My findings -> Crop Circles -> Home

Cette page en français

Crop Circles:

My findings:

Are there UFOs in the crop circles?

An evaluation of a published casebook and its related argumentation.

A known French UFO books author claims that UFOS or "mysterious balls of light" are in connection with crop circles.

He had initially told of "many observations which seem credible" of "balls of lights" and UFOS that he associates with the crop circles phenomenon - without specifying what this association consists in - and had rejected loud and clear the thesis that the crop circles are made by people, though admitting that some of them are, but without offering any clear explanation about the crop circles supposedly not made by men. He however specified that it does not seem to him that these "UFOS of the crop circles" so to speak, are "nuts and bolts UFOs", (an expression generally used to ridicule the notion of the explanation of some reports as extraterrestrial visitors craft).

I thus asked him what cases he thinks are valid, the best cases, the serious cases, investigated cases that would justify his claimed "relationship" between crop circles and UFOs or "balls of lights", but although he did claim that these cases are "numerous" and even "countless", he did not quote any single one at that time. I thus presented three of them myself: a case that had been declared "unexplainable" by ufologists and the "crop circle expert" Nancy Talbott; which I explained as a very obvious fireflies, a case of "mysterious luminous beam" displayed by "crop circle expert" Fred Silva which looks just like sunbeam across a hole in the clouds, and the case of the co-called "orbs ", which are found as hundreds of photographs including photographs taken in crop circles; which are nothing more than light diffractions of fuzzy objects, dust, insects, taken with the camera flash on. This, in a foreseeable manner, resulted only in verbal assault against my person. After some other exchanges, it became rather clear that there was nothing else to hope for, and that when asked about valid case that confirm that crop circles are in connection with UFO or "balls of lights" I would get only nonsense.

Recommended:

• So-called "orbs" and why they are not "UFOs".
• "BLURFOS" and why they are not "UFOs".

The famous author, on a mailing list with dozens participants including at least some crop circle believers, who also claim crop circles are "made" by "UFOs", was then the only one of the bunch who made the effort to finally present a "casebook", a collection of cases I demanded to check about the claims that they prove the claim.

These cases to defend this opinion were presented a few days after my asking, with the specification that the text is free to copy and publish, that the relater photographs do not appear in it for copyright reason. The author asked that his name be given: Gildas Bourdais. The fact that writers copyright photographic documents or have people pay for reproduction is naturally indicative of the real motivations of those authors; but the author of this list of case cannot be blamed about that, an unacceptable situation in the context of the allegedly "scientific" examination of a scientific issue.

Thereafter, on that mailing list, I was denied the right to answer. Then the whole discussion started again, but very quickly the administrator forbad any crop circle discussion, telling me, privately only, that crop circles are no ufology topic, an opinion that he obviously hides on these mailing lists where only the belief in a "crop circles mystery" is tolerated. It started again on a third mailing list. Gildas Bourdais again publicized his text to a member who in fact had asked where my crop circles articles were! And of course, on this mailing list too, I was then censored. Such are most UFO mailing lists of the French lunatic fringe: belief is the rule, criticism or skepticism about allegedly alien or otherwise "mysterious" crop circles is not tolerated and censorship is the answer. As I am practically the only one not to share the crop circles beliefs on these mailing lists, I am systematically flamed, insulted, then censored, to the great satisfaction of the proponents of "crop circles not made by the men", who push their dishonesty so far as to propagate the lie that "mailing lists close" because of me.

What follows is the Gildas Bourdais' text, without any omission, and the case-by-case examination of all the "sightings" and claims it contains.

This text was first published on the "pro crop circles" website by Anne Moro, at http://www.culture-crop.com/lesboulesdelumiere.htm, then it was also published at http://www.ovni.info/article.php3?id_article=37 and some web "UFO" forums.

Let us add that Gildas Bourdais' article was also published in the ufology magazine Lumières Dans La Nuit (LDLN), #383, November 2006, with the same cases less three (because I had immediately explained those 3 to Gildas Bourdais!), and article with an introduction by the editor claiming that these cases are proof of a UFO and crop circles connection:

Yes! With LDLN, the cases of Gildas Bourdais are no more "to evaluate", there isn't any possibility that "some could be misinterpretations or hoaxes" as Gildas Bourdais wrote, the "crop circle connection" is now flatly proven. And the natural lengthening of the nodes by phototropism, although even the die-hard proponents of the crop circles mystery cannot deny it anymore, at LDLN, it is impossible, it is only a "tall story that circulates on the Internet". Obviously "other one" who does not see that UFOS or balls of lights have really something to do with the crop circles is... myself! Prediction: you will never find in LDLN the least indication of my findings, none of my articles will ever be referenced in there.

(It must be noted the magazine also publishes a translation, also by by Gildas Bourdais, of the stupidities about the so called "crystalized soil" of the Edmonton crop circle...)

This is quite correct but without connection with the crop circles.

In my opinion it is totally absurd that any aspect of the UFO phenomenon can be "used" to defend that "they" make the crop circles or have some connection (carefully left in the realms of mysteries) with the latter... Even the WW2 foo-fighters are used here!

But the question was not at all to show that there are UFO sighting reports or "balls of light" reports without commonplace explanation or that can be explained as alien visitors.

The question was that there is a "crop circle phenomenon", that this phenomenon is explained as resulting from a long tradition of pranks which became a "land art", this being ensured by a impressing number of evidence and refuted by nothing valid, and this explanation cannot be rejected with the reason that pilots saw luminous phenomena - besides, these were sometimes non-luminous and diurnal - during WW2!

This is just the old trick of using UFO matters without any connection with crop circles matters, this trick is rather constantly made by the "experts" in crop circles and by certain ufologists too.

Who doubts that "observations of luminous balls and similar phenomena" in the whole world are reported? How does this tell anything relevant to crop circles?

What does "innumerable" mean? the largest catalogue of UFO sightings, UFOCAT, comprises approximately 140.000 entries - including many dubious cases, cases with trivial explanations and hoaxes. The number is not "innumerable", this claim has no value and no relevance.

This is still without demonstrated connection with crop circles and it not refute their very human origin. This is to mislead you. It works very well with crop circles believers, it does not work with me.

On June 3, 2009, I had lunch with a local journalist, rather skeptical about UFOs. He pronounced right away: "I'm just amazed that the recent Airbus plane crash wasn't blamed on the aliens!" I replied that it amazed me too that a stupid idea like this had not surface yet but that it probably would soon, and I was right: the next day, it was said. So let's blame any plane crash to flying saucers...

This is textbook wishful thinking of whimsical ufologist. Balloons are UFOS, a luminous reflection is "a UFO circling Concorde", and even without least the crop circle, it is "connected... Inevitably... Because!"

There you go. The quasi total of these videos are only groups of kids balloons, not "luminous", and some are Venus and planes mistaken for UFOS, and I saw only 2 or 3 of them on about fifty video that are still mildly puzzling to me.

The majority of these videos are collected and publicized by terrible TV journalist Jaime Maussan, (see about him: www.ufowatchdog.com/hall4.html) who filled is UFOs TV shows with it in the last years. Some short explanations are given here so that the reader understands how some sensationalist journalists are unable to recognize, for example, a group of balloons, and how a UFO book author just buys this too.

First thing you need to know is that launching helium kids balloons is a popular activity in Mexico and other South-American countries. For example, many schools celebrate the first day of the school holidays by organizing a party where kids launch balloons. This of course generates reports of "UFO fleet seen by many" in the medias.

For all these videos, no decent investigation is to be found. Gildas Bourdais does not specify which of these videos are "real UFO" as he seems to believe; which prevents any full-fledged examination.

And of course, all this has nothing to do with crop circles!

I can all the same give some images of these videos, these so called "UO fleet" or "Balls Of Light" which are actually just balloons. And of course, it is just those that are kids balloons, bright in the sun, that are called "Balls of Lights":

This shows what sorts of "UFOs" Gildas Bourdais believes in.

The next case we are served is:

Actually, the "luminous ball" isn't one and did not "circle around" the Concorde, this is pure fabrication!

This June 1976 video was publicized a lot. It does shows a "ball" but a small blurry bright spot, which is not really "luminous" but just whitish or bright or shining, it does not turn "circle" the Concorde but slightly precedes the upwards movement of the camera. Besides, the image shown is a shameless edited version that can be found on the web, the "ball" being much more "luminous" than the vague reflection in the original video:

This is how it really looks like on the video.

This is the edited version.

This helps changing an unimpressive reflection into a mysterious "ball of light"!

The video was analyzed long ago, the analysis was presented in a UFO TV documentary, and this analysis revealed that it was actually a reflection of the sunlight in lenses system of the camera.

Because the camera in question was equipped with an automatic stabilizer, to avoid the otherwise inevitable jumpy moves when filming a plane from a plane, it gave the wrong impression that the movement of this reflection were independent of those of the camera.

This case without witness, as no UFO was seen, this case of a simple reflection, long explained, surfaces again and again on Internet, whereas the explanation received no publicity.

The author of the text sees in this simple reflection a connection with the crop circles:

The first thing is that there was no crop circles yet in 1976, since the initiators, Doug Bower and Dave Chorley, had not done a single crop circle yet!

Obviously, there were UFO sighting reports in Wiltshire before the two men started to make crop circles; there were UFO sightings reports before, there were UFO sightings reports during, and there will probably be UFO sightings reports after the crop circle era, in Wiltshire and elsewhere.

The error here is again to associate UFO sighting reports or balls of lights reports with the crop circles without reason: a (so-called, explained) UFO filmed high in the sky close to a plane above Wiltshire is no demonstration that it does crop circles or that there is any connection between UFOs and crop circles. Michael Hesemann is a very bad ufologist, sensationalist, who speculates wildly, and just like Gildas Bourdais, simply forgot to check whether the "Concorde UFO video" is really mysterious or not.

So our first "crop circles UFO" case is worthless: it is not a UFO, and there is no crop circle!

Besides, Hesemann published other "UFO photographs" in his crop circles book, those of Carlos Diaz and those of Paul Villa, who on the one hand are without connection with crop circles and on the other hand are forgeries! This is how the crop circle business of the alleged "experts" functions: false UFOs and false connections.

Skeptics always do that. They only talk about the cases with commonplace explanations, or the case they wrongly believe to be explained, and overlook all the cases that endanger or refute the socio-psychological thesis.

But on the other side, since the matter here is to demonstrate the assertion that UFOs and crop circles have really something to do with each other, putting forth a catalogue claimed to be "impressive", talking of "innumerable observations", while simultaneously suggesting that these could be mistakes and hoaxes, without specifying which cases could be mistakes and hoaxes, is of the same low level of research than the "skeptical" views on UFOs criticized here.

What matters here is that the "Oliver's Castle video" is a forgery, which is known since years now. But Hesemann does not want really to admit it and presents it in his book with ambiguous comments in order to leave the reader in doubt. This tells a lot on his crop circles and UFO "expertise", this quite simply does not have any value in a demonstration that balls of lights or UFOs are at the origin of crop circles, what it really shows it that a video is no guaranteed honest recording of a real event.

Gildas Bourdais states that the cases he listed may be mistakes or hoaxes. He writes that "some" of them may be.

This shows that he made no verification, no investigation, no research on any of these cases, that instead of evidence he just collected "candidates", that he does not regard his own list as anything convincing, while all the same claiming there is an "impressive file"!

