What do you get if you add together a sore throat, a baby
continually crying and some nutter accusing you of being a
government agent ? A BUFORA lecture of course ! Poor old
John Macnish, this was every public speaker's worst nightmare
come true - the curse of the crop circles eyeing up their next
victim !! Fortuitously John Macnish's contribution to the crop
circle debate was saved by some old fashioned common sense and
the showing of two previously unseen crop circle videos which
will form the basis of Cropcircle Communique II, which is
to be released this Spring (See address.).
John Macnish began by introducing the title of his lecture -
"Crop Circles, the Final Chapter", which he admitted
was a "relief at the end of an interminable obsession"
with the subject. He explained that he hoped his lecture would
"lift the lid and blow a few misconceptions".
His first video concentrated on the mystery of the circles,
drawing attention to the evolution of patterns and the variety of
explanations that had been proffered. This first video featured
the famous Day Time Live "trilling" incident at
Beckhampton, the Blackbird fiasco (including the BBC Breakfast
Time interview with Colin Andrews), the confrontation between
George Wingfield and Terence Meaden at Barbury Castle, and Doug
and Dave's claim to have invented the phenomenon in
"1978". John Macnish confessed that during 1992 he had
kept "a very close eye on" Doug Bower and Dave Chorley
and that this had led to "a year of revelation" for
himself. A few factual errors crept into this first video, eg
Macnish claimed that circles "always appear at night"
and that "no hard facts had emerged" during the 1980s
which pointed towards a solution. Both of these are highly
contentious statements.
At the end of this first video John Macnish discussed the Doug
and Dave claim. He began by stating that at the Chilgrove
demonstration both men claimed to have made no more than 30
formations a year (sometimes less). According to the records of
the Circles Phenomenon Research Group there had been at least 75
"confirmed crop circles" for 1987. This contrasted
sharply with the "26" circles recorded by CERES.
Macnish believed that this discrepancy was because CERES
counted a circle as just one formation whereas CPR counted
each separate component. Macnish concluded that whilst there was
no reason to suspect deliberate misrepresentation the use of CPR's
inflated figures by the media had helped to discredit Doug and
Daves' claim.
Next John Macnish admitted that Doug and Dave had no
"hard evidence" which proved their claim. He concluded
that most cerealogists had dismissed their claim because they had
taken no photographs of themselves half-way through making
circles. According to Macnish this widespread dismissal of Doug
and Dave contrasted sharply with the reactions of the two men who
had examined their story most closely. He believed that both
Meaden and Delgado had listened to Doug and Daves' claim and
carefully examined their maps and diagrams. Following this both
Meaden and Delgado had "dramatically changed their
viewpoints" after reviewing this evidence. Meaden now
dismissed all but the simplest of circles as hoaxes whilst
Delgado (in 1992) had "washed his hands" of the
subject. This, in Macnish's view, demonstrated that "the
hard facts surrounding this subject are not always what they
seem". He concluded that "sometimes, the hard facts
amount to a downright con".
In his second film Macnish began by examining the results of The
Cerealogist's circle-making competition at West Wycombe.
During the commentary Macnish stated that:
"I was well impressed with the formations, by the lay of the crop and by the precision of the shapes that these teams had created."
Strangely, the "team of experts" that were called
in to examine these man-made hoaxes were "not nearly so
impressed" with what they found. Macnish felt that the fact
that these "experts" already knew that the circles they
were examining were hoaxes influenced their conclusions. His
video went on to show how Adrian Dexter's team easily constructed
an outer ring.
Next the video showed Rupert Sheldrake, one of the two men who
thought up the idea for a circle-making competition. Sheldrake
made an astonishingly frank statement about the man-made circles:
"They were much better than I expected. Firstly, the performance at night was much more silent and much less obvious. ... I think the standard of these formations was extremely high. The subtlety of the way things were laid, the subtlety of the way the stalks were bent and that kind of thing, may well differ from the ones observed which may be genuine in the fields, but the overall impression is very very good, they've done fantastically well."
John Macnish then presented night-time film of Doug and Dave making crop circles during 1992. This was achieved by using a night-time image intensifier with a range of about half a mile as well as still photography. The video film showed Doug and Dave using their circle-making equipment at night. Macnish concluded that because of the quality of the circles they produced. "After a very short time I had absolutely no doubts in my mind that everything they claimed they could have actually achieved".
