Well since Pilgrim.1 is slow on growing this thread, i decided to help her out
I don't know if any one here as heard about saint bernadette, the Nun whose body is still fresh well over a hundred years after her death.

She was to die twenty–one years later in 1879 after a prolonged and painful illness. She remained hidden in a convent about 300 miles from home, a refuge from the interrogations and the pilgrims that never ceased seeking her. At thirty–five, her strong–willed manner gave way to her frail body, and she finally entered into her eternal happiness.

While she took with her the knowledge of certain secrets the Virgin gave her, one secret remained hidden in our presence. The most spectacular of all the incorruptibles, Bernadette's miraculously preserved body remained buried in a damp grave for thirty years until the cause for beatification was taken up. To this day, the body of Bernadette is a profound source of inspiration and of mystery surrounding the ways of the Lord. The face of Bernadette is one of surreal beauty, and will remain for us always the face that gazed into the eyes of the Mother of God.




source: http://www.catholicpilgrims.com/lourdes/ba_bernadette_intro.htm

KunleOshob:

Well since Pilgrim.1 is slow on growing this thread, i decided to help her out

I was actually slooooooooooooooooooow! You no go blame me - all the things wey I dey carefully read are sooooo amazing that I have to keep going back to them to make sure that I no go wayo anybody for here! Sorry, I'll smart up and answer present sir next time.

Fresh Body?

That is something ooh

But i think the Egyptians did stuff like that too na

Gamine:

Fresh Body?

That is something ooh

But i think the Egyptians did stuff like that too na

Gamine how are you long time In the case of the egyptian mummies, the bodies never remained fresh they were just successful in preserving them from decay, the mummies still dried up. Apart from the eyptian's system of mummifying bodies can be preserved today via embalming which is even more effective than what the egyptians did. However in the case of St bernadette her body was never preserved or embalmed and she looks as it she is sleeping over a hundred years after her death. you can do a google search on her name for you to understand more.

HEy, ive been great

its nice to know, things are a bit calm around here

i am checking out this stuff and its unbelievable

Are they sure, it isnt Madame Taussande stuff

@Gamine,

You dey, abi you no dey?

Gamine:

Are they sure, it isnt [b]M[/b]adame [b]T[/b]aussande stuff

I checked it out from various sources - there was no MT stuff to wayo anything O!

I dey o

and i dey kampe!

you have bin enjoying yasef na.


About this St Bernadette, i dunno what to say

i am speechless.

Was God an Alien?
In World War 2 an American fighter pilot crash-landed in the Brazilian rainforest where he was discovered by an isolated tribe of natives. Impressed by his technical gadgetry and his descent from the sky, these primitive people elevated him to the status of a god and created a religion around him. Today, the “proof” of their religion consists of a series of artifacts hanging from tree branches, including items such as a broken plane engine, an empty cigarette lighter and a rusting pocketknife. But to the educated reader, these artifacts are instead testimony to the fact that the artifacts of a religion are not proof of the religion itself but rather proof of the actual event which occurred (and was quite possibly misinterpreted). As Arthur C. Clarke once said, “any sufficiently advanced technology is perceived as miracle”. Could Christianity be the product of a similar misinterpretation?
In the 1960’s, while mankind was rapidly breaking the shackles of his home planet and venturing out into the nearby Cosmos, the idea naturally evolved that maybe our planet had been visited by extra-terrestrials in the distant past. When Erich von Daniken released his famous book, Chariots of the Gods, in 1968, the hypothesis arose that maybe God was the primitive misinterpretation of extra-terrestrials visiting Earth, whose high technology was perceived as miracle, and may have formed the basis for many of the ancient religions around the world.

Was God an Alien?
To its credit, this hypothesis can explain all of the events in the Bible and in other ancient religious documents all throughout the world. If it is assumed that it is possible for space aliens to travel a number of light years to Earth in the first place, then a number of the stories in the Bible can be explained in terms of extra-terrestrial intervention. We are told in the Bible that the three wise men followed a moving star, which led them to the location of Jesus. It has been postulated that maybe this star was really Haley’s Comet, as calculations suggest that the comet was in the sky at the time; however, a comet would be pointless and difficult to follow. Alternatively, believers of the “ancient astronaut” theory have suggested that the star could have been a UFO, which the wise men were compelled to follow via telepathic communication with the aliens (which is commonly reported in alien abduction reports).

