Crop circles

Shenshen · 31-07-2014 12:10PM #1

'Tis the season....

Now, crop circles have been appearing in the South of England since the late 1970s, and got a good amount of public interest and press coverage in the 80s.

Doug Bower and Dave Chorley owned up to making them in 1991, and since the knowledge became public they've started popping up the world over.
One of the more recent ones appeared in Raisting in Bavaria, and apparently, thousands of people have visited it - some just out of admiration for the workmanship, some to "feel close to the aliens who created it".

And that's where I can't help wondering : People have explained how they're being made. Youtube is full of people having filmed themselves while creating them and instructions on how to make them (two examples : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rtkMrNrEMLM and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_opN9ghPKQ), there have been full-blown documentaries of people making them for fun, yet some people still claim it's aliens?

Why?

Buzz Killington the third · 31-07-2014 12:14PM

Shenshen wrote: »

yet some people still claim it's aliens?

Why?

Lack of intelligence?

endacl · 31-07-2014 12:16PM

Some people are wilfully and willingly delusional. We have forums on here that testify to that fact.

Maximus Alexander · 31-07-2014 12:16PM

Because people be cray.

eamonnq · 31-07-2014 12:16PM

I think they are covering up for the aliens by pretending they made them.

SEPT 23 1989 · 31-07-2014 12:18PM

Doug Bower and Dave Chorley are shapeshifters

Maximus Alexander · 31-07-2014 12:18PM

The moon landings never happened.
9-11 was an inside job.
MH17 was MH370.
Lizard people.

This is what you're dealing with. The really scary part is that out there, every day, when you're working, shopping, having a pint, these crazies are interacting with you and you can't even tell. They look just like regular people.

Philo Beddoe · 31-07-2014 12:21PM

The tendency of people who believe something without evidence to continue to believe when evidence to the contrary is provided is extremely widespread. In fact it's probably something we all do from time to time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/True-believer_syndrome

Buzz Killington the third · 31-07-2014 12:26PM

Philo Beddoe wrote: »

The tendency of people who believe something without evidence to continue to believe when evidence to the contrary is provided is extremely widespread. In fact it's probably something we all do from time to time.

Sure there's still people searching for Nessy even years after the only photograph of 'the monster' was admittedly a hoax.

Oink · 31-07-2014 12:26PM

At this stage i've come to think that people pretend to believe in shoite like that as a hobby, like others play football. Deep down they can't possibly believe it, it just keeps them entertained in that sad little life they have.
Or else Darwin was wrong, and I will jump out the window before accepting that.

There. People arent THAT dumb. They just pretend for fun.

EDIT: and if there are €&@$£; out there who destroy farmers' crops for fun, I can't print here what I'd like to do to you, you <self-snip> pieces of <snippety snip>.

Nemeses · 31-07-2014 12:27PM

Philo Beddoe wrote: »

The tendency of people who believe something without evidence to continue to believe when evidence to the contrary is provided is extremely widespread. In fact it's probably something we all do from time to time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/True-believer_syndrome

Sounds a bit like Religion believers or could that be defined as faith? :pac:

Maximus Alexander · 31-07-2014 12:29PM

Nemeses wrote: »

Sounds a bit like Religion believers or could that be defined as faith? :pac:

It's a little bit different because you can't conclusively disprove God. If you could, and people continued to believe, then yes it would be the same.

Shenshen · 31-07-2014 12:29PM

Philo Beddoe wrote: »

The tendency of people who believe something without evidence to continue to believe when evidence to the contrary is provided is extremely widespread. In fact it's probably something we all do from time to time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/True-believer_syndrome

Interesting... I'll be reading up on that. I'm always curious on what makes humans tick.

I just find the notion so odd - surely when I see a traffic cone on the head of a statue in a public place, I would not assume aliens levitated it there. I would assume that there had been be bunch of probably slightly sozzled students in the vicinity the previous night.

