[Following the publication of our Swangate Update in CW16 Dennis Stacy
replies to allegations published by Henry Azadedel, the well
known international rare orchid smuggler. PF.]
To correct each and every error of fact or assumption that
appears in Dr. Armen Victorian's recently distributed article,
"Disinformers, Deceivers and Their Legitimate
Supporters" (March 7, 1993) would probably require a small
hard drive and try the patience of anyone who bothers to read
this. However, since I am personally described therein as "a
punch-drunk editor," I think its imperative that I set a few
of Mr. Victorian's more egregious remarks straight.
To begin with, while he preaches accuracy in reporting, its a
principle that he himself fails to practice. He says, for
instance, that I coined the phrase "case of the
century" to describe the Linda Napolitano case currently
under investigation by Budd Hopkins. The first time I refer to
the case is in my coverage of the speech given by Budd Hopkins at
the Albuquerque MUFON Symposium. My article appeared in the
August, 1992, issue of the MUFON UFO Journal, pp 3-10.
There are 11 subheadings in that article, only one of which is
surrounded by quotation marks: "The Abduction Case of the
Century". Here is my concluding paragraph: "If it
continues to hold up under scrutiny - and especially if the
political figure can be induced to come forward and corroborate
events - then this could indeed be the 'case of the
century'".
I understand that English is not Mr. Victorian's native
language, but he surely understands that when words are put in
quotation marks they refer to someone else's direct quote ? I
didn't coin the phrase, in other words. It sounds like a small
point to make, but there are others. And it is, after all, Mr.
Victorian who is a stickler for accuracy, isn't it ?
Next, he says that after I "faxed a ridiculous letter to
Mr. [George] Wingfield "I wrote back with the excuse that
[I] was drunk when [I] wrote the letter, therefore apologising
for its contents". Here's what I really said: "Dear
George, I'd meant to send along a follow-up fax before receiving
yours of today, mainly to apologise for the intemperate tone of
my own previous fax and remarks. Not to make excuses, but I
received your original reply late at night, and by the time I
responded, quite frankly, I was under the influence. It is, after
all, that time of year. So by the cold light of day, I again
apologise for my abrupt tone and any imperative remarks."
The date of this letter is December 12, and I asked George to
forward Mr. Victorian a copy as well.
This friendly riposte is what Mr. Victorian characterizes as
my craven "admission" of habitual drunkenness. Note,
first, that I don't apologize for the contents of my previous
fax, but for its impertinent tone. At this time faxes were being
frantically exchanged back and forth across the Atlantic, leaving
and arriving at all hours of the night and day. Note next the
date. I don't know what social circles Mr. Victorian travels in,
nor do I frankly care, but I can tell him that the Christmas
season in San Antonio is quite a festive one, with friends or
family throwing a party virtually every other night of the month
right up until New Year's Eve. I did what I thought was an
honourable thing, and admitted that I had been drinking (which
wasn't the same as saying I was drunk) and that I probably should
have waited until morning before "shooting from the
hip". For this frank openness in a personal letter intended
only for myself, George and Mr. Victorian, I now find myself
thanked by having it held up in public ridicule as
"evidence" of my "punch-drunk" editing of the MUFON
UFO Journal. But I can guarantee you one thing: it'll be a
cold day in hell when Mr. Victorian apologises to anyone,
previous former colleagues included, for any of his actions,
however regrettable or reprehensible.
A mere ten days later, on December 22nd, Mr. Victorian offered
to sue MUFON for libel. We consulted our attorneys, and
through an intermediary he was advised to proceed full steam
ahead. We are still waiting to hear from Mr. Victorian's lawyers.
I predict we'll still be waiting well into the 21st century,
because Mr. Victorian knows that any such suit doesn't stand a
snowball's chance in hell of success.
Even so, Mr. Victorian was allowed the opportunity to reply to
the Schnabel article in the MUFON UFO Journal. And we duly
published his response in the January, 1993, issue, ridiculously
lame and inept as it was. In the same issue we also published a
response by Graham Birdsall of Quest International, editor of UFO
Magazine. Wingfield's response followed in the February
issue. (Between bouts with the bottle, I do miraculously manage
to get some work done !).