The birth of Jesus might be elucidated by the speculation that aliens visited Mary in her sleep (which she perceived as a dream in which she was visited by angels). The aliens could have artificially inseminated her with genetically engineered, or possibly even alien sperm; and this could explain the superhuman abilities which Jesus was reported to have had, and also the fact that Mary gave birth while she was still a virgin. So, perhaps Jesus was one of the first alien-human hybrids.

There is certainly a degree of romance and mystery to this theory, and it is attractive in its consistency with our current worldview and worldwide religions, but unfortunately it is far from proven. In a sense the aliens of this age have superceded the God of previous generations, in that any unexplained phenomena can now be attributed to some bizarre form of advanced alien technology, rather than to divine intervention. Admittedly, the evidence in support of the ancient astronaut theory is highly speculative and based on questionable data (consisting mainly of ancient myths and archaeological sites). In addition to this, the plausibility of interstellar travel is still debatable. So what are the alternatives?

But maybe neither of these hypotheses are necessary. Yes, it is possible that visitors from outer space did land on earth a few thousand years ago and communicate with our ancestors. But it is also possible that the prehistoric people were responsible for their own art, technology and culture.

Source: http://crash.ihug.co.nz/~marshall/aliengod.htm

Chei!



Someone once said, its mind boggling to know whats happening in the room

across yours, talk more trying to figure out the world.

DISCLAIMER: My previous post does not represent my views, however it makes interesting reading.

That write up was hilarious in a sort of way.

Okay guys, I was trying to sift through the plethora of info available to me on the phenomena of Crop Circles. I guess (as someone noted offline) that I was being "economical with gist", and I thought probably a good thing (not the best thing) to do at this point is to post some of those findings for people to read and make out issues on their own. Enjoy.


A NHNE Special Interview:
Crop Circles:
Colin Andrews & Joyce Murphy
Monday, September 30, 1996
Interviewed by James Gregory & David Sunfellow

http://www.nhne.com/interviews/intandrewsmurphy.html

[list]Interview:

NHNE: How did you first get interested in crop circles?

ANDREWS: I became involved after spotting five circles in the form of a cross in a field near Winchester, Hampshire, England in July 1983.

MURPHY: My academic background is in mathematics and physics. I happened onto George Wingfield speaking in a Dallas hotel in 1991 and became fascinated with his descriptions of crop circle geometric designs and mathematical glyphs.

>snip<


NHNE: How many crop circles have you personally visited and investigated?

ANDREWS: Approximately 2,000 individual circles in 600 patterns.

MURPHY: Over 40 since 1991.


NHNE: Have you personally experienced anything unusual in connection with visiting crop circles, such as feelings, visions, physical sensations, heightened sensitivity, etc.?

ANDREWS: Yes, but too many to go into here. There are many references in my book "Circular Evidence," and in the "Undeniable Evidence" and "The Madison Square Garden Crop Circle Special" videos.

MURPHY: Myself, only warmth; however, I have witnessed all sorts of reactions in other people including a client last year who was violently ill for two days with flu-like symptoms. Then we discovered that another person with another group was experiencing the same violent symptoms. A scary experience as an expedition leader.

NHNE: What was your most memorable crop circle experience and why?

ANDREWS: While visiting a circle in a remote field at Kimpton, Hampshire, England during July 1987, I heard a very strange buzzing sound which was close to me and appeared to interact with me. I was overwhelmed by the experience and it left me very touched because it began after I had stood near the ring alone and prayed for a clue as to what the crop circles were about. A year later, the same sound was recorded on two occasions in crop circles -- one was at "Operation White Crow," the other while a BBC TELEVISION crew were interviewing myself and Pat Delgado, my co-author of "Circular Evidence."

MURPHY: This year's Triple Julia Set -- a fractal following the single Julia Set -- and most emphatic, the Mandelbrot Set of a couple of years ago. Whether hoaxed or real, these were the most meaningful to me personally.


NHNE: How many crop circles in England do you estimate are genuine, versus faked?

