From Report A Crop Circle Formation:
From Report A Crop Circle Formation:
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.
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.
Unsurprisingly, Charles Mallett has picked up the ball and run from one side of Wiltshire to the other with it:
Nancy Talbot and the BLT research team have also formally and publicly withdrawn their support for the Connector (this screenshot is from Monique Klinkenbergh’s Facebook group and also shows her stance):
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.
A new circle has just been reported at Manton Drove, near Marlborough in Wiltshire, and we rather like it.
With a dreary lack of surprise, however, RACCF and CCPMT – which in many respects are the same page – have given it a trouncing. Which tells you a very significant thing. RACCF and CCPMT only like crop circles which were made by them or by their friends. You can be sure that any circle which they put the boot into is one they know nothing about.
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:
Charles Mallett interviews former RACCF admin Krsanna Duran in an attempt to peep behind the curtain of “The RACCF/Pyrka Phenomenon”. Despite our click-bait header it must be said that this video is long on duration, makes for cheek-numbing viewing, and won’t tell anybody who has already looked in any depth at said phenomenon much they don’t already know.
Report A Crop Circle Formation persist in their claim that they don’t pay for Facebook page likes, despite their ‘like’ count being ridiculously high and much higher than any other crop circle page. Maybe they’re telling the truth; maybe they don’t; maybe they really are that popular. With that in mind, we thought we’d keep an eye on their ‘like’ counter. Here’s how it looked at 10:24am today.
And here’s how it looked at 11:28am, i.e. 64 minutes later.
306 additional likes? In 64 minutes? And you didn’t pay for them? Yeah, right. Why don’t we believe you?
Our favourite circle of the season, and one that we know was much-loved by many people.
Even the farmer loved this one, despite his initial misgivings. The story featured in The Daily Mail on 5 August 2014 and is well-worth repeating, if only because it’s heartening to see a farmer appreciative of a circle that appears on his land, especially in view of the anger of many Wiltshire farmers in recent years. Read it here – below we have included screen captures of the whole article, partly for convenience and partly in case the link goes down:
We were especially impressed with the fact that The Daily Mail of all people acknowledged that the pentagram is a harmonious symbol and not a satanic one. Unlike Andrew Pyrka and Report A Crop Circle Formation, who went all fire and brimstone, hell and damnation, over this circle:
Yeah, right, Andrew, of course. Now go and take your meds.
Ignoring the ring of code – which has yet to be deciphered – perhaps the most striking and innovative thing about this design is the fact that the pattern is entirely within the lay rather than the conventional ‘alternating standing and flattened bits’ style. Yes, there have been woven circles before – indeed there were other woven circles in 2014 – but Cherrington takes it to another level entirely. Though few people seemed to pick up on it when Cherrington appeared, there is one particular example we can think of where this has been done before.
This circle appeared below the Hackpen Hill white horse in August 2013. From a distance it merely looks like a small and unremarkable ringed circle.
A closer look, however, reveals a striking hexagram lay.
This was one of those circles which was for the most part neglected when it appeared, but which was loved by all who took the time to appreciate it, especially those who visited. Its qualities take effort on the part of the participant. Perhaps that is the message of these two circles; get to know them, appreciate the detail, rather than just give the aerials a quick glance and a ‘yeah that’s nice’ or ‘fail’.
We’ve not seen anybody else link these two circles, though to our minds the relationship is obvious. Cherrington 2014 is Hackpen Hill 2013 taken to the next level.
…so low we’re already digging into the floor, CCPMT reply.
When friends fall out, it can often provide useful ammunition against existing enemies. Screen shots from CCPMT, wherein Matthew Williams and CCPMT accuse Steve Alexander of paying circle makers to make circles for him to photograph. They’ve made this accusation before, and to date have provided no evidence whatsoever to substantiate their claim. We agree with Darren Francis’ comments here. Making crop circles is a choice, not an obligation. If CCPMT have proof Steve has ever commissioned and paid anybody to make a circle, they should provide it. If not, they should shut up and apologise to Mr Alexander for such slander. Neither of these things will happen.
From reading this latest post, one could be forgiven for thinking that Report A Crop Circle Formation – which purports to be a “crop circle reporting and discussion portal” – doesn’t want there to be any circles. Now why could that be?