I have in my possession a report obtained from a large company of chartered surveyors and at some cost to myself. This level of professional testimony would stand up in any court of law and should be taken very seriously. The company's integrity should never be doubted.
It was not long into our meeting when it became quite evident that the Ansty CC would be totally impossible to achieve within the parameters and implied modus operandi described in the 'Earthfiles' report.
The Phoenix CC 2009 used here as example; this event also had non-geometric aspects that were uniquely shaped.
Rope and tape measures would just not do here either! TST with close staking markers would simply be the only way you're going to do this one accurately.
Let's be absolutely clear here...to undertake such a task as Ansty without the training and skills to use the latest modern technology the task would be quite simply unthinkable. Before such apparatus was invented any attempt to make a CC like Ansty by hand would be a super-Herculean task by comparison. It would take many weeks to just manually 'set-out' from a paper plan which is basically what the debunkers would have you believe is their MO. This is good as we are about to show that this MO is quite unrealistic. I have NEVER known the 'claimers' to reference TST as their MO. No sane MRICS would engage in something like a clandestine crop circle event.
A few points prior to RICS Report.
Point 1.Mr I. Halling (an anonymus individual who contacted me by phone personally purporting to be a friendly researcher who was fishing for information and who turned out to be an imposter and disinformer who was working along side of 'Earthfiles .com' ) submits to us his 'reliable witness' Resident 2, who seems to have been on continuous watch because he couldn't have known what was going on unless he must have returned regularly to take 'notes'. Halling just happened to bump into him on Sunday 4th Sept. afternoon, or so he claimed. LOL. This mystery man allegedly reported 8 persons present (very specific) "possibly working in shifts" and doing 'work' for the first 3 nights (again, specific), one with white coveralls and 7 with black. The inference here was the guy in white was used as a marker. This is absurd because even if they "worked in shifts" as he said, the initial period only requires/demands one/two max very skilled (qualified MRICS could be wearing pink pyjamas if they so wished) operative/s. If the eight took turns it would be like having a large team of dentists to do one operation. Makes no sense when one is quite enough...the cost of seven additional dentists for all this time would be astronomical and serve no purpose. Money went to farmer's charity anyway so there wasn't any commercial incentive. Who would actually pay for unnecessary dentists!
I haven't told you what the estimated RICS cost for Ansty is yet!
Reference Earthfiles interview with Halling.
LMH..."IN THOSE 8 PEOPLE, THE PERSON IN WHITE MIGHT HAVE BEEN USED LIKE A MARKER IN THE FIELD?" (Leading question.)
IH..."Exactly. The white clothed person was perhaps the leader, the one to go ahead and the others would follow that leader. Or the white was used for line of sight".
No 'line of sight' as implied here is needed as TST is a bit more sophisticated than that...it is accurate to one millimetre if needed! It uses IR. Remember, this is still his night time scenario here we are talking, the first x3 nights with several men (up to 8) 'working' away, sometimes "maybe in shifts"... In fact at this stage it only requires one/two persons setting datum and orientation of TST!. But the damage just one/two men moving around during this process would be huge as you will gather from the report. Remember, we are talking tall standing crop here. Just the incidental damage aspect alone invalidates the M/M hypothesis totally! The reference I made to lasers in my original article on this was a false flag! 'Reliable' witness 2 fell for it! Remember, TST.
To have so many people (8) wandering around would serve no purpose in the real world of surveying as all measurement is done via EDM+prism (Electronic Distance Measurement/Meter) in conjunction with a 'total station' or TST (Total Station Theodolite). Basically, a design is plotted on software then translated to land. The process after the initial datum fix would only require one/two persons using TST, two at absolute maximum. Remote option is used. Laser-line would not be used. TST uses IR.To suggest up to 8 people were involved in this initial process of mapping and setting out is daft! It totally demonstrates how little these debunker types know about modern surveying techniques! TST is an electronic/optical instrument used in modern surveying and building construction. The 'total station' is an electronic theodolite (transit) integrated with an electronic distance meter (EDM) navigating from and to the instrument to a particular point. Robotic total stations allow the operator to control the instrument from a distance via remote control thereby allowing flag marking etc. This eliminates the need for an assistant staff member in theory at this time as the operator holds the reflector and controls the total station from the observed point in the design. So any need for further personnel (8 stated here) at this time is quite unnecessary and indeed contra-indicated. I have no idea where he gets this idea from. (I think 'Resident 2 is full of B/S frankly...sorry, but his whole IH story is fantasy and farce.
All the stories you've heard referencing manual tape measuring are only good for the smallest and simplest of patterns and design and the end result cannot be guaranteed. It takes an age to map in this manner. Salthrop took 3 men 8 hours to do 70 ft CC. Remember, we are talking here of a major construction of around 2 acres in area and 100m in diameter!