Thus, at this stage, I could just end my answer and ask that the author starts "filtering" his catalogue, that he specifies which cases he considers "credible", before presenting the list as "evidence" while all the same admitting that there could be hoaxes and mistakes in it!

Now of course in the "Lumières Dans La Nuit" magazine version of hi article in the magazine, these "yet to evaluate" cases are called in the editor's introduction, "convincing"... and "truthful"!

I had indeed clearly asked him his "best cases", not an inventory of tens of "raw", unevaluated cases, which according to the author himself could be mistakes and hoaxes, which removes of course any conclusive value to his catalogue!

Contrary to what had been said about my approach, I will all the same check these case, all of them, thus putting on my own shoulder the burden of the work that the author should have done before using these cases to claim an non-human origin of the crop circles.

This is very revealing: while the "observations of UFOs in the usual meaning of the expression" (?) are "numerous", "innumerable", the author admits a scarcity problem when the goal is to finding such cases in connection with the crop circles. Claims of "innumerable observations", of "impressive file", of what he believes to be "balls of lights" are made, but he very knows well that there is little if anything really worth in this, that it is yet "to evaluate", not at all impressive; and he knows very well that it does not tally with the "clearly seen structured craft" which would suggest some extraterrestrial activity, and he then tries to save the case by claiming that he will show some case. We went from "innumerable" to "rare" and the scarcity being embarrassing, it is claimed that the shown cases are examples of a larger file. Best cases? "Innumerable cases?" Not at all! For the "impressive file" of "innumerable observations"... remains "to be evaluated" and the "clear UFOs" are "rare"!

In reality, as we will see, this is the core of the failure of the "casuistry of crop circle UFOs". The emperor has no clothes, at best we will get some lights in the fields at night, some "BLURFOS", reflections, flash photographs illuminated dust specs, not to mention the inevitable aircraft lights in the night; the commonplace causes that the serious ufologists most of the time identify by carrying out an investigation, but that the "crop circle experts" cannot identify and do not want to identify.

I remember what he had written initially on July 22, evoking "very numerous observations of 'balls of light', which one finds in abundance of testimonies, which seem credible, and photographs in almost all the books and articles on the subject."

We will thus see of course see if these "very numerous observations of balls of lights" that "seem credible" and other "rare UFOs in the usual meaning of the expression" are of any worth.

As the author realized that there was hardly anything of true strangeness in his list, hardly any "structured craft" of clearly nonhuman manufacture, but practically only "nocturnal lights" and small things without much strangeness nor credibility, as we will see, he is forced to establish a link between these low-strangeness sighting reports and observations of UFOs as nonhuman structured craft. He wants, he must make the reader believe that his low-strangeness cases are of the same value than the really puzzling high strangeness UFO sightings.

That is how the most wild speculations live on in ufology. One wants to claim a connection between A and C, one claims without evidence that A is in connection with B, one claims without evidence that B is in connection with C, and one claims still without evidence that A is "thus" in connection with C.

Of course anything can be "claimed", and ufology crowds claim all of things about UFOs. It is a very different matter to demonstrate the claims are anything more than pure fabrication. To demonstrate, not to claim, should be the priority of ufologists, but it is generally not, the priority is generally just to promote "mysteries" by making claims.

I note that in all his introduction - and I am not surprised since I did the checking long ago though without publishing about it - that the author believed that I was still to look into "crop circle UFOs". the author talked of no "crop circle UFOs" yet. Balloons in Mexico, WW2 foo fighters, a reflection on a video...

He could just as easily have mentioned any VALID or INVALID case as "connected to crop circles", for example:

• the Belgium sightings in 1989-1993
• the French flying saucers in 1954
• the Betty and Barney Hill abduction
• Gordon Cooper's UFOs
• fairy tales
• the Roswell UFO crash
• the Lubbock lights
• ...etc, since just anything is "connected" to crop circles!

Obviously, when the physicist Eltjo Haselhoff explains that these photographs show nothing more than reflections of the camera flash on insects or dust specs or droplets the night, for our author, this is not "vile debunking", it is " the good explanation ". But when ufologists explain it, as I had done myself, or as they did years before Haselhoff told in his book, flaming follows immediately!

Amnesia stroke Gildas Bourdais: in his book, Haselhoff claims that lights photographed and filmed in the crop circles are "numerous", but it actually presents NONE, and that is the real problem.

See, on this matter:

• Haselhoff and the 'balls of light' in crop circles.
• Haselhoff and the 'ball of light crop circle in Hoeven'.

Let us note here that Gildas Bourdais announces that he left aside the "orbs-type photographic cases, simple photographic artifacts. One feels well that he regrets this, since he satisfies himself with fearing that these are only artifacts, without saying clearly whether he clearly realizes that they are mere artifacts. I will get back to Haselhoff and orbs later on.

All Bourdais' article so far was irrelevant because it deals with phenomena that sometimes are "UFOs" and sometimes are just "IFOs" but always without connection with the question "where are the evidence that UFOs are doing crop circles?" The following part is also commented on. The ufological errors are everywhere, I will explain them, but I would be very astonished to be thanked for that!

German Andreas Müller is not a ufologist, he never published any UFO sighting investigation report, he is simply interested in the crop circles, he visits and photographs crop circles, and is convinced that they are " mysterious ". He wrote some books on the subject. His web is at www.kornkreise-forschung.de

Michael Hesemann is a German journalist author of UFO books, crop circles books, books on the paranormal. As opposed to what some websites tell, he is not a "scientific anthropologist."

The book deserves to be read to get the picture of the author's thoughts. This is about crop circles there announcing the arrival of the Antichrist and "9/11", this is about angels, gods, demons, astrological predictions, Fatima, the Apocalypse, King Balthazar, Hénoch, Jesus, the Kaballah, Niburu, the Talmud, the Bible, prophet Jöel, comet Hail-Bopp, an incredible esoteric-mystic "new age" mix of beliefs that could challenges the reason of the most open-minded people. Not to adhere to "all the ideas" which are in there is very nice, but to take all this as a work of reliable ufology suitable for building up a "case book" is one hell of a leap of faith!

Linda Moulton-Howe, who had a good place in ufology's "Hall of Shame" amongst other things because she support the shameless hoaxes of a Brazilian guru "Urandir", who claimed to have been abducted by alien, this is again a terrible reference! The bottom was reached when she claimed that this "Urandir" had managed to have Brazilian military UFO files declassified, when this must be credited to the long patient work of the Brazilian Committee for Ufology, a federation lead by ufologist AJ Gevaerd!

See on this matter the denunciation by AJ Gevaerd of Moulton-Howe's inventions:
http://www.ufowatchdog.com/ajbrazil.html

And:

Source: UFOWatchdog at www.ufowatchdog.com/hall5.html

Colin Andrews is unable to distinguish a UFO from a flashlight, nor a bird's song from a "paranormal" sound. He is the "expert" who, as he was repeatedly fooled by crop circles makers, claimed that the CIA persecutes him. He made a trade of the crop circles, selling books, CD-Rom's, DVDs, videos, conferences. He was the consultant for the Hollywood crop circles movie "Signs", and the last news I had had about him was that he again was a movie consultant (Maybe for the Hollywood movie "The Men Who Stare At Goats", loosely based on research by Colonel John Alexander, interpreted by George Clooney. Alexander is a US military man interested in UFOs and the paranormal, and he already stated that there was "no more than 5% of truth" in the movie!). Colin Andrews is the top "crop circle business man". We will see detailed examples in my article, others were given in this section of my website.

And with other hoaxes, not to mention videos of birds and windshield reflections etc., as we will see

For recall: the very mystical Janet Ossebaard is interested in crop circles and does not have any experience in ufology. She is at the origin of the so-called "dead flies mystery." She had brought the dead flies died to a biologist for analysis, the analyst told that the flies were killed naturally by fungus, not by mysterious paranormal or extraterrestrial "EM waves", but she then simply ignored it, just like physicist Haselhoff ignored it, whereas this explanation given before by an Italian researcher is now accepted (if I understood well) even by French cereologist Anne Moro who took note of my article on this matter [Later rectification: I believed that at the time I started this article, but Anne Moro later purely and simply removed any mention of my article on the so-called "dead flies mystery" from her website!].

By the way: http://www.circularsite.com/licht6-eng.htm shows an image which according to Ossebaard is "a pillar of light" on a crop circle. Do you think that she wondered even for a minute whether this was just the reflection of the car's windshield frame on a window of the car? She didn't!

The worst sensationalist books and a TV "documentary" filled of laughable videos, that's what our author considers to be ufological sources worthy of use.

It is obvious that of all these sources, NONE is the work of a ufologist worthy of this name.

No Bruce Maccabee, no Richard Hall, no Wendy Connors, no Brad Sparks, no Ann Druffel, no Pierre Guérin here, no ufologist, no field ufologists from England or France, though they are not missing!

Instead, we are served non-ufology sources with their "New-Age" crap and authors rightly dismissed by the whole ufology community having common sense, for their, authors of commercial books, merchandisers, with no ufology experience.

This does not surprise at all our author, which shows again that it does not make the difference between serious ufology and the sensationalistic and commercial non-ufology of crop circles books!

Let us note initially that the quotations given by the author of this list seldom are "very summarized" but are nothing more than "very summarized" cases right from the start in their original sources, cases almost always lacking the least ufological value, and cases where essential information is missing or hidden, as we shall see.

So here we are again confronted to Eltjo Haselhoff's views already mentioned above.

The obvious is that in all his book he reports only ONE case of crop circle "ball of light" or "UFO" " and this one and only case is just utter BS.

But whereas he does tell that "since the crop circles appeared, luminous anomalies were reported by many witnesses", he carefully avoids to cite even some examples of such cases, as I had already told several times to the author of this catalogue.

With regard to his book, this claim is by no means factual, it is only an unsupported claim. There is no "abundance" of such case, there is just nothing. The scientist does not publish anything to support his claim, which is just utterly pseudoscientific!

And it is even worse than that, since he exhibits this photograph in his book:

Instead of putting a caption of this photograph clearly telling that it is only one of these orbs effect from a camera flash on dust or insects or other small stuff, which he should know very well, the caption claims that these are "plasma balls"!. A careful reader might notice the quotation marks of this caption, but a less careful reader will not notice it and will simply read "plasma balls", which, as it is written, and as they are above a crop circle, will create the "connection" in his mind when there is no connection!

By the way, what did Gildas Bourdais tell in his introduction? He told that he will not mention any case of "orbs" type since they are explained by Eltjo Haselhoff!

Who explained the "orbs" effects? Not Haselhoff, not at all. These false "balls of lights" were explained long before, by scientists, field ufologists, people such as James Neff and Dr. Bruce Maccabee. Haselhoff is not to be credited, he just fooled readers by showing such an orb photograph captioned "plasma balls on a crop circle".

So, there we are, we see that author recognizes that his case collection remains to be evaluated.

In other words, these are only reports that could have commonplace explanations, mistakes and hoaxes, and the author did care at all to do the necessary ufological work of evaluation of these reports.

I asked the best proving cases that UFOs have to do with the crop circles phenomenon, since this was his claim, and what do I get? A list of reports from the most doubtful literature, a list acknowledged to be still "to evaluate" and possibly including hoaxes and mistakes...

So that's the evidence, this is the stuff on which rests the "UFOS and crop circles" belief, dear readers: stuff that remain "to evaluate"!