Mr. Victorian also quotes from a letter by an unnamed
"couple of American crop circle researchers," in which
Robert Irving is described as a "psychopath ... a
nutter," and one of four men dressed in black they saw
coming out of a field the night before. As Mr. Victorian himself
must almost assuredly be aware, that letter is itself now highly
suspect. It was received in England on November 12, 1992, and was
supposedly written by a Ray and Suzie Marks, then allegedly
living in Berkeley, California. Unfortunately, and to the best of
my current knowledge, no such couple exists ! So much for Mr.
Victorian's own much-vaunted penchant for accuracy. If he knows
who Ray and Suzie Marks really are, then let him come forth, say
so, and adduce evidence of their existence. Put up or shut up.
Mr. Victorian also claims to have three independent
voice-stress analyses indicating that Jim Schnabel was telling
him the truth (instead of simply putting him on) when he spoke of
a conspiracy of "sinister forces" (including Satan)
aimed at disinforming the crop circle phenomenon. Surely, then,
this is physical evidence, evidence that in the interests of
accuracy Mr. Victorian should publish and make public, instead of
just referring to it on occasion ? Bluntly, Mr. Victorian, put up
or shut up.
Mr. Victorian also claims that "some of the vocabulary
[Schnabel] used is only [used] by Intelligence officers or their
recruits." His example ? Schnabel says people sometimes
become "burned out" ! Apparently, Mr. Victorian is
unaware that the phrase "burnt out" has been used by
almost everyone in this country at one time or another, from
football coaches to anyone caught in a dead-end job that they
don't like. It's even in the American Heritage Dictionary of
the English Language, Third Edition. Look it up, Mr.
Victorian and improve your accuracy.
Mr. Victorian also told another crop circle researcher that
his itemised telephone bill would put lie to Schnabel's version
of events. According to Schnabel, Mr. Victorian first talked to
Rob Irving. Irving then called Schnabel and played a nearly
30-minute tape of their conversation, thus preparing Schnabel.
Mr. Victorian claimed his phone bill would prove that he called
Schnabel immediately after talking to Irving, and that therefore
there was no 30-minute gap, ergo, Schnabel was caught lying.
Unfortunately, the copy of his phone bill Mr. Victorian supplied
didn't match the one kept by British Telecom ! Now, who's
accurate here, and who's lying to suit their own personal agenda
? For that matter, what is Mr. Victorian's agenda ? Again, put up
or shut up.
Over the past couple of years Mr. Victorian called me several
times to ask my opinion on this or that case or individual, or to
ask for someone's telephone number, address or some other tid-bit
of information. To the best of my ability, I freely provided the
information he sought on each and every occasion. For this open
co-operation I am now being labelled "punch-drunk" and
presumably the active agent of some heinous intelligence
conspiracy in league with the Devil yet. (And if any good
intelligence agency worth its salt - satanic or otherwise - would
hire punch-drunk editors in the first place).
The fact of the matter is that Mr. Victorian knows no shame.
And anyone in this field who continues to co-operate with him on
a personal level can't say they weren't forewarned when the worm
finally turns, as it almost assuredly will. You can learn from my
experiences, or you can learn from your own. For your help in Mr.
Victorian's personal quest - whatever it is - you can expect to
eventually be repaid in calumny and threats of legal action
should you ever dare deviate from his paranoid world view.
Come to think of it, maybe I WAS punch-drunk. Otherwise, why
would I have bothered giving Dr. Victorian the time of day, let
alone my own personal trust and confidence ? Fortunately, now
that I've sobered up, I've had a complete change of heart.
Dennis Stacy.
PF: This article was first published on the MUFONET
BBS Network.
Sorry folks but I've held this over to issue 18 due to lack of
space.
Fresh from the release of his controversial new book Round
in Circles, Jim Schnabel took time out to answer questions at
a meeting of the Essex Crop Circle Group on Thursday, 28th May.
In his book Jim is careful on words concerning the various
crop formations he is suspected of hoaxing during the 1992 summer
season, but not so tonight. He freely admitted to single-handedly
creating the so-called `charm bracelet' pictogram that appeared
within spitting distance of the Waggon and Horses public house at
Beckhampton in August last year.