ANDREWS: I think it is possible that as many as 70% of the crop circles currently appearing in England are hoaxed, but that is not by any means a confident figure. Many are not visited on the ground due to limited resources, but by aerial surveillance you can usually get a good idea of legitimacy. I have visited many hoaxes and have been part of a number of experiments with people (including the British Army) who have tried to replicate the features of the genuine article. The experience of Pat Delgado proves that if you jump to quick conclusions before all the information has been gathered, it is possible to be fooled. [A few years ago Delgado was too hasty in announcing that a certain crop circle was legitimate, only upon further investigation to discover to his dismay and embarrassment that it was a hoax.]

MURPHY: I do not have any estimate of percentage of real versus fake, but the ones I have personally observed showing layers of plaited plants, an intricate, intelligent layering that which I know cannot be man made, are about three times as common as the sloppily-pressed-down ones consisting of just damaged plants.


NHNE: What are the qualities that most distinguish an authentic crop circle from a hoax?

ANDREWS: These are the main ones:

-- Well-defined geometric design.

-- No damage to plants.

-- No soil compression or foot prints.

-- A spiral fingerprint recognized by my database.

-- Rotations verses diameter.

-- Changes in plants at cellular level (I personally think this is not yet established but has been published in the scientific literature).

-- Magnetic anomalies.

-- Established mathematical ratios between component parts.

MURPHY: The huge intricate designs and the layers of plaited plants.


NHNE: Have you personally met any of the people responsible for creating fake crop circles and, if so, why did they say they were doing it?

ANDREWS: Yes, several. The most fascinating thing is they do not know why they do it. Some younger ones just do it for a laugh or publicity and the results are usually very obviously hoaxed. Even the famous Doug and Dave have admitted, "It was as if we were being told to do it."

MURPHY: No, and it is hard for me to imagine anyone wasting precious time and energy on such a feat as hoaxing a circle.


NHNE: We understand that there are records of crop circles from as early as the 16th century. Is this true and, if so, how wide-spread and developed were crop circles of past centuries versus today?

ANDREWS: There are three records of crop circles in the 1600's, but the modern-day phenomena started around 1923 with small numbers up until 1976, at which point they increased in number and complexity.


NHNE: Crop circles seem to be evolving into increasingly complicated shapes. They also seem to have evolved through a series of strikingly different themes over the years. Any ideas why?

ANDREWS: In general terms, we appear to have been spoon fed images of animals, insects, mathematical models, fractal geometry, and, in recent years, astronomy. I interpret that as a spiritual nudge: "Know who you are and how you work and then look outwards to learn more."

MURPHY: No, but would anyone be paying attention to just simple circles after all these years? If they had remained just circles, by now they would be just accepted without question as part of our humdrum reality. Perhaps someone is trying to hold our interest or attention. Remember, our attention spans are growing shorter and shorter these days. We must be constantly entertained with increasing cleverness!


NHNE: Do you have any explanations as to why some genuine crop circles are so stunningly symmetrical and beautiful while others seem sloppy and disjointed?

ANDREWS: No, but I have noticed the hand of different cosmic artists throughout my research -- country by country, and county by county. I believe we ourselves are a part of what is happening -- our awareness is reflected by the organizing field in the quality of the form produced.

MURPHY: Don't know why any genuine circle would be sloppy unless the makers caught the crop in a very advanced stage and thus the palette became difficult to work with.

NHNE: Most foreign crop circles appear to be concentrated in the USA, Australia, Germany and Canada. Any idea why this might be? Why aren't more crop circles appearing in other countries around the world?

ANDREWS: Not known, although you have missed a major hot spot in the Czech Republic.

MURPHY: Maybe persons in these other countries are so caught up in the more human things such as getting food on the table, etc. that they just do not have time to pay attention to something they feel is trivial.


[The following questions were answered by Joyce Murphy only.]


NHNE: Why do you think most crop circles are appearing in England, typically within a 40 mile radius of Stonehenge?

MURPHY: No real opinion on this unless somehow Stonehenge is the true center and the more perfect works of this art occur near the centers of strength. I just heard a theory about Stonehenge a few days ago from a recent abductee who reported that the aliens said Stonehenge is a cosmic clock with a crystal in the center which breaks up light into rays of red, blue and at least one other color (I forgot which) which are then projected onto specific stones. Perhaps crop circles are just appendages of this clock.

NHNE: How do crop circles that have appeared in snow, ice, rice paddies, sand and other natural media compare to the ones appearing in crop fields?

