Category Archives: Crop Circle Connector

Crop Circles: The Ultimate Undercover Investigation

Despite the title, there’s nothing ‘undercover’ or ‘ultimate’ going on here. Cheesy as a deli counter 2003 documentary from Julian Gibsone for The Crop Circle Connector. Simeon Hein, Andreas Muller, Stuart Dike, Dan Darby, Peter Sorensen, Charles Mallett, Frances Mallett, are among the interviewees.

Staggering Hypocrisy [mc]

One would think that after the smacking he receives every season (literally so last year) Matt Williams would have gotten the point by now, but every spring the guy pops back up like a whack-a-mole. Making the same arguments which have been proven to be bullshit, and utterly oblivious to the fact that much of the croppie scene considers him a bollocks-talking troublemaker who has brought nothing but destruction to a subject they hold dear.

He seems to have moved away from talk of any Wiltshire boycotts this time round – perhaps even he’s having difficulty putting a pro-Matt spin on the fact that every single UK circle so far this year has been in Wilts. He’s also shut up about Monique Klinkenbergh and the “circles being cut is all her fault” lie he’s been spouting for the last three years, having finally admitted late last season and by-the-by that it wasn’t true. Is he going to apologise to Monique? No. Why? Because – in his words – “she’s a cunt”.

So what’s got him in a lather now? Circles he considers wonky. Same old. Matt, no one cares. What’s more, you don’t care either.

wonk-7-june-16

wonk-18-jun-16

Why do I say that? Because, Matt, if you really cared, you’d have posted a similar YouTube video and RACCF criticism regarding that piece-of-crap bird circle from last July, instead of heaping praise upon it as you did (see my post Flippin’ The Bird). These circles get ripped apart for alleged imprecision, whereas your mates can bang out any old shite and get patted on the back for it. It’s got nothing to do with wonky circles. It’s because these two 2016 circles weren’t reported to you. Because you don’t know who made them. Because you imagine them the work of people you’ve fallen out with. Because, Matt, as ever you’re more transparent than a window.

Even the Connector can’t help themselves this time round, as exhibited by their latest and breathtakingly hypocritical post:

june16-2016-fake1

I’m guessing the ‘RC’ initial here is Red Collie. It’d be too much to expect the Connector admins to actually put something together themselves instead of merely posting things other people send them. Collie, you do know that most of the other circles which the Connector gets the exclusive on are made by Matt’s mates and reported directly to him so he can photograph them, don’t you?

Miles Challett

…Must Be Funny [MC]

Money, money, money. Regular readers of RACCF, CCPMT and their ilk will know the stance these pages take on this aspect of the crop circle subject, though it’s less a stance and more an obsession. To them, croppiedom is brimming with sinister shysters who are only in it for the dosh, who will lie and distort to fleece you of every penny. Steve Alexander, flying and photographing circles, producing photo-books and running conferences? He’s only doing it to make money. Monique Klinkenbergh and her Crop Circle Access scheme? Your Wallet Access scheme, more like. Charles Mallett and Silent Circle? He’s just after your hard-earned, too. Circlemakers.org? The greatest sinners of all; they make crop circles for profit!

MoneyCropCircle

Part of the problem here is that RAPMT (as I will now collectively call them) cannot comprehend that others view the subject differently to them, and find it difficult to understand why people would want anything to do with it if there wasn’t a profit motive. Therefore it can only be the case that these people are hiding the truth from you in order to rob you blind. This says a lot more about RAPMT than it does about those it criticises. Whether it was RAPMT’s intention to profit from the subject themselves at one point or another in the past is also worth bearing in mind, though not the subject of this article.

Let’s look at this calmly, taking each of the criticised individuals named above in turn.

Steve Alexander does what he does because he loves crop circles and wants to document them. He has a passion for the subject, and wants to share that passion with others. Why does he use helicopters and not drones or microlights? Because the quality of the images acquired is far superior to images obtained using the latter. He’s a very skilled photographer who knows what he’s doing. And with all respect to the drone flyers (or droners, as I sometimes like to call them), Steve’s photos are far better than yours. Do the yearbooks and conferences make money? Perhaps a little, once all the costs are taken into account, not to mention the expenditure of time, but I’d imagine any profit goes into funding helicopter hire, which is far from cheap.