He openly spoke of dumping his circle-making equipment at
Avebury Trusloe before making his way across the open fields
under the light of the full moon and reaching his virgin canvas
of ripe wheat. The water trough had not been anticipated, he
said, and at first he had intended avoiding it completely.
However, after marking out the outer ring he stumbled over it
again, so decided to incorporate the wretched thing into his
design. It acted as a good sighting point, but was not
geometrically perfect in its positioning within the formation.
Apparently, the idea had been to construct a new variation of
the crop pictogram with the different components linked in a
wheel, instead of the more usual line of interconnected features.
The antlers, he pointed out, were meant to have been a
continuation of the fractal idea first employed in the Ickleton
Mandelbrot Set of the previous year. He claimed the blueprint for
the design had first been scribbled down on paper before being
sealed in an envelope and sent to himself; a second, condensed
version being concealed beneath the postage stamp. This, I'm
sure, he will produce to order if requested.
Jim's disclosure concerning this quite unique formation was
most extraordinary, particularly as it will be more difficult
convincing the farmer concerned that fallen crop can, as he
claims in his book, be picked up with the blades of a harvester
if lowered sufficiently.
As the evening wore on Montague Keen, having read Jim's book
from cover to cover, fired the confident young American with
question after question concerning his accusations regarding the CCCS
and the purpose of his circle-making activities. For instance,
was Jim's book really inferring that the CCCS was a
religious organisation masquerading as a scientific body with no
fixed views on the phenomenon? No, was the obvious answer,
although Jim pointed out that it did contain certain individuals
whose religious views probably outshone the scientific commitment
of the CCCS. What's more, there were indications, Jim
said, of possible links between key members of the CCCS
and the appearance of hoaxed formations. On a number of occasions
there had been formations appearing following private predictions
from within the CCCS, indicating that the perpetrators may
actually belong to the organisation.
In his usual calm manner Montague pointed out that Jim and his
colleagues had seriously diluted the results of the 1992 Project
Argus experiments through his clandestine activities. Yet despite
this set back, various low-level EM changes had been recorded in
certain formations tested by the Argus team as can be seen in the
125-page report of the project. With a wry smile on his face, Jim
was curious to know which formations had produced these effects !
On the Doug and Dave front Jim spoke of the simple though
effective techniques the two sexagenarians had employed to
construct their own circles and formations. For instance, for a
quintuplet set one would stand in the centre of a finished circle
with a wooden cross shaped device, while the other would take out
a line and carefully move through the crop in a wide ring. When
aligned with one of the four equal angles of the cross a red
light would signal the spot where the next satellite should be
swirled. Jim admitted to `essentially' believing Doug and Dave's
claims - leaving room for doubt, even in his mind. He also said
that the two men believed they would attain more fame and fortune
than they actually received at the hands of the international
press and media.
Did he believe in a natural crop circle phenomenon Jim was
naturally asked. Yes, he revealed his belief in genuine crop
circles - probably only single circles - such as the Tully reeds
case of January 1966. He also admitted to being baffled by the
Mowing Devil case of the seventeenth century and even suggested
that ten summers of surveillance upon Adam's Grave would catch
the real phenomenon in the act. I found his answers incredulous,
and wondered whether, as a confirmed circlemaker, he was pulling
our leg at this juncture of the proceedings!
Jim was confident that most crop formations are of man-made
creation, and who knows he is probably correct. He said it would
have taken a skilled team of three people some three to four
hours to construct the Barbury Castle formation of 16/17th July
1991. So, if they had begun, say, at midnight, the team would
have finished their masterpiece by four in the morning. If this
was correct, would they have then gone on to construct the huge
and highly accomplished `key' formation that appeared the same
night only a mile or so away at Preshute Down? I doubted it very
much and Jim seemed unaware of the fact that this had appeared on
the same night. I also pointed out that this same night had seen
an additional circle at Hackpen Hill only a few miles away as
well as the appearance of a small formation at nearby Wooton
Basset.
