Basic Requirements needed for Accurate Human Construction of a Pattern in any Standing Crop-Part 1.
Reference Ansty CC in particular. A response to the unrealistic assertions and non sensible claims made by a Mr Colin Andrews who is well known 'old-school' CC commentator, well known to the G1 (1st generation) group anyways. He purports to be an expert crop circle researcher, a position I now feel is in urgent need of review. In the past many have looked to him for CC information, a position of responsibility which I now believe he may be abusing. He was one of the earliest people on the CC scene back in the ‘80s. Point is, if he is no longer able to make good judgement or is no longer up to speed, what he says will be of little value, will ill-serve or even do great damage to those who have trusted him and previously taken him seriously. This is a very serious matter as is the subject as a whole.
I would like to make it crystal clear right now, this is NOT a witch hunt (I hope I’m not that shallow!) nor an attempt at character damage; more on it is a genuine and heart felt attempt towards truth in a very difficult subject. My hope is that this subject will be allowed to move forward somehow after 35+ years of what simply amounts to…inertia and disinformation.
So…please read the following and decide for yourselves if CA’s claims are likely to be correct… or false.
Firstly, let us see exactly what Mr Andrews has to say about the Ansty CC, with my observations/comments in green text.
CA: (from his Facebook.) THE ANSTY CROP CIRCLE – RESOLVED. My investigation into this exceptional crop circle has been completed. Since 1999 my focus has been on the well documented cases of 'interaction' involving public, (I’ve never seen the man doing surveys or interviews; or does he mean identifying positive developments/initiatives with a view to debunking them, like charity for instance? Sounds harsh but recent background suggests such.) researchers,(Iv'e never met the man and I'm there in the thick of it, and on the front line for most of the summer for last 6 years now… nor has the prominent farmer I've been working with for several years now) and human circlemakers (they hardly exist...they are largely a total myth, a figment of his imagination to disinform the public). Because this crop circle was as impressive as I have seen, I wanted to know this time, who made it and why? I got my answers and not everybody will be pleased with the findings.
The exceptional quality is due in large part to experienced hands that made it and the three days they took to complete it. (Utterly impossible in practical terms. I have spoken to qualified surveyors and an architect who I have met in the CCs and all agree with the above.) The names are known to me. They have in recent years been involved in producing designs in sand on the south coast of England. (No secret, common knowledge. A Mr. JR et al and others have worked on sand patterns over the years, yes true but crop circles, certainly not true.This borders on slander as it simply isn't true, based on feasibility and sensibility. Ask JR et al to do what they do in sand, at night-time! No can do! The people to whom CA refers (JR et al) have publicly and strenuously denied any complicity.)
A three day construction period allowed them to perfect the design ( I have spoken to the farmer and she said at the time when they were away the farm was still operational with other staff still working and in place…saw nothing unusual. Had such damage occurred whilst they were away this fact would have been conveyed to them.) with the agreement of field owners. (He has not conferred with the owners who have denied any involvement. They have stated clearly that it was not there the day before. Again, almost, if not completely slanderous.)
The design was a commercial commission for Mothership Glass: (These people also deny any involvement. If they were promoting something they most certainly would indeed make this public.)
The design was a take on the company logo but was not identical to it. Note: below is their actual logo.
Note: The statement made by the field owner/shop owner, is nearly identical to the landowners statement from another commission for the computer chip company Nvidia in Salinas, California couple years ago. i.e.:
Ansty Farm Shop's Karren Price said “her family never goes on holiday, but on returning from a five day break in Devon yesterday, they woke up this morning to discover a giant pattern in the wheat”. (We know she did...CCs happen very quickly.)
This is an attempt to distance the landowner from the temporary deception period while publicity builds, hence they can say a lot without lying, after all they were allegedly not there! (They said they woke up in the morning and it was there implying it happened over night.) It was NO surprise as stated. (Don't know what CA means by this. If it was "no surprise" to the farmer that has already said that he had no knowledge of the event happening why would the event NOT be a surprise? Of course the man would be surprised. He said it was not there the day before.)
