Following Doug Bower's lecture at Marlborough the previous
Wednesday (described in CW18)
this second meeting was held in the amphitheatre at Neal's
Meeting Yard in Covent Garden. This summary of what took place is
based on a tape recording of the meeting supplied by one of The
Crop Watcher's many spies and agents. Sadly this second
lecture was poorly attended, with only about 35 people in
attendance compared with nearly 100 at the Marlborough meeting.
In contrast to the earlier meeting the Covent Garden lecture was
a more abusive and disruptive affair, largely due to the antics
of Stanley Morcom, one of the original members of the Centre for
Crop Circle Studies. Morcom bought himself and his subject no
credit at all by engaging in repeated outbursts and slanderous
attacks. On two occasions Morcom openly accused Bower and Brown
of being "liars", an accusation which to my knowledge
he has not withdrawn.
The style and format of the lecture closely followed the
Marlborough lecture, as Ken Brown had wisely planned the meeting
by preparing written notes of what he was going to say. He again
repeated his main theme "Tonight is intended to highlight
the fact that corn circles were Doug Bower's original idea".
Doug Bower then repeated the statement he read out at the
Marlborough meeting. It read "I would like for us to go down
on the record for us to apologise to farmers and landowners, and
thank them all for the tolerant and good-humoured way - I hope
that's correct - in which they've viewed the escapades of two
middle aged pranksters who became obsessed with an idea - it was
nothing more than a practical joke from the start".
Ken Brown continued:
"I don't ever want to criticise true faith, however much
I might disagree with it. I don't wish to make a fool of anyone's
sincere belief but I AM justified in criticising Colin Andrews,
Pat Delgado and Terence Meaden and latterly George Wingfield, of
course. But particularly all those who were around in the early
years of circle investigations who made no effort to be entirely
objective. It seems to me those so-called experts were everything
but objective in their research of the circles. To my mind they
all deserve the severest criticism. There was sufficient evidence
around for this subject to have been wrapped up, packed away and
forgotten completely in fact even before - well before - Colin
Andrews came on the scene in the mid 80s. "
"Anyhow, you can easily see, when Doug and Dave came
clean in the TODAY newspaper in '91 it was far far too
late. Doug and Dave had been swamped, overtaken. They'd become
irrelevant to the religion of corn circles. And because they
themselves hadn't seen the faith growing they were amazed their
story wasn't taken seriously. Just try to imagine yourself in
their shoes. You tell the truth, you KNOW its the truth, but the
Pope and the Priest and the Parishioners will not give up their
faith. But then why should they ? Faith is not about reason.
Faith is not about being rational. Faith is [not] common sense.
And much worse, Faith does not like to be questioned. So when I
first met Doug Bower and Dave Chorley they still had no
understanding of the diatribe being hurled at them. But after I'd
earlier provided a few circle magazines and comments from a
couple of lectures I'd been to their eyes began to open. I could
see that the TODAY newspaper story gave only a brief and
slightly distorted picture of a period which must have lasted
over 20 years since Doug and Dave first met. Some of my more
reasonable circle friends were raising questions about how much
of the real truth these two guys from Southampton really were
telling. I just happened to be there at the right time and the
right place. "
Ken Brown then repeated the claim that he made at the
Marlborough Meeting, that on the 28th October 1991 he presented
Colin Andrews and Pat Delgado with evidence which supported Doug
and Daves' claim. According to Brown Colin Andrews stated that
"There are probably only about a dozen circles out of all
the circles we have ever had that I can put my hand on heart and
say they are absolutely genuine". According to Brown Colin
Andrews repeated this claim in a telephone conversation with Ken
Brown on January 18th 1993. Then it was Doug Bower's turn.
"Well, as Ken has already said to you, the thing that's
upset us most of all is the opposition that we've had from these
people. The general public I think - the majority of them anyway
- accepted our story right from the start when it arrived in the
paper in September 1991, but what was going on behind the scenes
up until that time we had no idea until Ken came on the scene and
he told us more or less about it. We only knew about four people
which is the important people - these are the people that are
still in opposition to us. I mean we've had nothing but insults
over the telephone and in writing. My wife has been insulted. Its
been nothing but insults ever since it all started in September
'91. This is the thing that upsets us most of all. As Ken said
just now we were hoping that the whole thing would have come to
an end in September '91 they would have probably come up to us
and shook our hands and say 'Thanks very much for what you've
done, we've made a lot of money out of you and my God this is
what's really behind it all' - its the pounds, shillings and
pence - this is all that really matters. There was a statement
only three days ago in the Southern Evening Echo - that
Pat Delgado and Colin Andrews have now reached the 500,000 figure
for his books -and translated into four languages. So I mean I
can see really why the resistance and opposition has been put up
towards us, they wanted to keep this going. And anyone with an
income such as that are not going to accept our story."
