Crop Circles

[photon]

Originally Posted by Dion

Of course one person doesn't represent everyone. I would think if this guy is making circles he has probably shared and swapped ideas with others who do it also. What compelled me was the time frame involved to make these things and that the one he talked about couldn't have been made in one night. Or the fact he never suggested that it might have been amde in 2 nights - something i thought he would have stated.

I agree about the timeframe thing, I'd never really thought about that and with hundreds of circles, one would think either a large number of people would have been involved (increasing the chance of a distinctly human evidence), or multiple nights being involved.. but neither are impossible explanations and that's not considering the "trick" that we aren't thinking of.

Not that that proves humans did it, but if the possibility remains then in the absence of evidence humans are the most likely candidate because all of the other speculated causes in themselves have no substantiated evidence.

If there was already evidence of aliens, or evidence of "energy lines", or evidence of magnetic eddies, these hypothesis would be more plausible.

Originally Posted by Dion

The real evidence might be hard to find then.

Real evidence usually is, that's usually a difference between science and pseudoscience.. real science is very hard.

[photon]

Originally Posted by Dion

Just to clarify. I never claimed it was evidence. I merely posted it so people can read it for what it is - theory. And to show that some attempt is being made to try and understand why they are being made.

Fair enough, though I don't like the word theory, speculation or hypothesis is more appropriate; theory has connotations of experimentation and measurement, to me anyway.

[MJK]

Originally Posted by photon

So you welcome what some people think but not others? That seems pretty closed minded.

You want to be open minded when it comes to cool things, why not open minded when it comes to proper rational thinking?

Your "some people" comment was clearly (at least partially) directed at me. Grow up and speak to someone directly when you're going to insult them, or don't do it at all.

Of course something cool is happening here, look at all the cool pictures. Yes something beyond ordinary might also be happening, but why do you feel it's ok to presume that those out of the ordinary reasons are the proper explanation when there's no evidence for them?



You have your opinion, but you haven't said why you hold that opinion yet.

I don't have to say names if I don't feel like it and for the record it was directed at more than one person. That's why I said "some people". If it was just you I would have used your name, no worries there bud, I am not afraid of you or your logistic muscles.

"You want to be open minded when it comes to cool things, why not open minded when it comes to proper rational thinking?"

I am! You might be right about everything and they might all be man made. I am at least reasonable enough to accept that and I am pretty sure I have stated that already???

I am open to the fact that they might be ALL man made. You are not open to the fact that something else could be responsible. I have been open minded the entire time..proof or no proof it really doesn't matter becuase neither side can say for sure what is and what isn't.

Ya dig?

I think God makes all crop circles. Cheese told me so.

[Dion]

Originally Posted by photon

I agree about the timeframe thing, I'd never really thought about that and with hundreds of circles, one would think either a large number of people would have been involved (increasing the chance of a distinctly human evidence), or multiple nights being involved.. but neither are impossible explanations and that's not considering the "trick" that we aren't thinking of.

Not that that proves humans did it, but if the possibility remains then in the absence of evidence humans are the most likely candidate because all of the other speculated causes in themselves have no substantiated evidence.

If there was already evidence of aliens, or evidence of "energy lines", or evidence of magnetic eddies, these hypothesis would be more plausible.

Your post better explains to me your stance on this issue - thank you. I would agree that real evidence is lacking. I'm not a believer that Aliens or UFO's created thses things. The vast majority IMO are mand made, still the unxeplained ones have me curious.

[MJK]

Originally Posted by Dion

Your post better explains to me your stance on this issue - thank you. I would agree that real evidence is lacking. I'm not a believer that Aliens or UFO's created thses things. The vast majority IMO are mand made, still the unxeplained ones have me curious.

I agree with you 100% here.

[photon]

Originally Posted by MJK

I don't have to say names if I don't feel like it and for the record it was directed at more than one person.

That's why I said at least partially

I am! You might be right about everything and they might all be man made. I am at least reasonable enough to accept that and I am pretty sure I have stated that already???

I don't think I ever claimed they were all man made. I'm just trying to find out why you think that non-human origins are worth considering at all.

I am open to the fact that they might be ALL man made. You are not open to the fact that something else could be responsible. I have been open minded the entire time..

Where have I given any indication that I am not open to any possibilities? You know what they say about assuming things...

proof or no proof it really doesn't matter becuase neither side can say for sure what is and what isn't.

This is a very typical statement of a pseudo scientific thought process. That there is no "smoking gun" does NOT mean all possibilities have equal merit. I return to my horse, zebra, unicorn example. I rolled out that example for reason, to try to illustrate that not all possibilities have equal merit.

The question is why you think any non-human origin has enough merit to be worth serious consideration.

[edn88]

Crop circle creators are all vandals in my opinion (including the alien ones).

[Dion]

Originally Posted by photon

Fair enough, though I don't like the word theory, speculation or hypothesis is more appropriate; theory has connotations of experimentation and measurement, to me anyway.

I always thought theory and specualtion were one and the same.

FWIW if i had told you i have a huge interest in UFO's that date back to the time i was a child it might have explained better why i search and read all stuff pertaining to the mysterious and the unknown.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by MJK

Anyone who thinks they are ALL made by people during the night are crazy.

See, now when you start off with that, and then say you are open to the possibility that they are all man-made...

[MJK]

The question is why you think any non-human origin has enough merit to be worth serious consideration.

I think that has been covered already. Dion has made some excellent posts and shown some good examples why there should be at least some questions asked.

I am really not interested in a debate and wasn't from the start. I just wanted to see what people thought. Feel free to debate with others but I am really not interested.

[MJK]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

See, now when you start off with that, and then say you are open to the possibility that they are all man-made...