MURPHY: The only one I have seen was a photo of a circle on the Hudson River formed on very thin ice. I remember it to be quite complex, considering the materials the artist had to work with.

NHNE: Crop circles are appearing in more and more other media. Any ideas why?

MURPHY: Just trying to get the message out -- whatever that message may be. Perhaps it's, "If I keep trying and trying, and maybe one of these days those Earth idiots will get the message."

NHNE: How many serious crop circle investigators and crop circle organizations are there in the world today?

MURPHY: Quite a few persons are now doing crop circle research. We are seeing more and more names of organizations that we have not heard of before. One of the most sensible theories that we have heard is from the very dedicated researcher Ilyes. She has her theory printed in a short booklet form. I would not attempt to quote her theory, but invite your readers to have a look.

NHNE: Given that a host of new crop circles is continuing to appear every year, often becoming more complex and difficult to explain, why do you think the scientific community and mass media at large isn't paying more attention to them?

MURPHY: They feel they have already been there, done that. In their opinion, since they have found no explanation, there may not be one. Also, Doug and Dave (admitted hoaxers who came clean) have settled the issue for most people. Everyone knows that it was Doug and Dave made all the circles throughout the world and are still creating more and more complex patterns in their retirement. I would like to be their travel agent. And now others have taken up the rewarding hobby -- those circles which are not created by Doug and Dave themselves are done by this growing group.

NHNE: Who or what do you think is responsible for creating crop circles? Why are they happening and what is their message or meaning for humanity?

MURPHY: I personally believe that there are three possible answers:

-- The Gaia Theory (as Colin Andrews once stated) that Mother Earth is living organism and that she is crying.

-- That multi-dimensional ETs are creating some sort of message for all us.

-- That the superpowers have some sort of new toy and their games are resulting in these works of art.

I think the season for crop circles may have peaked in the summer of 1996, and that there may not be many more. Our time is nearly up on this planet. We have messed our own nests and we do not even realize it. We are living in a very fragile environment. If only one small element of this intricate creation fails, then we could start tumbling. Total chaos might be the result. If we, as conscious beings, have not received the message by now, we never will.

A short intro about Andrew Colins:


[list]Colin Andrews is a well-known researcher and author and is widely acknowledged as the world expert on the crop circle phenomenon. He is the founder of Circles Phenomenon Research International, the first organization established specifically to investigate the crop circle phenomenon. His scientific investigations are responsible for much of the current information available on the subject.

Andrews is an electrical engineer by profession and a former senior officer in British regional Government. For three years Colin advised the British Government on the crop circle phenomenon, supplying technical and scientific reports to the Under-Secretary of State for the environment (Rt. Hon. Nicholas Ridely, M.P.) in the Margaret Thatcher cabinet.

. . . .

He believes that a large number of Crop Circles are fakes but that the paranormal is involved with the remainder. He has witnessed many bizarre events since beginning his long investigation into this mystery but is determined to continue his research in a scientific manner and an open mind.

source: Crop Circle Research
[/list]

I am joining this thread quite late, with a lot of water having gone under the bridge. But I thought, following a discussion I had with the original poster elsewhere, that I was important to give it a different edge.

I have read some of the contributions and have not been convinced that there is anything beyond hoaxes and chances. I shall start with the crop circle debate and post the following:

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Levengood's Crop-Circle Plant Research
Joe Nickell taken from ---> http://www.csicop.org/sb/9606/crop_circle.html
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In several technical papers, W. C. Levengood purports to show that "Plants from crop formations display anatomical alterations which cannot be accounted for by assuming the formations are hoaxes."[1] Unfortunately, there are serious objections to Levengood's approach. First of all, while he uses various control plants for his experiments, nowhere in the papers I reviewed [1,2,3,4] is there any mention of the work being conducted in double-blind manner so as to minimize the effects of experimenter bias. (As one "cereologist," the Earl of Haddington, said of another laboratory that claimed to detect different "energy levels" between crop-circle and non-crop-circle areas [a concept that appears to have begun with dowsers], "When they are not told which sample came from a Crop Circle and which from a heap of grain in my back yard they are either unable or unwilling to give a result."[5])
The question of bias is important since Levengood's attitudes and assumptions reveal him as a partisan crop-circle "believer" of the Terence Meaden, ion-plasma-vortex variety. Alas, Meaden-who wrote several articles and books advocating the vortex hypothesis-was increasingly forced to conclude that great numbers of crop circles, especially the elaborate pictograms, were produced by hoaxers, and he reportedly abandoned interest in the subject. [6] Levengood's colleague, John A. Burke, seems particularly defiant towards "alleged hoaxers" [7], as if there were not powerful evidence that most-probably all-of the crop patterns were man-made.[8]