Point 2. Halling states his 'reliable' Resident 2 witness reported 'laser'. Not needed here I'm afraid. TST would be used. If TST were not used this whole process would be far, far more unpredictable, 1st time perfect result very doubtful and take incredibly longer. In fact it's almost unthinkable!
This is a small green frog!
Point 3. As you will read, the setting-out process for this intricate design requires a multi-coloured flag coding system whereon different aspects of the design are recognised and actioned in a systematic and sequenced manner. In reality there would be literally hundreds of these markers (locations) and any human traffic would be required to confine itself to said (internal) areas at risk of causing damage to still-standing crop areas in the final design. If attempted at night with 8 personnel, with no massive illumination system in place they would soon become disoriented and cause damage. This traffic would in any case cause damage in the (internal) 'to be laid' areas also as these areas would need to be used as pathways.There could be no guarantee of nil damage that may be obvious later on. Finesse is the norm within CCs. Upon entering a new CC early on day one the ground- lay is always pristine in my experience and I have been first person in many. Have a look at the earliest photos of Ansty. Karren Price was one of the first, if not first to enter I believe; she told me that she was really impressed by the ground-lay. The Ansty CC was perfect having a machine-like consistency containing some rosettes and other refined features that I recognised and can cross-reference to countless other events over the years. That is one reason why so many personnel would not be involved as they would just cause more and more damage and get in the way. Make no mistake, this would be a very technically skilled, very professional work which bears no similarity to Salthrop whatsoever.
Bear in mind that at this point we are still talking 'mapping' or 'setting out'. After that we still have the massive task of precision laying of the crop.
Point 4. 'Pole lights', (NOT A PRISM POLE) as stated by Mr Resident 2 are not required at this initial time as technology used is not light dependant. To use light based equipment at night here would be stupid as it is a sure giveaway. Indeed, 'reliable' Resident 2 was standing there watching but nobody in the crew seemed to care. Odd. One would not need to do this at night anyway as all is legit...the farmer had been paid allegedly. LOL.
Small blue frog this time.
Point 5. Stakes. As you will read a substantial number of marker stakes will be needed to sensibly and realistically set-out the pattern on firm level terrain. This is standard practice. Normally on a building site the area to be set-out will be scrapped with relatively moist soil and no foliage l. In the case of a crop circle there is crop standing at about 600mm high. In our case stakes (usually wooden) to define specific areas to be laid down would obviously need to be well above that height so as to be seen clearly by the worker. These stakes would need to be let’s say at least 900mm plus the depth to be driven into the ground so they would have a total length of around 1m. at least.
In order for the symbols to be set out accurately markers would need to be placed at approx. 0.5m intervals. This adds up to a lot of markers for the 20 symbols and this aspect has NOT been factored into the report.
Now to the main point. We have so many stakes of probably 2.5cmx2.5cm minimum section to be placed in the ground, all colour coded. However, this seemingly simple task is challenged by the simple fact that, at the time of the event the ground was rock hard as little rain had occurred enough to allow the soil more workable for the first 75mm approx in depth. Now to get these many stakes in the ground in a timely manner one would need a LARGE HEAVY MALLET OR POST RAMMER WHICH ALWAYS MAKES A LOT OF BANGING NOISE. This would be a long hard job as stakes could NOT be just pushed into into ground. No banging sounds were reported by anyone including the ‘reliable’ witness referred to in the Earthfiles/Halling report. This is impossible unless a ‘JELLY MALLET’ was involved. (joke!) This task would not be possible without the use of stake markers. These many stakes would need to be collected up after the pattern was eventually laid down involving much coming and going causing additional damage under foot. This professional report does NOT view this task as a CC (more over a grand landscape gardening job) so assumes there would be no issues with hard, unstrapped soil.
We haven't even touched upon the actual laying process yet!
The Report. (All information pertaining to this professional company and its MRICS personnel have obviously been omitted...they certainly do not wish to be bombarded like K Price was!) I could produce hard copy if necessary.
METHOD STATEMENT – LANDSCAPE SETTING OUT
XXXXXXXX were approached by their client Mr Paul Jacobs to provide a detailed Method Statement for the setting out of a large, complex garden design project.
For the purposes of the Method Statement it will be assumed the size of the garden will be located within an area approximately 120m x 120m and will be contained within an outer circle(s) 100m in diameter. A typical design such as is shown below will be used for reference purposes.