Macnish went on to state that during 1992 Doug and Dave made
more circles than they had ever claimed in a single year:
"Their enthusiasm and co-operation persuaded me that they were telling the truth. They've nothing to hide. They've nothing to conceal. And I watched them as a natural history photographer would observe wildlife from a distance".
Macnish's video showed Doug and Dave making several huge
formations as well as "grapeshot" circles. Macnish
claimed that throughout the 1992 season Doug and Dave sent him
diagrams and water-colour paintings of formations that later
appeared in fields.
John Macnish noted that many of the dimensions of circles
published in the crop circle literature were consistent with the
dimensions of the formations Doug and Dave made during the 1992
season.
One fascinating revelation was that during the summer of 1993
John Macnish had accidentally caught on film a group of three
hoaxers making a pictogram on Waden Hill near Avebury. This hoax
was constructed in pouring rain and fog, under freezing
temperatures. For an independent eye witness account of crop
circle hoaxing at nearby Silbury Hill see the box on page 16.
John Macnish commented on Jim Schnabel's circle-making. He
remarked how strange it was that none of the crop circle
"believers" accepted Schnabel's claim to have made the
so-called Dharmic Wheel formations. Macnish's video showed
time-lapse photographs of Schnabel making such a formation.
Macnish showed a second film of hoaxers he had accidentally
captured on film.
Colin Andrews then appeared, talking about his doubt about the
Ickleton Mandelbrot formation. Apparently small
"pivots" which had been found placed around the edge of
the formation. Andrews also felt that the positioning of the
formation was suspicious. Despite these reservations he admitted
that the Mandelbrot was "extremely impressive". Andrews
also admitted that during an interview for the National
Geographic documentary he had found a peg with a white painted
top in the East Kennett pictogram. He concluded that because of
the positioning of this peg this formation was a man-made hoax.
John Macnish's lecture went on to examine some of Doug and
Daves' circle-making techniques in detail. He showed how the
hoaxers used the cap-mounted sighting-device which had bought
them so much ridicule. He also showed how they made grapeshot
circles and complex layering effects inside complex S-shaped
swirls. In this latter case Macnish claimed that the C.C.C.S.
had promoted Doug and Daves' hoax as "genuine".
Macnish then addressed the alleged similarity between crop
circle formations and prehistoric art forms. He suggested that
entoptic forms - random images produced by the subconscious mind
- might be influencing the patterns being created by hoaxers.
Since all humans draw on the same archetypes it was not
surprising that crop circles appealed to such a wide
cross-section of people.
After the break John Macnish fielded numerous questions from
his somewhat sceptical audience. In response to a question from
Stanley Morcom he began by explaining why Doug and Dave had
chosen not to enter The Cerealogist's circle-making
competition in 1992. This was due to three reasons - a fear that
by revealing their circle-making techniques they would compromise
their claim in the eyes of their detractors, a fear that farmers
would take "retribution" were Doug and Dave to be seen
making circles in public too often, and a fear that due to
Montague Keen's former links with the National Farmers Union
legal department they "might end up in jail without the
three thousand pounds". Asked to elaborate Macnish explained
that Doug and Dave have never set out to prove their claim, they
had made circles because they wanted to experience the thrill of
fooling people who had "set themselves up to be
experts".
The second question concerned the extent of the historical
evidence. Macnish began by stating that Colin Andrews and Pat
Delgado had done a "massive amount of research" into
the historical evidence. This reviewer would strongly question
this claim, because despite this "massive" research
Andrews & Delgado didn't know about the Westbury circles of
1980. Apparently the earliest photograph Andrews and Delgado had
discovered was taken by farmer Ian Stevens in 1978 [shown on page
16 of Circular Evidence], who reported seeing circles
"a year or so" before that on his land. According to
Macnish this photograph is the earliest known photograph of a
sharply-defined circle displaying "an intelligent looking
floor design" from an "English" field. Expanding
on this crucial theme John Macnish reviewed Paul Fuller's
collection of historical evidence. Macnish admitted there was a
"vast amount of data" including anecdotes, sketches and
the Mowing Devil case. He admitted that this suggested that it
was likely that "some kind of phenomenon existed before
[1978]". However, Macnish went on to state that
"nobody, to my knowledge, has got a single photograph of the
so-called crop circle phenomenon before 1978." He backed up
this statement by referring to Michael Green of the CCCS.