Regular readers of my posts will know that Monique Klinkenbergh has been criticised in some quarters since the very inception of her Crop Circle Access Pass scheme, which has degenerated to the level of bullying and harassment on the part of CCPMT. So why does she do it? Monique’s intentions are right, in my opinion. The situation in Wiltshire was a dire mess, with angry farmers cutting circles as soon as they appeared or were reported. Monique was not the reason circles were being cut. I’ve also covered this before. But to RAPMT, it’s always somebody else’s fault. Blame Monique. Blame Steve Alexander. Blame Team K Hole. Blame Charles Mallett. No. Blame yourself. Take some responsibility for once.

I applaud Monique’s efforts at building bridges with farmers. The Access Scheme, however, is unworkable in practice and doomed to fail in my opinion. Is she doing it for the money? No, she’s doing it because the situation in Wiltshire is in dire straits and somebody needs to save it. Does she make any money? I’d expect that once you take out her time and expenses any profit is non-existent. In fact I’d be very surprised if the access scheme hasn’t cost her far more personally than she’s made or is likely to make.

Charles Mallett and Silent Circle? Money-making scam? In what universe has that ever been remotely true? With apologies to Mr Mallett, let’s look at the Silent Circle’s history. Those of us who’ve been on the scene a long time remember when the Silent Circle began as a cafe along the side of the A4. We remember its constant closing, reopening, relocating from venue to venue. How could it ever be a profitable venture? Its target clientèle are only around for a few months of the year, and there aren’t exactly a great deal of them. It always functioned more as an information service and ‘drop-in centre’ anyway. Does anybody honestly imagine selling cups of tea and slices of cake and the occasional book or postcard could be a profit-making business? Try taking that one on Dragon’s Den; you’d be laughed out of the building. And each year Silent Circle got smaller, from dedicated venue to pub room to Yatesbury Village Hall to Barge Inn portacabin to Yatesbury Airfield. It wouldn’t surprise me if this year Charles is running it out of a deckchair in his front garden. So why do it? Because Charles is fascinated with crop circles. An information centre showing locations and images of the season’s circles is something Wiltshire has had for two decades, and a good thing for visitors, not all of whom check the internet every five minutes for the latest circular arrivals. Silent Circle and Monique, along with the Henge Shop in Avebury, are the only people currently providing this. Note also that Charles is often very critical of UK crop circles, especially those in Wiltshire, dismissing them as man-made. He’d hardly say that if he was trying to make money from the gullible, would he?

Circlemakers.org? These guys have been making circles commercially since the 1990s. And what of it? Anybody could have done what they’ve done. Anybody can present themselves as a commercial circle maker for hire. If you have the skill. That’s the thing. These gentlemen have formidable circle making ability. It’s too easy to sit on the sidelines grumbling, rather like musicians whose band never got anywhere while a similarly styled outfit had great success. If you can do it, do it. If you can’t, shut up.

Having written all that, I can’t help but feel a resounding “so what?”

Two reasons – first off, if someone makes a profit from the subject, good luck to them. There are many others who have done so, past and present, who I notice are not the subject of RAPMT’s ire. Colin Andrews, for example, oft boasts of how many copies Circular Evidence sold, which no doubt netted him a decent sum. The Crop Circle Connector charge a fee to access their archives, sell DVDs, and are one of the most advert-heavy websites I’ve ever visited. That’s how things go. Some farmers have profited from circles on their land, too, and nobody has a quibble with that. I especially applaud those farmers who donate profits recieved from circles visitors to charitable causes.

Second reason – this is crop circles we’re talking about. A rather minor interest subject, with far fewer dedicated followers than most and certainly compared to 20 or 25 years ago. There simply isn’t a large enough audience there for somebody to make stacks of wonga.

“The circle makers aren’t making any money”, Matt Williams has previously carped (with the exception of the .org chaps, of course). Well why the hell should they? What they do is illegal. They choose to do it, for their own reasons, and once they leave the field at the end of a night’s work that circle doesn’t belong to them any more. It’s out in the world, for all to see and visit and do as they wish with and have their own opinions on. “It’s yours because it’s free”, the Diggers famously said. And that is how it should be with crop circles.

So there you go. Money doesn’t come in to it, except in the case of a handful of individuals who are obsessed with the subject. More to the point, are disgruntled that they never made any. Whether they lacked the ideas, or the nous, or the skills, it never happened. And that makes them bitter. They see profit everywhere. Especially where there isn’t any.

