A new video series from circles researcher Gary King. Episode one focuses on the recent circle at Waden Hill, Avebury, Wiltshire, with some excellent drone footage and Gary’s on-site ground analysis.
I’m long in the tooth enough to have lived through several ends-of-the-world that weren’t, so eyelids were scarce batted when Report A Crop Circle Formation’s predicted ‘2015 Armageddon?’ did not come to pass.
RACCF’s banner image* is both hilarious and confounding, a collection of straw-men the likes of which have not been seen since the legendary Wiltshire Farmers’ Scarecrow Convention of 1989.
Let’s start with their “every truth” hyperbole, and note that ‘truth’ is one of RACCF’s favourite words. By any logical analysis this is flat-out incorrect. ‘Truth’ is entirely relative, and throughout human history there have been many commonly accepted ‘truths’ that were never “violently opposed”. This statement is an intellectual nonsense.
Next, we get to their analysis of 2014 – regular readers of my blog, and other “counter to RACCF” news pages, will know that every line of this is baloney.
What ‘truth’ – that word again! – has been hidden? Since the 1980s there has been a tremendous amount of investigation into and public exposure of circle making – not only via rent-a-rant Matthew Williams and the circlemakers.org gentlemen, but by crop circle researchers. To name but some – Jenny Randles, Paul Fuller, Ian Mrzyglod, Ken Brown, George Wingfield, Rob Irving, Jim Schnabel, John Macnish, Terence Meaden, Jurgen Kronig, Peter Rendall, Peter Sorensen, Terry Brown, Freddy Silva, Simeon Hein… I have little doubt that most of these names – let alone their work – are unheard of to RACCF.
Have circle makers been ignored? If RACCF’s feed is anything to go by, the buggers couldn’t shut up even if they tried, and silence should of course be the creed of any circle maker worth their salt in the first place. I’m reminded of ‘goatboy’ from The Crop Circle Connector Forum’s summation of the role of the circle maker (which I have also seen attributed to Rob Irving) as “Enter field. Make circle. Leave field. Shut the fuck up”. If anything circle makers should be ignored if they want their circles to be taken seriously, to stand and be considered on their own merits. If they don’t like this, and want artistic acclaim, they shouldn’t make circles. Simples.
As for “start selling tickets”, “farmers cut out circles”, and “act like not your fault [sic.]”, I shan’t go over these points again here as they have all been dealt with previously on this blog and I don’t wish to needlessly repeat myself. Instead I refer you to the articles Farmers, Lies and Videotape, The Boycott That Still Never Was, and “Sadly It Has Come To This”, amongst others.
Andrew Pyrka likes to imagine himself a shepherd of men, a table-turning messiah come to spread the ‘truth’ amongst the ignorant. It doesn’t seem to have occurred to him – or any of his RACCF brethren – that anybody could possibly have ever considered crop circles to be man-made in the past, despite more than 20 years of extensive investigation into and documentation of this aspect of the subject before he bumbled onto the scene. His ignorance of the subject and its history is sometimes breathtaking. Oh how we laughed when for example he discussed the ‘malting stage’ of barley. Oh how we laughed when he accused for example Rob Irving (yes, the same Rob Irving who has publicly espoused a human origin since 1992, producing countless articles, two books, and numerous TV appearances) of distorting evidence in order to deceive others into believing a non-human origin of crop circles. Oh how we laughed again and again.
Like most messianic wannabes, Mr Pyrka’s world-view is depressingly black and white. In his mind, either one knows the ‘truth’ that all crop circles are made by human artists, or one believes that all crop circles are made by aliens. In reality, of course, different people believe a great many diverse things, and even those who entertain the view that some crop circles may have a non-human origin hold a wide and arrayed range of opinions as to the essence of that source. Only for a few is it aliens.
Let the people consider Exhibit # 1, the massively magnified to the point of blurring photographs of bits of field and hedge and tree-line, in which Mr Pyrka’s pareidoliac eyes see ‘aliens’. If we couldn’t see them too we were simply wrong. Here are some examples. Mr Pyrka claims to have never digitally manipulated his images. I don’t believe him.
