The Crop Watcher

Issue 16  March/April  1993

Old Sarum, Salisbury, 1992
(Photo:  Richard Wintle)

IN  THIS  ISSUE

Doug Bower speaks out ... Ted Phillips' Physical Trace Catalogue
... Swangate Update ... Crop Circles in Japan ... Government
Cover-Ups ... Fire in the Sky ... UFO Chases Helicopter ... The
First 1993 Circles ... 
Editorial

Welcome to your new Crop Watcher. As you can see,  I've finally
splashed out on a new home computer so from now on there'll be no
more  annoying changes of type face or distressing gaps where I
couldn't find something to fill in the gaps between articles. It
also means I can finally get back at Bob Kingsley by boasting
about my new machine - the Volvo of the PC world - its a 486
DX-33 PC with a 170 Megabyte Hard Disk and 4 Megabytes RAM. Crop
Watcher is produced using Microsoft Publisher  but the PC also
holds Lotus 123 spreadsheets as well as all the usual Windows
utilities and DOS.  The master copies are printed on a Hewlett
Packard Deskjet 500 printer. Now that I don't have to rely on
friends to print off the masters we'll be able to keep to a
better publication schedule. Thanks to all of you for being so
patient with our first 15 issues. 
In this issue we have some interesting  material which, to some,
proves beyond doubt that there IS a genuine crop circle
phenomenon involving  a poorly understood natural phenomenon.
This is taken from Ted Phillips' Physical Trace Catalogue (see
pages 20-26), which will be reproduced over our next few issues.
We also have the second part of Doug Bower's highly revealing
interview with UFO Sweden's Clas Svahn.  In this interview Doug
justifies his 13 years of hoaxing and points the finger of
accusation at the cerealogists for their incitement of mass crop
circle hoaxing and mass trespass.  We also have news on crop
circles in Japan as well as a Swangate Update.  
Crop Circles Have Arrived

Alan Watson of Banbury has informed me of the first crop circle
to appear in 1993 - an 18 metre diameter circle at Aston Rowant, 
just north of the M40 in Oxfordshire (OSGR SU 717984). Alan first
saw the circle on the afternoon of Sunday 2nd May as he drove
northwards along the M40.  The circle was in oilseed rape and
exhibited a 2 metre diameter central portion that was untouched. 
The rape was shoulder height but the crop was broken and
damaged - a sure sign of hoaxing. Around the rim stems were laid
down in a distinctive manner that contradicted the flow within
the circle- almost as if the hoaxers had laid the outer rim first
and then worked inwards.  Readers will recall that in CW10 & 12
we exposed the activities of the Amersham group of hoaxers - seen
creating the Butlers Cross quintuplet and caught  leaving a field
near Amersham shortly after a newly formed circle was discovered.
Hoaxers frequently choose sites to obtain maximum publicity -
this formation is in full sight of  the motorway, although Alan
tells me that the formation is invisible to people walking along
nearby public footpaths.  Also, this sounds like another weekend
job - a few pints at the nearest pub then down the farm for some
rolling around. Well, something like that anyway.  If you see
circles in your area please let us know, we need to keep track of
the hoaxers and we are keeping the NFU informed of developments. 
Our thanks to Alan for his help.  Also, Terence Meaden tells me 
that a 50 foot circle with 7 small outliers appeared near
Saltford in Avon at the beginning of May.  Without wishing to
point any fingers it seems strange to me that there is a very
active local crop circle group.  Perhaps the "aliens" are trying
to tell us something ?

The Cerealogist

Well, for those of you who read this sad rag  I expect you won't
have been too surprised to see the torrent of abuse and invective
printed on page 26 of the winter issue by Editor John Michell.
Those of us on the meteorological wing of the crop circle
movement discovered long ago that to dare to question the wisdom
of the cerealogists was to invite a public flaying at every
opportunity.  In his revealing interview Doug Bower comes to
pretty much the same conclusion that we did, that such tactics
come from people who seem to have lost more than just their
public credibility. The more sane UFOlogists get used to it, so
I'm not going to become involved in a slanging match. However, as
John Michell still refuses to withdraw errors of fact made in his
"studious" magazine, here, for the record,  is the letter I sent
to Michell  on November  10th  1992:- 
"Dear John, I was very amused to read your comments about how Dr
Meaden has apparently 'left the [crop circle] scene', and how The
Crop Watcher has 'bravely survived the decline of the plasma
vortex theory to which it was originally dedicated and now makes
a wider, humbler, more questioning approach to the phenomenon'.
You seem to have an uncanny knack at rewriting crop circle
history whilst avoiding some of the more unpalatable truths about
the crop circle phenomenon. Despite what you say Dr Meaden and
his meteorological collaborators (eg Kikuchi, Ohtsuki and Snow)
are still conducting scientific research into the plasma vortex
theory, having recently presented a paper to the Twentieth
General Assembly of the International Union of Geodesy and
Geophysics in Vienna. Despite what you say I am still happy to
support a meteorological explanation for simpler crop circle
patterns whilst continuing to entertain the delicious irony that
many classic UFO cases may represent encounters with a mechanism
similar to that being investigated by Meaden and his colleagues.
I hope therefore that you will allow me to set the record
straight following your somewhat inaccurate comments.