Miles Challett

Crop Circles: The Pillocks, The Muppetry, The Tosh [MC]

I’ve been meaning to put up a post covering last season’s events on the bafflingly-named Crop Circles: The People, The Mystery, The Truth page for a while, but other things have intervened. Why ‘bafflingly-named’? By “people”, they mean “the half-a-dozen people we don’t like”. I don’t know what “mystery” has to do with anything, since the page admins seem to have convinced themselves they know the minutiae of everything circles-related, so by that definition there cannot be any “mystery”. By truth, they mean “ill-informed personal opinions, bigotry, re-posts from RACCF and whatever Matt Williams has pulled out from between his butt-cheeks this week”. Let’s have a look at what they have to say.

ccpmt mw pics jun 19 15

I’m not sure why CCPMT are so happy that Matt Williams has announced that all photographs marked Copyright Crop Circle Connector these days are taken by him, since it has severed the last threadbare strand of credibility the Connector still had as a cereological research body. Matt knows this, and seems content to let his friends fall on their sword – why else would the images be captioned with Connector copyright if not to obscure the fact that Matt took them and therefore knew about the circles before anybody else did?

Oddly, Matt has stated in the past that his images are free for anybody to use, so how can there be “large scale photo theft” taking place? He didn’t specify “they’re free to use, unless your name is x, y, or z”. The “Alexander… Database website” referred to here is www.cropcirclesdatabase.com, and despite RACCF/CCPMT’s allegations, I have yet to see any evidence that this site is run by Steve Alexander. Neither have RACCF/CCPMT, but they prefer to let their prejudice against Alexander make up their minds for them. Williams also seems confused as to exactly what “image theft” entails – all photos on said Database site are credited, with a URL to the site of their origin. Reproducing them without permission constitutes a breach of copyright, but is hardly “image theft”.

Personally, I consider the Crop Circles Database site an excellent and valuable research resource, whatever its legality or otherwise. Their images are taken not just from the Connector but from a number of other websites, including Steve Alexander’s Temporary Temples. Of all these websites, the Crop Circle Connector is the only one that charges a fee to access their archive.

While we’re on the subject of the Crop Circle Connector, what do Messrs Gibsone, Fussell, and Dike do, exactly, other than administer the page? They don’t take the photographs, they don’t draw the diagrams, they don’t write any of the reports or commentaries. All of this is given to them gratis by others, then disappears into the vaults and can only be viewed if you pay. Why do RACCF/CCPMT have no problem with this, when they are so vehemently critical of anybody else charging money for any aspect of the crop circle subject? Extraordinary, and extraordinarily hypocritical.

ccpmt solstice circles jun 24 15

The majority of CCPMT’s posts are regurgitations from RACCF, despite their claim that the pages have no affiliation whatsoever (a claim that is utter hogwash, as anybody who studies both pages closely can easily deduce). This example is pitiful, and shows how slight is their grasp of the crop circle subject.Sure, circle 2 pictured here is a bit of a cock-up and looks incomplete. Circle 1 is fine if a little askew (many formations, including those acclaimed by RACCF on account of being made by their mates, are askew to one degree or another). Circle 3 is one of the finest of the 2015 season and a very long way from being “an absolute mess” (see my June 27 2015 post A Rose By Any Other Name for a more detailed look at this formation). Every week, month, year, the quality of crop circles varies. Your point is what, exactly? “Created by a bunch of amateurs”? Every circle maker, including your fabled “master”, is amateur. The only individuals who could be considered professional circlemakers are the .org guys, who you despise for reasons I’ve yet to fully fathom.

ccpmt steve a jul 21 2015

I’ve previously written an entire post addressing the allegation of Steve Alexander commissioning circles. Nothing has been “proved.. before”. No, “Stevie hasn’t been a naughty boy”. “Yet again hes [sic.] been caught out”? What were the other times, pray tell? Williams is not “100% correct”. He is “100% making it up”.

ccpmt avebury business jun 26 2015

Not content to accuse Steve Alexander of commissioning circles – which is Bollocks with a capital B – it appears that other “business’s [sic.] in the Avebury area” are also now colluding in illegal activity for profit! If this is the case, CCPMT, your duty should surely be to take all the evidence you have gathered to the police. You do have evidence, don’t you? Thought not. You also have no proof whatsoever, despite “good suspicion” (i.e. guesswork), “that the owner of Silent Circle and others in the area and his shady friends are making crop circles to prop up their business’s [sic.]”. It’s a lie. If you have any proof, show it. You can’t, because you made it up. I know the circle pictured above had no connection whatsoever with Silent Circle or any other “business’s” because I know who made it. Do you? No, you don’t. You’re just talking cobblers.

ccpmt gary king 11 aug 15

Of course, everything Matty says about this squalid event is “all very true” and Gary is “a liar” and we should not believe “a word [he is] saying”. Thing is, for the most part their accounts of the event concur. Does that mean they cancel each other out,or connect and explode like matter meeting antimatter? Do tell!