Conclusions: Names of human circle-makers/land artists are known to me. They are on paid commission by Mothership Glass to construct the design, taking three days in a field owned by Ansty Farm Shop. (Oh yes, sure, these miracle workers are going to be beavering away for at least three days in broad daylight (or did he mean night-time in which case it would take considerably longer) as he says, with the consent of the farm which is not true and in full view of all people coming and going and nobody asking questions...like..."What's going on in that field over there"?) The amount of money’s passing hands to the landowner and each crop artist and allegedly also a charity, (not allegedly, a positive fact) is outside of my research objective.(and so is CC research it would seem.)The farmer has stated ALL monies are to go to charity. (This is a correct statement.)
I thank a number of reliable individuals who assisted me with this investigation. (Who are these ‘reliable’ people...CA will not tell us). On this occasion the primary driver was not a mysterious interactive source but a money making effort by those involved. (If the primary driver was a money making effort, why is it all going to charity?)
“Consider the smooth consistency and finesse of the ground lay here”.
In short, none of what this man says makes any sense at all, yet, as with other old-timers, he has an audience built up over the years…who believe and trust him. So please look around yourselves and beware! I believe him to be an unreliable ‘witness’.
Now please read what I have good reason to know is a fair assessment of the task.
Just to say here… I am NOT a qualified surveyor nor do I have a First in PhD rocket science. But I have spent a large part of my life successfully working in the property restoration and construction environment. I like to think I know a little about measurement and mapping and my practical acumen has served me very well over the years. I have no reason to think I am STUPID as Mr C A would have me believe. So here is my response to him, and others like him.
Bottom line here Mr Andrews... and the likes…
“In order to embark on a task such as Ansty one would need a task force with a high skill set comprising of at least one qualified land surveyor and one who is well practiced in the use of trigonometry and triangulation. These people have cars and expensive equipment and there would be a need to park, either openly or not. The Ansty site is very close to farm shop buildings and its personnel so this may be an issue. Good and easy access to the site would be required as work would take many days of going back and forth.
The area in question would first need to be assessed by means of accurate reconnaissance to take account scaling issues etc and factors such as topographic variation (T/V) that may well bias the end result from an aerial perspective. The ground is unlikely to be perfectly level. Where T/V was present another site would need to be chosen as theoretical calculations needed to correct these errors would be far beyond any realistic CC task brief. (Fact is many CCs occur perfectly symmetrical and true on T/V land and show absolutely no signs of distortion when filmed from above.) These guys would need support workers for marker placement etc. and crop sculpting.There would need to be a live-feed aerial monitoring unit, the operator well coordinated with ground crew, and capable of giving real-time
”It is important to consider the exact status of the terrain being used as if uneven can cause distortion when viewed from above unless compensated for in subtle ways which this CC at Stanton St. Bernarnd 2013 had. It is perfectly circular when viewed from above.”
Photos Jim Peyton and Paul Jacobs.
surveillance of work being carried out on the non -predictable, non geometric/artistic (symbols) components of the design. This aspect would be particularly challenging as the symbols are graduated in size, the overall design not being of a true symmetrical nature . All stages of this work would need to be relatively positioned, well distanced and centred.The symbols would need to be done free-hand and first time perfect as the resultant ground-lay would show any deviance away from a smooth, machine-like and consistent sweep that is quite evident in Ansty. However, the task would actually need to be carried out in daylight conditions unless laser-line surveying apparatus was used. This is quite obvious to the the eye and would be a complete give away if the operation was to be clandestine. Theodolites and optic tools are used routinely on new build and land mapping tasks and the newer models now have infra-red distance calculating capability (but not the old...significant when we reference CCs long past but still perfect.) In the old days tasks took longer. Conversely, we have sound reason to know CCs happen quite quickly in reality.