Despite what you say it is a matter of public record that Jenny
Randles and myself have always considered hoaxing as a reasonable
solution for at least some crop circles. We were the only
researchers to write a book where an entire chapter was devoted
to  crop-circle hoaxing.   On  page  73  of  this book we stated 
'In our view, there is growing evidence that SOME aspects of the
circles mystery are the product of .... a controlled hoax'. We
also discussed hoaxing in numerous media interviews dating back
to the mid 1980s. Unlike others we also debated the strength of
eye witness testimony, suggesting that perhaps some crop circles
were meteorologically produced whilst others were hoaxes. Our
evaluation of the evidence has now been proven beyond doubt,
although I accept that we have had to revise our estimate of the
extraordinary degree of hoaxing as new evidence emerges.  It has
been very disappointing to see the vicious and libellous
dismissal of the Doug and Dave claim by your chief correspondent,
George Wingfield, the former 'consultant' to Flying Saucer
Review.
Thanks to Wingfield's actions other researchers of a more
moderate disposition have found it difficult to evaluate this
staggering claim. Nevertheless as the Doug and Dave story emerges
CERES
has come to accept the claim that Doug Bower and Dave Chorley
made between 200 and 250 circles across central southern England
since the mid 1970s. We also accept that the United Bureau of
Investigation made many dozens of formations across Wiltshire. We
believe that as many as 99 per cent of all modern-day circles
have been created by the numerous groups of hoaxers we have been
exposing in The Crop Watcher during the past two years.
Strangely, this unwelcome evidence has not appeared in The
Cerealogist. Why not ? It seems that as the crop circle subject
dies a slow and lingering death, those researchers who
consistently ignored eye witness testimony and crucially
important historical evidence are also guilty of encouraging mass
crop circle hoaxing around the globe. This seems to be a fitting
epitaph for those flying saucer believers who refused to learn
the lessons of history and who succeeded in blackening UFOlogy's
name once more. In fifty years time scholars will rediscover the
crop circle debate and will cast judgement on us all. When this
time comes it will be interesting to see how The Cerealogist, The
Circular and The Crop Watcher will be judged by historians of the
subject. I for one have no regrets. The real question now is do
you. Yours, etc."

Well, John Michell seemed to take exception to this submission,
and eventually responded on December 4th 1992:-

"Dear Paul, Thank you for your letter. I was inclined to print
it, but then I saw your mendacious [ie dishonest, PF] references
to The Cerealogist having yearnings towards extraterrestrialism,
being super-naturally inclined and so on. Since you should know
full well that we have no yearnings or inclinations in any
direction except towards assessing the evidence in search of the
truth, your remarks are wilfully spiteful and unwarranted. I
shall comment on them in the next issue.

You should acknowledge that we pioneered hoax theory [sic],
publishing the first full statement of it, by Peter Williams, at
a time when you were thinking and writing only about the 'plasma
vortex', and running the Ken Brown series [sic]. Many readers
have complained that we give far too much time to hoax theory
[sic]. I merely try to reflect what is going on and am not, like
you, a True Believer in anything [sic !!!].