Isn’t it uncanny how everything that was crummy about last year’s otherwise fine and business-as-usual crop circle season is gleefully proclaimed on this page and on RACCF? I do wonder why these people even remain on the croppie scene. They clearly feel no joy at a subject that has enriched and transformed the lives of a great many people.Their smug and bitter jottings exist only to mock. All who do not share their beliefs are considered fair game. Their only pleasure is in the superiority they feel over others. I sincerely wish they would just fuck off into the ether, and leave the rest of us to peacefully enjoy the circles in whichever way we choose to participate, be it researcher, observer, croppie, maker. Because despite everything there is still a great deal of wonder to be found, provided one puts in the effort, knows where to look, and trains one’s senses to shut out the fucktards shouting one down.

Miles Challett

Hoaxing Activity In The Etchilhampton Area

According to an article posted recently on the Silent Circle site, the “Etchilhampton Hill (Wiltshire, UK) area [has been] marked for substantial hoaxing effort” in 2016. The article is worth quoting in full:

“The area marked – north of Etchilhampton Village, Wiltshire, UK – has been marked by crop circle hoaxers and their supporters for substantial crop circle hoaxing activity during the summer of 2016.

The support structure that operates alongside the actual circle hoaxers comprises cropcircleconnector.com website, drone aerial photographer/s and Paul Jacobs, owner of the notorious yellow van – who charges unsuspecting visitors to the circles he covers outrageous fees to enter the given circle/s he covers.

The Holy Trinity: Jacobs and the yellow van, CCC website and convicted crop circle hoaxer / Drone photographer, Williams. It’s a scam and has nothing to do with the ‘real’ crop circle phenomenon. The primary reasons for the scam are…financial gain, website hits and something that amounts to deviant kicks for the hoaxers..they seem to get a thrill of sorts from conning people into believing that their vandalism is in some way special and meaningful. slightly creepy!”

Screen-Shot-2016-02-13-at-15.02.54-400x277

We do wonder how Charles Mallett knows this, exactly; does he have a “Deep Throat” circle making source? Is it merely guesswork on the grounds that the Etchilhampton farmers are known to be circles-friendly whereas a lot of other Wiltshire farmers are prone to cutting? It’s not exactly uncommon for the area to have circles; it has at least one or two every season. Only time will tell if Charles’ prediction is accurate.

Screen-Shot-2016-02-13-at-15.08.00-400x223

Addendum January 2017: As it turns out, only one circle appeared in the Etchilhampton area, which statistically means nothing for Charles’ claim. And as far as we’re aware, this circle had nothing to do with the “Holy Trinity” mentioned in Charles’ post, and merely appeared, unassuming, waiting to be discovered, as all the best circles should.

2016.08.09_18.42.50_-_Steve_Alexander

Farmers, Lies, & Videotape [MC]

Report A Crop Circle Formation and Matthew Williams persist in their claim that the reason farmers in Wiltshire are cutting out circles is down to Monique Klinkenbergh. They’ve been saying this so long they may even believe it. And it’s nonsense. Malicious, slanderous nonsense at that.

How do I know this? Ask the farmers why they are cutting circles. They’re the ones doing it. They should know.

Here’s a video interview with Tim Carson, who has farmed the land around Alton Barnes in the Vale of Pewsey since before circles first began turning up there. A great many circles have appeared in these fields since 1990 (more 120 by his estimation), and he has left them be. So why are they now being cut?

https://youtu.be/dGqmnE5g4x4 (I’ve had to put this one as a link because the YouTube settings exclude embedding)

Because the farmers in that area have had enough, basically. You’ll also note his support for Monique Klnkenbergh, and his statement that the cutting policy began before Monique’s involvement, both of which fly in the face of what Williams and RACCF are peddling. The importance of this last point cannot be underestimated. Monique’s intervention began in the summer of 2013, yet as these photos show the cutting of Wiltshire circles was already prevalent in 2012.

2014.11.25_15.14.10_-_Monique_Klinkenbergh

Woodborough Hill, June 2012. Photo by Monique Klinkenbergh.

2012-06-25_12-32-50_-_steve_alexander

Milk Hill, June 2012. Photo by Steve Alexander.

2014.11.25_15.19.56_-_Monique_Klinkenbergh

Wilcott, July 2012. Photo by Monique Klinkenbergh.

Jpeg

Lockeridge, July 2012. Photo by Monique Klinkenbergh.

2012-07-31_13-11-09_-_monique_klinkenbergh

Windmill Hill, July 2012. Photo by Monique  Klinkenbergh.