Ken Brown then presented Doug Bower's own photographs of crop
circles from the early years - photographs of crop circles which
Brown claimed had never been reproduced in the crop circle
literature. He claimed that Doug Bower had numerous photographs
of such circles and that this proved that Doug must have made
these circles. He accepted the point that was made by Stanley
Morcom and another member of the audience that had there been
only one or two such photographs this would have proven nothing.
His point was that there were numerous such photographs dating
back to 1980-82 and that this was pushing coincidence beyond
chance level.
Ken Brown continued: "Some people have said that Doug and
Dave must have copied an original idea - [They say] where did
they get the idea from? They must have copied the same thing
somewhere in their mind or seen somewhere - [This is] Not true.
That's [a photograph of] Tully. Tully was some circles made in
reed beds or circular impressions made in reed beds. The
photographs - I've blown one up there - is of a dished side - a
curved side, the reeds are bent in other words - curving in a
little bit like the side of a cup. So that's what Tully looked
like. Paul Fuller keeps coming up to me -and he came to
Marlborough to bring out all his photographs - Paul lent me all
his evidential photographs for pre Doug and Dave circles. All
Paul Fuller's photographs are blown down - blown down - pretty
flat - not even with a slant on like that - they are even more
wind blown than this [Tully]. Paul Fuller says there are plenty
of circles pre the mid 1970s. I don't deny that, but boy oh boy
they're not circles as we know them. Circles as we know them -our
crop circles - since the mid 1970s are straight rigid sided
affairs. They are not wind blown with slanting sides. They are
not dished like Tully was dished."
Readers are invited to comment on this claim. The 2nd edition
of Crop Circles A Mystery Solved (Robert Hale Ltd) carries
three photographs of circles which we believe disprove Ken
Brown's claim that Doug and Dave "invented"
straight-edged crop circles in the mid 1970s. These three
photographs were taken in Canada (1977) and Australia (1973).
Doug and Dave have repeatedly confirmed that they only created
crop circles in Britain. There is also a photograph of what looks
very much like a sharply- defined crop circle at Aix-en-Provence,
South-East France, on 20th May 1977, in The Probe Report,
Vol 3, No 4, April 1983.
Doug Bower was then invited to describe how he made crop
circles. He and Dave always wore Wellington boots with deep
treads. Apparently Dave Chorley used to be very concerned about
the damage their boots left in the standing crop but this would
normally be covered up by the circle they were creating. Ken
Brown stated that he thought it was "remarkable" that
the crop circle researchers had never noticed the tracks left by
these boots. Lucy Pringle remarked that she possessed photographs
showing tread marks underneath circles.
In response to another question Ken Brown stated his belief
that Doug and Dave had never made any "grapeshot"
circles - the smallest circles they had ever made were only 8
feet across because the width of the security bar from Doug's
shop was only four feet long. In response to another question
Brown dismissed the claim that it was impossible to see where the
tramlines were in the dark without the use of a torch. He went on
to state that it was quite possible to walk through standing crop
without leaving a trail. Stanley Morcom confirmed this.
Doug Bower then explained that the centre of every circle he
had ever made displayed a clockwise circle. The only exception
was when making the outer rim. Ken Brown described how Doug Bower
had created the "illusion" of a spiral pattern by
laying down a sequence of straight lays. This method had been
convincingly demonstrated to him by Doug in the field. In
response to a question from the audience Ken Brown stressed that
he had only examined the Bower and Chorley method of laying
circles and that other groups of hoaxers undoubtedly used
different methods which produced different characteristics.
Doug Bower then explained that he had discovered that standing
crop was often knotted into small patches where the wind had
blown the crop to point against the direction he was pushing his
4 foot rod (the security bar from his picture framing shop). When
this happened it was much harder work to push the rod through the
crop as it had to be pushed at an angle. It was this angle which
contributed towards the eccentricity of the overall crop circle.
Sometimes this effect was so marked that Doug would have to use a
piece of string to mark out the rim of the circle so that he and
Dave Chorley could push the crop down into a more neat circle.
This was exacerbated if he and Dave Chorley began making a circle
from opposite positions within the initial eight foot circle.
Ken Brown then prompted Doug Bower to repeat the story of
"Von Ryan's Express" first told at the Marlborough
Meeting. It seems that this story relates to the 1978 Headbourne
Worthy circle - shown on page 16 of Circular Evidence. As
Doug Bower states this formation would certainly have been
visible from the main Winchester to Waterloo railway line. Again
Dave Chorley's Christmas Card that recorded this event was
presented (Dave's inscription read "Must be something big
going on in Micheldever tonight" - a reference to a remark
by the ticket inspector at Winchester railway station).