Green was an archaeologist who had conducted a search through
Cambridge University's Archeology Aerial Photography Society's
archive, which contained photographs dating back to the 1920 and
1930s. Apparently Green had failed to find a single photograph of
a crop circle. His questioner attempted to refute this argument
by insisting that Macnish extend his studies beyond England to
include overseas cases.
The third questioner asked Macnish about the video tapes he
had made during Operation Blackbird. Macnish stated that his team
had five video cameras operating on the night the Blackbird hoax
was perpetrated. One camera was positioned in such a way as to
record half land and half sky, in case an unidentified phenomenon
created a circle. Apparently this unpublished video sequence
showed nothing but sky all night. The third questioner then asked
about the timing of events, as Pat Delgado had later claimed that
several people had witnessed flashing triangular lights in the
sky. Macnish stated that this eye witness account was reported to
him by Delgado at 8.15 am that morning, before he had even
examined the video tape. At this point the discussion became
somewhat acerbic. Jayne Macnish refuted a suggestion that they
and the BBC were "covering up" evidence. She offered to
take the name and address of the questioner and send him a copy
of the relevant video tape for him to view. This reviewer has
seen proof that this promise was kept.
Another member of the audience asked Macnish why no one on
Bratton Down had seen the crosses that were found in the
Blackbird hoax circles despite the extensive use of binoculars.
Macnish explained that the crosses were only 2-3 feet across,
were a long way from the hillside and that there had been a great
deal of excitement at the time. He also described how members of
the Operation Blackbird team had immediately guarded the
formation once it was seen so that no one could tamper with it.
This was to ensure that Colin Andrews and Pat Delgado could
examine the circle and pass judgement on it. He surprised his
questioner by stating that he had film of the hoaxers making the
Blackbird circles and that this had been enhanced by the BBC at
Basingstoke and then shown on the BBC 6 o' clock news that same
evening.
The fourth question concerned the bending of plants at their
nodes. John Macnish admitted that he had never managed to film
the "magical" bending of the crop claimed by the
researchers because the bend was always at ground level. Indeed
he had only seen this effect once, in a circle at Baltic Farm.
Pressed to explain how some circles were only a few inches below
the height of surrounding crop Macnish described how the
geotrophic response mechanism always defined the shape of the
stem. He also drew on the work by Project Argus, which apparently
found that the peculiar bending of stems inside crop circles was
entirely natural.
The fifth questioner began by claiming that Michael Hesseman
had "numerous" photos of crop circles predating 1978
which Macnish should have known about because they were passed
around at Doug Bower's July 1993 Marlborough meeting on July 28th
1993 [actually it was me, PF]. He also claimed that despite
Macnish's earlier comments Pat Delgado was still conducting
research into crop circles. Macnish pointed out that his claim
that Delgado had "dropped out" of circles research
related to 1992 not 1993 and that this statement was supported by
Delgado's suspension of his Newsletter that same year.
The fifth questioner then returned to his earlier point (3rd
question) and implied that by refusing to release video shots of
hoaxers making circles Macnish was covering up evidence. Not
surprisingly John Macnish took exception to this. He and Jayne
Macnish again offered to give any assistance required to the
questioner to satisfy his point. The member of the audience
claimed that it was possible to simulate hoaxers making circles
on film and that he could do so in "ten minutes". John
Macnish countered by pointing out that it would cost £ 15-20,000
to produce such a simulation. John Macnish went on to question
why he and other sceptical researchers were being accused of
being involved in a conspiracy to discredit the subject...
"All I want to know is WHY do we want to discredit it ?
What's in it for us ? I really don't understand."
The next question related to the Steven Alexander film.
Macnish admitted that the film was a complete mystery and that he
had no explanation for it. He went on to state that whatever the
film showed there was no proof of a causal relationship between
the "UFO" and the giant pictogram that was in an
adjacent field.
Montague Keen asked the seventh question. He wanted to know
how it was possible to create "weaving", where bunches
of stems overlap in different directions up to five times. Keen
drew attention to Ralph Noyes' photograph of this effect in the
1992 Dharmic Wheel, which Jim Schnabel claims to have made. He
asked how can hoaxers create this effect ? Macnish responded by
stating that he had seen Schnabel recreate this exact effect in
circles he had created under test conditions. Keen responded by
pointing out that as far as he could recall Schnabel had failed
to recreate this effect when producing his demonstration circle
on Keen's farm. Macnish accepted this but pointed out that he
didn't think Schnabel had meant to exactly replicate the effects
found in his Silbury Hill dharmic wheel at Keen's farm. He then
explained how hoaxers deliberately set out to create effects
which they knew crop circle experts claimed were mysterious in
their books and articles. He also believed that some effects were
accidental by-products of circle-making. "I think
[researchers] often credit circle-makers with far more precision
and planning than they actually put into [making] circles."
