Crop Circles discussion

Posted: 12, May 2011 in Uncategorized

legitimate formation

http://unitedcats.wordpress.com/2010/07/22/crop-circles-what-would-a-ufo-week-be-without-crop-circles/#comment-32586

The above link is to an discussion I’m having with Doug’s Darkworld, over the nature of Crop Circles.
This may have the sane futility factor as a discussion about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

But such as it is, the discussion on Crop Formations needs to take place, now, more than ever, in my opinion.

This was the shot that sparked a very heated debate over there:

[cite]The designs all seem to quite clearly come from human cultural references, sometimes subtle mathematical ones, but there’s yet to be a crop circle that screamed, or even whispered, that it was conceived by a non-human mind. why do none of them contain imagery, symbols, or mathematics of non-human origin? [/cite]
A convincing arguement is made for the fact that all mathematics, geography, art, written language, agriculture, architecture, essentially all culture, is of “non-human origins.” We’re told, in the Vedas, Talmud, Popul Vuh, Gnosticism, even the one-and-only Holy Bible, that these things descended to us from the god(s). In Egyptian lore, Thoth was the bearer of math, building, geography: all things we now take for granted.
Not to put words in your mouth, but it seems that you are saying that simply because you recognize the symbols elements, that they are of human origin. Your argument looks through the wrong end of the telescope. You, yourself, may be so intimate with mathmatical theorems that it’s second nature for you, but this hasn’t always been the case for humanity, and isn’t even the case for much of the world now. Breathing, taking a crap, fornicating, killing and eating may all very well be of human origin, but complex math like geometry, and trigonometry isn’t. These are “alien concepts” that our human brain needed to be trained to understand, let alone master–as some of these formations clearly demonstrate.
I dispute this premise of “non-human origin” as the litmus test, the so called “smoking gun,” of their authenticity. I don’t see why that’s such an issue. There’s plenty of things in our world clearly of human origin that are no less baffeling to us; things obviously man-made, but no less alien. The carbeurator of the internal combustion engine, for example. Let’s say there was a perfect rendering of said carb: would one still be able to decypher the meaning? Look at Stonehenge, the pyramids at Giza, the earthen lines in the Nazca plains of Peru, cave drawings. Manmade, sure, but what is their meaning?
Seeing these symbols only on some superficial level of the shapes being the totality of the meaning, is an untenable view. Sure there exists circles, squares, triangles, straight and crooked lines. I’ll concede that they’re recognizable shapes to humans, but that doesn’t make them necessarily “of human origin.” Those shapes are simply the building blocks. It’s the way the whole image is constructed; the nature of multiple similar, and dissimilar, shapes which are compounded to create new, and foreign designs. Let’s just say, for the sake of this discussion, that the following shapes are of human origin: a vesica pisces, a turnbuckle, rings, straight lines. These are, essentially, the individual elements comprising the so-called Dolphinograms (“http://www.cropcircleship.com/wiki/Image:Hy24.gif”). Even if I’m accepting that the individual elements are man-made, the completed formation is still unusual, and “alien.”
Let’s say, again for the sake of this discussion, that ALL of these symbols are of human origin. So what? If we accept that these formations, the real non-hoaxed ones, are meant as a form of communication, does it make any sense for the communicators to present their message in some alien language? If you’re trying to communicate with someone, it’s obvious that there needs to be a commonality of understanding. Symbols and mathematics satisfy that requirement.
I maintain that the overwhelming majority of Crop Formations, historically, have not been created by human hands, or human deeds, since first reported in the 1700′s; but if they are “human” made, these formations are no less alien and mysterious to us. They resonate on some subliminal level that our modern “scientific” endoctrination has suppressed. I would make a good case that symbols themselves are alien to our present-day Culture of Twitter. If it’s not spelled-out in 140 characters or less, we can’t be bothered to figure it out.