Before any setting out can take place a topographical survey needs to be undertaken and for the purposes of the Method Statement it has been assumed this does not exist. A topographical survey outlines the area in detail where the design will be located and will also highlight any surrounding features, such as buildings, walls and tress etc that may have an influence on the exact position of the garden. Also a fundamental part of the topographical survey will be establishing a reliable network of control stations (local datum points to enable a Total Station (Electronic Theodalite) to be setup over and correctly orientated). After the topographical survey has been completed, the finalised garden design can be inserted in the drawing at the agreed location. This will enable a co-ordinated plan to be produced to subsequently set out the details of the design.
From the design drawing any point can be selected, exported to a text file and uploaded into the Total Station to enable it to be set out on the ground. Points to set out can include but are not limited to radial points, arcs, intersections and circle centre points.
When we are ready to set out the points, the first thing to do is to setup the Total Station over a known point, i.e. a survey control station established during the topographical survey. The station will have known eastings, northings and level (x,y,z co-ordinates). The Total Station now needs to be orientated correctly, this is achieved by referencing to a second known survey station. Typically the Total Station maybe setup over a station called ST01 and referenced to ST02. To check the Total Station is setup correctly it is good survey practice to set out a minimum of two known points, typically ST03 & ST04. When you are happy the Total Station is orientated correctly you can begin setting out.
The Total Station is fully robotic and works by locking onto a glass prism that is located on the top of a detail pole that is held by the surveyor/setting out engineer. Once the Total Station is locked on it is controlled by the surveyor using a controller with a digital display attached to the detail pole. The Total Station and controller talk to each other via a radio link. Whilst in setting out mode the Total Station uses infra red technology to stay locked onto the prism.
To set out a location, stand facing the Total Station and simply select the point, for example PNT01, press the distance button on the controller and the display will tell you if you need to move left, right, backwards or forwards in order to locate on the ground the exact position of the point. Whilst walking to the point the Total Station will follow the detail pole and it will also continue to take distances as you walk. Once you are have located the point on the ground, i.e. when your left/right and back/forward display are both showing 0.020mm or lower, the point can be marked on the ground with spray paint and/or a timber peg or coloured flag. Once this is complete the ‘as set out’ location is recorded and stored on the internal data card and downloaded at the end of the day for checking. As soon as the point has been recorded the Total Station will increment to the next point or the closest next point (depending how you prefer to have the Total Station set up).
With regards to the typical design below, in theory the simplest way to set out the design would be to set out all the elements at the same time, but in practice, because of the complexity of the design we do not believe this would be the most efficient. We believe the best way would be to set out the design in 4 stages using different colour markers for each stage. We would suggest the following:
Stage 1 – Set out the centre points (Fig 1) of all the circles and mark with red flags/markers. The circle circumferences can then be marked on the ground by simply using string attached to the centre marker, scouring the arcs and marking with paint. Further flags/markers can be added around the arcs at this point if required.
Stage 2 – Set out the 3 ‘propeller’ segments (Fig 2), using blue flags/markers. We would suggest setting out the end points and intermediate points every 1m-2m.
Stage 3 – Set out the large centre circle (Fig 3), as per the method used for Stage 1, using green flags/markers
Stage 4 – Set out the 3 large ‘petals’ (Fig 4), using white flags/markers, as per the method used for Stage 2.
Fig 3. Fig.4
With regards to timescales we estimate the topographical survey and the setting out would take 6 days to complete using a 2 man team. It would be impractical to use more than 1 team because the Total Stations would continually lock onto the wrong prism.
Setting out fees are charged on a daily basis at £575.00 + VAT per day or £450.00 + VAT for a part day. The above fee includes for all materials such as paint, pegs and flags.
It has been suggested there may be a requirement for some ornate sculptures or characters to be located around the perimeter, the centres of these can be simply set out equally spaced. If the individual complex shapes need to be marked out we estimate this could be undertaken at a rate of 100 locations per day, for the same fees as above. (A 'location' is a point for spacing intervals of e.g.1 m.)
Due to the ornate nature of the above pattern we believe the above method is the most time efficient and accurate way of undertaking the setting out, To approach the project in a more ‘traditional’ manner, for example using tapes and a measuring wheel would be unrealistic because it would result in the process taking longer and it would be far less accurate.
We hope the above meets with your approval and should you require any further information please do not hesitate to contact us.
With kind regards
It is very clear that the Ansty CC WAS NOT as described in the Earthfiles/Collins reports and should sensibly be considered as a 'mysterious in nature' event.
I rest my case.
Postscript:Please read and please share with friends this very worrying and scandalising piece dated 31.5.17 regards information being suppressed on new Italian crop formation! Clic here.
It would seem that the most spectacular and important events are being subjected to disinformaion campaigns. People deserve to hear the truth!