produce these effects; they boast about being able to create complex patterns using ordinary mechanical means. It's difficult enough for humans to produce these patterns. For them to simultaneously be using some advanced technology to create the effects BLT is studying *just to puzzle a small number of scientists*--rather than to amaze the public and confound the media--is an Occam's razor reject, IMHO. You can make very impressive circles mechanically that serve the latter purposes and, when they're acknowledged as hoaxes, satisfy the vast majority of people that they're all human-made. > And if the elongation of plant nodes are invoked, I need more > context than a two pictures of "different" looking nodes. The site has citations to published articles in peer- reviewed journals; you could look those up and see if they gave you more context. They probably have unpublished material as well that they might be willing to share with you. I'll bet they'd be willing to answer questions as well. I didn't quote this part of their statement of purpose: "Secondly, our intent is to publish these research results in peer-reviewed scientific journals and to disseminate this information to the general public through lectures, mainstream articles and the internet." They have a two-hour slide show available (see the bottom of the home page). They say to contact them about scheduling. I don't know whether that means they send one of their people along with the slides, or how big a group you have to have, but it might be worth inquiring.