The timeline by itself destroys the “it’s all Monique’s fault” argument.

The honesty box theft Mr Carson mentions occurred in 2009, and is covered in this article. Another likely contributing factor to circles-cutting was Matthew Williams’ circlemaker TV, which showed circle makers openly bragging of which circles they had constructed, and with a great deal of antagonism towards the farming community. The show began airing in 2010. A backlash from farmers was predicted at the time by members of the Crop Circle Connector forum and was of course ignored.

The following video was shot inside a circle in the field below Milk Hill in 2012 (see second photograph above), another area where circles have been appearing in abundance for decades without being cut. So why is the farmer cutting?

The audio on this video isn’t the best. If you can’t make out his words, here’s what he says:

“I’ve just seen shitty things what Matt Williams and Terry and all them dickheads who make them…. Coming back, you know that one we had a few years ago, and they’d do a bit one night then they’d come back and do a bit more. I caught them with my own eyes, I caught them making a crop circle on our field. And that’s what I don’t want. And I know that if I cut their crop circles out they won’t come back and do another one… I cannot understand how much they wind me up. And they’ll sit and they smirk just smirk at me… I hate them.”

So there you have it. Why are farmers cutting circles? Because they’ve had enough, because of piss-taking circle makers, and because of Matthew Williams. No mention of Monique Klinkenbergh, except in positive terms.

Look, RACCF. Look, Matt. Your allegations are utterly bogus. The farmers have said so. Stop pointing the finger elsewhere, grow a pair, and face up to it.

Miles Challett

Connectorgate

The Crop Circle Connector have become rather embroiled in controversy of late, thanks to Matthew Williams explicitly stating that all photos that appear on their website marked ‘copyright The Crop Circle Connector’ are taken by him. See Facebook screen captures below.

raccf mw cc photos

This is an edited version of the post; we were unable to get screen captures of it before it was changed. The original was much more explicit in stating that all photographs marked as (c) Crop Circle Connector were taken by Williams. The whole thread has since been deleted. This next post was from some days later, but makes the position clear. Only the first few lines are relevant for the purposes of this discussion.

raccf mw cc photos 2

Unsurprisingly, Charles Mallett has picked up the ball and run from one side of Wiltshire to the other with it:

Screen-Shot-2015-06-28-at-21.08.36-600x361

Nancy Talbot and the BLT research team have also formally and publicly withdrawn their support for the Connector (this screenshot is from Monique Klinkenbergh’s Facebook group and also shows her stance):

talbot

How have the Connector themselves reacted? With their usual stock policy whenever courted by criticism, i.e. ignore it and wait for things to quieten down. The same can’t be said of Matthew Williams, however, who responded with ‘so what?’ and ‘no big deal’ RACCF posts, which have since been removed (though see our second screen capture above for a flavour).

The thing is, this story isn’t really news; we’ve known about the Connector’s photography source for some time, and we suspect quite a few of our readers have, too. Though regardless of how many videos and RACCF posts Williams makes, we can’t help but think he has missed the point. This isn’t about him. It’s about the Connector. They’re the ones being criticised, not him. He may say ‘so what’ but we doubt many of the Connector’s regular readers or paying subscribers, many of them far from the fields of Wiltshire and reliant on the Connector for research data, would see it that way.

It’s been said before on this blog, but bears repeating. The Crop Circle Connector has long abdicated their supposed role as crop circle researchers. They’re a PR company for circle makers.

The Protected Connector

We’ve always found Report A Crop Circle Formation’s and Crop Circles The People The Mystery The Truth’s ‘turn over tables in temples’ attitude somewhat at odds with the selectiveness of their targets. We were therefore very interested earlier in the summer when Crop Circles Anonymous asked CCPMT why The Crop Circle Connector were exempt from their criticism, despite the Connector clearly having profited from crop circles (as an aside, we’d remind you that RACCF and CCPMT still insist they have no connection, despite sharing the same attitudes, allies, enemies, outlook, and unique linguistic style. We don’t believe them; whether you do is up to you).

Here’s Crop Circles Anonymous’ post:

This was. we’d imagine, prompted by this post by CCPMT on May 5 2014:

  
A contrary state of affairs indeed and CCA were, we feel, justified in their questioning. The responses were wisely captured and preserved by CCA, as CCPMT have a liberal deletion policy with regard to posts and comments on their page:
 A further and most curious comment on the matter was made by the “nothing whatsoever to do with CCPMT” RACCF a little later:
So effectively what these two pages are saying is that, despite The Crop Circle Connector embodying everything they so vehemently criticise others on the crop circle scene for, they won’t say anything because the Connector are mates. At least they’re honest about it, and don’t even appear to be denying it once you wade through the shoddy English and obfuscation. This does of course make a sham of their ‘we oppose crop circle deception and profiteering’ stance, but there you go; they said it, not us.