Admittedly, "testimonies are numerous", if you wish. This is repeated again here, like a leitmotiv, as if the number had the least convincing value and as if these were really numerous. Actually, this number is not high at all: about sixty stories not yet evaluated in this catalogue! To compare with, for example, the 140.000 reports of UFO sightings recorded in the UFOCAT database a few decades ago! But the question is to know whether these testimonies support the claimed thesis. They are not, they are "to evaluate"!

Again a bold claim that should have been demonstrated. But it can't be: this "5 to 20%" percentage means just nothing at all. Firstly, there is not absolutely any really reliable census of the crop circles but according to the one or the other they are "thousands." And secondly not even one of the "experts" ever dared to say clearly, even less demonstrate, how much would be "authentic" (not made by the men) according to them: 1% 5%? 90%?

Andreas Müller's percentage is thus only hot air!

The situation is that the notion of "true" and "hoaxed" crop circles has no roots. All crop circles are "true". You can visit them, you can "touch" them, you can walk into them.

The controversy is that according to some so-called "experts", among these crop circles, some are made by men but the others are made by, depending on the "expert", aliens, psychic forces, god or gods, demons, "military agencies", unknown intelligent natural forces and so on.

However, what interests us here is of course (since practically nobody denies that men make crop circles, at least some of them, and that this at least is largely proven) to check for each one of these cases which is claimed to be a "crop circle connected to a UFO or luminous ball", whether that crop circle is really not made by men.

This is the most important point, and we will see that instead of establishing this, our author just pretends that all of these crop circles are "not done by men", or that it just does not matter since UFOs could visit crop circles made by men.

What he just told us, in essence, is that if a UFO sighting takes place in or close to a crop circle, then the connection between this UFO and this crop circle is exactly the same one as when the crop circles expert or crop circles buffs visit a crop circle! The UFOs come to visit the crop circles...

In other words, there is not intrinsic relationship between UFOs and crop circles, "they" are "crop circle tourists" just like some people are.

What is omitted, is that the majority of these "UFO visits" can be explained by the confusions caused by the "experts" and the tourists visiting the fields with their flashlights in the night to "catch" the crop circles maker.

What needed to be done, instead of copying from sensationalists books vague anecdotes of "balls of lights", believed true and unexplained without even the most basic verification and check for commonplace explanations, would have been to provide serious investigation reports on UFOs or balls of lights really without commonplace explanation and really in clear connection with the appearance of crop circles. We will see that not one such case appears in all this catalogue!

The author now shows his cases. So I checked them all insofar it was possible, as the information is so miserable in the sources he used.

1974, Langenburg, Canada:

This time information exists: for example, several years ago I opened a file - still small - on this relatively well-known case:

../htm/ufocropf.htm

This case is a "minor classic" of ufology, used by Hesemann from Canadian and American sources "closer" to the case.

It is an appealing case in the sense that there are obviously structured craft reported, which cause flattening in a field. The witness is a single witness, but there is no particular reason to reject his testimony, as told by the local police officer who knew the witness. There is no particular reason to make a solid case of it either, since anybody can flatten wheat.

It should be noted that this occurs in 1974, outside any crop circles flap, and in Canada whereas the crop circles begins in Wiltshire in England and takes its international aspect only decades later. I too classified this case as a "UFO making (allegedly) crop circles" (flattening crop), but it is necessary to understand that it cannot correspond in a strict sense to "crop circles", that it is a case of traces in the vegetation rather than clear-cut rounds or complex figures like those that decorated the English countryside decades later. A simple look at the photographs shows how "crop circleish" this doesn't look!

Ewin Fuhr showing the traces the flying objects allegedly left in his field. Must this really be called "crop circles"?

That's it, you were fooled: just because a UFO left traces in a field, there you go, decades later, once the "crop circles mystery" was created, it is called "a crop circle"!

Let's argue too much and count: ONE case. But a case of what? A single witness story of clearly "nuts-and-bolts" technological craft causing relatively disordered flattening in a wheat field.

An important point is this one: all the crop circles of the world, those of the "true crop circle phenomenon", are indeed in connection with UFOs. But not as "experts" want you to believe! What happened is that the two men who started making circles in the fields did it as a prank to make people believe that flying saucers had landed - this is why they were circles - and they did this because one of the two men had been inspired by such a landing trace, in Tully in Australia, the famous "saucer nest".

To understand how it all happened, read this interview.

Andreas Müller, Gildas Bourdais, and the others, thus recycle UFO traces in the vegetation, to call it "crop circles". They are then included in "crop circles data bases", and in their "case" shows. Examples for cases in France in 1954:

• Rehainviller.
• Sain Souplet.
• Chabeuil.

How dishonnest!

1985, Stockbridge Down, Hamphshire, England:

Hesemann merely copied the primary source, the book "Circular Evidence", by Pat Delgado and Colin Andrews, who indicate on page 35 that two retired people, Patricia and Jack Collins, stated on July 6, 1985 in the evening to the police force of Hampshire that as they drove on A272 and were near Stockbridge Down, they saw a large vertical circular object that resembled a fun fair big wheel, which was motionless and "hovered close to the ground." Colin Andrews says that Pat Collins told him that they were within approximately 200 meters of the thing, and that there were yellowish whitish lights on the circumference and rows of lights which went from rim to the center, and that they were terrified. Colin Andrews says that two police cars searched Stockbridge Down and did not find anything.

Colin Andrews adds that the nest day morning, five "mysterious" circles were found close to Alresford, and later, five others in Goodworth Clatford. Colin Andrews says that the two sites of these circles and the site of the UFO form a straight line, and that n UFO in the identical wheel shape was seen between fields with crop circles by four people close to Warminster in August 1982.

Colin Andrews does not seem ready at all to wonder whether the big wheel of a fun fair could be mistaken for a "UFO" by two old people, although they perfectly described a big wheel!

To get the picture about Colin Andrews' qualification level, let us recall that for a another crop circle, which was directed towards the North according to him, he managed to find extraordinary that pranksters had carried "complex calculations" to find the direction of the North. Yes, Colin Andrews ignores the compass!

Let's take the scarce objective information provided here by Colin Andrews. The UFO is seen in "Stockbridge Down, Hampshire", which is at 51.111227N 1.455691W close to Stockbridge in Hampshire. The "mysterious circles" are close to Alresford.

What the "experts" carefully hid, in order to put in your minds that the crop circle appeared at the same place of the UFO, is that the distance between the UFO sighting site the crop circle site is about 250 kilometers!

To make things clear, I indicated these two sites on this South-eastern England map:

You cannot fail to notice that Hesemann does not tell at all where the five "mysterious" circles are - neither does he tell what makes them "mysterious", which prevents you from realizing this distance. Colin Andrews gives it, but he does it to claim an "alignment".

Well, let's check out this so-called alignment.

We have three places:

Now you can just plot these coordinates to figure out what the "alignment" looks like:

This again indicates the degree of confidence you can put in claims by Colin Andrews: none!

Let's also note that this pathetic English case, chronologically the first listed here, is in 1985 whereas crop circles appeared since years... without any UFO.

There of course nothing extraordinary to still find crop circles "at the same place" ten years later. How much more nonsense can crop circles buff circles put out? Was this "crop circle" 10 years later also visited by a UFO? By the same uninvestigated UFO of the retired couple, seen 10 years before 250 kilometers from there? What a connection!

This is absolute nonsense, just typical of what "crop circles experts" claims are really worth: nothing.

1988, near Avebury, England:

There were many more crop circles in Silbury Hill. In these weeks of 1988, no less than 50 crop circles appeared in a 10 kilometers radius around Silbury Hill, high place of demonstration of the artists who do them. It is also useful to know that these crop circles of 1988 are in the stylistic period where the artists were years beyond the simple single round, and started to create for example three rounds laid out in an equilateral triangle, and naturally, figures consisting of a central round with four rounds around, which is called here "Celtic cross." Chorley and Bower already had made followers.

Actually, the initial presentation this case is as follows. A crop circles "expert", George Wingfield, presented in his world tour of lectures in 1991 a slide, in particular at a MUFON conference on April 19, 1991 at Holiday Inn in Northpark, Texas. On the slide, there was a young woman and nothing more. George Wingfield, was introduced as the President and the Research Director of the "Center for Crop Circle Studies" (CCCS), and presented also as a "Professor", said that this young woman named Mary Freeman lives "in Wiltshire", and that on July 13, 1988, around 11:30 p.m., she drove by car, leaving Avebury that she had visited, when she saw a light below a cloud, which became "a large gilded disc", that a luminous beam came out of it "at 65 degrees" in the direction of Silbury Hill, that "forces fields" made objects in her car fly up, then that she was abducted by aliens in their UFO, that these aliens showed her pictures of crop circles, and that two days later there was a crop circle in a field.

As no serious ufologist would grant credibility to such a story without a bit of investigation, because investigation is not possible because "Mars Freeman" didn't exactly show up, the opposite than what some skeptic believe to happen with UFO stories then occurred:

Instead of getting embellished with time, the story on the contrary was impoverished from one author to the other to remove all the extraordinary stuff so that the story appeared more "credible". No more aliens, no more flying saucer UFO, nor more large gilded disc, no more "field of forces", no more abduction!

After a few years, all that remained is what Hesemann reports: a woman observes a ball of light project a beam of light to the ground, two days later morning a Celtic cross crop circle is found.

From my research, I managed to learn from another crop circles "expert" source that "Mary Freeman" is probably a pseudonym used to dissimulate the true name of the young woman, who is a native of Marlborough, that she drove in the evening there on the A4 because she returned from a "druidic ceremony" at the old prehistoric site of Avebury. The woman then was part of the crop circle tours business, in which she gives the usual "New Age" speech. Let's also note that some sources locate the "appearance" of this crop circle at July 14, 1988 and others at July 15, 1988.

In addition, in his book "Meeting With Three Spacecraft", author Michael Irving ensures that he sketched a Celtic cross of five circles in July 1988 on paper, that the drawing started to shine in the night, that the next day Mary Freeman saw the UFO shoot its beam in Avebury, that it was reported in detail in the local newspaper Marlborough Times and that the following day the crop circle appeared close to Silbury Hill.

There never was the least investigation of this story by the least ufologist; we are just asked to believe it is true.

June 1989, Silbury Hill, England:

This is again a case written on by Hesemann and Moulton-Howe whereas the primary source is Colin Andrews. We will see further a case whose alleged witness is Linda Moulton-Howe picked up in... Hesemann's book. How weird.

If you consider what constitutes the "UFO report" here, it is just this:

"An unidentified person whose age, background, credibility are left unsaid, is claimed by a crop circle expert who made a trade of this "mystery" and presented fraudulent or eccentric data on several occasions:

"I saw in June 1989 in the area of Silbury Hill, at night, a shining luminous orange object of ten meters in diameter in my opinion go down and put itself behind a tree."

Per se, this constitutes a UFO sighting report with no credibility, no reliability, no strangeness.

Silbury Hill is a popular place for the artists who create the circles because they are quite visible from the hill, which is a tumulus. The place is of course also attractive because of the presence of old megaliths and prehistoric stone circles.

The case is not even at the minimal level of information of a recorded UFO sighting testimony: no date, no time, no duration, no situation map, no directions, no angular size, no elevation, nothing! Ufologically speaking, a story like that is of no value, and to believe this must be an alien craft of some paranormal experience is just a leap of faith based on nothing and to show a complete lack of understanding of what ufology is - or should be.