Ken Brown then stated that according to his calculations Doug
and Dave made 42 of the circles that featured in the 61 colour
photographs in Circular Evidence, 27 of circles featuring
in the 52 colour photographs in The Latest Evidence and 34
of the circles featured in the 68 colour photographs in The
Crop Circle Enigma. [This makes a total of 103 out of 181 (57
per cent). Of course some of these photographs are of the same
formations so this percentage is an inflated estimate of the
actual percentage, PF].
In response to a question from Alice Keen-Soper Ken Brown
stated that in his opinion any circle which postdated Doug and
Daves' first circles was by definition a man-made hoax. In
response to a second question from Lucy Pringle Ken Brown
admitted that there was no photographic proof that Doug and Dave
made the circles but that he and Doug were "baring our
souls" so that people could assimilate all the evidence that
was available. A third member of the audience [Chad Deetken I
think, PF] pressed Brown as to why he believed Doug and
Daves' story simply because they had told him they had made the
circles. Brown retorted that there was more than just their word,
he had interviewed both men at length, had discovered their own
photographs of circles they claim to have made in Doug Bower's
scrap-book and had seen the result of a demonstration which
convinced him of the truthfulness of their claim. Doug Bower
responded to a further question about why he and Dave Chorley
made so many circles over such a prolonged period in time. Doug
Bower admitted that it had become an "obsession" that
was fuelled by the media publicity.
Ken Brown then prompted Doug to recount the early years of his
circle-making. Many of the points raised at this point in the
meeting had been raised at the Marlborough meeting so these
points will not be discussed here. The only new revelation
concerned Doug's own photograph of a previously unpublicised
quintuplet event at Cley Hill in 1983. In response to another
challenge by Chad Deetken Ken Brown pointed to the TODAY
newspaper's own photographs of Doug and Dave half way through
making their demonstration circle at Sevenoaks - the formation
which featured in TODAY's exclusive story which had been
promoted as genuine in such glowing terms by Pat Delgado.
Ilene Bower was invited by Ken Brown to describe how it was
the Alfriston formation of 1984 which alerted her to the fact
that Doug Bower was involved in something secretive. She was
alerted by the high mileage on the car, which Ilene noticed
because she did the books for her husband's picture-framing
business.
Doug Bower went on to describe how he alone created the
"first" circle in oilseed rape - at South Wonston in
1987. He rejected Chad Deetken's claim that he couldn't have made
this circle without damaging the brittle thick stem. Ken Brown
asserted that he had a list of 12 circles in 1987 which had not
been made by Doug and Dave but which must have been made by
copycat hoaxers. Later the audience were amused to learn that
following Colin Andrews' request for information about new
circles Doug and Dave would make a new formation and then
telephone him with the news !
The first flashpoint of the evening concerned a disagreement
between Ken Brown and Stanley Morcom over the so-called Swastika
formation. Ken Brown stated that the truth behind the appearance
of these Swastikas was difficult to unravel as Doug and Ilene
Bower were both convinced that Doug had made only the second
formation, the one positioned north of the A303 trunk road. Ken
Brown found this difficult to accept as it would imply that
another group of hoaxers made the original circle and that Doug
Bower then made the second formation less than a mile or so away
by sheer coincidence. At this point Stanley Morcom interrupted
and claimed that on a previous occasion Ken Brown had claimed to
him that Doug and Dave did not make either of the two Swastikas.
During the ensuing argument Morcom accused Brown of changing his
story and "lying" to him. Brown dealt with Morcom's
attack in his normal good-humoured way by admitting that he was
actually an "M.I. 5 agent". Whilst this amused the
audience it did nothing to deter Morcom's mounting disbelief in
Doug and Daves' story.
Morcom renewed his attack by referring to Doug Bower's earlier
claim that he made most of his circles using the four foot long
security bar from his picture-framing shop. Morcom stated that
the 1989 Corhampton triplet displayed "seven or eight"
concentric rings with an average width of 2 foot 2 inches. Morcom
wanted to know how Doug Bower could make concentric rings 2 foot
2 inches across with a rod of 4 foot length. Ken Brown suggested
that the rod could have overlapped adjacent lays. Morcom himself
suggested that this effect could be produced if the rod was
pushed through the crop at an angle. Morcom then returned to the
controversy over the two Swastika formations and Brown concluded
by saying that he thought that even though Doug Bower could not
recall having made both Swastikas the facts suggested to him that
Doug Bower must have been responsible for both formations.