There is, in fact, no satisfactory evidence that a single "genuine" (i.e., vortex-produced) crop-circle exists, so Levengood's reasoning is circular: Although there are no guaranteed genuine formations on which to conduct research, the research supposedly proves the genuineness of the formations. But if Levengood's work were really valid, he would be expected to find that some among the putatively "genuine" formations chosen for research were actually hoaxed ones-especially since even some of Meaden's most ardent defenders admit there are more hoaxed circles than "genuine" ones. [6,8] In fact, there is now evidence that a major formation that Levengood believes genuine and uses as a basis for theoretical discussion-the "Mandelbrot" formation-was the work of hoaxers. [6]

Although Levengood finds a correlation between "structural and cellular alterations" in plants and their location within crop-circle-type formations (as opposed to those of control plants outside such formations) [1], he should know the maxim that "Correlation is not causation." As the noted Temple University mathematician John Allen Paulos recently demonstrated-quite tongue in cheek-there is a direct correlation between children's math ability and shoe size! [9] Comments statistician Rand Wilcox of the University of Southern California: "Correlation doesn't tell you anything about causation. But it's a mistake that even researchers make." [9]

That Levengood's work does not go beyond mere correlation in many instances is evident from his frequent concessions: For example, "Taken as an isolated criterion," he says, "node size data cannot be relied upon as a definite verification of a `genuine' crop formation." [1] Again he admits, "From these observed variations, it is quite evident that [cell wall] pit size alone cannot be used as a validation tool." [1]

Even his alleged correlations are suspect. Citing variations in pit expansion and node size in plants from within the formations, he states: "These energy distributions are by no means uniform."[10] Again, he cites formations where there were increases in plant pit size well outside the formations, saying that "some 20 feet out is the farthest I've seen this energy carryover and so even [though] those crops were standing upright and looked perfectly normal they had been hit." He attributes this to "several different kinds of energy" being involved. [10]

He thus gives the impression that, like Meaden, he is constantly rationalizing new data and attempting to fit it in to preconceived vortex notions. Apparently no one has yet independently replicated Levengood's work. One scientist from Colgate did attempt to verify his seed germination claims using some of his seeds but without success.[10] Apparently few mainstream scientists take Levengood's work seriously other than one or two friends who wish "to remain anonymous because of the ridicule. [10]

Until his work is independently replicated by qualified scientists doing "double-blind" studies and otherwise following stringent scientific protocols, there seems no need to take seriously the many dubious claims that Levengood makes, including his similar ones involving plants at alleged "cattle mutilation" sites.[10]

Acknowledgments
I am grateful to Franklin D. Trumpy, professor of physics, Des Moines Area Community College, for critiquing this article.
References
W. C. Levengood, "Anatomical Anomalies in Crop Formation Plants," Physiologia Plantarum 92 (1994): 356-363.
W. C. Levengood, "Technique for Examining Crop Circle Energetics," Report No. 18, [Pinelandia Lab], October 12, 1993.
W. C. Levengood and John A. Burke, "Delineation of Electromagnetic Energy Influencing Crop Formations," Report No. 24, Pinelandia and Am-Tech Labs, September 28, 1994.
W. C. Levengood and John A. Burke, "Study of Simulated Crop Formations, 1994," Report No. 27, Pinelandia and Am-Tech Labs, October 10, 1994.
The Earl of Haddington, letter to The Cereoloqist (Spring 1991), quoted in The Skeptics UFO Newsletter 10 (July 1991): 7.
Joe Nickell, "Crop-Circle Mania: An Investigative Update," Skeptical Inquirer, in press.
John A. Burke, Introduction to W.C. Levengood's Report No. 18 (see ref. 2).
Joe Nickell and John F. Fischer, "The Crop-Circle Phenomenon," chapter 11 of Joe Nickell with John F. Fischer, Mysterious Realms: Probing Paranormal, Historical and Forensic Enigmas (Buffalo: Prometheus Books, 1992), 177-210.
"Statistics Often Misused to Cite Links as Causes," Lexington Herald-Leader (Lexington, Ky.), January 5, 1995.
W. C. Levengood, telephone interview by A. J. S. Rays, December 8, 1994.
About the Author
Joe Nickell is CSICOP Senior Research Fellow.

