Not that anyone here really cares. But an engineer/film producer (by trade) just made a documentary on the crop cirles. It's an hour long and just aired this week. It shows the laborious work of investigators and scientists who looked carefully at the phenomena and concluded a good portion of them were man made. But not all. AND....he found that the fellows MAKING the hoaxed circles have ties to the British Intel agency MI5, and he PROVES it.
So the question remains....why are they spending millions of taxpayers dollars and sending their frontmen into the fields illegally at night (trespassing) to make faked circles? WHAT ARE THEY TRYING TO HIDE? Why are they trying to cover up the real circles?
The only reason for that, at least in the EARLY days around 1985 and 1990, may have been because they weren't sure WHERE they were coming from, and perhaps wanted to see if it was a Russian/Chinese/US secret experiment. So, it was a cover until they COULD discern the origin of it. But now, why are they still doing it nearly 25 years later??
If you have the time, watch this documentary, that was just released this week in the UK and decide for yourself. For regulars here such as podrock, ER and David F Mayer who believe ALL crop circles are hoaxes, I'd challenge you to watch this movie and tell me there's nothing here, because YOU are the ones being manipulated. And please tell me why:
http://www.richplanet.net/detail.php?dbindex=207
❗
"Crop Circles--the Hidden Truth" (originally from Mysteries of the Multiverse)
The whole thread (24 posts)
- "Crop Circles--the Hidden Truth" (originally from Mysteries of the Multiverse)
- Re: "Crop Circles--the Hidden Truth"
- "Foggiest" idea?
- And where is the PROOF that all 4,000 of these are done by the likes of Rob Irving or John Lundberg?
- Re: Re: Re: Burden of Proof
- Re: Re: Burden of Proof
- Re: Burden of Proof
- Smithsonian Magazine
- Crop Circles: The Art of the Hoax--Smithsonian Magazine
- And you need to open your mind up just a bit
- You Need More Skepticism, Much More Skepticism!
- A case for a double O