To give an example: when a witness tells that an unknown object has a size of "ten meters", any decent ufologist knows perfectly well that it has no real significance if there isn't at the same time a specification of the distance which locates it without uncertainties at less than one about fifty meters. Indeed, beyond 50 meters, the human stereoscopic vision does not make it possible to tell the size of something unknown. This is why the ufologists endeavor to determine if the distance can be established, and to determine the size of what is observed not in term of absolute diameter or width, but terms of angular size. In the most basic investigations, one asks the witness to compare the apparent size with familiar objects like the Moon. In the better investigations, a more objective calibrator is used, or at least comparisons in term of objects held at arm's length are done. This is basic ufology!

Do we find more talkative sources about this case? Yes we do.

Timothy Good, a journalist who is interested in UFOs and wrote several books - he is known to accept a lot - we indeed learn in his "The UFO Report", 1990, that it was again George Wingfield who told about the case. The UFO is described as "an orange sphere which lands", the witness is said to have had the feeling that time stopped, Wingfield, who is afraid of nothing deduced that the witness went to a "different temporal dimension" and he had, according to Wingfield, "visions and all kinds of ideas since... He claims affirms to have had a marked change of personality." We also learn that this witness does not want his name to be known and that the event took place on June 29, 1990. Nothing more.

In this case present, all this could be caused by an imaginative witness soaked in "alien crop circles" mythology which would have seen a plane, or helicopter, or planet Mars; which at 22 hours that day from Silbury Hill was precisely "landing" slowly at 289°51' and low on the horizon by 9°9' - what a coincidence!

Again with this case, there never was the least investigation by the least ufologist, no research at all to get the story right and check the possible commonplace causes; again, we are supposed just to close our eyes and believe this was a UFO without commonplace explanation.

June 1989, Silbury Hill, England:

This should be "Wansdyke", not "Wandsdyke", a place right in crop circles country, where crop circles are done every year.

Once again it is George Wingfield, the "renowned crop circles expert" who is at the heart of the story. The sources from George Wingfield are "The Cereologist" magazine, #1, summer 1990; and "Towards an understanding of the nature of the circles," pages 25-26 in "Crop Circles: Harbingers of World Change", Lower Lake publishers, California, Atrium Publishers Group, 1992.

George Wingfield tells that he and his "team of researchers" observed several small lights hovering in a field where two small crop circles were found later. He reported that these lights were very weak and moved slowly and very near the wheat stems tops. They died out, lit, gathered, died out, during more than one hour.

Just like with the previous case, the data are of second or with third hand, they are skeletal, and a very commonplace explanation should immediately come to the mind of any experience ufologist who already considered many cases of mysterious lights in the fields of the crop circles:

The lights can be flashlights, used by other "experts" who might have been there the same evening within 200 or 300 meters of them to watch for the appearance of crop circles, or the flashlight of crop circles makers themselves, or flashlights of youngsters having a good time in the crop circle. These flashlights show obviously an intelligent behavior, and they can extremely well have moved away or have been turned off when the "experts" started to approach.

It could of course also just be fireflies like those BLT's Nancy Talbott was unable to explain even on photograph, as fireflies can also be described as "small luminous balls", "very weak", and can obviously also show a "intelligent behavior" when they are approached. But if the distance from 200 or 300 meters indicated by MH is correct, obviously flashlights explain the case better. A problem: at 200 or 300 meters, it it not possible to perceive that they were just "very close" to the wheat stems tops.

It should be noted that George Wingfield later made much less ambitious statements. In a TV documentary called "UFOs and Paranormal Phenomena - Messages From Another Dimension", which is completely in favor of the thesis that crop circles are not all made by people but by the aliens or "paranormal forces", he told:

"We tried to make lots of experiences to catch UFOs on film and we've never been entirely successful in this endeavor. In every case there has been no visible agent."

June 1989, Silbury Hill, England:

Alas, three times alas:

• The witness name is Liam Besant not Leon Besant.
• The thing does in now way pass "above the tractor".
• On the video, the tractor shows its rear to the "phenomenon" and drives while the thing passes behind, whereas according to "experts" the "tractor stalls" (because of the UFO).
• At one time, the tractor does marks a stop, but it is at a crossroads, and makes a half-turn there, which reveals that the stop is nothing strange.
• Steve Alexander, who shot the video, is one of most known photographers of... crop circles, a detail omitted here.
• Nothing justifies the claim that the thing on the video is "luminous". On the video, it is simply white or bright.
• Nothing justifies that Liam Besant is in the tractor seen on the video. Besant was found months after the video was shot and publicized.
• Colin Andrews did interview Liam Besant, but it is doubtful that people who are mistaken on his name questioned him.

There is a totally plausible and ordinary explanation to the thing on the video: a bird!

Below, one of the frames. The yellow line on the left indicates the tractor, which turns its back to the so-called "ball of light", the yellow line of right indicates the "ball of light." In the insert, the enlarged "ball of light", called a "metallic saucer of 10 centimeters" by George Wingfield in a TV documentary.

No analysis of the video was ever carried out. The original was never shown under decent conditions. Of course! One would have likely realized that the UFO was just a bird!

You can see its wings flapping!

Another case of just a bird called a UFO...

On most of the versions of the video published on Youtube, Dailymotion and the like, the audio track of the video was removed. Perhaps the audio track was too disturbing for the "crop circles experts"? Fortunately, in a somehow dated "documentary" called "Crop Circles - The Quest for the Truth", the audio track was still here.

What do we hear on the audio track?

Man: "- It's a bird."

Woman: "- It's not a bird."

Yes, on the audio track, a man who probably had better eyesight than the others, who did not have his eye in the camera, understood that is was only a bird and told it!

June 29, 1991, near Bristol, U-K.:

The source is again Hesemann. "Close to Bristol" is not a decent indication of place. No name is given, the primary source misses. A pictogram in form of sports weights (two flattened rounds and a line joining them) is typical "Doug and Dave style" at that time, but could also be a creation of their followers.

Again the same old song of the crop circles books authors: to repeat over and over that there are "many cases", But good cases, decently documented, investigated, and without possible commonplace explanations? Zip.

July 6, 1991, near Beckhampton, U-K.:

Lights and a "humming pulse", that can be at choice, non-exhaustive:

• farming machine,
• helicopter,
• airplane,
• car...

It should be noted that the "famous triangle of Barbury Castle, called 'the mother of all the pictograms'", which does not have really anything impressive about it, a very simple design, is moreover a faulty crop circle:

So-called "crop circles experts" publish photographs and "sketches" of this formation which attenuate or deliberately rectify this error, in order to claim that it is of an "impossible perfection"!

This crop circle is very easy to make for trained artists. At the time, it seemed "impossible" to the experts with the reason that it was "too complex"! But it is not impossible at all, artists made much more complex circles since, also publicly, and this one has a terrible mistake which makes the claims of "perfection" just laughable.

And what about the terrible article by Paul Vigay on this formation, an article in which, having learned that people did it, he starts by showing that it is easy do a crop circle like that "on computer", to then conclude without giving any reason, that he is convinced of its "authenticity"? Call that science, call that expertise!

( http://www.cropcircleresearch.com/articles/e002-barbury.html )

And, of course, this crop circle of Barbury Castle is not really in Beckhampton, not really "at this place" where the lights supposedly were seen.

As for the "UFO" of this crop circle... Not named witnesses, skeletal descriptions in a few words, making think of a helicopter, a flawed crop circle, no investigation, no research, no checking...

July 20, 1991, Marburg, Germany:

All things considered, "luminous balls" pass by, and there is supposedly no crop circle there. The next day, there is a crop circle. And this is supposed to prove that these "balls" made this crop circle or have a "connection" with the crop circles.

Whereas "luminous balls large as a soccer ball but not so round flying at high speed by night" could be planes, or cars headlights on another road for example, if is ready to admit that "large as a soccer ball" does not mean anything ufologically valid, Appeared and discovered are confused to give a smell of magic to the case. In reality: no investigation, no publication of the testimonies, no research, no reference, no indicated primary source, how can the least credit be given to such an anecdote?

Ufology investigation? Checking? Forget about it, you must just believe.

July 23, 1991, East Kennet, U-K.:

Again George Wingfield, the crop circles "expert". A "color photograph", how amazing, as if black and white photographs were taken nowadays... Of course, the "ball of light" has all the chances to be only some reflection caused by the sun on the lenses of the camera. A beam of the sun is even visible on the photograph (left); but the sort of ufology of crop circles professors does not recognize the existence of the "reflection" phenomenon as it isn't paranormal enough.

August 18, 1991 or 1992, Marlborough, U-K.:

At what distance?

It is quite a shame that in 2006, a ufologist is still capable to take things like "approximately 20 cm in diameter" literally, when it is actually meaningless! That brings us back to ufology in the 50's...

"The saucer was large as an orange! The saucer had the size of a soccer ball! The saucer had the size of a truck!"... How many more decades do we have to wait before any significant number of people realize the irrelevance of such absolute sizes for purported unknown objects, and the need for angular sizes?

Yes, a tiny thing, circles here so that it is even noticed. A bird again?!

It goes without saying that the video is copyrighted, a commercial product, but by chance, a crop circle fan made this small thumbnail (left)...

And of course, the crop circle is there four days before the "luminous phenomenon" occurred. How pathetic a connection!

And of course, Dominik and Constantin von Durckheim are no surprised bystanders, but crop circles buffs.

August 8, 1993, Cherhill, U-K.:

The rather ghostly "London UFO Study Group" (the website was at www.crowdedskies.com) also tells stories of men-in-black I already discussed elsewhere. Where is their footage? I don't know! Hesemann specifies that the luminous "sphere" - on a video, anything round is of course called "a sphere"! - is filmed only "a few seconds." And the variations of natural radioactivity from a place to another is totally usually exceed these "300%". Value measured by Hesemann? Gildas Bourdais does not tell about it, but it is in Heseman's book: 0.38 microSieverts/hour. Guess what? 0.4 microSievert/hour... is nothing "300% superior to the normal" but precisely the average value of the natural irradiation!

(Cf. for example www.astrosurf.com/luxorion/radioactivite-mesure-protection-civile.htm)

Colette Dowell publishes the crop circles fanzine "Circular Times" and appears on TVs, "Sightings" on Fox TV, "Encounters" and "The Other Side" on NBC etc. Her business is diet consulting, "New Age" style, she sees "sacred geometry" in the crop circles, claims to have been abducted by aliens and to carry an alien implant in the head, and was member of Steven Greer's pack.

You can however get a good laugh reading how she tells that Colin Andrews accused her to be an accomplice of the video fraud of "Barbury Castle crop circle UFO video:"
http://circulartimes.org/Crop%20Circle%20Video%20Oliver's%20Castle%20Fraud%20LWCMD%20CT.htm

Chad Deetken (and not "Deekten") is also a crop circles buff, Canadian, it is usually him who films the lights of flashlights of the other researchers, that one then calls "balls of lights of the crop circles".

So-called "prankster" David Irving" who would have, according to Linda Moulton-Howe, claimed this crop circle, does not exist, this is really Rob Irving, a member of the famous CircleMakers (CircleMakers.org), who, for obvious reasons at the time, did not overtly claim the crop circles that they made illegally:

Then, that must we believe about these " lights "? Nothing. No data, no investigation, no research of the possible commonplace explanations... As usual.