[cite]…if the Earth itself were conscious and capable of communicating, one would think it would have multiple unmistakable avenues of communication …[/cite]
Who are the aliens? If I’m saying that the majority are not hoaxes, if not done by humans, then who/what is doing them? Like it or not, this is where the discussion starts getting metaphysical. Basically, they are a manifestation projected from a different dimension(s). For the sake of this discussion, simply assume that they’re 4-D beings. That’s probably easier to digest than if they were 11th-D individuals. What one needs to understand is that there are all sorts of “angels,” spirits, and etheric beings of other dimensions, or density levels. There are, in fact a small number of alien beings residing on Earth. There really is an amazing cross sections of “people” living on this planet. Here we would have to be very generous in our description of refering to some beings as “human”, or as “people”. All these beings have free will because they get to chose. Some chose to enslave others. Some chose to help others.
Thinking of this in terms of mind, we ask what is consciousness? Our consciousness exists while we’re sleeping. During this time, our consciousness leaves our bodies, and enters a dimension other than the 3-D world. It is spirit at that point. It’s still us, as a human, it’s attached to our body, or a part of it is anyway. So, once that consciousness leaves our body, it goes 4th, 5th, 6th -D, whatever. So from that state, given the proper tool, a human consciousness could create those shapes.
In our 5-senses-limited-3-Dimensional world, we can see an actual example of 2-D being: a flatfish, so-called fluke. It’s flat and circular, like a pancake with fins. Both eyes are on one side of its body. Within its world, anything to the side of it doesn’t exist. It couldn’t see me crouched down below its horizon of sight, therefore I wouldn’t exist. It’s also a thinking, feeling being, so it would sense that I was there. It’s more primative than the simplest 3-D human, but yet that fish would grasp the meaning of those formations directly relating to, say for example, water. So, if you can imagine a being, call it human or not, but of 4 dimensions, you’de never really see him/her/it, except for the tinyest of cross sections, a plane, which resides in our common time-space.
Terrence McKenna posits that our soul is foreign to us. Science, scientists, religion, materialism have caused us to become alienated from our true selves. So in essence, that which we can’t see, hear, touch, taste, or feel with our hands is unknown, and therefore alien. If we only use 10% of our brains, at best, what is happening in the other 90%? Let’s be real: how much brain power is being used during World of Warcraft, or any video game, for that matter? So, if only 2% of our mind is being used, that equals 98% of our own head being alien to us.
Perhaps the crop formations are meant as a way to help us, by getting us to think about “primative” symbols, motifs, projections which conjur something familiar, yes. Something primal, yes. Something understood, or overstood? Well, maybe not. Hopefully, by looking at the shape, it brings forth something resonent in your mind, and spirit.
Nature is so alien to homo saps, that if these were done by the Earth Herself, it would be as if created by some kinda extra-terrestrial. Somewhere in here, natural processes are used–behold, alien technology. Essentially, Christianity as a religion, killed nature and religions based on it. So we’re at the point of calling witches anyone who understands nature, and natural processes. The symbols, motiffs, formations aren’t just familiar to mind, they’re organic to it.

[cite]…but there’s yet to be a crop circle that screamed, or even whispered, that it was conceived by a non-human mind. [/cite]
You look in the wrong place for evidence of “alien” creation in these things. The evidence lay not in the symbols them selves, which are universal, but in the way they are created. Actual witnesses, those who study these formations can tell you there is a noticable difference between the human made ones, and those produced by the balls of light which are consistently reported in association with the formations.
One of the biggest differences comes from how the stalks are laid down. In the human-made ones, the stalks are broken, not bent. There is no pattern to the lain stalks; it rather looks a mess, a hodge-podge of stalks. With the light ball produced ones, not only is there descernable patterns, but they actually layered in such an organized pattern, representing a wide variety of “strokes” used to create a number of different textures, and directions within the fallen grains–much like one would use a paint brush to create texture and “shading” on a flat canvas. The most amazing of these textures are the ones where the stalks are bent 8, or 9 inches above the ground. To date, no human being has been able to reproduce that particular “pattern.” In the human produced ones, the stalks are ameteurishly broken, more often destroyed. Whereas, in the light-ball produced ones, the plants are not only still living, but actually do better on account of the treatment..
There’s also the fact that in the light-ball produced ones, there’s the presence of a black, charred substanced which, under chemical analysis is determined to be amorphous iron. The human prodeced ones can’t reproduce that. Within the stalks themselves, tiny holes appear in the bent area, where steam vapour is released. They know it’s steam because that particular area shows a lower content of water. Additionally, eyewitnesses report clouds of steam that accompany the production of the formations. Humans can’t/don’t create that when they hoax these things.
There’s also the fact that crossing over the boundry of a real crop formation will play havoc on electronics. Consistently, people report their cameras, phones, other electronic recording devices start to malfunction once the threshold of the Formation is crossed. People have regularly reported their devices failing, and internal components “frying.” Alkaline batteries regularly stop working. Eyewitnesses have reported odd time shifts: losing time, watches not working, or stopping altogether. Man-made formations don’t produce any of the above.
When crossing the boundry of the light ball produced formations, people have reported unusual and disorienting effects in their body: nausea, headaches, anxiety, other body reaction. Hoaxed circles don’t produce physiological effects, or none that anyone’s reported.
Immediately preceding the light ball produced formations sounds are heard, such as a crackling, humming, and/or a trilling sound. Eyewitness’ exposed to this sound claim it’s unique to the formations. No sounds of that calibre are reported accompanying human-produced formations.
Do we need to talk about the presence of footprints leading too-and-fro and/or within the formations themselves?
The hoaxers would have us focus on the superficiality of the designs themselves, as if that shallow element is the most paramount. Yet even by that standard, the hoaxed ones are visually inferior to the light-ball produced designs. Within the light-ball produced ones, there is a precision, and skill missing in the human produced ones. This may be their most obvious, therefore most notable feature in decyphering hoax. When plotted on “the grid” they are mathematically/physically perfect, or as near-perfect as produced by any machine. The points match-up. The geometry is spot on. New things are actually revealed in their precision. The hoaxes are obvious from this standard.