Jim admitted constructing five formations in one night during
1992, but accepted my suggestion that at least two separate teams
must have been out on the night of 16/17th July 1991, meaning a
total of some six or more individuals involved in these nocturnal
pursuits; how long will they be able to keep their actions quiet?
On the subject of Rita Goold, the Leicester medium, Jim said
he believed she was responsible for the White Crow letter sent
anonymously to Colin Andrews in 1989. He even believes that Colin
may well have known the authorship of the letter but deliberately
kept this to himself. Despite these allegations, Jim accepted
that Rita probably had very real psychic talents but acted like a
`trickster' character on occasions.
Throughout the whole evening our speaker was open, honest to
himself, and thoroughly entertaining in a likeable sort of way.
He won over the audience by his openness which will hopefully
allow people to more easily accept the blatant reality of crop
circles being of man-made creation; he also succeeded in taking
away the us and them concept built up by certain researchers
during the 1992 season.
Overall Jim Schnabel can offer a lot of answers to the crop
circle community, but - as he readily accepts himself - certainly
not all of them.
I am very grateful to an internationally-renowned crop circle
hoaxer for sending me a copy of this amusing interview. This
interview didn't quite go according to plan, but I won't spoil
all your fun. The beginning of the interview is incomplete but
Peter, the presenter, begins with some comments about how crop
circles are now generally believed to be man-made hoaxes...
PETER: ... but a group of scientists now of international
repute claims that these strange markings which seem to appear
overnight are not made by human hand. One of the scientists who's
involved in the research is Colin Andrews, author of
"Circular Evidence". He is spending the next few months
in this country undertaking further research having been to the
United States. He joins us from our Winchester studio. And with
me in our Southampton studio is Martin Hempstead of the Wessex
Skeptics. Colin, if I can come to you first. This seems a very
high powered piece of research for what many people think is just
a joke. What is the basis for your research ?
ANDREWS: Well good morning Peter. I have just flown back to
the United Kingdom from America, having spent what 3 months in a
pretty concerted effort to round up the necessary scientific
expertise to try and resolve once and for all - hopefully -
exactly what is happening with regard to those mysterious crop
circles. We have a number of scientists flying in behind me. I
think, perhaps, the most interesting research is going to be
conducted into establishing the electro-magnetic field across
Southern England and the magnetic field [at] one or two
particularly key sites, like Cheesefoot Head at Winchester here,
Alton Barnes in Wiltshire and a number of other sites around
Silbury Hill on the border between Wiltshire and Hampshire [sic].
Overlooking effectively through Dr John Birk [?] at the scrollway
theory he has [??] and believes that what might be happening is
that free electrons are being released at the very boundary -
that's the acquifer boundary between the reservoir water, which
of course is held in this carboniferous structure - the chalk -
below Hampshire and that due to the drought that existed between
1976 up to November last year these vast volumes of water -
billions of gallons of water - were being pulled back north [???]
in the reservoir releasing electrons, which he believes may be
responsible for a plasma vortex of a kind - which, of course is a
theory which you might have heard about before.
PETER: That's quite complex, but what you're saying is ...
you're looking at a sort of geological phenomenon to explain it
rather than anything human.
ANDREWS: That is just one research effort, Peter, there are
others going on also. We are looking at the earth grid vectors
and looking to see whether there is some other interaction
between other external components [ie UFOs, PF.] and the
earth grid vector itself of the planet.
PETER: But, ... quite a lot of money is being spent on this,
right ?
ANDREWS: Yes it is. We have funding for a number of projects -
plant analysis is going full steam ahead now because we have
major breakthroughs in the last few weeks and we have funding
from America to look at the plants themselves, analyse the plants
more thoroughly than we have in the past. In a number of
laboratories in America, here and in Germany $ 18,000 has been
spent quite alone on this scrollway theory, which is measuring
the electrostatic and electro-magnetic field in Hampshire and
Wiltshire. A lot of money has been spent and I guess before we
get to the bottom of it a little bit more will be spent also.
PETER: Now let me bring in Martin Hempstead, who's here from
the Wessex Skeptics - skeptical on what grounds ? That we've had
the answer ? That it's a hoax ? Or that it doesn't really matter
? Or what ?