@huxley,

A warm welcome to this thread. Here are a few considerations that might be of interest to you:

huxley:

In several technical papers, W. C. Levengood purports to show that "Plants from crop formations display anatomical alterations which cannot be accounted for by assuming the formations are hoaxes."[1] Unfortunately, there are serious objections to Levengood's approach. First of all, while he uses various control plants for his experiments, nowhere in the papers I reviewed [1,2,3,4] is there any mention of the work being conducted in double-blind manner so as to minimize the effects of experimenter bias. (As one "cereologist," the Earl of Haddington, said of another laboratory that claimed to detect different "energy levels" between crop-circle and non-crop-circle areas [a concept that appears to have begun with dowsers], "When they are not told which sample came from a Crop Circle and which from a heap of grain in my back yard they are either unable or unwilling to give a result."[5])

Every single objection from the above research has been soundly met by scientific researchers of the crop circle phenomena. Even the highlighted part of that entry does not present a serious objection - because the researcher seems to be sitting down lazily and expecting someone else to conduct an "independent" study that he would again dismiss as a "hoax".

However, I fail to see how the above research answers to the following well-attested observations of genuine crop circle phenomena from another scientist who has been involved in this study for some decades and has visited the sites of 2000 such occurences. Here are a few;

NHNE: What are the qualities that most distinguish an authentic crop circle from a hoax?

ANDREWS: These are the main ones:

-- Well-defined geometric design.

-- No damage to plants.

-- No soil compression or foot prints.

-- A spiral fingerprint recognized by my database.

-- Rotations verses diameter.

-- Changes in plants at cellular level (I personally think this is not yet established but has been published in the scientific literature).

-- Magnetic anomalies.

-- Established mathematical ratios between component parts.

That was why I posted just a link there for anyone interested to check these matters for themselves and ask serious questions about research carried out on site of those phenomena with those observations that were subjected to rigourous scientific scrutiny. The results? After visits to over 2000 such occurences, the hoaxes were about 80% with some self-confessed pransters - but what about the remaining 20% genuine crop circle occurences that are undeniably not man-made?

Some interesting news about crop circles:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/norfolk/content/articles/2006/09/22/feature_inside_out_crop_circles_20060922_feature.shtml

http://www.lifeinthefastlane.ca/crop-circles-mystery-unraveled/offbeat-news

http://www.ufoparts.net/Crop-Circle-Research-Explanation.ashx

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=0879759348/roberttoddcarrolA/

huxley:

Some interesting news about crop circles:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/norfolk/content/articles/2006/09/22/feature_inside_out_crop_circles_20060922_feature.shtml

http://www.lifeinthefastlane.ca/crop-circles-mystery-unraveled/offbeat-news

http://www.ufoparts.net/Crop-Circle-Research-Explanation.ashx

Lol, dear huxley, it is way tooooooooooooo easy for anyone to dismiss orphic phenomena as a "hoax" - a baby doesn't even have to try sooooooooo hard to do so. However, even the criteria given earlier from Colins Andrew were simply put there deliberately as a starter for simple disgestible form for anyone not yet familiar with the phenomena.

However, there was another scientific test conducted just to see if these phenomena could be replicated by human ingenuity using any method they chose - and come up with the same results as those which were said to have no signs of having being man-made. Let's see a bit of this and check the conclusions:

[list]Scientific analysis

In 2002, Discovery Channel commissioned five aeronautics and astronautics students from MIT to create crop circles of their own. Discovery's production team consulted with crop circle researcher Nancy Talbott, who provided them with three attributes that she believed set "real" crop circles apart from known man-made circles, such as those created by Doug Bower and Dave Chorley. These criteria were:

1. Elongated apical plant stem nodes
2. Expulsion cavities in the plant stems
3. The presence of 10-50 micrometer diameter magnetized iron spheres in the soils,
distributed linearly