You said: [cite] taking great pains to avoid using ANYTHING unfamiliar to humans. [/cite]
If I assume for the sake of this conversation that mankind invented mathematics with no help from “the gods,” what of the crop formations? Is it true that NONE of these are alien to mankind?
Let’s look at the so-called “Julia Set” of 1996 (“http://cropcircleconnector.com/Sorensen/classics/classics.html”); on Salisbury Hill, just a stone’s throw from Stonehenge. The Julia Set is one of the fractal designs. Fractals exist in nature in the form of trees, leaves, coastal shorelines, rivers, etc. It’s an uphill battle to consider a fractal to be of human origin. Even though we can represent these forms with the assistence of a powerful computer, certainly that hasn’t always been the case.
On a different note, bystanders at the time this was made claim that the ’96 Julia Set appeared within a 15-30 minute window; yet researchers surveying the site took about 5 hours to survey, measure, and to do all the stuff that they do.
It is true that these symbols are familiar to us, from our modern perspective. Our society does suffer from an information overload.
[cite]“Many agriglyph formations simultaneously represent perfect aspects of many disciplines, such as the “Julia Set” formation in a field opposite Stonehenge in England. To mathematicians, it is an exact reproduction of the computer-generated fractal “Julia Set” image. To a musician, it is a base [sic] clef. To a marine biologist, it’s an accurate cross-section of a nautillus. To the scientist, it constitutes a mammal with precisely the correct number of vertebrae. Other crop patterns reflect with equal precision the traditional, spiritual symbols of many Earth cultures (http://www.experiencefestival.com/wp/article/crop-circles-natural-portals-to-freedom.)” [/cite]
Also, the 1991 “Mandelbrot Set” in Cambridgeshire (“http://www.greatdreams.com/crop/mndlbrt/mandlbrt.htm”), another Crop Formation fractal, is notable in its mathematical perfection.
I would submit, that to our so-called scientifically advanced society, a simple circle can be baffeling. In Western society, a circle might be considered a simple thing, easily revealing its secrets. From our so-called advanced perspective, we might even think the lowly, primative circle has no secrets to offer. But is that so? To Euclid, the numerical value of pi was mystery. Figuring the area of circles was a mystery. These days computers can figure pi to thousands of places; our hand-held calculators can instantly figure the area of a circle. Does that mean that this “man-made” symbol has no secrets to divulge; that it isn’t indeed baffeling? I mean, think of it, what if it were a game: If you had the tool of pi, how would you play with those circles, rings, and curves?
In Eastern societies, a simple circle is a different matter. It has the value of The Void. It also means completion: wholeness, inclusion, even healing in certain circles. It’s the beginning and end, at the same time. By extension, that simple circle symbol mayhaps be of human origins, but is equally no less baffeling to Western “ruler straight” logical thinking. In addition, there are a growing number of symbols relating to Eastern religion, philosophy, an/or metaphysics.
There’s the 1996 Ecthilhampton work, which is quite amazing in its scope, “a chain of circles and pathways approximately 4100 feet long crossed from one end of a field to another” (http://easyweb.easynet.co.uk/~mark.haywood/html/etchilhampton-1996.html.) What makes this more interesting is the glyph on the top, resembling the solar plexus chakra. The symbol may appear also as a horse with its tail up, in this case signifying the Egyptian sphinx.
Are the hoaxers that familiar with the totality of man’s symbolic history, whereby they’re able to accurately represent these forgotten languages, Eastern esoteric symbols, heiroglyphics, Mayan symbolism, cave drawings, and other arcane pictoglyphs? To believe that body of 5, no less 8, people are that knowledgable and capable of that degree of precision, to me, requires a monumental effort of faith.