HEMPSTEAD: There's absolutely no reason to believe these
things are anything but made by people. Also [I'm] amused at the
pseudo- scientific rubbish that you've just heard coming from
Colin Andrews. He didn't mention, of course, that he's got
mediums involved in this so-called scientific research, that
Colin Andrews himself has no scientific qualifications at all and
has never published anything of any value [and] that he couldn't
investigate his way out of a paper bag. I'm very skeptical of
anything he says. I'm also skeptical because he's spent years now
telling us there's going to be revelations in the next few months
that have never materialised except for him and a bunch of ardent
followers, so I think this is just more nonsense from Colin
Andrews.
PETER: But we see circles. Are you just saying that all they
are is hoaxes [sic] by people who are just pulling the wool over
people's eyes ?
HEMPSTEAD: Exactly that !
PETER: Why would people go to so much trouble to do that ?
HEMPSTEAD: People have all kinds of motivations for doing all
kinds of things. If you look through history you'll find that
people have done very peculiar things and its very difficult to
understand their motivations. For example, I remember Jim Jones
of Jonestown in South America, where he killed off hundreds of
people, most of us would find that very difficult to understand,
yet it happened. There are many peculiar things that people do
and in fact I think its quite easy to understand that fooling
people like Colin Andrews might make some people sitting round in
pubs quite amused.
PETER: Alright, well let me bring in Colin Andrews. Its been
suggested that you and your supporters have no scientific
qualifications. What do you say to that ?
ANDREWS: Well first of all Peter, isn't it sad that what
you're listening to are two human being talking to each other and
simply the energy which is coming from the scientist - the doctor
that you have sat there - who has been asked many times by myself
and the scientists working with me to join the research effort
and the best he's been able to do.
HEMPSTEAD (Interrupting): I've never been asked by you to do
anything Colin...
ANDREWS: ... is to join Doug and Dave and to tread corn down
in constructing hoaxes. I'd like to ask him, if I may, through
you, just to ask two very simple very basic questions. Does he
first of all understand what the polyembryonic condition is. Can
he explain how it has been replicated only from plants in genuine
crop circles in Canada, Germany, Australia and Great Britain, and
this is just not replicable in plants in control samples in those
countries.
PETER: Well, I must admit I don't know what the polyembryonic
condition is, I don't want to become too scientific-bound. I'll
let Martin answer that in the sense of do you not accept that
there may be geological phenomena that we don't fully understand?
HEMPSTEAD: Well that's a very broad question and of course the
answer has to be yes, but in this case we don't need to invoke
any unknown phenomenon. Its quite easy to understand why crop
circles form but the argument of people like Colin Andrews is
fairly simple its because if people like Colin Andrews can't see
how they are made he can't see how they are hoaxed he tells us
that therefore no human being could hoax them. This strikes me as
rather a high degree of arrogance - in other words because he
can't figure out how something is done it can't have been done by
human beings. There is absolutely no reason to believe that
they're anything but made by people and its just as simple as
that. Now all this nonsense about polyembryony is just more
waffle. Let's see it published in some reputable journals and
replicated by reputable scientists and then we'll believe it.
ANDREWS: Well that's exactly what is going to happen.
HEMPSTEAD: Well this has been done for a couple of years now
Colin but it hasn't been published yet. I don't wait around for
two years to publish things that have the significance that you
claim these things have.
ANDREWS: Martin, what I would have to say is that it sounds
simply by your rhetoric that this is ...
HEMPSTEAD (Interrupting): ... This isn't rhetoric Colin, I'm
talking facts here. Rhetoric is the kind of thing you come out
with, you don't come out with evidence you come out with
nonsense...
ANDREWS: If I ...
HEMPSTEAD (Interrupting): ... Your book, for example, included
physical nonsense about [...] photons...
ANDREWS: If I can ...
HEMPSTEAD (Interrupting): ... If you can speak sense then it
would be very interesting to hear that.
PETER: OK, well its Colin's turn, whether you accept that its
sense or not. Colin ?
