Jeroen, an accredited PhD is at least an indication that your ability to argue your case has been well articulated and has stood up to criticism in an academic environment. A correspondence course, like that offered by the Clayton College of Natural Health, doesn't do that. And it says something...
I note with interest that Penny Kelly also refers to Levengood as 'Dr.'. It might be wise to contextualise this error in terms of Kelly's own doctorate from the Clayton College of Natural Heath, whose 'use of degree titles may be restricted or illegal in some jurisdictions' (according to Wiki).
While there's nothing wrong with checking an aerial photo for construction flaws that could be attributed to people, if by implication a 'flawless' crop circle is assumed to be 'genuine' (i.e. not man-made) then the methodology itself is flawed for the simple reason that man-made circles spawned...
1. It wasn't cut.
2. There was no immediate difference between the flattened plants and the standing plants, except that some were flat and some were standing.
3. Most fields in Wiltshire are conveniently accessible.
Malf, it's just relatively young barley, not ready to be cut for another month or so. I put it up here because it presents a different appearance to the examples Trancestate put up. The lines you see are, yes, tractor lines but for spraying rather than cutting.
That's not quite what I meant, though I note the similarity to one of my favourite quotes, from Geraldine Finn: We are always both more and less than the categories that name and divide us.
What I meant was that once a 'fringe' subject becomes universally recognised and understood it ceases to...
I agree with this.
And this. It's not that I disagree with the rest of what you say, just that I don't know enough about those things to form an opinion. Like you said yesterday, we can't be into everything.
I've read Sheldrake's book. I quoted from it yesterday. I've met him a few times too...
Of course, the day it is proved/discovered/understood is the day it ceases to be paranormal – it becomes normal. 'Today's magic is tomorrow's science' and all that.
The circles were very evocative, even when the phenomenon was limited to simple circles. Perhaps less so now because too much...
I enjoyed the Jack Hunter interview.
"For me personally, I think it’s too early to really come up with any kind of solid, definitive model of what’s going on. But I do think that whatever it is that’s going on, it’s going to be way more complicated than we’re even aware of at the moment."
I wrote: But Matt Williams' approach also yields scientific results: Making crop circles and observing how people respond to them is just as scientific, albeit in a different way. Not all science has to be done in a lab. That is proper fieldwork.
Oh it is, regardless of whether Matt (or you...