And yet, numerous explanations are possible. Here is one: in August 1993, Adrian Dexter, winner of the crop circle making competition of 1992, launched gaz balloons containing green lights above East Field in Alton Barnes. How mayn did he launch elsewhere, where and when? This is of course not the kind of questions "crop circles experts" ask.

July 28, 1993, near Alton Barnes:

Alton Barnes is a place where crop circles are found all the time.

How strange, that almost only "cereologists" only see "(?) coming down from the sky".

But what do they see? Helicopters? Birds? Who knows!

Who are the ten cereologists? Where are their statements? What did they see? Where is the investigation report? Where is the video?

June 27, 1994, near Arad in Romania:

There are diverging versions on the web, as well as an article in the French ufology magazine Lumières Dans La Nuit (LDLN) #326 in 1994 on pages 41-42, where the business is dated June 20 whereas it was in the night from June 26th to 27th at 4 o'clock in the morning for "craft", and a newspaper said that a crop circle was found on 28th. The TV told about the crop circle on the 29th, and RUFOR investigators said it was first found on the 22 by workers who did not care about it.

A detail is missing here: " The noise that the craft produced made the high power lines vibrate and threw into a panic dogs and herds."

This crop circle in Arad in Transylvania was only a simple flattened ring, 42 meters in diameter, with a 6 meters diameter (6 meters too, not really an accident) circle in the center, very easy to do even for beginners. As for the UFO, it sounds quite like a helicopter! But it was more likely to be invented or exaggerated.

That a helicopter hovers above a crop circle is of course inconceivable to crop circles "experts".

And all this is coming from an Eastern Europe country where hoaxes and inventions, as well as the most extreme superstitions, are just flowering!

What about a Rumanian version?

http://www.asfan.ro/arad.htm

• "It" did not fly 3 meters above the field but 30 meters above the field and 50 meters of the witness.
• There were no "witnesses" of this "craft" but one, Crisan Traian, a 49-year-old tractor driver working as a shepherd.
• The "dogs and herds" thrown into a panic sum up to Crisan Traian's dog and his three sheep.
• Other mysterious lights were reported... thereafter... in the direction of Arad airport!

The case first came out in the Arad local newspaper Adevarul, then appeared in the local pages of the newspaper Mirador in 1995, then again in the Monitorul de Fagaras magazine for July 14-20, 1999, where it was said that RUFOR investigated and found nothing to support any conclusions, and that the area is known for superstitious and religious people, including somebody who also claimed to have seen that UFO, claiming that "someone came down of it, wearing a long dress white and resembling Jesus-Christ". Others came forward, with contradicting testimonies, some seeing entities from head to toe, approximately 1.70 meters in height, others seeing only their heads. The "investigation" is by three young people of the area...

Left: Front cover of issue 9, year 1, 1994, of the RUFOR bulletin, showing the simplicity of the crop circle.

Several local reports insisted that there were "no traces leading into the crop circle when it was first found", a really silly note since the crop circle is over tramlines. Tramlines are used by the circle makers to enter the field without leaving obvious traces. In this case, it is obvious that a tramline leads right in the center of the design!

According to the press, Rumanian officials of Arad garrison made radioactivity measurements and found nothing. It is also said that analyses of ground samples at the radiation laboratory at the Center of Preventive Medicine in Arad confirmed the absence gamma radiation, and that there was no magnetic anomaly.

The description of the "UFO occupants" according to statements by Crisan Traian ro RUFOR reproduced in LDLN is:

"The object was round. I saw a door opening, by which two figures appeared, who held themselves at sort of pipes. They had large beards, like popes, as well as moustaches. I saw them as I would have seen you at a distance of 30 meters. They were not taller than me. The one I best saw had a thin face, with eyes like a Chinaman."

Nobody insisted on the bearded saucer men, and nobody found doubtful that the shape of a person's eyes could be seen from 30 meters away.

And nobody cares that Rumanian sources say that Crisan Traian claimed to have seen the saucer and its men creating the crop circle on the 27th whereas the workers filmed it from the top of a grain silo 5 days before on the 22nd!

Of course: as for once a nice round UFO craft creates a crop circle - allegedly - crop circles buffs just want to believe it is a true story.

July 25, 1994, near Wilsford, U-K.:

Two Dutchmen saw strictly nothing. This is again one of these "invisible UFO" that excite those who want to see UFOS everywhere. Hesemann believes that it cannot be a reflection with the reason that the sky was covered, it was thus inevitably a "ball of light" which "emits its own light".

Foeke Kootje and Conny de Bruyn, once again, are not at all just two ordinary Dutchmen, but two crop circles bufs, privileged targets of the "balls of lights". (cf. "I nuovi cerchi nel grano. A fenomeno che contina", by Michael Hesemann). Foeke Kootje sells the DVD "Crop Circles - The UFO Connection".

Another Foeke Kootje story, told to Linda Moulton-Howe:

"DID YOU ACTUALLY SEE A PHYSICAL SPREADING COMING FROM THE HELICOPTERS?"

"I could it feel and I had the feeling impression that something was emitted from the helicopters, but it was very difficult to determine. It seemed colorless."

"But what happened later, during the same afternoon, is that Foeke Kootje was filming close to Woodborough Hill when an Apache helicopter started circle at a rather low altitude. I and others were on a heap of hay near East Field. This helicopter moved between us and Woodborough Hill and something was released from the helicopter and it left what seemed to be a kind of pink trail in the sky which came down straight to the ground. It remained in the air during a while and there was a strange odor - an unusual odor, not like normal smoke or things like that."

Yes, in Wiltshire, in 2007 still, "experts" can't identify an RAF helicopter launching a missile decoy...

July 27, 1994, Adams Grave, U-K.:

All wrong! That video only show two maneuvering military helicopters, the area being used intensely by the RAF, and when they fly a quite unimpressive crop circle, they look at it for a while.

At a certain time, one of the helicopters is hovering, and from a distance Andrews and his friends in a car say they see a "ball of light" that "flashes" somewhere "in front of the helicopter", Colin Andrews claims later, even adding that the helicopter "goes right on it". It is hardly discernible on the video, and a woman in the car with Andrews comments - it can be heard in the video: "it looks like an ordinary light". It is absolutely not "in front of" the helicopter, but behind, on the ground, motionless, a simple reflection... Obviously, crop circles "experts" did not deem useful to get out of the car and go see what object there caused the reflection!

This is how they perform their "research" on "balls of lights."

The "approximately 30 to 40 centimeters" diameter is a total joke, typical of the exaggerations of authors who confuse sizes of objects and visual effect on the retina of flashes of light.

This helicopter hovering in front of a crop circle is supposedly "chasing a ball of light" claimed to be in front of it.

3-4 august 1994 or 25 july 1994, West Stowell, U-K.:

This is illustrated by a photograph of what could be just anything, bird, butterfly, waste bag, Mylar balloon...:

Of course, again, only "crop circles experts" are the "witnesses", or rather, are puzzled with just all and anything appearing on photographs and videos.

And of course, Gildas Bourdais takes care to remove the well too embarrassing sentence that follows those he quotes in Hesemann's book (p 259):

"They even surprised crop circles makers doing crop circles at the time of their nocturnal surveys". Isn't this omission to perpetuate the myth of the inexistent artists who are allegedly "never caught" making the crop circles?

Misinformation, crop circles made by men, artists caught doing them, and "whatzit" on photographs, with no research for commonplace explanation... it remains "to evaluate" indeed!

Another of these photographs of so-called "balls of lights" in the crop circles.

You do not need to be an "expert" to realize that this is just the sunlight reflections in the optics of the camera...

August 3-4, 1994 or July 25, 1994, West Stowell, U-K.:

Here is the primary source: it is a book in German initially but reprinted in French, "Le Mystère des Crop circles" by Werner Anderhub and Hans Peter Roth, the sketches are on page 23. The date given by the "author-witness-experts" is: "one night of August 1994". The "Galaxy" crop circle was already there since days, and the authors do specify: "Let it be very clear. We did not witness the creation of a new crop circle, but we were witnesses of an occurrence in and above such a sign." As usual, the fact that the witnesses are crop circles buffs and authors of book on the matter is carefully dissimulated by Gildas Bourdais.

They by no means described "four other lights", but a kind of fog which rises from the ground, and on the fourth occasion this fog allegedly took in a few seconds a definitely parallelepiped form, which moved in their direction, then returned to the crop circle while taking again the shape of a cloud and it dissipated while going up towards the sky. In spite of this apparent strangeness, it does not seem that the crop circle buffs witnesses (their book is incredibly biased) did not think of explaining whether this could have been the brush of light of a flashlight on the natural mist from some other night visitors of these very attended places. A flashlight obviously "guided by an intelligence!"

"We were called Higher Intelligence"

(Doug Bower, the inventor of the crop circles).

September 15, 1994, in Mexico:

An affair investigated in particular by Mexican ufologist Pedro Ferriz Santacruz who proved to be only one of a series of frauds, with no "radarscope" detection at all but with a chap under a cloth filmed as being an alien! And expectedly, the inescapable Jaime Maussan puts it all on a TV "documentary", adds images of crop circles in England to the mix, and makes us believe that these crop circles are in Mexico!

Result: entries in the "crop circles databases" with comments such as "no specification":
www.cropcircle-archive.com/archive/index.php?decade=1990&year=94&month=9&language=en&thumb=&sortby=,day&sort=,1&id=1783&i=4

This is how alleged "abductee" Whitley Strieber told the case on Art Bell's radio show:

"Jaime [Maussan] and I are together fairly frequently and when he comes up to San Antonio, when we go out to the 8:30 Mexicana flight back to Mexico City that — to take him to the plane, everybody on the flight immediately recognizes him. He's a superstar in Mexico. In any case, here's what happened after the UFO was observed over Metepec. The next night, the lady took this video of this strange thing. The next day, they found that a cornfield where the creature had been moving toward was all trampled down. Incredibly, over the next few weeks, the tower kept reporting to Jaime that this UFO was reappearing in different places around the area. He took up a helicopter finally and went to each coordinate that the tower had given him and at each place found the same thing. The crops had been crushed and trampled under the area where the UFO had appeared. A remarkable story."

You are not dreaming: all this comes from Jaime Maussan, the "strange thing" caught on video was someone disguised of a cloth playing the alien for a hoax, filmed by "witness" Sara Cuevas Tornel, and the alleged "crop circle in Metepec" were in fact the plants of the field flattened by the feet of this person, Maussan making up the rest!

Above: image of the video of the Metepec alien. The "Metepec crop circle", in fact, as Whitley Strieber told it, is the part of the field trampled by the alleged alien!

1995 and 1996 in the Netherlands:

Zero level ufology by Hesemann. There are observations, because he told you so, and that's all...

I did explain these stories of luminous balls in the fields of Holland, just read about it, laughter is guaranteed.

June 27, 1995, Telegraph Hill, U-K.:

That Hesemann never understood that it is some insect does not amaze me, but our that author still believes such "BLURFOS" photographs are "saucer-shaped UFO" whereas he had the opportunity to read the explanations on such photographs several times !