I shall include a kind reference to The Crop Watcher in the next
issue, especially Peter Rendall's amusing piece, hoping that all
continues well with it and you. Despite claiming 'a Mystery
Solved' I am sure you are as confused and uncertain about this
phenomenon as is every other honest person. You should not be
afraid to say so. Yours Sincerely, JM."  So, according to John
Michell, "The Cerealogist" has "no yearnings or inclinations in
any direction except towards assessing the evidence in search of
the truth".  Why then has "The Cerealogist" failed to interview
the two dozen or so eye witnesses, or  the numerous farmers we
have spoken to who recall seeing crop circles on their parent's
land dating back to the 1930s and beyond ? If "The Cerealogist"
has "no yearnings or inclinations in any direction" why has
Michell failed to publish (or comment on) the map we published in
CW12 describing the two dozen (groups of) hoaxers known to be at
work in Southern Britain ? And if  "The  Cerealogist" is really
only interested in "assessing the evidence in search of the
truth", why does the extensive pre 1980 evidence not form a
central part  of that analysis ?  We invite readers to write in
and comment on Michell's  facetious claims.  But there is more
....  Astonishingly, Michell claims that his magazine "pioneered
the hoax theory" by publishing pro-hoax articles by Peter
Williams [issue 3, pages 10-11, Spring 1991] and both Williams
and Ken Brown [issue  5, pages 11-14, Winter 1991/92]. Michell
must have forgotten the fact that  Jenny Randles first discussed
hoaxing as a solution in Northern UFO News way back in
July/August 1984  ["Mr Mossop (the farmer) ought to seriously
consider suing the press and daring them to print such twaddle
again next July/August when (I safely predict) some other moron
will fake more 'landing pad marks' to get his name in the
papers."]. Michell also seems to have forgotten that in July 1991
(two months before Doug and Dave went public) I had dismissed "up
to 50 per cent" of British crop circles as hoaxes (in The
Independent on Sunday,  18th August 1991). 

I find it difficult to understand how John Michell can have
missed the article I wrote in April 1987 in the newsstand
magazine Exploring The Supernatural (Vol 1 Issues  9 and 10),
where I debated crop circle hoaxing at length.  I stated "This
quandary leaves us with one of two possibilities. Either all
circles are created by hoaxers, and there are several teams of
hoaxers at work in several countries over many years; or else
only  a few circles are created by hoaxers, and the majority must
be caused by something else." My article discussed the 1983 hoax
by the Daily Mirror at Westbury,  and the possible collusion of
the Daily Mail in the suspected-hoax at Alfriston [now known to
be one of Doug and Dave's creations].  I also queried the
authenticity of  the 1986 Childrey circle [also claimed by Doug
and Dave] as well as the Headbourne Worthy single.  I concluded
"If it can be shown that complex formations have the same
temporal and spatial distributions as the single established
circles, then it seems that a 'natural' theory (in particular the
whirlwind theory) can reasonably account for all but the proven
hoaxed circles. If, on the other hand, no complex sets can be
found pre 1980, then I for one, will remain sceptical of Dr
Meaden's explanation for the more complex mystery circles that
have been appearing with such regularity across the wheatfields
of  Southern England over the past few years." 

Well, you just have to give Michell credit for re-writing crop
circle history so comprehensively. But next Michell falsely
claims that when Peter Williams' article was published The Crop
Watcher was "writing only about the 'plasma vortex'". Strange,
because in issues 1-4 (all published well before Williams' first
article) we dismissed the Seghill Key as a "hoax" (CW2),  we
featured a "Hoaxer's Diary" (CW3) whilst Jenny Randles produced
compelling evidence that numerous circles were hoaxes in her
"Informed Circles" articles. Of course Michell also ignores the
whole chapter devoted to crop circle hoaxing in our book "Crop
Circles, A Mystery Solved" with his ad hominem attack.  

To round off this slur Michell implies that I am not an honest
person. For someone who has spent eight full issues desperately
trying to keep unwelcome evidence from his readers this is the
action of someone who has seen his fondest dreams exposed as a
fantasy.  Given the very obvious links between "The Cerealogist"
and flying saucer believers like George Wingfield and Colin
Andrews I refuse to withdraw my claim about "yearnings towards
extra-terrestrialism". As Kevin McClure says in the current issue
of "The Wild Places",  The Cerealogist encapsulates "every-thing
you wanted to know about human fortitude in the face of
adversity...", a magazine that has resulted in the "true
believers... putting up the shutters. ... To put it simply,
forget about genuine research and investigation, there's another
religion in the making, and it's as daft as the rest of them...".

As for his other comments, well yes we certainly did make
mistakes. We were quite wrong to accept the commonly-held belief
that it was impossible to walk through mature crop at night
without leaving a trail. We were also wrong not to undertake
extensive experimentation of hoax techniques back in the mid
1980s. And we were wrong not to give up our careers and sit in
the copse at Cheesefoot Head every night throughout the summer
with a pair of infra-red binoculars waiting for Doug and Dave to
do their dirty deeds. We'll be examining our mistakes in a future
issue to see what can be learnt. 