The Recurring Circle

On 22 June 2014, just after the summer solstice, a new circle appeared in a barley field by the side of West Kennett Longbarrow. It was quickly recognised as a remake of a circle that appeared in the same field – then wheat – in 2011. Herewith the two side by side for comparison.

west-kennett-2014

West Kennett, 22 June 2014. Photo by Nils Fordall.

2011-07-27_22-19-08_-_wccsg

West Kennett 25 July 2011. Photo by WCCSG.

Less acknowledged is the fact that the original had itself appeared twice in 2011; the second version was in a barley field on the other side of the barrow, and began as a centre circle with ring on May 17, with additional rings added on June 23.

2011.05.22_10.39.37_-_Olivier_Morel

West Kennett, 17 May 2011; this photo was taken before the additional rings were added in June. Photo by Oliver Morel / WCCSG.

We liked this design in 2011, and we still like it now in 2014; there is a beauty and a harmony to its proportions, and an underlying pentagonal geometry which makes its apparent simplicity deceptive. Andrew Edwards elaborated on this on his website cropcirclegeometry.co.uk – please read Andrew’s article at the link to understand why there is a lot more to this design than first meets the eye.

Others, however, were less impressed by the reappearance of this design.

The first to put the boot in, surprisingly, were The Crop Circle Connector; we say ‘surprisingly’ because it is unusual for them to be this critical of a circle, especially one as neat and elegant as this.

westkenntt2014r

Matthew Williams swiftly followed, along with Report A Crop Circle Formation. Unfortunately the relevant thread on RACCF was deleted before we could screen-capture it, so we are unable to reproduce their comments; herewith some of Williams’ comments from a few days later, which echo the same sentiment.

mw Kennett comments jun 25

Screen capture from Report A Crop Circle Formation, 25 June 2012 – please note that these comments were made after the West Kennett circle was wrecked; see below.

Guys, calm the frak down! It’s only a crop circle! What is your problem? Well actually we know exactly what the problem is. This is a beautifully designed and made crop circle, and you guys have no idea how it got there. It wasn’t the work of your mates or anybody who tips you off, and it gloats in the face of your ‘no circles in Wiltshire this year’ campaign. The reader will also see, in the screenshot of Matthew Williams’ comments above, the ridiculous suggestion that this circle was made by Charles Mallett and Monique Klinkenbergh. No, it wasn’t.

Within a few days the circle was trashed, and not by the farmer (who had given permission for visitors to enter). A small single ring in the same field was also wrecked. Who could have done such a thing, if it wasn’t the farmer?

west kennett wrecked 2014

trashed ring 2014

The finger of suspicion was soon pointed at Matthew Williams and/or RACCF; the destruction certainly furthered their ‘boycott Wiltshire’ notions, and the ring being turned into a ‘No!’ left a very clear message. Their amusement and lack of concern at the trashing of these circles – which most people found abhorent – did little to support their denials of any involvement.

raccf kennett trashing comments

Report A Crop Circle Formation’s response. They have since deleted this thread. Note also the similarity in style with the screenshots in our ‘ET Go Home’ and ‘Xenophobia, Bigotry & Crop Circles’ posts.

mw kennett comments jul 1

Understandably feelings ran high over these actions and over the possible identities of those involved. On 30 June Crop Circles Anonymous issued a very strongly worded statement:

“Observers of the crop circle subject cannot help but be aware of a worrying trend this season. Circles which appear outside Wiltshire are first reported via aerial photographs on The Crop Circle Connector. Anybody familiar with the history of that website and its image sources will know who is behind the camera. Circles which appear in Wiltshire, without the prior knowledge of The Crop Circle Connector and its contacts, are rubbished, and – in some cases – physically destroyed.

Matthew Williams and Report A Crop Circle Formation would like you to believe that they are the voice of crop circles and of crop circle makers. They are not. Their views are their own, and shared by few.

Matthew Williams and Report A Crop Circle Formation would also like you to believe that there is a unanimous boycott of Wiltshire fields by crop circle makers. This is a lie. These individuals have decided they want a boycott, to further their vendettas against Charles Mallett and Monique Klinkenbergh. Circle makers who do not agree with this, or who have no interest in politics, have seen their work destroyed by those who purport to speak on their behalf.