See the "psychic photographs" by Chris et Ed Sherwood at www.cropcircleanswers.com/cropcirclesites.htm

The photograph is nothing more than what the less incompetent ufologists nicknamed "BLURFOs", the small blurry trace of insects or birds with the typical report "I did not see anything at the time but when I downloaded the picture on the computer there was this strange object, and it was not there any more on the next photograph."

To call this a saucer-shaped UFO is just silly.

As for " It is a little blurry, it seems to be rather high in the sky, and a hoax appears improbable", it tells a lot on Gildas Bourdais' ufology!

July 24, 1995, Roundway, U-K.:

Still the same crop circles buffs, who, every time a bird or an insect or whatever appears on one of their photographs think it is a UFO or something paranormal.

Here still, the alleged witness is a " expert in crop circles " of the " Center for Crop Circle Studies ", information still carefully omitted.

Some examples of 1995 pictures:

Over-exposures, accidental exposure, morning mists, reflections in the lenses, all these things "not seen at the time", these "surprise-photographs", are called "balls of lights" and are associated with the crop circles simply because the images are taken during crop circles visits by the crop circles buffs or crop circle merchandise sellers. Although these people introduce themselves as "photographers" or "researcher", no research is done.

As for the crop circle found in Roundway of day there, it is only amateurish work and you must really be very enthusiastic to think that aliens or whatever supernatural entity did this:

August 4, 1996, near Alton Barnes, U-K.:

First distortion of the story: it is actually (MH, p. 61) "a triangular object with three lights." Of course, Paul Vigay is a crop circle expert, like almost all these people who see UFOs in the crop circles.

Vigay's report is at www.cropcircleresearch.com/articles/s0006.html, it is by night, he absolutely did see a "triangular object" but three lights! Of course, three lights form a triangle. A "shallow" triangle, specifies Vigay. On his "reconstitution", misleading because it is on a diurnal sky whereas the sighting was at night, the lights are one besides the other, there is no shape, no triangle.

It is low on the horizon - no angle given - and he estimated that it was 1.6 kilometers away - no azimuth given. It flickers, as it must be expected with planes and helicopters, and it drifts slowly in the sky as aircraft do.

No checking of the presence of military or civilian planes or helicopter traffic was made, while at the same time Paul Vigay locates the thing above the plain of Salisbury, a military test range. No quantified data, no of angular size, no angular velocity measurement, nothing. Vigay does indeed wonders a second if it could be "a plane" or "an helicopter", but does not seem to realize that three lights can also be three planes or three helicopters, therefore much more distant than if it was only one aircraft, and that the noise of planes or helicopter is not inevitably audible when they are distant.

Does a crop circle appear? Nope, the only connection is that it happens in crop circles country.

Pathetic!

February 1997 in Brazil:

No date, no names, no report, no source, no photographs, no investigation...

Again, I'm the one who tells the full story.

The story comes from the newspaper Correio do Povo, in two articles on March 1st, and 3rd, 1997. The witness is Claudete Parazzi, 55-year-old, married to a farmer, who on February 27, 1997 in the night at 9 p.m. was sitting on her house balcony near the airport of Sepe Tiaraju and heard a "strange noise" which came from one of their fields, and while looking towards a house, she saw a "sharp red light". She told it the next day to her husband Juvenal Parazzi and their daughter, they then found, not a "crop circle" but a "round of 10 meters" in one their fields, however described as having this incomprehensible design:

l l l

	(__l __)

Claudette talked about it to a newspaper and a safety guard of the Frangomil Corporation farm not far away, Arno Polanski, who then also said to have seen the same evening "a ball of amber light in the sky which disappeared in a few seconds" and was "the size of a truck". The newspaper that found the so-called "crop circle" in which was allegedly a strange white dust that covered the leaves of the plants, a dust that was allegedly sampled for laboratory analysis. Ufologists of the ABPU (Associao Brasileira das Pesquisas Ufologicas) are said to have started an investigation. At least, this is the version that appeared on the US web bulletin UFO Roundup.

Here is actually ABPU actually wrote about the case on March 27, 1997 in their bulletin Vigilia under the title "Estranhas marcas No solo intrigam moradores of Santo Angelo", an extremely brief report which is far from comprising the minima of a decent ufology investigation:

On February 28, 1997 in agricultural properties close to the Regional Airport Sepé Tiaraju, at 11 km of the town of San Angelo, traces puzzled residents. There were two traces, one in a corn field of the Porazzi family and the other in a grass pasture not far, that belongs to the Frangomil farming co. The vegetation was flattened and disturbed center towards the edge forming circular surfaces, which in case of the Frangomil trace covered 300 square meters.

Frangomil's local manager, Arno Ari Dresch, estimates that something must have tried to land there and gave up, and it stated in the newspaper Correio do Povo: "we think of a helicopter, but the propellers would have hit the power lines".

In the three previous nights, residents mentioned big lights maneuvering in the area, and strange sounds.

The first sighting was on February 25, by Vanda Polanski, 42-year-old, who said that within 300 meters of the place where the traces were found, "we were watching TV when we heard a strange noise, similar to that of a car's engine stalling. I went to look and I was frightened. There was a great light and then several others smaller and red, which gathered until disappearing."

The Polanskis' neighbor, Claudete Porazzi, 55-year-old, her daughter Lisiane, 26-year-old, and her niece, 14-year-old, said that at the same date, "We heard a noise. It seemed that a helicopter was falling. We all left the house to see what was going on and first saw a flash of orange color when we came out from behind the barn. Just afterwards, several red lights gathered and disappeared after having exceeded the height of the eucalyptus trees. They were very large balls and they formed a triangle". She tells that she succeeded to make out six very luminous spheres maneuvering at high speeds.

ABPU people visited these traces on 1 March 1997 and it was estimated that they do not result from known flying machines or known natural phenomenon. The ABPU research team, chaired by Hernán Emannuel Snows Mostajo, also found footsteps traces of apparently small feet, with heels and three fingers. They gathered ground samples, plants, and took plaster moldings of the footsteps traces. According to the ABPU ufologist Hernan Mostajo, the material for analysis is sent to the researchers of Rio Grande do Sul Federal University in Santa Maria.

Nothing more was published on these events since 1997.

What can be noted? First of all, that the foreign "crop circle experts" cannot spell the witnesses names correctly. Then, these witnesses, who are far from being qualified observers, suspected helicopters. Noises of car engine. Lights in the night. Can helicopters can be the correct explanation? It can very well be the correct explanations for noisy nocturnal lights in the distance! In particular, lights that gather and disappear can be on helicopter flying away, or a formation of helicopters flying away. But footstep traces? Well, why couldn't they be animals traces? Is it outrageous to raise such questions? where are the answers? Does any trace of nonhuman steps have to be alien without further ado?

And what about these "crop circles", as Hesemann says, an expression never pronounced by the witnesses and the ABPU ufologists? That's simple. Here is a photograph of these so-called "crop circles":

We are far from the complex figures of the English artists in Wiltshire... What do we have to exclude that the plants just poured under the wind? Where is the strangeness? Nowhere, if except that UFOs, or helicopters, operated in the area. Obviously, for "UFOs in crop circles" proponent, such a scenario is probably unthinkable...

July 27, 1997, near Silbury Hill, U-K.:

The "men who looked as if on official mission" were actually Steven Greer's CSETI people. Not at all official, just a group of most eccentric ufologists! Episodes and "testimonies" of that day are here with accompanying comments.

In 1992, Greer, used to visiting crop circles, was in Alton Barnes and told he communicated with a UFO. That night, skeptic Jim Schnabel and the circle maker Rob Irving had flown their balloons again! (Fortean Times No.115).

But Hesemann and Bourdais won't know about that.

August 7-8, 1997, near Alton Barnes, U-K.:

No source, no investigation, no name, but belief, ah, belief!

One Dirk Laskowski who came to England in 1997, met there another of the crop circles buffs, Frank Laumen. Actually, Laskowski sees crop circles in his dreams. He visits the "snowflake" crop circle mentioned by Hesemann, then, in the night of August 7, 1997, he has another dream:

"Then a couple weeks later, on August 7, I had another dream. In this one, I saw myself standing on top of a hill, looking down into the valley. A helicopter came by with a very strong light. And while the helicopter was directing its searchlight into the field in the valley, a crop circle came into being. I was not able to see much about what the crop circle looked like because there was a kind of fog everywhere. When I woke up that morning, August 8, I was able to remember this dream. I also thought about the dream I'd had 13 days before, and realized that this new dream might actually happen, since the one before it had come true."

Forget your "mothership", our enthusiastic crop circle buff dreams at night about helicopters making crop circles with their headlights!

I was just about to forget to mention: indeed, it is told that a group of Czech tourist who spent the night on top of the hill that night to watch UFOs doing crop circles saw... "a complex dance of light events over the field at the southern foot of Milk Hill."

Complex dance of the light of the flashlights of the tourists and experts who haunt the places every night in search of the "paranormal" and UFOs, without forgetting crop circle makers themselves!

A mothership. How silly.

July 9, 1998, West Woods, U-K.:

As witnesses, Matthew Williams and Paul Damon (MH, pp 77 to 80), introduced by Colin Andrews as "ufologists" of the "Truthseekers" group, whereas they are crop circle makers, a well-known fact but carefully hidden to the reader by Hesemann!

Above: Matthew Williams on the way for crop circle creation demo.

July 9, 1997, U-K.:

Again the same fraud:

Terry Butcher might very well be "a farmer", but actually he is also a crop circles buff, member of the CPR International group who accompanies Colin Andrews in his "research"!

Just buy the "Cosmic Artist" CD-Rom by Colin Andrews to see a photograph of "Synthia Andrews and Terry Butcher of CPR International " - Colin Andrews' cereology group.

A hole in a cloud? And thus an invisible UFO had to go through? You bet. Holes in clouds are nothing paranormal.

July 9, 1997, U-K.:

How sad that they filmed the helicopters but not the "mothership", isn't it?

Again the same people... Matthew Willams and Paul Damon are not just ufologists, but also circle makers!

What is going on? Well, Matthew Williams, field ufologist for a long time, wanted to know about crop circles. Since it is claimed that men could not do the crop circles, he tried, saw that it was not impossible but easy, and understood that the so-called crop circles mystery was just rubbish.

Matthew Williams never saw a "mothership". Just more rubbish! Because Matthew Williams fights against the twaddle of the "crop circles experts", the latter just invent more rubbish about him.

Mid-July 1997, Alton Barnes, U-K.:

Another fact omitted carefully here, not without reason: all these events and their "witnesses" also see the participation of Steven Greer and his group of eight comrades (MH p. 81). Yes, the Greer crowd again!

Not dated, U-K.?:

Always same video of the helicopter which "does not seem to see a ball". Due: a reflection in the lenses of cameras, a bird that passes, this undoubtedly impresses crop circles experts, but they are not things the RAF can chase!

Nick Pope, who is hardly likely to be called a "vile debunker", explained many times that the military is not interested any more in the crop circles. Their initial interest is that when the first round crop circles by Doug and Dave were found, farmers confronted the RAF because they thought that their helicopters rotors do the circles in their fields.

To read: www.nickpope.net/crop_circles.htm

2001, Col de Vence, France:

The "ball" is not a ball, but an internal reflection in the video camera lenses, the same kind of effect as for "Concorde UFO" video explained here. The witness did not see anything, he "discovers" it later by looking at his video. The witness then spent a lot of time at the Col de Vence to capture "phenomena", and the DVD documentary the Col de Vence team shows a series of these things: BLURFOS videos (insects, birds, primarily).