It's a strange thing to me that people would cast aside the most obvious and easy explanation to go for a more complex and unlikely one.
I mean, what self-respecting alien would travel unimaginable distances to stomp a pretty pattern into our food?

Duckworth_Luas · 31-07-2014 12:31PM

Why can't people understand that even when it wasn't the Lizard People it was the Lizard People.

endacl · 31-07-2014 12:32PM

Nemeses wrote: »

Sounds a bit like Religion believers or could that be defined as faith? :pac:

Nah. If you can get a quorum to share your delusion, it ceases to be a delusion and must be 'respected'.

Kenny Logins · 31-07-2014 12:40PM

Because anomalies.

http://www.bltresearch.com/plantab.php

ScumLord · 31-07-2014 12:46PM

Because aliens are behind everything, haven't you ever seen Ancient Aliens? Do you think those aliens did all those things and just stopped? We all know the popular alien infrastructure projects like the pyramids but you might not know they're also behind arches, the number 3, swords and just about any large object carved out of stone.

After watching ancient aliens I think it's unlikely humans have the skills to carry out most large scale industrial projects because we have no experience in building these large projects. It's quite likely everyone you see working on a building site is infact an alien and construction cranes are actually anti-gravity devices in disguise. The crop circles are probably the same, the people pretended they did these circles using earthly means are just covering up the alien conspiracy to do something awful to the human race at some unknown date in the future.

BeerWolf · 31-07-2014 12:49PM

Maximus Alexander wrote: »

Because people be cray.

kylith · 31-07-2014 12:49PM

Maximus Alexander wrote: »

It's a little bit different because you can't conclusively disprove God. If you could, and people continued to believe, then yes it would be the same.

Not exactly. You can't prove a negative, i.e., you would have to have documented evidence of the creation of every crop circle that ever has been, which is clearly impossible, in order to prove that aliens didn't make any. This is why the Burden of Proof is based on the people proposing the idea, e.g. all they have to do is produce evidence of one crop circle being created by aliens to give credence to their claims. This is the same for gods - you can't prove that there are no gods, but the believers have to put forward just one piece of evidence to prove that gods exist.

There is, imo, no difference between believing in gods and believing that aliens make crop circles - both have zero evidence supporting them and believers in both wilfully ignore all the evidence that they're probably wrong.

Kenny Logins · 31-07-2014 12:52PM

kylith wrote: »

Not exactly. You can't prove a negative, i.e., you would have to have documented evidence of the creation of every crop circle that ever has been or ever will be, which is clearly impossible, in order to prove that aliens didn't make any. This is why the Burden of Proof is based on the people proposing the idea, e.g. all they have to do is produce evidence of one crop circle being created by aliens to give credence to their claims. This is the same for gods - you can't prove that there are no gods, but the believers have to put forward just one piece of evidence to prove that gods exist.

There is, imo, no difference between believing in gods and believing that aliens make crop circles - both have zero evidence supporting them and believers in both wilfully ignore all the evidence that they're probably wrong.

I find it funny that in the case of crop circles it's the science that is preventing people from accepting that they are man-made. See the anomalies I posted above.

kylith · 31-07-2014 01:23PM

Kenny Logins wrote: »

I find it funny that in the case of crop circles it's the science that is preventing people from accepting that they are man-made. See the anomalies I posted above.

Can you tell me:
What does BLT stand for, in relation to that site?
What scientific qualifications does Ms. Talbott have?
Am I correct in thinking that that site is just the teensiest biased in favour of crop circles having a non-terrestrial origin?

I see nothing on that site to indicate that those plants have been subjected to anything more alien than 'bending'.

preston johnny · 31-07-2014 01:30PM

Farmers make them with a Protractor

Dravokivich · 31-07-2014 01:34PM

I need to mow my lawn, tempted to do something with it now and submit it to them BLT lads, see if they'll send anyone down to figure out how the aliens did it.

beano345 · 31-07-2014 01:36PM

There's a want in people to believe be it religion,the loch ness monster or conspiracy theories.