Stanley Morcom again interrupted Ken Brown as he was
discussing Doug Bower's construction of the first pictogram at
Chilcomb in 1987. Morcom challenged Doug Bower as to how he
constructed the "coffins". Doug Bower replied that he
and Dave "jumped". Morcom took this to mean that Doug
Bower jumped ten feet in one go - something Doug Bower had
obviously not meant to imply. Ken Brown correctly pointed out
that the TVS newscast of this formation showed that there was a
trail linking the "coffins" to the rest of the
formation but Morcom demanded that Doug Bower answer his question
without Ken Brown's assistance. In the ensuing argument Morcom
twice admitted that he believed that "all" crop circles
were hoaxes. His questioning of Doug Bower to account for how he
managed to jump "10 feet" from the spur to the
"coffins" then became unnecessarily provocative and
confrontational. Morcom concluded the argument by stating that
"I've got a feeling that I've been told a lot of lies".
Subsequently, when describing the Hazeley Farm Fields
pictogram both Morcom and Pringle challenged Ken Brown and
criticised him for telling Doug's story despite the fact that he
had not even been present when the circle making had allegedly
been taking place. Brown defended himself by stating that he had
examined the evidence at length with Doug and Dave and had
managed to coax out of Doug facts and events which Doug himself
had not understood. He justified his method of presenting the
evidence by stating that he knew "more about Doug Bower's
circle making than Doug Bower himself". Lucy Pringle then
asserted that despite the fact that many circles may or may not
be hoaxes she had still discovered unusual effects inside crop
circles that she could not account for.
Doug Bower again stated his unhappiness with the way he had
been treated by the "so-called experts". For years crop
circles had been promoted as genuine then suddenly - once his
story broke - he and Dave Chorley were being dismissed as
"frauds" simply so that a few people could carry on
making money out of his circles. Stanley Morcom countered by
pointing out that he had spent a fortune investigating circles
but Doug Bower never mentioned the sacrifice he and others had
made to research the phenomenon. This only seemed to incense Doug
Bower further as he forcibly pointed out to Morcom that he and
Dave Chorley had never asked Morcom to spend money investigating
their circles, it had been Morcom's decision to spend the money.
Morcom challenged Bower as to whether his circle-making was
intended to "fool" himself. "Yes - all of you. We
fooled you all!" was Doug Bower's triumphant response. He
continued, "My next hoax is going to fool the world even
more than this one". This ominous statement was met with
delighted applause from the audience.
Stanley Morcom attempted his fifth attack of the evening when
Doug Bower described how he and Dave Chorley left
"meteorites" in some of the Stonehenge formations of
1991. Morcom appeared to believe that Brown and Bower had changed
their story but eventually realised his error and withdrew his
charge. When explaining the "DD" signature Doug Bower
pointed out that "Every artist signs his own work".
This immediately bought a question from Chad Deetken as to
whether or not any formation had ever appeared with the
"DD" signature which Doug Bower had not made. Doug
Bower replied that to his memory there was none but that hoaxers
had copied them before and it was therefore conceivable that they
might be adding fake "DD" signatures to add
authenticity to their hoaxes. This didn't satisfy Deetken or
Morcom and another argument arose. At the end of this argument
Ken Brown summarised the reasons why he and Doug Bower had
organised the meeting:
"Things can get impossible with some people, I'm afraid.
We're getting to that stage where we're going to have to say what
we believe - and you're going to have to take it. Its no good
taking a point for the next fifteen minutes - all we can say is
what we have to say. We'll say what we have to say. If you don't
like it you can lump it. You know we really don't care. We have
come tonight out of good will, putting our money on the line. I'm
saying this from the heart, not knowing whether we'll get our
costs back. We are here to tell our story. Its only last week and
tonight we're going to tell our story as far as we're concerned
as after tonight I'm retiring from the corn circle fraternity,
totally. I have no more interest in it because I'm a hundred per
cent convinced that Doug is telling the truth, that Ilene's
telling the truth, that these circles, (sic) photographs really
are Doug's, that all this equipment is Doug's, that the story is
true and therefore to me, beyond a shadow of doubt, the whole
story is true that they started corn circles. A lot of you people
may disagree, you may have your own belief systems, you may have
your own reasons for disagreeing. That is no reason for us to
fall out, that's no reason for us to hammer a point for
ten/fifteen minutes .. we'll just have to agree to disagree, and
frankly I don't give a toss because I'm getting out of it, and if
you people want to go out in the fields swanning around, praying,
whistling, listening to sounds in the dark, seeing lights in the
sky, feeling better, feeling worse [that's] fine, I really don't
mind - its your life its not my life, and I don't wish us to fall
out about it tonight."
Stanley Morcom's attempt to respond to this statement was
objected to by the audience. Ken Brown then summed up how the
Doug and Dave story broke in August/September 1991. Finally, in
response to a question from Chad Deetken, Doug Bower admitted
that he and Dave Chorley had both made # 3,000 from TV
appearances and newspaper articles. At this point my bootleg copy
of the meeting finished. Thanks for the tape recording M.I.5.
PF.