This led to a discussion of the rules and factors surrounding the
West Wycombe circle-making competition, the varying standards of
circles produced under test conditions and how well these test
conditions approximated to reality.
John Macnish's evasive response to the eighth question
confounded his audience. He was asked to comment on the
"correlations" found in John Martineau's analysis of
the CCCS database. [Regular readers will recall that in
various articles John Martineau has been accused of being a crop
circle hoaxer]. Macnish responded "I think John has got
probably a better insight than most researchers into the
proportions ... and scientific proportions of crop circles. I
don't want to go into the explanation in too great a detail but
... its one thing to study the circles, but ... its often, it can
often be one jump ahead if you understand the planning behind
them better than perhaps ... less privileged, people in a less
privileged position than yourself". Not surprisingly someone
asked John to clarify his answer. Curiously Macnish avoided
explaining precisely what he had meant and instead went on to
discuss Professor Gerald Hawkins' discovery of
"diatonic" ratios in circles which Macnish knew Doug
and Dave had claimed to have made, a finding he believed he could
explain with reference to the length of their circle making
equipment.
The next questioner expressed his opinion that Macnish's video
told him nothing that was not already known and that it had
always been known that people could make crop circles. He then
asked Macnish to explain the Alexander film of a mini UFO
floating above the crop. Macnish explained (again) that just
because an unusual object was filmed above a crop circle this did
not prove a causal relationship. He then revealed that Canadian
researcher Chad Deetken had recently claimed that a circle
exhibited "deformed seedheads, crop cut with razor-like
precision, which couldn't possibly be made by human beings".
According to Macnish these samples had been taken from the circle
he had filmed being made by Doug and Dave that had been shown in
his first video. This led to a prolonged discussion about unusual
effects inside crop circles. Macnish described how the BBC TV Daytime
Live programme was plagued by problems whenever they did crop
circle items. He concluded that these effects were given special
attention because of the mystique surrounding crop circles.
According to Macnish normally such problems attract far less
attention.
Lucy Pringle then asked a question about animal reactions.
Macnish confessed that there were many things connected with crop
circles that he could not explain. However, he recalled that
during a Daytime Live interview in 1990 a dog was bought
into a circle which went berserk. Later his own dog was
physically sick when bought into a circle in Shropshire.
According to a local vet his dog had eaten barley husks which
have long barbed husks that caused this reaction. Lucy Pringle
went on to describe a second hand account of a dog entering a
circle and then almost immediately going to sleep at the centre.
John Macnish admitted that he couldn't explain this behaviour but
he still maintained that the link between the claimed effect and
the circle was "tenuous", as was the reaction of the TV
crew during the famous Daytime Live trilling sound
incident. According to Macnish the TV crew reacted in the way
they did because they were influenced "by where they
are". He concluded this discussion by stating that alleged
animal reactions inside crop circles were often inconsistent and,
in some cases, there were no reactions.
The next questioner asked Macnish's opinion about a
meteorological explanation for the crop circles. Macnish felt
that this was valuable work. However, he believed that when
Meaden first met Doug Bower Doug had claimed all the
"first" circles known to Meaden during the early years.
This problem was compounded because during the early years
relatively few circles were being reported. Macnish argued that
since Doug and Dave could account for "all" of these
circles (including the "first" circles at Westbury in
1980) Meaden's meteorological explanation was severely
compromised. Of course this argument avoids the issue of
contemporary eye witness testimony made during the early 1980s.
John Macnish's sceptical response prompted Ralph Noyes to ask Macnish his opinion about the historical evidence. Ralph Noyes described some of the historical cases and their relationship to modern events, referring to cases that feature in Ted Phillips' Physical Trace Catalogue
as well as to the Tully circles that had given Doug Bower the
idea of making crop circles. Ralph Noyes stated that he had a
slide of a crop field in Minnesota in 1974 which displayed
numerous circular markings [just like the 1989 Kings Bromley case
described by TORRO's David Reynolds in Circles From The
Sky, pages 73-83]. He went on to question the value of Doug
and Daves' decision to alter the date of their "first"
circles from 1978 to 1976 and then again to 1975 following Ken
Brown's research into their claim.