Maximus Alexander · 31-07-2014 01:37PM

kylith wrote: »

Not exactly. You can't prove a negative, i.e., you would have to have documented evidence of the creation of every crop circle that ever has been, which is clearly impossible, in order to prove that aliens didn't make any. This is why the Burden of Proof is based on the people proposing the idea, e.g. all they have to do is produce evidence of one crop circle being created by aliens to give credence to their claims. This is the same for gods - you can't prove that there are no gods, but the believers have to put forward just one piece of evidence to prove that gods exist.

There is, imo, no difference between believing in gods and believing that aliens make crop circles - both have zero evidence supporting them and believers in both wilfully ignore all the evidence that they're probably wrong.

I don't really agree to be honest. Despite not being religious myself, there is a difference here. Science can't, and indeed currently doesn't even attempt to, provide an alternative explanation for where the universe came from. Sure, we broadly explain what happened following the big bang, but in physics even the concept of what is before that is meaningless, since time didn't exist. There is a gap here which religion can fill, rightly or wrongly.

Crop circles have a clear, demonstrable and surprisingly simple explanation. To persist with the belief that they are created by aliens in spite of this is a different kind of crazy to religious faith.

ScumLord · 31-07-2014 01:56PM

kylith wrote: »

Can you tell me:
What does BLT stand for, in relation to that site?

It stands for Bacon Lettuce and Tomato.

What scientific qualifications does Ms. Talbott have?

But they utilize an "optical microscope". Haven't you ever heard the saying "seeing is believing"? Science.

Am I correct in thinking that that site is just the teensiest biased in favour of crop circles having a non-terrestrial origin?

You're clearly part of the alien conspiracy.

kylith · 31-07-2014 01:57PM

Maximus Alexander wrote: »

I don't really agree to be honest. Despite not being religious myself, there is a difference here. Science can't, and indeed currently doesn't even attempt to, provide an alternative explanation for where the universe came from. Sure, we broadly explain what happened following the big bang, but in physics even the concept of what is before that is meaningless, since time didn't exist. There is a gap here which religion can fill, rightly or wrongly.

Crop circles have a clear, demonstrable and surprisingly simple explanation. To persist with the belief that they are created by aliens in spite of this is a different kind of crazy to religious faith.

I know what you're saying, it's easier to gather substantial evidence disproving crop circles than gods, but when it comes to proving a negative my point stands - it's not up to anyone to provide conclusive proof that aliens didn't create crop circles, it's up to those putting forward the claim to prove that they did.

Potatoeman · 31-07-2014 01:58PM

Kenny Logins wrote: »

Because anomalies.

http://www.bltresearch.com/plantab.php

I watched a documentary on C4 a few years ago about that and the guys claiming they hoaxed them could not reproduce that.

kylith · 31-07-2014 02:00PM

ScumLord wrote: »

It stands for Bacon Lettuce and Tomato.

Mmmmm, sandwich institute...

But they utilize an "optical microscope". Haven't you ever heard the saying "seeing is believing"? Science.

Ah, an OPTICAL microscope. Well, that changes everything!:pac:

You're clearly part of the alien conspiracy.

Well, I should hate to be part of a mundane conspiracy.

endacl · 31-07-2014 02:19PM

Potatoeman wrote: »

I watched a documentary on C4 a few years ago about that and the guys claiming they hoaxed them could not reproduce that.

I watched a documentary on National Geographic channel (or was it Discovery? Same difference. They've both gone to shyte in recent years....) that showed evidence for mermaids.

TV documentaries are there to entertain these days. Not so much to inform...

endacl · 31-07-2014 02:21PM

Kenny Logins wrote: »

Because anomalies.

http://www.bltresearch.com/plantab.php

Jebus! That's fierce sciencey language altogether on there. I'm convinced!

Crop circles

Comments