Finally Michell dismisses our conclusion that only a few circles
might be created by wind vortices as an argument that is
"obviously artificial, for there [is] no reason to single out any
particular kind of formation as more or less genuine than any
other." Once again Michell conveniently forgets the fact that we
have uncovered numerous claims by farmers who are insistent that
either they have seen simple crop circle patterns being formed by
atmospheric vortex mechanisms or who insist that their parents
and grand-parents knew that simple crop circle patterns were
caused by the wind.  Some of this evidence was uncovered by Ian
Mrzyglod before Andrews and Delgado began claiming in "Flying
Saucer Review" that the phenomenon was the result of a paranormal
force directed by an "unknown intelligence".  The fact that this
critical evidence has been ruthlessly kept from The Cerealogist's
readership says more than I could ever say about Michell's
Editorial policy.  So, come on John, stop the insults and start
debating the evidence.  No one likes a bad loser ...  PS If
readers want to see what John Michell really believes about the
crop circles, read his Editorial in issue 4. "The intelligence
behind the phenomenon is beyond our knowledge and control, ... we
are inescapably subject to its influence. That influence is
clearly benign, even god-like...A great power has arisen...We can
now see something of what the ancients meant when they spoke of
revelation...". Golly, for a moment there I thought I was reading
Flying Saucer Review  !!


"The View From The Hill"

The Occasional Diary of a Cropwatcher

by Peter Rendall,   R.N.,   M.I.5,   S.W.A.N.,   V.E.S.T.A.S.,  
B.R.  "And Now For Something Completely Different..."

Have you ever seen that bit in the Monty Python film 'Life of
Brian', where Brian, pursued through the desert by hordes of
followers who think he's the Messiah, turns to them and shouts
'Look, I'm NOT the Messiah, now please go away' ? If you saw it
then you'll know what happens next; a silence falls over the
crowd, then a small voice says: 'Only the true Messiah would deny
his divinity...'. In bewilderment, Brian cries: 'What chance does
that give me ? Alright. I AM the Messiah, now GO AWAY!'. This, of
course, only brings the crowd to its feet, screaming: 'He IS the
Messiah!'. Its a Catch 22. In the eyes of his followers, Brian is
most definitely the Messiah, and nothing he can say or do will
convince them otherwise.  What, you are probably asking yourself,
has this got to do with Crop Circles ? Actually the answer is
quite a lot. The subject itself  has descended into slapstick
comedy, with claim and counter claim as to what is 'genuine' and
what is 'not genuine' being subjected to parry and thrust across
the tables of various groups and individuals the length and
breadth of the country. One of the foremost theories now being
given space in various Circles and UFO magazines is that old
cliche, the Government Cover-Up, or GCU for short.  GCUs are the
equivalent of Brian's desperate cry when told that 'Only the true
Messiah would deny his divinity. It works something like this:
Desperate to keep hold of their sinking subject, and faced with
overwhelming (to most sensible folk) evidence that the whole
thing has been one giant joke, the 'believers' start to cry out
GCU ! When the non-believers snort with derision and say 'Of
course there's no GCU - the whole thing's just a hoax; circles
are made by people !', then the True Believers cry: 'That's just
what an agent of a GCU WOULD say ! That PROVES its a GCU !' . 
You just can't win !!

Somewhat naturally this brings me to the latest offerings in 'The
Cerealogist'  by the CCCS Court Jester George Wingfield. In it,
George Wingfield recycles the same old argument which I've
outlined above, bringing 'Men-in-Black' (MIBs) in as well. As
usual, he's his normal rude self. I don't propose to enter into
any sort of argument or discourse about the meeting between the
'well known meteorologist', CCCS' Ken Brown and the 'MIBs', which
Wingfield reads so much into. Wingfield's story belongs to the
script of 'Life of Brian' and any denials will only be met with
the usual cries of GCU !

But while we're on the subject of cover-ups, let me not allow
Wingfield to get away scot-free: he's as guilty of covering up
things as the people he accuses of operating on behalf of the
Government.