Now, if we consider Ansty has in fact an overall area of around two acres and is 100 metres in diameter we soon can realise that the task in hand is quite massive and without the use of advanced surveying apparatus it would frankly be quite impossible. In short, I think you can now realise that just mapping an area of this size to define and accurately mark and place features and line schematics would indeed take many days.
Then we have the actual task of skilfully and carefully laying down the crop material in an ordered and considered manner and along with following a detailed plan. There would be no room for error as consistency would be lost. Ansty has this overall consistency.
“Surveyor at work with some tools routinely used in ground mapping. Cannot do without.”
We also need to consider the conditions in which this task is to be carried out. We have already said it requires day light for the optics to work if used (almost mandatory.) However, in our special needs case of CCs they are pretty much always manifesting at night-time, hence we have a big problem. Basically, no surveyor on Earth would dream of being commissioned to undertake such a task at night. If you did need to do this it would be required to provide an elaborate system of lighting which I think might be a bit of a give away. Personnel would be walking all over the place causing damage in any case as the design may not be fully defined. (In fresh CCs there is never any evidence of foot-tread anywhere!) To advertise your presence in this way would alert the farmer/locality and you would be prosecuted no question; a public fiasco no less would ensue considering the controversial nature of making a CC etc and the culprits would be identified and chastised beyond repair. (Who indeed would risk that?)
So, for such a proposition as this and for a commissioned team to settle down to undertake such a technically demanding task at night with the threat of discovery and restraints mentioned thus far borders on complete madness! If you had permission the task would still be the same but with no 'looking over your shoulder' worries. That's only going to happen very infrequently and in which case you would not need to be working at night-time. Commissioned debunking CC at Salthop took 3 men, 8+ hours in day light approx 70ft simple design. I regard this as my ‘control' sample which I documented… to the team’s annoyance!. See article here. http://www.coregroupinitiative.com/#!Report-on-EyeWitnessed-Event-at-Salthrop-Wiltshire/c218b/5672ddf00cf275ddd6e90995
These chaps are allegedly the best in the business would you believe!
“Could you really, sensibly and fairly consider a large and complex geometric design incorporating possible 3D perspective and perhaps off centre but freehand elements maybe, being constructed accurately within the restraints and parameters mentioned, using this rediculously primitive and time consuming method. It’s a joke! Seriously... IT'S SIMPLY AND UTTERLY IMPOSSIBLE”! If you still actually believe in this method you probably still believe the world is flat!
Then there's the cost and motive. In business and life generally there is usually a sensible and sober cost/outcome equation. Here, because of the novel nature of the task, no guarantees could possibly be made regards outcome which would call into question the cost effectiveness of such a task to the purchaser. If at some point all went wrong, the crew would need to pack up and do a runner pretty quick and would effectively be fugitives at risk from prosecution related to wilful damage and trespass, likely more! If caught, the magistrate would require details of the commissioning client who would also be discredited for aiding and abetting. Just not worth it.
In my mind this Ansty CC example equates to the rubbish and carnival of nonsense spoken a couple of years ago about the CC at Chualar CA.USA. Again, a massive and perfect CC...completely mysterious in origin.
So, for those of you that are not able to grasp these fundamental facts of organisation and construction you are, with respect probably not in a good position to give an informed opinion...as you are clearly not up to speed with this subject. Not meant unkindly, just a fact.
This is a very serious subject with immeasurable consequences/implications and should not be treated as a device for petty self-promotion.
Sorry, but you simply cannot argue with the above.This is not an opinion, it's just a list of mere facts. Ask any surveyor for his viewpoint.
I really think Mr. (CC Expert) C. Andews has not thought this through at all, (not 'research' at all) to the point of embarrassment to others that actually read it! I’m sorry to be the one who had to actually relate this…it gives me no pleasure at all".
Thanks for reading.