Let the people consider Exhibit #2, the blog Andrew Pyrka Watch, which documents more examples of Mr Pyrka’s chicanery than I have the time, space, or enthusiasm for here.
Let the people consider Exhibit #3, #4, #5, and #6, Mr Pyrka’s own website and Facebook pages, Crop Circle Wisdom (a great deal of which has been doctored or deleted over the years though thanks to The Way Back Machine we can still read it as originally written), Report A Crop Circle Formation, the Crop Circle Wisdom Facebook page, and Crop Circles The People The Mystery The Truth (note that Mr Pyrka denies any association with this latter page. Note also that that its unique, ungainly, pidgin grammatical style is identical to those of himself and his RACCF colleague and close associate Sue Davies).
Let the people consider Exhibit # 7, Report A Crop Circle Formation Exposed, which, like Pyrka Watch, has done a great deal of work in uncovering Mr Pyrka’s and RACCF’s sleight-of-fact.
Let the people assess all the above evidence, and make up their own minds as to the ‘truth’, and as to whether Mr Pyrka is indeed the chosen one or merely a deluded Cheltenham taxi driver.
I’ve touched in other posts on the subject of control, which in my opinion is the real underlying message here. RACCF’s relentless silencing of any dissenting view via post-deletion and banning on their pages. The persecution of Monique Klinkenbergh, Steve Alexander, and Silent Circle, all of whom provide information and commentary on the circles which runs counter to RACCF. The inane ‘Wiltshire Boycott’ and the seamy ‘Wellygate’. The vile personal attacks on the above individuals, and against Suzanne Taylor, Michael Glickman, Francine Blake, Gary King, Terry Hall, and numerous others, simply because they happen to hold differing opinions on the subject of crop circles, all the while championing themselves as the only source of ‘truth’. They want total control of the subject. They want theirs to be the only views you hear. They want to be the one and only source of information for new circles, for commentary on those circles, and to know (and to have the right to sometimes hint at) the authorship of all circles. If they can’t have that, if they can’t shape the crop circle phenomenon into a product of their own management and guidance, they want to destroy it.
If there is to be an Armageddon, it is one of these chumps’ own making.
(Posted on CCPMT, October 2014)
*Note that in between the first draft of this article and my finalising and posting it, RACCF changed their banner image – here is the current version.
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.
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.
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.
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”.
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.
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.
Somewhat bland and sensationalist “are crop circles made by aliens?” documentary. Charles Mallett, Linda Moulton Howe, Eltjo Haselhoff, Nancy Talbot, Gary King, and sundry ufologists provide the research perspective. Rob irving, John Lundberg, and Wil Russell recreate the May 1 2005 Alton Priors circle for the cameras.
Michael Glickman talks to Gary King, c.2011.
The infamous ‘Wellygate’, as our friend Miles Challett calls it, has made it into the Daily Mail. Article here, screens below.
The latest post from Report A Crop Circle Formation Exposed is worth quoting in full:
“At the end of last year I made a conscious decision not to get too involved this season. It had become tiring and thanks to the characters on RACCF, like dealing with the Jeremy Kyle Show does Crop Circles. In any event, the purpose of this page seemed to have been achieved, RACCF and those who run it had been ‘exposed’. Worse still for them Matthew Williams had taken the reins over there and what with his hypocritical, corporate stooge stance with regard to pseudonyms, the tens of thousands of bought ‘likes’ and his laughable boycott of Wiltshire was fast running the page into the ground. But Williams being Williams will always find a way to make a bloody nuisance of himself and, sure enough, this season has been no exception. I am, of course, talking about the Gary King incident, or Wellygate as our friend Miles Challett has referred to it. You’ve all seen Charles Mallett’s Skype videos with Gary and I’m equally sure that by now you’ve seen the two reply videos Williams has finally finished editing to show himself in the best light and posted on his truthseekers666 YouTube channel. Unedifying as the denouement of those videos may be they show, as Gary King claimed, the antics of a thuggish boor flying a quadcopter illegally and harassing two occupants of a crop circle who then goes on to confront and shout abuse at his victims in a car park and receive a well deserved smack in the mouth and boot in the cobblers for his pains. So much for a right to reply but if you look at his YouTube channel a third almost non sequitur video in that it refers to, but has no connection with, recent events was also posted. Entitled “A Message to Tim Carson and Others” it is an extraordinary piece and well worth a view, raising more than one point worth commenting on.