Let me take you back, George, to the formation which appeared
near Wroughton  in 1992 [Isn't that the one that George was going
to "eat his shirt in public" over ? PF] . I'd been to the 'Waggon
& Horses' for lunch that day, and met up with photographer
(sorry, I meant to say Government Agent) Rob Irving. Irving told
me of the Wroughton formation and accompanied me to the site.
There we met you, George, remember ? You were acting watch-dog to
ensure no-one else entered the formation and corrupted it. When
we inspected the formation I quite clearly found several obvious
'footprints', which I pointed out to you. Rob Irving witnessed
this. You summarily dismissed the footprints, and later tried to
make out that they'd been made by Rita Goold and Arthur Mills
when they discovered the formation. You weren't able to comment
on the fact that neither Rita or Arthur's feet matched the prints
found at Wroughton.  Do you remember Baltic Farm 1992 as well ?
When I arrived you were proclaiming to all who could hear that
the formations there had been 'made in the space of half-an-hour
that afternoon whilst a farm-worker was nearby'. And do you
remember me advising you to have a word with Busty Taylor ? You
must have spoken to Busty later, George, because you discovered
that the formations in question had been seen the day before when
Taylor flew over the area. I found this out by talking to several
members of the Beckhampton Group before going to Baltic Farm.
There was no way that those circles could have been made that
afternoon under the nose of the farmworker; rather that the
farmworker hadn't noticed the formations when he drove down the
field, but saw them when he drove back and ASSUMED they hadn't
been there when he first passed that way. Obviously you took my
advice and the mistakes didn't get a mention in your 'Circular'
article later. But then neither did you mention that I'd saved
you from making a complete ass of yourself on that occasion. 
(***)  Having mentioned these little incidents I must now mention
that I have been made aware of letters which Wingfield has
circulated to all CCCS Council Members, in which he names the
people who he is convinced have been making hoax formations.
These hoaxers are, of course, working on behalf of the
Government.. etc, etc. I don't feel inclined to pass comment on
these allegations either, because my denial of involvement (yes,
he names me as being a hoaxer !) will only lead into another
round of the 'Life of Brian' syndrome, and only time will tell
who is the REAL Messiah.

So, what of the future for CERES ? I'm glad to announce that
reports of CERES' demise have been greatly exaggerated, to coin a
phrase. CERES has now whittled down the number of circles
believed to be the result of a Meaden vortex to probably about 1
% of known formations. The group intend to carry out archive
research in some depth, accepting the criticism levelled at us by
the Wessex Skeptics in times past. We've accepted that we have,
in the past, been 'conned' by the hoaxers and are that much the
wiser for it. I believe we can agree with MOST other interested
parties in as much as we accept that the subject has been
completely contaminated with hoaxes, which makes field study a
bit of a lost cause. But then, if I'm a Government Agent, I would
say that wouldn't I ?

So, whilst some continue to delve deep into the realms of
mysticism, and George Wingfield entertains us all with his pig's
bladder and silly jokes, some of us will continue to think back
to those balmy summers of the late 1980s/early 1990s and, with
perhaps just a feint sigh of regret, turn to getting on with the
more mundane things in life.  PR.  *** PF Notes: This isn't the
first time that George Wingfield, or John Michell, or any of the
alien-intelligence believers, have omitted to give credit for
other people's work. Remember it was Wingfield who claimed in a
letter to Flying Saucer Review that it was his research that
exposed the highly dubious  nature of Frank Barnes' claim to have
seen a "giant grey spaceship-like object" creating a crop circle
at Cheesefoot Head. Nowhere in Wingfield's letter did he mention
the fact that it was my research that had exposed the glaring
problems with the case, not Wingfield's research two years later. 
Then there was Wingfield's claim in the Somerset press (Feb 27th
1992) that he had unmasked the fraudulent story by "Dave
Firestar" that he had seen a multi-coloured UFO creating a circle
at Butleigh Wootton in 1991. Again there was no mention of the
fact that it was CERES who discovered that the circle had been
seen being made by hoaxers and the police had been called and
caught the hoaxers red-handed (for a full account see CW13). 
Just  what is it with these rude, so-called researchers that they
repeatedly refuse to refer to other people's work ?  The
Cerealogist  (no 8 page 9) discusses the circles at 
Szekesfehervar in Hungary without the slightest mention of the
fact that our own Jenny Randles visited this site and
discovered  that two local youths had confessed to having made
the circles (See CW14 pages 7-10)  Such actions only serve to
underline the true extent of the public deception being
perpetrated by these so-called "cerealogists".  PF.