You said: [cite]“…it wouldn’t be too hard to express a mathematical law or geometric theorem in a crop circle that humans had never seen before. And so far, if aliens are making crop circles, they have been using only mathematics and geometry that humans are already familiar with….Or going at this from another direction, it’s been pointed out that a lot of crop circles clearly illustrate classic geometric theorems. Well, new geometric theorems are still being discovered, I mean, new things in mathematics are discovered all the time, it’s hardly a static science.”[/cite]
These just aren’t true. What new mathematic theorem was created last year? What new geometrical theorum has been discovered, or invented the year before? Or the one before that? In the last 30 years, what new geometrical theorems have you come up with, for that matter? In point of fact, new mathematical formulas are NOT being introduced all the time– certainly not new geometric formulas. Let’s take Euclid, from 300BC, as an example. In his treatise, Elements, which details his theorems, postulates, he details a number of theorems.
However, there are still some missing. According to Gerald Hawkins:
[cite]“…[these theorems] are not in Euclid’s books. I think he missed them, and I can show you a point in his long treatise where they should be–in Book 13, after proposition 12. There he had a complicated triangle-circle theorem, and these would naturally follow. One reason he missed them was he didn’t know the value of pi, and probably was not comfortable with the area of circles. Another reason why he missed them was that we are pretty sure that he didn’t know the full set of perfect diatonic ratios in 300BC” (Hawkins 1991).[/cite]
[cite] In response, the ever-skeptical scientific community would claim that these missing theorems could be proved by bright, young high school students. “Proving a theorem is one thing, especially after you’ve been told, but creating one is altogether a much harder proposition.” (Hawkins 1991).[/cite]
In the course of analyzing the other symbols, almost by accident, he discovers a fifth, more generalized theorem from which all the others were derived.
[cite] “To demonstrate how hard it is to conceive of a mathematical theorem, in 1992 Hawkins dangled this brain-numbing puzzle in front of the 267,000 worldwide readers of Science News. The idea was to challenge scientists and mathematicians to create, given the other four, this fifth theorem. None figured it out. A further challenge to readers of Mathematics Teacher proved equally as fruitless. Then, in 1995, a version of the theorem appeared, encoded into the Litchfield ‘Torc’ crop circle” (Secrets In The Field, Silva 2002).[/cite]

You said: [cite]” …If that is the case, then if the patterns were being created by a non-human mind, we would expect to see at least SOME elements, motifs, symbols, patterns, and yes, mathematics, that humans had never seen before. …And a lot of people have studied them, no one has discerned any message yet that I am aware of.” [/cite]
There’s a difference between seeing something, and creating something. It’s one thing to see a bird in flight, knowing it is heavier-than-air movement, and a whole other order of operations to invent a means of actually realizing that vision. This reminds me of persons who upon hearing an amazing story, second-hand, subsequently forget where they heard it, yet liking it so much they adopt it as their own.
If I accept your first statement as true, then it summarily needs to be recognized that some of these symbols, motifs, patterns haven’t been used, seen, or even recognized by humans for quite a number of years, perhaps hundreds of them. Notable examples are the so-called Mayan Glyphs. One such example is the July 1996 “Hunab Ku,” in Wiltshire, UK (http://www.diagnosis2012.co.uk/new6.htm). Certainly, any 10-year old may recognize the crescent, the spiral, and firey ring which comprise the symbol. That said, however, I couldn’t imagine the last, or first, time that you’ve ever used that symbol. I couldn’t tell you the first time I’ve seen that symbol as, say, I’m walking down the street.
The 2001 Chilbolton Pictoglyph–the reply to the 1974 message sent by NASA from the Aricebo telescope (http://www.alien-ufos.com/religion-spirituality-ufos-aliens-religion/12890-mayan-calender-crop-circles-proof-no-hoax.html). This formation is notable in the fact that it occured in a field quite near a secure facility. This reply has been studied, and figured-out to some extent.
We can also look at the 02 August1991 “Milk Hill script” (“http://www.dcca.nl/art/milkhill-uk.htm”). At first, this was brushed-off as an obvious hoax. But on second glance, it was a message. If it was a hoax, shouldn’t it be easy to decipher? Gerald Hawkins thought so, but eventually had to assemble a team of 12 scholars to decipher it. 18,000 common phrases, and 42 languages later, they arrived at an acceptable solution. Hawkins and his team finally figured the message was using post-Augustan Latin. Not only that, but 6 of the 7 letters for the script were traced to an obscure Knights Templar-based alphabet. So far, no hoaxers have come forth to take claim for this deceptively simple looking formation.
These symbols, among many others, have been studied by experts, and perhaps some not-so-experts. It’s a fallacy to claim that NOONE has been able to decypher ANY formation. Certainly, you have the choice to disagree with their findings, but that doesn’t mean that others haven’t deduced some meaning from them.
More importantly however, is reading between the lines of what you’re actually saying. You say that none of these symbols have been created outside of man’s invention, but yet noone’s been able to decypher any meaning. Well, which is it? If they’re of human origin, surely we can easily decyper meaning of most, if not all of them, right? Yet they do seem to elude our understanding. The fact of the matter is that a number of formations do show us things we’ve never thought of before, or which show new dimensions on things seemingly fully understood previously.