ANDREWS: Thank you Peter. You see this is ... has obviously
become a personal situation and Martin is referring simply to me
and I am co-ordinating and that's all I am attempting to do in
the crop circle phenomena is to co-ordinate the basis of the
world. I have scientists who are qualified much much higher up
the ladder than Martin is. We have ...
HEMPSTEAD: ... Qualifications do not matter - its publication
and evidence...
ANDREWS: You see, let me just finish because I'm trying to
tell you that Nature, which you know as one of the world's
eminent papers, literary in the scientific journals of the world,
and they are just about [changing his mind] - they have accepted
a paper from Dr Levengood and he is going to announce to the
world exactly what is happening in the changes to the genetic
structure of the plants which are creating this polyembryony
condition inside plants only inside genuine crop circles and this
cannot be replicated by human beings - which is what I tried to
say on Central TV when you became extremely hysterical last
time....
PETER: Martin, is what you're saying is that you don't want
any more money spent on these kinds of projects at all. That we
know all we need to know ?
HEMPSTEAD: If people want to spend their own money that's
entirely up to them. It seems a shame to me that the United
Nations would spend it...
PETER: Well that was my question, that the United Nations -
Colin is going to speak to the United Nations - as I understand
it, in New York later on - they appear to be taking it rather
more seriously than you are.
HEMPSTEAD: Well it is of course the parapsychology committee
of the U.N. rather than the entire U.N. I suspect that if you
were to talk to other members of the U.N. they might be very
dubious about it but in fact what does the U.N. know about it?
Absolutely nothing. They haven't been there, they haven't
investigated hoaxes, they haven't in fact hoaxed these things
themselves. Colin Andrews well knows that he's been taken in by
formations that he thought were what he called real unhoaxed crop
circles which in fact were made by people and the U.N. has no
knowledge of things like this, they haven't been there, they
don't know.
PETER: Colin Andrews - you'll be persevering I take it with
this, despite this kind of criticism...
[Total Silence]
PETER: Oh ! Apparently he won't !! I think we may have
temporarily lost Winchester....
At this point in the interview Colin Andrews appears to have
simply turned the microphone off in the tiny unmanned studio he
was using in Winchester. Having done many radio interviews from
this same cigarette-stubbed room without experiencing any of
those "technical problems" so beloved of the Beeb I
find it difficult to understand how an electrical genius like
Colin Andrews might have accidentally lost contact with the BBC
studios in Southampton (only 10 miles away).
Throughout this increasingly acerbic debate Colin Andrews
sounded uncharacteristically unsure of himself. At several points
he talked very slowly, as if desperately searching for the
correct combination of words to respond to Martin Hempstead's
arguments. Then suddenly it was the old Colin Andrews we used to
know so much about. Perhaps the "implant" in his
forehead was turned up a notch by the aliens ?
A more interesting issue raised by this interview is Andrews'
claim that a paper discussing alleged embryony in crop circles
has been accepted by Nature (arguably the world's leading
refereed scientific journal). Of course, if true this would be a
major scientific break-through - one which would challenge many
people's view of the crop circles overnight. On June 16th I wrote
to Nature to check this claim. As you can see from the
panel, Nature refute accepting such a paper from Dr
Levengood, although reading a bit between the lines it looks as
though Levengood certainly submitted such a paper.
Once again it seems that Mr Andrews is living in a different
world to the rest of us. And once again we expect Mr Andrews, if
he is a honourable man, to withdraw this incorrect claim in a
public statement.
Now for Martin Hempstead. Well we've all heard that claim
before haven't we...
"There's absolutely no reason to believe these things are anything but made by people."
Of course not Martin. Not if you totally ignore documented eye
witness testimony, the numerous historical cases or the
established pre 1980 belief in a meteorological explanation
amongst certain sections of the farming community. Not if you
sweep this embarrassing evidence under the carpet without
discussing it. Strange, but I thought Andrews was the one who was
supposed to be the True Believer.
This really leaves me with just one question. Which of these
two men are promoting a religion ? Is it Andrews, with his
desperate twists and turns to promote a "genuine"
cereology ? Or is it Hempstead, with his "Science Reigns
Supreme" philosophy ? Please will somebody let me know.
Thanks.
PF.