Well we all know I don't believe that they are all man made. I am reasonable enough and open minded enough however to accept the fact that if there was solid evidence showing they all are, then no problem.

Good?

[photon]

Originally Posted by Dion

I always thought theory and specualtion were one and the same.

Nope, the word theory has a very special meaning in terms of science, and pseudo scientific people / groups use the word a lot to try and lend their ideas merit. While a hypothesis is just a WAG (though maybe an educated one), a theory is a coherent idea or set of ideas that describes a phenomenon and has gone through rigorous testing, made accurate predictions that have been verified, and has tons of supporting evidence.

In common use people use theory to be synonymous with speculation, but when getting into stuff like this where evidence and stuff come into play, I like to be clear with the words being used to try to help communication.

FWIW if i had told you i have a huge interest in UFO's that date back to the time i was a child it might have explained better why i search and read all stuff pertaining to the mysterious and the unknown.

Heh, I used to have a huge stack of Omni magazines.

[Dion]

Originally Posted by photon

Nope, the word theory has a very special meaning in terms of science, and pseudo scientific people / groups use the word a lot to try and lend their ideas merit. While a hypothesis is just a WAG (though maybe an educated one), a theory is a coherent idea or set of ideas that describes a phenomenon and has gone through rigorous testing, made accurate predictions that have been verified, and has tons of supporting evidence.

In common use people use theory to be synonymous with speculation, but when getting into stuff like this where evidence and stuff come into play, I like to be clear with the words being used to try to help communication.

Pretty hard to argue with logic. Thanks for the explaination.

Heh, I used to have a huge stack of Omni magazines.

Back in my school years i had a collection of over 30 books on UFO's, the Loch Ness Monster, etc. Had a friend with whom i exchanged books with. Nerds they call us. Same friend made a fake UFO photgraph and conned most of his teachers and classmates into believing it was real. lol He's probably over in England right now making crop circles.

Nice to know i'm not alone on the subject btw

[jammies]

The world would be a better place if more people understood the difference between "open-minded" and "credulous".

It's really quite simple: credulous is where you think 2 alternatives that are "possible" are therefore equal and any one of them is just as likely to be true. Open-minded is where you understand that "possible" can apply to just about any concept, and that what you want to determine when evaluating alternatives is which one is PROBABLE, regardless of whether or not it agrees with your world-view.

MJK, as far as this pseudo-science goes, you are going with the "all alternatives are equally likely" school of thought. Go ahead and believe whatever you want, but if you can't defend those beliefs in argument, bringing them up on a forum seems disingenuous.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by MJK

Well we all know I don't believe that they are all man made. I am reasonable enough and open minded enough however to accept the fact that if there was solid evidence showing they all are, then no problem.

Good?

You did say that anyone with the opinion that they are all man-made is crazy.

I don't know how well that trucks with "reasonable and open minded".

Either way, I'd like to think there is something wacky going on with these crop circles, but the evidence has it that there isn't. I was hoping for the Bigfoot to be real too. It would be some pretty wild news. It just ain't working out. Guys with boards and twine make crop circles, Bigfoot was a rubber dummy.

Dang.

[MJK]

Originally Posted by jammies

The world would be a better place if more people understood the difference between "open-minded" and "credulous".

It's really quite simple: credulous is where you think 2 alternatives that are "possible" are therefore equal and any one of them is just as likely to be true. Open-minded is where you understand that "possible" can apply to just about any concept, and that what you want to determine when evaluating alternatives is which one is PROBABLE, regardless of whether or not it agrees with your world-view.

MJK, as far as this pseudo-science goes, you are going with the "all alternatives are equally likely" school of thought. Go ahead and believe whatever you want, but if you can't defend those beliefs in argument, bringing them up on a forum seems disingenuous.

A forum is just for arguing? Like I have already said, I wasn't even looking for an argument. I haven't even said what I really think it is and have decided not to now. I was just curious to see what others thought!

[MJK]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

You did say that anyone with the opinion that they are all man-made is crazy.

Well I thought most people would take that in a light hearten and spirited way! LOL

Sheesh, rough crowd.

[jammies]

Originally Posted by MJK

A forum is just for arguing? Like I have already said, I wasn't even looking for an argument.

What I'm saying is that if you want to bring up a controversial subject, you'd better be prepared to define and defend your viewpoint on said subject. I believe the correct term for not doing so is called "trolling".

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by Dion

I always thought theory and specualtion were one and the same.

FWIW if i had told you i have a huge interest in UFO's that date back to the time i was a child it might have explained better why i search and read all stuff pertaining to the mysterious and the unknown.

Absolutely not!

Theory is based upon observations and uses background knowledge to derive what is a likely explination.

Speculation is uninformed and based on opinion or a lack of knowledge.

A theory for how crop circles is made would be as follows:

Crop circles are all made by people.
It's based on the facts at had, namely that it has been demonstarted and proven in the vast majority of cases that crop circles are made by man, so it's not a stretch to theorize that the rest are created in the same way.


Speculation on the origin of crop circles, would be to say something like this:

"Some crop circles are created by aliens, or bigfoot, or magnetic eddies"

There is no evidence for this, and no logical reason for someone to conclude this, and untill some sort of data to support this becomes available, then it is pure speculation.

Edit: Oops, didn't realize Photon beat me to it.

[photon]

Originally Posted by MJK

A forum is just for arguing?

What's the difference between arguing and discussing? Probably only the amount of yelling involved

Originally Posted by MJK

I haven't even said what I really think it is and have decided not to now. I was just curious to see what others thought!

That's not a very nice way to treat people... People aren't a resource to be drawn on for your entertainment. If you want to find something out about someone you usually have to return the favour