He says it's an usual discovery. Therefore, I would think he is proposing a theory based on what he considers fact. That happens all the time.
Do you have photographs of your friend spreading the iron filings in the Cherhill formation or is that just "talk" too? Where are the comparative analysis from both specimens? (It doesn't appear to have be done).

See, it goes both ways. I wouldn't call him "silly or incompetent"; be careful there. That's close to slander. He had done so much more than you do; sitting there in your armchair refuting claims you really can't, but none the less, shore up your belief system.

NOTE:
Levengood stresses that simply flattening grain with planks or rollers does not produce cell wall pit enlargement, expulsion cavities, stunted or seedless seed-heads, significantly elongated stem nodes, or gross alteration in germination results.

**************************
Here are the statistical differences between different crop examined microscopically and their control samples: (not too long)

1. An abnormal enlargement of cell wall pits in bract tissue (the thin, protective membrane surrounding the developing embryo).

2. The presence of "expulsion" cavities (holes at the plant stem nodes blown from the inside-out). No such cavities have been found in controls examined by the researchers. These "blown nodes" appear to be the result of the plants having been exposed to a very brief (perhaps as brief as a few microseconds) blast of energy capable of causing the watery material in the cells to heat up quickly. This rapid heating may then produce steam, which, particularly in older plants with less elasticity in the fibrous node covering, creates holes as it escapes.

3. Grossly enlarged (both laterally and longitudinally) plant stem nodes in conjunction with a marked bending of the plant stem nodes, from as little as 10° to an extreme of 90° or more, occurring at some or all of the nodes of a stem. In an October 20, 1995 20/20 interview, Levengood described how node length on affected plants can reach a 200-300% increase over control plants-the most extreme increases being found in the less geometric, more randomly-downed crop formations.
In some of the more geometric formations, node length increases on plants were found to decrease exponentially with distance from the apparent energy source. This finding-that the degree of change in the plant stem node appears to be related to its proximity to the energy source and, thus, to the intensity of energy affecting it-is in accordance with the Beer-Lambert principle of absorption of electromagnetic radiation by matter, clearly indicating the electromagnetic nature of the system involved in crop circle formation.

4. Malformed seed-heads, in which in some cases the seeds are missing or, more often, in which the seeds are severely stunted. In his examination of samples from a crop circle referred to as the Newton St. Loe formation, Levengood discovered a high incidence (40%) of seed malformation, compared to an almost zero incidence in the control seeds. This is a common finding in crop formation plants.

5. Significant changes in germination, or seedling growth, rates. Growth rates in seeds taken from crop formation plants range from no germination at all to markedly increased growth of seedlings. These abnormalities appear to be related to the affected plant's species, its age at the time of the formation, and the apparent intensity and complexity of the energy system involved. In general, the younger an affected plant is, the more damaging the effect on seed production and development.

Based on Dr. Levengood's analysis, the researchers feel that they can reliably differentiate between mechanically-hoaxed formations and genuine ones by examining the number of blown nodes, malformed seeds or electromagnetic anomalies present in the formation in question.

Levengood stresses that simply flattening grain with planks or rollers does not produce cell wall pit enlargement, expulsion cavities, stunted or seedless seed-heads, significantly elongated stem nodes, or gross alteration in germination results. There is no possibility, he says, that the observed intercellular changes in crop circle samples could be replicated by hoaxers using these tools. Other anomalies found both in grain samples taken from crop formations and within the formations themselves support BLT's conclusions that the crop circle phenomenon is a genuine unknown, most likely having to do with an unidentified electromagnetic force. For example:

· Equipment malfunctions are common within and around the enigmatic formations. Many instances of electronic and mechanical component failure (such as jammed camera shutters, failed flashes, blanked-out film, etc.) have been documented by several crop circle researchers. Magnets and compasses often behave erratically inside or near a formation. Physical side effects have been reported by visitors to crop circle formations during and after exposure, e.g. nausea, headaches and other pains, dizziness, loss of balance and euphoria.