In response John Macnish accepted that he was unsatisfied with
the continual revising of the "1978" date claimed by
Doug and Dave. In his opinion 1978 was the most probable date of
their "first" circles because this was the date they
had quoted at the media demonstration at Chilgrove as well as the
date they gave to the TODAY newspaper. He justified his
decision by saying that both men must have repeatedly discussed
this topic with eachother prior to the TODAY exclusive.
With regards to the historical evidence John Macnish accepted
that there was an extensive collection of unexplained ground
markings (UGMs) from all over the world which Doug and Dave had
not made and which, to date, had not been adequately explained.
He pointed out however that the photograph on the front cover of The
Crop Circle Enigma showed a crop circle NOT a UGM, so [by
implication] it was clear that the CCCS had been studying
crop circles rather than UGMs. Ralph Noyes challenged this point
because there had been confusion over whether or not Doug and
Dave had really made the so-called Swastika formations of 1989.
Macnish responded that he believed that the issue of the two
"Swastika" formations had been confused because only
one of these two formations was really a Swastika and, in his
opinion, Doug and Daves' memories were not as clear as they
believed.
In response to a question from BUFORA's John Spencer
Macnish accepted that many of Doug and Daves' earlier circles
were placed in obscure places simply because Doug and Dave were
more concerned about getting caught than thinking about where
best to locate their circles to attract publicity. Ralph Noyes
returned to the subject of the Swastika formations, claiming that
he had personally searched for one of the Swastikas and found it
very difficult to find. Macnish responded to this point by
stating that he had been given numerous drawings and paintings of
formations that Doug Bower had drawn and then constructed which
the CCCS had never discovered because they were made in
such obscure locations and were harvested before the CCCS
or anyone else had found them. At this Macnish was again pressed
by the member of his audience who had accused him of covering up
evidence. It was stated that there was no reason why Doug Bower
could not have made these drawings after seeing real formations.
The next questioner asked for technical details about the
night-time film shown during the videos. He then asked Macnish
whether he believed that "every crop circle reported around
the world" was a hoax, pointing out that "several
thousand" such cases had been reported. Macnish began by
immediately questioning the "several thousand" cases
quoted, as he believed that this figure was "grossly
exaggerated". He then stated that "[All] crop circles,
as we would define them, - sharply-defined edges, - symmetrical
floor patterns, - any formation showing the slightest hallmark of
intelligent design - is man-made". Heckled once again
Macnish admitted that he could not prove this opinion but that he
thought it was wholly supported by the evidence. Another member
of the audience then implied that Macnish had not presented a
balanced viewpoint in his videos. Not surprisingly Macnish took
exception to this suggestion. He pointed out that in all his
videos he had gone to great lengths to ensure that what appeared
on film was balanced and well-researched. He admitted that since
producing Crop Circle Communique he had altered his
opinion about the subject by "180 degrees".
Again Macnish was asked about a meteorological explanation. He
responded by referring to Meaden's attempts to verify the plasma
vortex via laboratory experiments and stated that in his opinion
this was valuable work that needed doing. One member of the
audience suggested that the postulated atmospheric solution to
crop circles may have been responsible for the 1980 Tunguska
event. Macnish doubted this but pointed out that whilst Meaden
had produced a valuable theory it was no more than a theory and
that there was no "hard evidence" to support the
theory.
Another member of the audience asked John Macnish about Jim
Schnabel's claim to have made numerous crop circles. John Macnish
admitted that he had witnessed Jim Schnabel making numerous crop
circles during 1993. He also admitted that he was baffled by
Schnabel's "obsession" in driving "the length and
breadth of Britain" to make circles.
Finally Lucy Pringle again asked John Macnish to account for
some of the unusual effects associated with circles. Macnish
accepted that he could not explain the Daytime Live
trilling sound but that sound recording experts he had spoken to
had suggested it was some kind of natural or man-made
interference on the radio microphones. At the end the audience
warmly applauded John and Jayne Macnish for their lecture.
Readers will be pleased to learn that the contents of the two
videos shown during this lecture will form the basis of Crop
Circle Communique 2, which will be released shortly.
If you want a cassette tape of this lecture contact Robin
Lindsey at 87, Station Road, Whittlesey, Peterborough, PE7 1UE
(telephone 0733 203414).