You said: [cite]“The whole crop circle thing has actually turned into an industry, albeit a small one. Farmers make good money charging people to look at crop circles on their land, $10 a head in some cases. And they have every right to, crops circles are vandalism and the crops in the circle are basically ruined, not to mention more get ruined when people flock to see them. So they have to recoup their losses. “[/cite]
A few words on capitalism. I’m of the same mindset as you, I think, in relation to the capitalist taint on crop formations. It makes me a little squimish to see all the attempts to market them. But to me, this just seems to be the human thing to do, the human way to assimilate some pretty intense information. In the same respect that people turned the words of Jesus into a religion and subsequent business. The same might be said for the crop formations. I heard this expression: Jesus would be saddened and dissappointed by the religion that bears his name.
People are hoaxing and staging these formations for monetary gain. There is big business in dubunking these phenomena. That money is mostly coming from the U.S., British, and German governments to try and prove they’re hoaxes.
What is the bottom line here, in this alleged monetary equation? To me, quite simply that bottom line is that skepticism goes both ways. Logic, as with science is a double-edged sowrd. Show me the proof. If these things are faked, and hoaxed, then where are all the people doing them? If there’s so many more now, of, as you point-out increasing complexity, then where are all the hoaxers and their testimony? How come there’s not page after page of documents flooding forth to prove they’re all hoaxed, and staged as in the 1994 Halkpen Hill Formation staged by Tean Satan at the behest of Arthur C. Clark. Upon observation, when plotted to “the grid”, the missed points, the botched geometry. In all fairness, nine-fold geometry is kinda tough–that’s whey it’s historically been reserved for royalty, and “the gods.”
Show me the proof. Show me the money. Let me see logs, journals, gps readings, longitude/latitude points, sketches, diagrams, anything from the hoaxers shoing intent. As these designs get more complex, it requires greater efficiency, great coordination amongst a great number of individuals. Remember, they’re trying not to be seen, detected, etc., so this requires an even greater attention to detain, greater planning leading up to the blessed event. Because it’s an increased amount of people who are supposed to be executing this over a relatively short period of time, with the hopes of remaining undetected, then greater planning is required. If you’re trying to convince me that any group, big or small, would undertake a task such as some of these 900+ ft. formations one just a simple whim, or the figure-it-out-as-we-go, seat-of-your-pants kinda thing, you really are crazy.
Simply put: where is the documention from your eyewitnesses, the creators themselves? Certainly there must be dozens of people involved in the making of some 10,000 formations worldwide. With added complexity, you’re going to have to have a bigger work crew to get it done in a reasonable time, especially so as not to be detected. Look at some of the formations with 208 elements/circles. How long would it take you to do that–supposedly in the dark, nonetheless. Certainly, there must be a large number of people making these formations.
Well, no, there isn’t. If you search for the testimony of circle hoaxers, you’re going to find about 5 people now making them, not counting the production teams who go out there to offer assistence. While there may be more people creating formations, one doesn’t hear anything significant from them. It all seems to boil down to a selective few as the hoaxers, most notably is Team Satan, (now wanting to be known as the circlemakers,). Team Satan/the circlemakers (names Rod Dickinson, John Lundberg, Will Russell), in addition to other hoaxers: Robert Irving and Jim Schnabel (occasional collaborators with Team Satan) are the ones that get called when individuals, businesses, media want to stage a hoaxing. In 2010, A production company, Zig-Zag Productions was contracted by NatGeo to essentially stage a hoax, who contacted Team Satan. In THE ANATOMY OF DECEPTION (http://www.cropcirclesecrets.org/circlemakers.html), it details paid hoaxes by The Daily Mail (UK), BBC, and other organizations.
You said: [cite]” In any event, so much money is involved in crop circles now, that I noticed most crop circle images are copyrighted.” [/cite]
Ah yes, the necessity for protecting one’s self legally. Well, it is my understanding that laws and the legal system came to us, lowered from “the gods.” In which case, not really their best legacy to mankind.
If the seekers of truth are selling their photos, I have no problems with that. If the picture was taken by someone who actually went there to view, and photograph first hand, and document the formation, then good for him/her. They deserve to EARN back some of their expenses to go over to Milk Hill, or Wiltshire, or Etchilhampton, and all the elsewheres that legitimate formations take place. These people who travel, usually at their own expense, go there to collect data, take measurements, analyze soil, photograph, do electromagnetic analysis, and perform all the other documentation that we can now read, and review.
So, yes, why shouldn’t they protect what is theirs, that they produced by their own work? Would you want someone stealing your work, especially if it’s for the purpose of discrediting them as legitimate, does that make any sense at all?
You said: [cite]” The aliens are trying to teach us about capitalism?”[/cite]
Indeed there is quite a business involved in these crop formations–in debunking them. Even at a staggering 10 quid per head, the farmers aren’t getting rich off these formations. You know the tax man is swinging by shortly thereafter to collect his share. The people getting the money are the ones getting paid to hoax them. You’d be wrong to think that governments aren’t spending quite a bit of money on their disinformation campaigns. It is, to me, obvious why they have an interest in “proving” them as hoaxes. Because, if these are seen as genuine, then that means that the security forces who believe they own the air would be afraid that that would give the perception that they aren’t in control of the air. That’s one of the reasons why the other ufo phenomena is propagandized as being a hoax.
I suspect that the true teacher of Capitalism in relation to crop formations is none other than our government, the ones who created capitalism in the first place.