It is just silly that that are people who still believe in this "ball of light"!

And... Guess what? no the least crop circle there!

July 29, 1998, Barge Inn, U-K.:

No source, no name, nothing, and a small detail omitted:

Barge Inn (the-barge-inn.com) is the rendez-vous place of the crop circles artists, who come to listen to the theories of the "crop circle experts" there and pick up ideas for hoaxes.

Surely there was a serious investigation by crop circles experts that showed that it was not planet Mars... Because such experts surely thought of it, surely discarded it... Surely, but where?

July 31, 1998, Barge Inn?, U-K.:

A UFO, inevitably. A plane, a car, an insect, a crop circle maker followed by a police helicopter, that must be inevitably impossible, since it would be disinformation or "debunking."

The nice thing with night vision camera is that anything hotter than the area makes a ball of light. A person, an animal, anything.

By the way, where is the video? Where is the analysis?

July 31, 1998, Barge Inn?, U-K.:

The "luminous balls" that one cannot see with the naked eye the night can be anything, insects in flight, people, cars, campfires, filmed by the infra-red cameras of Japanese journalists in search for UFOs.

Again, where is the video? Where is the analysis

So, you again must want to believe, since the unavailable video remains "to be evaluated"!

1999, Peru:

No source, no date, no place, no witnesses name, no photograph, no investigation report; you must believe, right?

Actually, no "luminous ship" landed at all. On March 3, 1999, there were reports of "five glowing discs above Lima" according to the ones, actually two UFOs in Pucallpa in the Amazon at 600 km in the North-East of Lima, filmed on videos and shown on the TV channels of the country.

And in Lindera, a Peruvian village on the border with Chile, three circles joined by lines flattened in a corn field were found. Obviously, it would be only scandalmongering to recall that anyone can make crop circles in any field including in Peru.

Let's have a good laugh at the expense of "crop circles experts":

Distances between the crop circle of Lindera and the UFOs of Lima? More than a 1000 km!

So, if a UFO flies over London, it surely is connected with any appearance of crop circles in Paris, Berlin, Amsterdam...

May 2 and July 28, 1999, Milk Hill and Silbury Hill, U-K.:

Charles and Frances Mallett are, again, crop circles buffs. More about them later in this page.

13 and 14 June 1999, near Golden Ball Hill, U-K.:

When one photographs hundreds of crop circles, it is bound to happen that "weird luminous shapes" that were not seen appear on one or the other pictures.

Francine Blake was impassioned of esotericism and "New Age" stuff and then impassioned with the crop circles too, she created a "Wiltshire Crop Circle Study Group", organizes conferences and crop circles tours (www.theconversation.org/francine.html), and sells "crop circles" merchandises such as calendars and postcards (http://www.cropcircleconnector.com/anasazi/spiral.html)

Left: typical claim by Francine Blake. She claims that when you put a bottle of water in a crop circle, you can later see the shape of the crop circle in the bottle's water under the microscope. Source: http://www.psychanalysemagazine.com/parapsy-phenomenes-le-phenomene-etrange-des-crop-circles.html

June 19, East Field, U-K.:

Again a "witness" who is crop circles buff (www.visiblesigns.de) and sells crop circle merchandise.

A "ball of light"... Camera flash? Reflection? Can't be, of course...!

(http://www.circularsite.com/licht5-eng.htm)

Summer 1999, Milk Hill, U-K.:

Wouldn't this by chance be this video of a bird flying over a crop circle on July 24, 1999 and called "ball of light" in crop circles "documentaries"?

When a bird's wings flap... it's called "flickering ball of light!"

July 9, 1999, Silbury Hill, U-K.:

In the documentary, Maki Masao is claimed to be a "professional debunker", alas, he never was. On the contrary, he undertakes there a "parapsychology experiment" with 11 people, he "meditates" and he "asks" "forces that make the crop circles to create a crop circle containing a Japanese symbol." It did not work out; they started again later with five people, nothing happened. It is him only who talks of a "large ball of light" which appeared behind him when he meditated, and that in spite of his qualification of "professional debunker" he forgets to film this. But there is still no "crop circle with a Japanese design".

It is with the third "group meditation" that that success was alleged. Success is "a little in the west" - i.e., a crop circle with a hexagonal figure, how extraordinary, at a distance, place, and dates not indicated.

A "professional debunker"? La, la, la, lies, Maki Masao is a "researcher of the paranormal", author of "In Search Brazil's Quantum Surgeon: The Dr. Fritz Phenomenon", "Mystery Circles 2000", Tama publisher, Japan, 1999, and "Spiritual Adventures Of A Sushi Chef"...

"A little in the West" was in Beckhampton, not at any of the three different places the group meditation was done, "appeared" on July 23, 1999, and the "Japanese origami" design was:

Juky 18, 1999, Pickled Hill, U-K.:

Andy Buckley is - almost needless to say - another of the so-called "crop circles experts", from Manchester. On his video, you will see a bird dive towards the "six lights" which are only other birds.

Let's hear Matthew Williams about Andy Buckley:

July 24, 1999, near Woodborough Hill, U-K.:

Information is again omitted: Koch and Kyborg, alias "Kochkyborg" on the web, are once again "crop circles experts" (www.kochkyborg.de) - of the "mysterious energies" etc. kind. Also, they did that crop circle themselves, just as they made crop circles for years there on Tim Carson's ground, because they think that one can contact the aliens by flattening messages in crop circles. They think that the aliens come from Orion because this constellation is "connected" with some of the old Egyptian pyramids. They organize "meditation groups" that sit in their self-made "messages crop circle" in the fields and asks the Orion aliens to answer. (See their book " Die Antwort of Orion", "The response from Orion ".) It is not them who saw a "shining light", it was a claim by one of the participants in these group meditation meeting, Hans Niehaus.

July 27-28, Roundway Hill, U-K.:

"Bert" is Bert Jansen, "crop circles expert" and "New Age" merchandise reseller (sources higher in this page), just like Janet Ossebaard, Ed Sherwood and Kris Sherwood (renamed "Jilaen" by Hesemann for another "case"). Again, a photograph fault is promoted as an "unexplained light"...

Above, on Janet Ossebaard's website: this series " of orbs, so-called "unexplained lights which seem to float in the air", presented by Janet Ossebaard with her explanation: "I don't think the lights are probes: guided projectiles that are being operated from a distance by for instance another intelligence. My intuition says to me that these mysterious lights are manifestations of the great, universal, divine Consciousness. Not in the sense of the biblical God, but in the sense of the Great Spirit, the One, All That Is. Overt the centuries, humanity has given various names to One: that which is intangible, yet can be perceived, sensed and experienced..."

That is the sort of ufology at work with the "crop circles experts".

( http://www.circularsite.com/licht12-eng.htm )

July 28, 1999, Alton Barnes, U-K.:

It is enough not to seek possible commonplace explanations to get "UFOs" and other "balls of light". "Hawood" surely spells "Harwood".

August 1, 1999, Roundway Hill, U-K.:

Luminous phenomenon? Oh really?

That's what happens when the photograph doesn't pay attention and lets the camera cord in front of the camera...

August 3 to 4, 1999, Woodborough Hill, U-K.:

If "crop circles experts" Chad and Gwen Deetken observed it with the binoculars and saw that it was not a police car, it was to be an alien UFO or "balls of lights", right?

So was it a firemen's car? Helicopter strobe? Alas, all these experts with their cameras don't seem to have taken any pictures.

Dr. Simeon Hein is the "director of the Institute for Resonance in Boulder, Colorado" and "studies subtle-energy sciences including remote viewing, crop circles and related subjects. Dr. Hein has a Ph.D. in sociology and has previously taught research methodology at Washington State University. Dr. Hein first learned remote viewing in 1996 and subsequently became involved in crop circle research. He believes that all crop circles, regardless of their origin, create magical effects by virtue of their shape and the subtle interaction between humans, plants, and sacred geometry. In addition to assisting with Institute for Resonance crop circle tours he continues to teach remote viewing in Boulder and in Japan. Simeon's most recent book is Planetary Intelligence: 101 Easy Steps to Energy, Well-Being, and Natural Insight, a simple primer for anyone interested in connecting to subtle-energies on a daily basis."

( Website at www.CropCircleTours.com )

Even Art Bell finds it a bit hard to swallow ... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_cRr_gP9mZ0

August 5, 1999, Woodborough Hill, U-K.:

again, planes, flashlights, cars headlights, a bird again... with these witnesses:

Peter Sorensen: cropcircleconnector.com/Sorensen/PeterSorensen99.html
Ed and Kris Sherwood: www.cropcircleanswers.com
Bert Janssen: www.bertjanssen.nl/cropcircles.html
Janet Ossebaard: www.circularsite.com
Ron Russel: www.cropcircles.org

And here is the Bishop's Canning "UFO", from an advertizing clip for the "Contact" documentary:

Yes, a simple "orb", a mere reflection, nothing more, when our author ensured that he would not mention any since it would be "explained!"

Is Bert Janssen a simple ordinary witness? Once again: no, he is an author specialized in "crop circles", spirituality, new age literature, organizer of "life-coaching workshops" where one "takes his life in hand" with the usual mix of "shamanism and quantum physics":

(On his website: www.bertjanssen.nl)

The crop circles documentary "Contact", published in VHS in 2001, was done and sold by Ossebaard and Janssen.

Janet Ossebaard (www.circularsite.com/index1.html) sells a whole range of crop circles merchandise, books, DVDs, photographs, postcard, jewelry... She was at the origin of the pseudo-mystery of the "dead flies", she knew of the commonplace explanation and silenced it.

She still hasn't realized that photographic anomalies as for example "orbs" can have quite ordinary explanations: http://www.circularsite.com/licht1-eng.htm

July 18, 1999, Barbury Castle, U-K.:

And this "ball of light" is just an honest bird flying by!

If you check out the videos of so-called "balls of lights of the crop circles", you will have to ealize that these "balls of lights" do not make the crop circles at all, and also that they often fly in couple, birds' manners oblige. If you really look at it, you will see the "balls light" flapping their wings.

July 18, 1999:

Let us not forget, in addition to the BLURFOs, and the " Orbs", the famous "rods"!

Patricia Murray is of course a crop circle buff working with Michael Glicksman, another "crop circles expert".

And of course, Hesemann counts "six videos of this kind" because he counts in hoaxes like that of the Oliver Castle video and cannot realize that the birds are not balls of light visiting or doing crop circles. So, he believes that because there are already six videos, therefore the sixth must be more proof!

And of course, you would have surely realized that the "sixth video" is, to quote... "photographs"...

Photographs on which only the Biggest UFO Experts know by which technical miracle one determines "undoubtedly... moving".

At the next still shot of anything, let's just say that it makes a 7th video evidence...

So who is Patricia Murray? A brave farm woman of the area, who "didn't believe in those things" and was puzzled? again, not, Patricia Murray is in the crop circle business, at the sides of Michael Glisksman (www.michaelglickman.co.uk), "expert in crop circles geometry" and who introduces her as a "poetess and photographer who studies the crop circles full-time and experienced major illuminations inside the crop circles." She sells the series VHS tapes "The Crop Circles Lectures", her website was at www.cropcircleradius.com.