Over the course of a single night the team was able to create a stereotypical "man-made" circle that they then attempted to enhance using the three criteria. The team used lengths of rope to plot their design and trampled the wheat down in a spiral pattern using lengths of wooden board attached to loops of rope. To meet criterion 2, they constructed a portable microwave emitter, using it to superheat the moisture inside the corn stalks until it burst out as steam. To meet criterion 3, they built a device - dubbed the "Flammschmeisser" - that sprayed iron particles through a heated ring. However, the device proved to be too time consuming to use, and they were forced to finish the task by using a pyrotechnic charge to distribute the iron around the circle. The circle was later analyzed by graduate students from MIT, who declared it to be "on a par with any of the documented cases". Their conclusion was later questioned by Talbott, who noted that the team had only been able to recreate two of the three criteria. Talbott also expressed concerns that the iron particles were not distributed laterally. Furthermore, she felt that the team's use of night vision headsets and other technologically advanced items would be out of reach for the average hoaxer.[35]

The creation of the circle was recorded and used in the Discovery channel documentary "Crop Circles: Mysteries in the Fields"

Source: Wikipedia[/list]

What's the point? Even when another researcher (Colins Andrew) may have given no less than 8 criteria for distinguishing genuine crop circle from hoaxes, isn't it remarkable that even the basic 3 given by Nancy Talbott to MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) students could not be met, given the freedom to do so with any form of technology available to them?

Further, one should seriously question whether the skeptics who look for excuses are actually trying to help their audience learn anything. This was how they constantly denounced the UFO phenomena until undeniable evidence began to emerge and we no longer heard them cough! I think when people are wont to dismiss issues with "smart" arguments, it should be clear that they're not actually seeking to find answers - at best, it is the usual slogan for them to say: "there are inconclusive evidences" - as if they were careful to check things out for themselves.

Enjoy!

As you would imagine, I am a skeptic on most of these. A skeptic is someone who reserves judgment until all the evidence is in. As for UFO, crop circles, and a few others, I am new to the subject and hold judgment. As a naturalist, I am not "convinced" that "supernatural" forces are behind these things.

If it turns out that they are not created by humans, what ever creates then or are UFO are part of the natural realm that we have yet to understand. Basically when science explains a previously unexplanaible phenomenon, that phenomenon becomes part of the natural and know.

Incidentally, what is the evidence that has now convinced people that UFO are real? I have not kept up to speed this UFOlogy later, so inform me, if you may.

Cheers and bye. Am off to bed now.

Dear huxley,

My apologies. . . I was having a chat a while ago offline and a friend drew my attention to the fact that I might have been too forward in my repostes to yours. Again, I apologise - because it is not in my place to have assumed this was about you or any poster.

Nonetheless. .

huxley:

As you would imagine, I am a skeptic on most of these. A skeptic is someone who reserves judgment until all the evidence is in. As for UFO, crop circles, and a few others, I am new to the subject and hold judgment. As a naturalist, I am not "convinced" that "supernatural" forces are behind these things.

If it turns out that they are not created by humans, what ever creates then or are UFO are part of the natural realm that we have yet to understand. Basically when science explains a previously unexplanaible phenomenon, that phenomenon becomes part of the natural and know.

Incidentally, what is the evidence that has now convinced people that UFO are real? I have not kept up to speed this UFOlogy later, so inform me, if you may.

Cheers and bye. Am off to bed now.

As for the UFO phenomena, I posted one earlier: https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-178839.32.html#msg2896671

Again, during the course of trying to grow this thread, I was being careful to not alarm readers with all sorts of excitements. That is why I constantly left disclaimers that pilgrim.1 had no answers - we see and observe these "orphic" phenomena and would not be vacant of thought as to make hasty conclusions, even when some of them are unquestionably attested as real.

Anyhow, thanks for your inputs - it was quite refreshing and helpful to see someone challenge these issues, rather than swallow them wholesale. Not that I question the occurences of genuine crop circle; but the reason why I had been slow to grow the thread was to afford me time enough to scrutinize what would be suitable to be posted on the forum, so that no one is unduely excited on hoaxes. Nonetheless, it would be helpful any other time where rigorous research that debunk these findings may be posted so everyone could learn - so please, where you may come across any such research, do not hesitate to post them.

Regards and thanks again.