“In the video Williams makes the statement “I have not made circles since I was convicted” which was nearly 15 years ago, I believe. OK. That’s a flat lie. What’s more there are many circle makers out there who know it’s a lie. He’s made circles all over Wiltshire, including on the Carson’s land, so the real question is why circle makers who have worked with him continue to support him in this lie? Why are you doing it because if he’s lying so easily about this what else is he lying about?
“Williams goes on to say he is not violent and has never threatened anyone. Not true, in fact it’s another lie. Elsewhere I refer to an encounter in the Coronation Hall car park in Alton Barnes in which he explained to me how to disable someone with a punch to the throat. During the same conversation we discussed his recent arrest during which a policeman suffered a broken arm and the circumstances surrounding that arrest. He made the claim that it was all the fault of Shelley (his then house mate and co-presenter of the execrable CMTV) and proceeded to say if he got hold of Shelley (who had wisely scarpered) he would give her the beating she deserved. He further claimed to “hate all women” (a statement that has current relevance). Shelley had already called the police to the shared house claiming Williams had been violent towards her. At some point in among this farrago a stun gun was recovered from the premises which Williams claimed to belong to the, by now, absent Shelley. (He’s done this before btw when his ‘house-mate’ Paul Damon fled the country at the time of Williams’ arrest for circle making. The police seized computers from the shared premises and Williams has since stated that they “belonged to Damon” and that he was a “pervert” – nothing to do with him apparently.) So, police called to his house to deal with an alleged assault, stun guns on the premises and subsequently a policeman gets a broken arm whilst trying to arrest Williams. But don’t worry he’s not aggressive or violent – it’s always everybody else. Or so we’re told.
“Next we’re treated to the Williams theory on how it could possibly have come about that he has been linked with threats of violence to the Carsons. It’s all the fault of that nasty Terry R back in 2012. Of course, what a relief, it’s another one of those unhappy situations that befall Williams where one of his close associates is involved in something nefarious and in which Williams is not involved. Williams, by his own admission, was involved with Terry when it came to making the circles that appeared on Carson land that season and which he flew at the crack of dawn in his now defunct microlight before the Carsons could get the machine out to cut them. He was involved with Terry when it came to laughing about this in the Barge but a conspiracy to assault the Carsons on their own land? Goodness no, that was all that ghastly Terry and an irresponsible film crew, he would never do such a thing, violence being anathema to him. He would never have been part of that conspiracy and acted as ‘film crew in his own employ’ had Channel 4 not scuppered this scurrilous enterprise, would he, even though he knew about it? Just one thing, then. Why did he make no attempt to warn the Carsons that this plan was in the offing? OK he’s not the Carsons’ favourite person so a knock on the door may have been a bit risky but why not alert the Carsons via one of their friends or even do what most responsible members of the community would do and call the police? After all he’s quick enough to call them when it suits, isn’t he? Sadly Terry doesn’t appear to be around to give his side of the story, or even give some clarity to the allegations of his being paid to make circles by Steve Alexander. Just as an aside – look at the photos Steve got of those circles on Carsons land back in 2012. He seems to have managed to photograph not much more than some damaged formations and the roof of the Carsons’ combine. Now if he paid Terry once why on earth would he have paid him again if this was the result, particularly when Williams has the photo of the undamaged formations and is crowing all over the internet about it? More lies.
“One last thing in this already overly long post. Finally we have the admission that the cutting of formations is nothing to do with Monique Klinkenbergh and that it is the fault of Terry and the campaign against the Carsons. Finally, after years of Williams’ lies, misogyny, racism and abuse we get the admission of what he knew all along that Monique is innocent of all the dreadful accusations he has levelled against her. The last three years, therefore, have been nothing more than a hate campaign designed to drive her away, presumably because she’s committed the sins of being foreign, intelligent and, worst of all, a woman. It’s too much to hope for an apology from Williams but he may like to think again about a post artist and circlemaker Wil Russell left on RACCF recently urging him to find something else to do and leave the circles behind. It’s good advice, particularly given the way things are going. After all, what has he achieved? A collection of crop circles of very poor quality and a litany of negative events that have left him with more detractors than friends.”