June 1-2, 2000, Silbury Hill, U-K.:

Again crop circle buffs as witnesses: Charles and Mallett France, of the Silent Circle Coffee, Cherhill, Wiltshire (www.silentcircle.co.uk). It of course inconceivable to mistake the decreasing Moon behind some clouds for a ball of dark yellow light suspended in the sky... except for serious ufologists who would check this before making a fuss about it.

July 18, 1999, Pickled Hill, U-K.:

Actually, this is not a bird which follows a "ball", but two birds.

Throughout the "Contact" documentary, we have video footage of bright and fuzzy things flapping wings in the distance. The documentary claims that this is "mindblowing evidence" that the crop circles are made by whatever unspecified alien or paranormal power.

All you need to do is to walk in the country with a video camera and you will get the same sort of "BLURFOs" (bird, insects) that you could call "mindblowing evidence."

The sensational sells better, and advertising texts thus praises:

"In this mindblowing documentary we are shown a number of videos of BOLs around crop circles. These include examples provided by John Smith, Steve Alexander, Kerry Blower, Peter Sorensen, Dominik and Constantin von Durckheim, Donald Fletcher, John Wheyleigh, Stuart Dike and verbal reports from Charles R. Mallett, Robbert van den Broeke and Maki Masao. These provide proof of an "irrefutable relationship between crop circles and lights."

Here the sort of things that the "experts" call of the "balls of light video": just birds!

"Mindblowing evidence"... "unexplained"... "irrefutable"..."numerous"... Come on!

Kerry Blower?

Here is what she wrote October 4, 1998 when she realized what the crop circles mystery amounts to:

(Source: www.nhne.com/specialreports/srcropcircles/fieldreport8.html)

Many of the people claimed to be "crop circles UFO witnesses" later understood that people make the crop circles and that a fuzzy spot on a photograph or some light in the night is not inevitably a UFO making or checking out the crop circles. Many understood, but not everyone.

John Wheyleigh's video?

On August 11, 1996, he rushed into the famous Barge Inn in Alton Barns and told that he spent the night watching the fields from a hill at Oliver' S Castle. Nothing happened, he fell asleep, and in the early morning, it hears a " strange sound ". It rises and there are " white balls which sink towards a lower field. flying over the field!

At least, that is the story as told by Wheyleigh!

For this "mindblowing" John Wheyleigh video (below) is nothing else than the "Oliver's Castle" video hoax! The hoax denounced as video treachery, by our "experts", the video that Gildas Bourdais admits to be a hoax elsewhere in his very article, the one that Colin Andrews admits to be hoaxed...

Peter Sorensen's investigation: http://cropcircleconnector.com/Sorensen/articles/sorensen.html

"Mindblowing documentary", they say... serving again and again birds and hoaxes, Robert van der Broeke and John Wheyleigh and the likes...

John Smith's Picked Hill video?

What a joke! As "UFO" or "ball of light" chased by a bird, as Gildas Bourdais believes, it shows only a bird, complete with flapping wings!

July 2000, Bishops Canning, U-K.:

See above.

Bishop Cannings is Matthew Williams lives. He is introduced as "witness", whereas he is one of the artists who make the crop circles. He was arrested by the police in 2003, had to pay a fine for having done crop circles in the area, as the tools had been found at his home follow a search warrant.

Let's talk about the witness of this case, Peter Sorensen. Just read his website at cropcircleconnector.com/Sorensen/PeterSorensen99.html :

That is what "witness" Peter Sorensen really has to say about crop circles!

In France, my country, idiot ufologists without a brain also claim that I am "a debunker paid by the Gov'nment "!

July 31, 2000, East Kennet, U-K.:

See above.

Once again, witnesses, Ed and Kris Sherwood, and the others, are crop circles "experts" (if one wants to believe it), not ordinary people.

Kris Sherwood (CropCircleAnswers.com) takes this BURFO photograph ("saw nothing at the time but...") for a "gray UFO in the shape of disc":

Such stuff, the inevitable insects, bits of paper, birds, that sometimes well naturally appear on photographs, are just called UFOs or "balls of lights of the crop circles"...

Ed Sherwood writes long articles on the Internet with mystical and whimsical crop circles theories. Sherwood's site is with www.cropcircleanswers.com, and is claimed to be a scientific research website on its home page- no kidding! The first thing that you get to see there is a photograph of the infamous " orbs" on a crop circle. These "spheres" have a perfectly commonplace explanation, but Ed believes they are "balls of light" coming from "another dimension". Ed also claims to be a psychic, and a psychic healer.

Above: Kris and Ed Sherwood's website, with lots of "photographs of psychic anomalies" taken near crop circles or archeological sites... Anomalies? reflections, orbs, over-exposures, finger in front of the lens, mist, vapors, artifacts, insects, birds, the usual batch...

Uncanny. http://www.cropcircleanswers.com/120301/PSI-G_CCpics/2c.htm tells that Ed Sherwood meditated in a crop circle to see "balls of lights". Kris photographs. On her image, her finger in the field of the objective on the left and the flash illuminates the ground in front of Ed. Scientific analysis? Kris mistakes the illumination of the ground by the camera flash for a "luminosity felt and photographed"... The remainder is the same, with lots of "orbs" obviously, those that Gildas Bourdais rejected as explained.

Franck Laumen and Andy Buckley are "crop circles experts" too.

Let's talk of their video. It is copyrighted, it is a commercial product. Here is a still from the video; which shows nothing more than that:

According to Frank Laumen, this is the helicopter pacing the UFO.

Ufological quiz: tell me which one is the helicopter and which one is the UFO.

August 3, 2000, East Field, U-K.:

Again a Linda Moulton-Howe story. She lost any credibility by supporting a Brazilian guru who claimed to have bee abducted by aliens and to be the hero of the announced opening of the Brazilian Air Force UFO file whereas he had nothing to do with it. In this case, Moulton-Howe is herself among the alleged witnesses. And as by chance, Moulton-Howe's sightings are in books by the other authors, Hesemann here, whereas she is the number one Gildas Bourdais source.

You just need to believe...

Let's see the testimony:

All we have is a "flash of red light" which could be anything, and "a yellow oval which seems to pulsate" which could be anything too.

So, an "expert" in crop circles, UFOS and other mysteries, but no details, on the contrary, a ridiculously skinny testimony, a totally useless report. No data. No angular sizes, no elevations, no azimuth, no timing, no hour, not precise location, no verbatim description, not even the minimum minimorum as regards UFO sighting testimony, let's not even ask about investigation, there is no shade of investigation here. A two-sentences sighting report... How pathetic.

To note also: the relationship with the "night vision camera", who do not show colors, is by no means specified either. Naked eye sighting? Binoculars? Infra-red? Who knows...

And a little ufology secret of my share - true ufologists would want to make a note of this: by night, helicopters rotor blades generate infra-reds, invisible to the naked eye but producing nice "pulsing" UFOS on infra-red cameras.

What about the "form of communication" then?

When "crop circles experts" spend nights outside in the crop circles fields, they have flashlights, and they see the flashlights of the others experts in the distance and the darkness, calling it "mysterious lights". They flash their flashlights, and of course, the others answer! You get the "intelligent response".

Add to the mix the military of the area with their planes, helicopters, flares, decoys, the ordinary airliners in the distance, a storm, the photographers flashes, cars headlights, farming machine lights, and UFO and BoL's sighting are guaranteed. All that is missing in the lot is: serious ufology, the investigating ufology.

Again a story picked up by Hesemann from Linda Moulton-Howe.

Just believe if you want...

As for the ("Windmill Hill" not of "Wind Mill") crop circle, it was hardly created by this UFO being given that the alleged witnesses had settled in the crop circle to spend the night watching for UFOs before the UFO came.

Convenient omissions: they see a light in the South and take the binoculars to see that the light "seems disc-shaped" and "glowing". When this light leaves, the girl sees elsewhere two other red light. Impossible to know what the triangle was, which in the report seems independent of these lights and goes away fast. It is described as "very large", and silent, it is not specified whether it was observed with the binocular or not. The "pictogram" i.e. crop circle was already there, the witnesses had "heard that the new pictograms deploy an even more powerful energy [sic]" Thus, copy after copy, the original story, whatever it was, is tirelessly distorted and sensationalized...

Don't even dream it was investigated...

August 12, 2000, Golden Ball Hill, ENGLAND:

To discover a crop circle at Golden Ball Hill nothing extraordinary. Every year, crop circles are done there because the hill offers a good sight on the artist's creations.

Here again, as by chance, the witnesses are the people totally involved in the crop circles mystery.

No useful ufological information is provided.

The "pictogram of the year" has nothing different from the others from that year.

And finally the ultimate laugh: "believers now started to tell that the hill is called "Golden Ball Hill " because of the "balls of lights" that are allegedly seen there.

Balls of lights and various flashes abound there... when the RAF helicopters fly.

Detailed report? Investigation? Forget about it!

August 13-14, 2000, Milk Hill, England:

To discover a crop circle in Milk Hill is nothing extraordinary, this is again a preferred location used by the artists, for the reason that the hills give a good sight on their works and lots of people get there to watch crop circles.

Hesemann manages to find the luminous flashes extraordinary because they occur "in spite of" a strong rain! During a rainy night, two luminous flashes are nothing extraordinary: they can very well be thunder flashes.

As usual, an information is omitted: "Charles Mallet" is actually Charles R. Mallett (two "t"'s), this "crop circle expert" interested in UFOs and the crop circles since 1997, appearing in many the "documentaries", spending nights in the crop circles with his wife and claiming that the UFOs and the luminous balls "interact with the conscience of the observer."

August 20-21, 2001, Hoeven, the Netherlands:

Again a case blindly believed. Gildas Bourdais believes in it!

Bad luck, I had already informed here about the claims by Robert van den Broekke .

Crop circles UFO's?

"Crop circles UFOs" and other "balls of lights in the crop circles" just amount to claims not by "ordinary" witnesses that have no part in the controversy, but by witnesses who are almost always so called "crop circles experts", crop circles products merchants.

The data are merely a few lines, so meager that they are useless, and generally distorted, with everything that would disturb the belief in the "mysterious crop circles" stripped out of it. Absolutely no investigation, even minimal, was made, not even at beginner's level, and the most obvious ordinary explanations do not even come to the mind of the alleged "crop circles experts".

The rare cases where at least something is shown, a video, a photograph, only very ordinary confusions and hoaxes appear; the usual birds, the so-called "orbs", sunbeams through the clouds, reflections on panes on in lenses, photographic artifacs such as over-exposures, insects, etc.

Not even one of these 60-some cases was the subject of a ufology investigation. The possible commonplace causes are not even considered. "Crop circles experts" are not ufologists, they simply believe all and everything is "extraordinary" or "paranormal" without any research. And some ufologists follow them, also believing all and everything without any thinking, and they then publicize this to their already convinced audience, reader who do not make the least effort of thinking, checking!

All this makes for piles of BS books, "documentaries", CD-Rom, DVD, VHS tapes, conferences, web pages with call for money, and the business goes on and on. Not to believe is not tolerated, to show what it really amounts to results in hatred, insults and censorship.

This is all granddaddy's ufology, in which gullibility is required from the reader, and the sale of the sensational is the goal.

Other so-called "evidence" about crop circles are commented here.

Feedback  |  Top  |  Back  |  Forward  |  Map  |  List |  Home

This page was last updated on May 13, 2009.