@Pilgrim.1
I assume you are unable to continue growing this thread I can understand why. You see this topic is just too deep and if you get immersed in it as i once did, it could permanently change one's world views and perceptions of reality. I had wanted to start a similar thread months back but i just didn't know how to start it cos people would just assume one is nuts. Any way what is your take on the bibleufo and ooparts sites i refered you too?

KunleOshob:

@Pilgrim.1
I assume you are unable to continue growing this thread I can understand why. You see this topic is just too deep and if you get immersed in it as i once did, it could permanently change one's world views and perceptions of reality. I had wanted to start a similar thread months back but i just didn't know how to start it because people would just assume one is nuts. Any way what is your take on the bibleufo and ooparts sites i refered you too?

@KunleOshob,

Lol, how are you doing today? Actually, I admit to being slow. . infact, very slow indeed. . . to growing this thread. I should wake up soon on that. Some of the reasons you outlined are indeed true - for those who may dabble into these orphic phenomena without a very strong foundation may soon find their worldviews quaggy (whatever such a worldview is). Reality? Yes. But perceptions? The answers are varied.

However, what may be said is that no one honest enough to look into those occurences would pass them off as hoaxes - to do so would be d[/b]ishonest with a deliberate 'D'. Like I have often said and still maintain presently:

pilgrim.1:

Again, during the course of trying to grow this thread, I was being careful to not alarm readers with all sorts of excitements. That is why I constantly left disclaimers that pilgrim.1 had no answers - [b]we see and observe these "orphic" phenomena and would not be vacant of thought as to make hasty conclusions, even when some of them are unquestionably attested as real.

Most of the ones gleaned, I have tried to make every effort to go to independent sources to investigate them. Results? One cannot deny them out of hand. There are far too many real occurences for anyone to foolishly dismiss them. Some of those pointers are the stuff I'm trying to put in concise and digestible forms instead of filling the pages with very long posts to bore readers. Where they could not be helped, I shall summarise them and post the links.

Cheers.

ok, i look forward to sharing views on this topic

@KunleOshob & pilgrim.1
I hope it will be better than How To Fly To China As A Witch

Obinna how are you? Hope you thouroughly enjoyed your crusade

@KunleOshob
It went on fine.
But how do you find this topic https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-44159.0.html

obinna5000:

@KunleOshob & pilgrim.1
I hope it will be better than How To Fly To China As A Witch

Lol, obinna5000. . e go better!

Guys, sorry to have kept you waiting. Like I said, I don’t want to be an alarmist, and that is why I’m taking my time to sort things through the crop circle bit in order to sift the chaff from the wheat. Get what I mean? So, after having gone through every possible source critiquing the many reports, the gist will be in. . . and then UFOs will be back on air.

For now, a different variety of orphic phenomena will be posted. Unfortunately, there’s no way I could independtly ascertain the veracity of these occurences; but that is not to say that they were not real situations and events. What is clear is that these things happen in our world, and people are still studying them to understand their nature and intents. Observe, reflect, and draw your own conclusions – remember my disclaimers.

Many thanks.

1. Ghost Girl Caught On Tape?

What would you think of this scenario? Two girls turned to walk away, and from the ground a figure rose (apparently had been crouching) and speedily joins the girls to walk away.

[flash=425,355]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oB2kMgC_vyE&hl=en&fs=1[/flash]

Source: YouTube

@Pilgrim.1
The video link you posted is no longer available.

KunleOshob:

@Pilgrim.1
The video link you posted is no longer available.

That's something. I just clicked again and I'm watching it - both here on the forum and at YouTube site:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oB2kMgC_vyE

DISCLAIMER: My previous post does not represent my views, however it makes interesting reading.

KunleOshob,

This disclaimer is a welcome relieve

2. Dead Girl Causes Accident?

This is intriguing. Some guys picked up a girl late on night, who apparently was on her own on a lonely road. Shy, withdrawn and reserved, she continued the ride and was vague about what had happened to her. It turns out that she started pointing to a ‘spot’. . and finally told how she got an accident on that very spot! Before they could digest that, her face had changed somewhat, and. . . crash!!  It is said that police confirmed a girl by name as was picked up had died some years earlier on that spot before she appeared to get a ride from these unsuspecting chaps!

[flash=425,355]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XnH9OJP6FTk&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en&fs=1[/flash]

Source:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XnH9OJP6FTk