Crop circles appear as and where they will. Nobody controls them. Any claim to speak for all circle makers is a nonsense. Observers should also take note that the Wiltshire crop circles are clearly nothing to do with these self-appointed spokesmen or any of their associates. They are unauthored, unclaimed, untethered from any individual or agenda. As crop circles should be.

Matthew Williams, Report A Crop Circle Formation, and The Crop Circle Connector are not the voice of crop circles. Crop circles belong to everyone. All crop circles, regardless of their location or relative quality. Do not allow bigots to take what is not theirs.”

But the West Kennett crop circle design wasn’t done yet, and appeared for a fourth time on 13 July, in a wheat field adjacent to the 22 June iteration. Unfortunately this version had a very short lifespan and was cut out by the farmer on the day it was discovered; the poor man being of course the silent victim in this sorry tale and who had no doubt had enough of the whole business. It was however photographed from the air by Nils Fordal:

2014.07.13-West-Kennett-Longbarrow-1x600

As can be seen, this version is also very neatly made, and – despite the claims of its detractors – clearly not the work of newcomers. Whoever made it was skilled and knew what they were doing. Note also that it appears to have the same dimensions (and relationship to the tramlines) as its June 22 2014 sibling. Although swiftly cut, it was visited and photographed at ground level very early in the morning of 13 July.

Ground shot and comments via Silent Circle website.

west kennet 13 jul 2014 ground report

P12605281

One would think that the message in this design’s destruction and subsequent reappearance was clear. Matthew Williams, however, was far from happy. You’ll remember his inexplicable indignation (see above) about the 22 June version of this design; this latest incarnation seemed to tip him over the edge.

williams July West Kennett

While most observers were too busy being dumbstruck to respond, once again Crop Circles Anonymous stepped into the fray, with the following response to Williams on 16 July, with which we have to say we agree and which expresses things much better than we could:

“And people accuse us of ranting. Regardless we are grateful to Matthew Williams, as his outburst provides an excellent opportunity for us to address several issues.

It does indeed beggar belief that one who has consistently been so scornful of farmers in the past should now speak in their defense. We will address this point in greater detail below.

Mr Williams regards these circles as ‘boring’. That is his subjective view. They do not exist for his benefit. Others have enjoyed them.

Mr Williams wonders ‘am I missing some gigantic point here’? Clearly he is. It does not occur to him (and he is not alone in this) to simply ask that there may be a reason why the same design has appeared four times in the same location in different years. But grasping deeper meanings never was Mr Williams’ strong point.

Circles have appeared in these fields since the late 1980s. The farmer has for the most part been circles-friendly throughout, leaving formations intact and allowing visitors. He did just that with the ringed circle that appeared in this location on 22 June of this year. There is no reason to suspect that ordinarily he would not have done so with this latest circle. So what changed?

The June 2014 circle, and a small ring which featured in the same field, were wrecked by nocturnal visitors several days after they appeared. Mr Williams has previously made the extraordinary claim that this was done by the farmer. It was not. He knows who did it, as do we. These attacks caused more damage to the field than the circles or their visitors would have done, and are likely the reason the circles were cut. Until then the farmer showed every intention of leaving them be. It follows that the cutting of this latest circle is more likely a pre-emptive act on the farmer’s part rather than a particular anti-circles policy.

Mr Williams further writes, “As regards hammering the same field again and again – I thought this nonsense went away after last years antics.” If this statement were heartfelt, why was it not made when circles appeared at Woodborough Hill in June of this year? Because – unlike the Silbury Hill circles – those circles were made by friends of Mr Williams, who notified him, allowing him to photograph them before the farmer removed them? Surely not.

Which brings us to a wider point. Why are previously circles-friendly farmers cutting circles? In the case of West Kennett 2014, we have detailed above what we consider may be pertinent factors. But why, after more than 20 years of circles not being cut in the Vale of Pewsey, was such a policy introduced in 2012, a policy continued to date and the “last years antics” Mr Williams refers to?

Mr Williams, did you not think that in your ongoing contempt for farmers, that when you insulted them on your internet show, that when your associates in seeking a taste of acclaim boasted of which circles they had made and where, the farmers would not take notice? Did you not think that despite the masks the farmers know who these people are? “They’ll never catch me”, proclaimed one. Perhaps not, but they can cut out any circles as soon as they appear.

We fail to see how the Silbury Hill circles “add to… “ITs Manmade” being shouted through a megaphone directly at 1ft into your ear drum.” How could they? They are simply anonymous crop circles. Their originator is silent. The only persons shouting such words at such volume are Mr Williams and his Report A Crop Circle Formation associates.”