I know people expect me to choose a side in this (and, given the content of my previous blog entries, likely assume that side will be Gary King’s), but I don’t. I don’t condone violence, and consider the behaviour of both gentlemen unacceptable. Despite my pacifist leanings, however, I’m realist enough to know that I live in a world where one risks a kicking if one pushes some people too far. I console myself with the fact that croppies are for the most part peace-loving and laid back sorts, though as I’ve said previously, the only thing about this episode that surprises me is that Williams hasn’t received a smacking before, considering his long history of pissing people off. As my friend Jamie Foxwarren put it, this incident “may not be pretty and it may not be within the law but it is what happens when you spend years behaving the way Williams has. You won’t find many, if any, people in the CC world that have not raised a glass to Gary King.”
Charles Mallett interviews Gary King regarding the recent altercation with Matthew Williams in the Etchilhampton crop circle. I’ve no doubt we have months of YouTube monologues from Williams to look forward to. The only surprising thing about the whole saga for me is that it took this long for someone to give the guy a smacking.
Crop circle Facebook pages come and go. The latest, the ironically named ‘Crop Circles The People The Mystery The Truth’, is perhaps the nastiest yet.
Where do we start? The page’s ‘Mission Statement’ is a good place –
‘Allow me to step into a quick introduction of what I used to do and why have I taken upon myself to combat pathetic battles within the crop circle community .I am a retired **** pilot who has seen a great deal in this life of mine. I now work on demand with a security firm which takes me away to many interesting places which allows me to integrate with people from all wal…ks of life.
During my time in the forces, there was one particular niggle which used to send my blood pressure through the roof and that’s ‘ BULLIES ‘. Thankfully and in most cases issues were solved before escalation reached uncontrollable levels. In plain words I simply hate bullies.
In my spare time, which I have considerable more than I would like these days, I surf crop circle pages to catch up on the latest gossip and news. Why ? . That will be answered in time to come so make sure you pop back now and again .
In the last few days I received an invite to a new crop circle page which I declined . What I saw at first was OK and fair enough until few days later a post popped up which instantly sent me back to what I experienced in the forces.
So what I intend to do, which I will do fairly and squarely, is to explore each individual within the crop circle community. I will give credit where its due, I will be critical, I will advise where I can, I will provide a fair assessment of what I think of you but be prepared to be torn apart if you cross the line . Got it ? Good!’ [sic. throughout].
This is – to be frank – bullshit, as is the claim that ‘Contrary to belief , there is a misconception in thinking that this page has anything to do with other crop circle pages … Whatever you are thinking , you are 100% wrong . We are a small independent group who’s wishes are to put the record straight where we possibly can.’ [sic. throughout]. Reading these statements, one might reasonably ask which individual or individuals consider themselves qualified to make such assessments, indeed to ‘give advice’ as to where every single person in the crop circle community has gone wrong. Their identity isn’t hard to deduce, and most certainly is not a retired pilot.
It has been blatant from the start this page is an off-shoot of the Report A Crop Circle Formation page. As has been noted by others on the page, one giveaway is the unique linquistic style of the posts, one shared by RACCF’s administrators. Does this matter? Since a page that claims to tell only the truth is clearly founded on untruths, yes.
So which crop circle personalities have been assessed thus far? Here is a sampling:
The ‘completely naive’ Francine Blake:
The ‘bully’ Charles Mallett:
The ‘victim of deception’ Winston Keech:
Gary King – also ‘naive’:
The ‘nauseating’ Suzanne Taylor:
The ‘victim of abuse’ Matthew Williams (a particularly hilarious claim given Williams’ approach to crop circle ‘research’ over the years, which – as anybody who has watched his YouTube channel will know – consists chiefly of expletive-heavy attacks and vitriol aimed at anybody who doesn’t share his opinions):
This post is now getting rather lengthy, so I’ll split my next few observations into separate posts. There is also = in my view – a much bigger issue underlying all of this, which I also intend to highlight in due course.