A Brief Reminder Before the 2018 Season Begins.
"This is the most comprehensive, compelling and objective analysis of the Ansty 2016 event that exists on the net and should answer so many of the questions/posts I have read. It is based on facts as opposed to relying on wild exotic theory or anecdotal/ here-say 'reports'. IOWs..."He said, she said...I know the people that did it" etc. This report would be convincing enough in a court of law so it should satisfy most sensible queries. It employs a 'paid-for-by-myself' written report by a large established company of Chartered Surveyors. If you take the time to read this article carefully it should soon become very clear and obvious that the event in question ( Ansty 2016) would be utterly impossible to create within the alleged parameters and M.O publicised EVEN WITH the use of TST. (FYI there has NEVER been any reference made to TST within the historic crop formation narrative that I can find... and I've read a lot of it believe me! The only references to TST you'll find are my references. The principles applied to this example hold true and sound to the vast majority of other CF events that have been recorded over the years. I live in the practical world of property restoration/construction, well versed with measurement, getting from point A to point B as it were...IOWs, task management. It is easy for me to identify the deceivers and the liars who to me just look sad and desperate . For me the business of CF construction would be no different from any other building/surveying task. It is merely a matter of 'nuts and bolts'. Please check this report out and also many other non-exotic CF research articles on my site."
Bullet points for those in a hurry or who can't be bothered to read full report...
1. After a necessary topographical survey of the site the actual 'setting out' alone for this particular task would be about 8 days as stated therein using TST technology. This does NOT include the setting out of the glyphs /characters around the periphery. This would easily double the time needed as they are all unique shapes and unpredictably asymmetric. Also all the above would NOT include the actual laying down of the crop material so as to achieve a 'machine-like' end result, free from any signs of collateral damage due to worker comings and goings or mis-tread.
2. Without the use of TST such a task would simply be quite impossible to achieve first time perfect, especially at night as there would be no 'real-time' reference overview to check for error.
3. The cost to commission a RICS company such as this to task would be in excess of £500/day+VAT and in any case it is unlikely any company would lend its good name to such a pointless and controversial enterprise like this. Any sane people with these skills would most certainly not be messing about in fields for 40 years and at risk of arrest and for zero gains!
4. My personally paid-for report from this RICS company was based on a proposal for a rich celebrity, a hypothetical 'landscaped garden project' with no reference to crop formations whatsoever. The starter plans submitted were those of the simplified Ansty CF design containing no finesse details such as rosette features.
5. The high-end consistency of nearly 40 years of worldwide events would wildly challenge the concept of 'probability' beyond imagination in terms of something 'humanly instigated', especially after concidering the aforementioned prerequisites.
6. Anyone who questions the above would probably have little or no understanding of construction and/or TST technology. That stated herein is professional reality.
The above information should in theory close the mysterious/non-mysterious debate especially when coupled with other observed factors such as: 1. If bent nodes occurred within a CF as they commonly do in immature crop they are always present early on day one of CF creation. Impossible! (phototropism takes several days to effect plant). 2. 'Energy Leak'. 3. Concept of 'probability'. For those that come from a pragmatic, well balanced and possibly scientific position this should be enough but I fully realise that there are many that just cannot adapt/accept CFs as being of a genuine phenomenal nature due to numerous considerations. These may include psychological, social and spiritual reasons. Those of a practical, perhaps constructional background as said, will very soon agree that with most constructural projects mistakes are in fact frequently made. With bricks and mortar or timber for instance these mistakes can be either covered up or put right somehow. But with a less forgiving medium such a fragile standing crops or snow one would need to start again if evidence of damage were to be avoided. We never see/record/photograph partly worked CF designs where errors have been made and then subsequently abandoned.
The dis-information associated with this and indeed so many other complex CFs is part of a cynical long standing campaign of propaganda based on the theory that once the initial seed is sown, one with a slightly believable element and no matter how absurd, most 'sheeple' will latch onto it and stay with it long term. IOWs, propa-ganda for proper-geese...wak...wak! Message here: don't be a 'sheeple'! But in all, a sad reflection, both ways, on the human condition I would say! The most important aspect herein is that people are informed of the truth, the facts so as to make up their own minds. This is all one can do.
NB. TST ....Total Station Theodolite; a high-end GPS programable tool mounted on a tripod commonly used in professional surveying of land and building sites accurate to at least one millimetre. It is used in conjunction with a hand-held staff that 'talks' to the static station whereon the operator may walk around and fix any point relative to that static station.