Williams’ response to that was long, rambling, and for the most part nonsensical; we reproduce it here in the interests of fairness of debate and to give an indication of the quality of discussion or lack thereof.

mw cca response pt 1

mw cca response pt 2mw cca response pt 3mw cca response pt 4Two further perspectives well-illustrate the divisive nature of this circle.

The first is from Matt Gyro, a newcomer to the crop circle scene. Note that Gyro also makes the incorrect assumption that it was the farmer that destroyed the June circles, and takes the opportunity to have a dig at Monique Klinkenbergh and make the utterly unfounded allegation that these circles were made for profit, his thinking undoubtedly influenced by Matt Williams and RACCF.

”Deja Vu? Today we were told of another crop circle in Wiltshire next to… West Kennet Long Barrow. We were slightly surprised to hear of another formation in the same little patch of Wiltshire that has already been bestowed with not one but two formations in the last few weeks…

But wait, are you sure that’s a new circle? It looks a lot like the previous circle… In fact it looks identical!…

Now we were disappointed. It wasn’t a new exciting design, it was a iteration of a design we had seen in the same location only a few weeks earlier.

We then got to thinking. I bet the farmer is annoyed… We can see that the farmer that owns the little patch of Wiltshire has clearly reached [the stage where] his frustration has manifested itself in the form of a genuine massacre of crop circles on his land.

All three of the formations on his land have been defaced and now, cut-out…

So why is this happening? Why are we seeing formations in the same field? Why are we seeing the same designs repeated just weeks apart?

Surely the message from the farmer was clear when the two earlier formations were defaced. He does not want them on his land…

We think that the circles that are appearing in the fields next to West Kennet Long Barrow are indeed the work of men. We believe that these particular men are quite amateur and are not blessed with the gift of imagination and show a complete lack of artistic vision. It is our opinion that these men are driven by greed and the desire to make money from believers and general tourists that visit the lovely county of Wiltshire. We think that they continue to show no concern for the feelings of the farmer who’s crop they continually damage….

To all of you crop circle fans out there we offer this piece of advice:-

Do not feel that you must part with your cash to enjoy the formations. Do not feel obliged to buy into any schemes that promise to give you access to the crop circles and lure you in by promising that the money you have paid is given to help the famers [sic] who’s crops have been damaged.

Remember that even some of the crop circles that give off that magical energy and have a special feeling about them may have actually been created by incredibly artistic, smart and intelligent human beings that we label “Circle Makers”.

Crop circles are made to be enjoyed and admired by all, don’t let people monetise them to further there own agendas. There are websites, including ours (shameless plug) that will give you photographs and videos for free. Print them out, make your own calendar or postcards, you don’t have to pay for these things. Of course if you want to, that’s fine…

It’s just an opinion.”

Indeed it is just an opinion, and one we find wrong in many respects.

The second perspective, from circles veteran Jack Sullivan, is rather different:

‘Who or whatever is responsible for the persistent effort to draw our attention to this formation design, has been determined to confront us with it over three years since May 2011.

This, it now appears, was due to the fact that it is far from being just a random arrangement of bands of flattened and standing crop, it has been asking us the question we our selves ask, viz, does it have a meaning? and awaiting an answer from us

Up until the last few days no one has been able to proffer a viable answer but now a Mathematician and Geometer, Andrew Edwards, after his brilliant analysis, is able to show that the formation is a very clever and elegant demonstration of the geometric relationship between circles of particular dimensions and a series of Polygons. All the circles forming the edges of the bands are a structure for five precisely dimensioned polygons. See Below:- The design embeds 5 regular polygons:-

image003

One square, One Pentagon, two Hexagons, and one Heptagon. Inwards from the outer circle the number of sides of each polygon are 4: 5: 6: 7: 6:

This means that the formation design is one of the most significant in crop circle history, demonstrating an ability and level of intelligence we have not seen in our run of the mill known human circlemakers. It ranks in importance with the famous Barbary Castle Pi formation and is a more difficult problem to solve in that the Pi formation arrived complete with all necessary information for the solution visible in the field. That is not the case here.”

Both these perspectives appeared on The Crop Circle Connector. Oddly, Gyro’s appeared on the main page for the 13 July circle while Sullivan’s was relegated to a sub-page. Is this due to a bias on The Connector’s part?

Matters calmed down a little as July moved on, with new circles drawing people’s attention, but we still think it remarkable that such an unassuming and subtle crop circle as this could have been such an unexpected opener of so many cans of worms and the focus of so much debate. Or perhaps not; crop circles have frequently done extraordinary things to people. That is after all their purpose.