You said: [cite] “…but people have shown time and again that the most complicated crop circles can be made by small numbers of people with the simplest of tools and a basic understanding of geometry. It’s not rocket science, and as far as I can tell from my readings, there’s nothing here that particularly needs explaining.”[/cite]
As far as the layman looking at these formations, it’s not in the least surprising that the “average” person can’t tell the difference between the real and the fake. Heck, one publication even considered the Wallstreet Journal as experts. Surprisingly, they were suprised that they couldn’t find the hoax.
Here in Walmart Nation, we’ve essentially replaced everything real with cheap substitutes. In our quest for cheap crap, we obtain from the lowest bidder. In our quest for lighter weight, humans have invented less-substantial, flimsier imitations of most parts that we use to construct houses, boats, other trappings of modern life. We’ve out-sourced our food, clothing, shelter, work, even our minds, to others, even sadder to corporations. We now live the “life of luxury,” where people live longer. Obtained through economic and scientific Imperialism (i.e. conquest); created, has been the alleged highest standard in the whole World, nee, the Whole Galaxy. The deification of stuff can have only one natural, logical conclusion. The procurement of stuff leads to cheaper, and cheaper substitutes of the original, real thing. Unfortunately, in the bargain of obtaining “more” (including knowledge and data), Homo Sapien Sapien (“the more man”) has lost connection with things real, of meaning. Homo Saps is now adrift.
Where modern (Western) humankind is particularly deficient is in those things which require physical labor. The majority of people don’t know how to use tools, stomping boards, and otherwise. Thinking machines now do his work for him. For the overwhelming number of people, making those formations of say, over 200 individual elements, would be just the same as “rocket science.” We don’t manufacture things, including crop formations. Quite honestly, the work involved in doing them is incredible, if people are doing it. If you don’t think it takes a huge amount of hours, and “manpower” to do one, go ahead and try it yourself. What does yours look like? Or even better yet, try to draw one, using a pencil. What does that look like? Looks exactly the same, oh, well than try it with a paint brush. How’s that one look? Exactly the same, well, then you’re ready for the stompers, and boards, and other mechanical things they use to make them. If you think it’s that easy to do it, where ALL those formations are 3-D human made forms, then you should have no troubles doing it.
That to me is the true total, the bottom bottom line. There is just not enough talented people out there, with the proper time to spend making all those 10,000 formations. Modern “more” man is just not capable of producing those amazing works. Those symbols evolved from a much older, more civil civilization. An intelligence both familiar and organic to us, yet as foreign and alien as our own soul.

zenparadiso

January 14, 2011 at 12:28 pm
Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s