Quote:
Originally Posted by TRANCOSO
Jonah, Im a very 'cheerful' person, but I get very aggitated when I smell trolls.
I'm always open for well documented statements opinions on a subject, but in this case I just notice 2 persons throwing in a lot of blunt statements.
The 'Matthew' video has as much scientific value as the Nat. Geo. documentary. None.
The crop formation discussion is not about what's obviously man made, it's about that which cannot be explained.
I've often been to Wiltshire, saw very complex formation appear in broad daylight with only a one hour interval, no tracks to be seen & a pattern only vissible from the air.
Both Soulcrafter & Trainedobserver make a mockery of the crop circle subject & that really pisses me off.
The forum is not meant for (big time) BS posts. At least, that's my opinion.
(I'm not hiding behind an anonymous avatar. Anybody who wants to know what TRANCOSO's real name is - who I am - can find me at www.ikgeloofalles.nl - as I've already posted before in a seperate thread.) |
Sorry, i just dont believe you. You are most probably part of the "lets lie to damn the ******* circlemakers" brigade. Sorry to be blunt but circles dont appear in broad daylight. Its just that simple.
If so, please oh pretty please tell me which one you saw that formed infront of you. I really am all ears on this. Go ahead make my day. I cant wait to tell the circlemakers who created it that apparently they are all mentally ill and deluding themselves that they were out at night creating it!
Seriously though dude. This isnt funny hearing people saying this stuff.
Re: National geo and other documentaries. What you maybe dont realise is that journlists come along and they basically put their cards down on the table with researchers and tell them what they intend doing. This causes researchers to say "If your going to film or speak to circlemakers we wont give you an interview". Which is why now a lot of docu makers dont say who they are working with because researchers just pull tantrums and pull out. However journalists arent interested in b******t they want the inside story. So they speak to everyone, get the juicy angles and play one side off against the other for entertainment purposes. However they will usually come down more favourably on the side they know is telling the truth. So after speaing to both sides which side usually wins the truth argument??? Well circlemakers every time! The only time you see "circles cant be made by people" put forward in a docu is when the docu makers have a bias agenda or believers making those documentaries, orthey are codus made by crop circle lovers like Suzanne Taylor (grrr). National Geo arent in the business of siding with the loonies of the world... and the arguments given by researchers are easily washed away with demonstrations with circlemakers making circles.
One journalist this year gave us a list of things the researchers said we couldnt create. So we ticked everything off on their list by creating those effects in front of the cameras. No lengthy set ups either, we were being challenged to do it - so we did it with no questions asked, bosh bosh... theres your circles with those effects present. You see the difference is that we as circlemakers have factual things we can do and show. Researchers make claims. thats the difference. We actually go out and show what we can do. Thats fact. Journalists can see the difference. Now we cant win against people who want to make up wild stories that cannot be disproved but it just goes to show how far the believer community will go.