An Interview with Doug Bower

The Man Who Claims to have 
Invented the Crop Circles

(Continued from Crop Watcher 15)

SVAHN:   Some people say you were paid for (making) all these
circles. BOWER:  We had a small sum but not a great deal of
money, no, no. We had lots of interviews over the telephone, we
did chat shows and we did TV interviews (and) we did two
demonstrations. The TODAY  newspaper wanted us to do a demon-
stration in a field of corn at Sevenoaks in Kent, and when that
was complete they telephoned Mr Pat Delgado, who was the leading
researcher at that time,  they telephoned him and asked him if he
would care to come down to Kent that afternoon and tell the
farmer whether he considered it a genuine circle or not; and Mr
Delgado walked into the field - we were in hiding , we were up
the road about 4 miles out of the way - and Pat Delgado walked
into the field, apparently - the farmer told me afterwards - and
he said "Its the finest thing I've ever seen in my life", he
said, "its absolutely genuine", and he didn't really want to
leave it for quite a while; (but) eventually he did leave to go
home, and we were brought back in view, the helicopter took the
photographs from the air, and on the following Sunday we all
agreed that we would go round to his home, which was the day
before  the news was to break in the newspaper on the Monday, 
(and) we would break the news gently to him so that he wouldn't
have a heart attack  because of all the hard work that he'd put
in for many many years; and this was decided on, so the
photographer and journalist went round to his house first,
knocked on his door and told him that "We've got some News about
the corn circles for you, we've got two chaps outside in the
car..", we were round the corner, so when we eventually arrived
at his house he immediately recognised us because David (Chorley)
and I had always met them, shaking hands with them up on the
hills each night for years, and of course we were gleaning
information from them for many years and he immediately
recognised us and asked us in, and he gave a bit of a speech and
he said, "To be quite honest," he says, "... I'm quite relieved
its all over", and (then) his daughter interfered and she said,
"I think we'd better ring your partner", which was Mr Colin
Andrews, "... and get him over here". He came over and, of
course, when Pat Delgado broke the News to him he was absolutely
furious (but) within 2-3 days Pat Delgado had retracted all his
statements and said that it was so dark when he arrived at the
field [at Sevenoaks] at half-past four in the afternoon that he
didn't know what he was looking at - or words to that effect -
and (that) "... Everybody makes mistakes so it wasn't a genuine
circle afterall", but up until that time Pat Delgado said it was
genuine and he thought that the TODAY newspaper was going to
quote him as being the expert once again to looking at one of the
finest  circles and patterns he'd ever seen, but little did he
know that in 2 days time that the whole world would know that it
was Dave and I that had done all the circles... [correcting
himself] ... not ALL the circles, as I say,  (but) SOME of the
circles -but that particular one we did [sic], and then of course
we did a demonstration for the media at Chilgrove in Sussex,
where there were so many people trampling over that after we did
it that they called it 'a pathetic mess', which was a bit unfair
really.

SVAHN:  It was a typical circle (in) the beginning ?
BOWER:  Oh yes, that was the pattern - the ladder circle - that
we were doing, yes...  SVAHN:  But it was not 'a mess' when you
made it ?
BOWER:  No, not really, no. The only thing is that the corn was
over ripe and instead of the ears of the corn being straight up
they were curled over, consequently when the corn was (laid) down
the ears of the corn were coming up; but of course everyone was
trampling over (the corn), there were about 20 film crews there
trampling over it - I mean this is what's done the damage over
the years, you see the methods that David and I used to put these
circles down with the sticks did not damage the crops in any way
whatsoever. The only damage that was done to the crops was the
hundreds of people that would go into the farmer's fields,
trampling on it and destroy-ing it. In fact the farmer at
Sevenoaks when we did the demonstration there, the next day he
put his combine harvester in and he salvaged every grain  of
corn, but no one had walked on this you see.

SVAHN:  Did you at any time leave tracks straight into the circle
that later on was explained as early viewers entering it ?
BOWER:   What do you mean ? The underlying paths?

SVAHN:  No, sometimes you can see a circle and a track leading in
from the road. BOWER:  Yes, well instead of the general public
walking down the tramlines, the tractor lines, to look  at the
circle, they were walking through the growing corn, so
consequently when the photographs were taken a week or two later
there were all the pathways  leading into it and the farmers were
getting very annoyed about it. 
SVAHN:  And this you must have been aware of ?
BOWER:  Oh yes, but there was nothing we could do about that. 
SVAHN:  But I mean you didn't take advantage of this and
sometimes leave a track by yourself ? BOWER:  No, no. We went in
without any damage whatsoever. We didn't want anyone to know that
we'd been into that field at all. We wanted to let them think
that either something had come down from above without no tracks
whatsoever ... [sic] 
SVAHN:  I'm very curious about Barbury Castle and the Mandelbrot
formation. BOWER:  Well the Mandelbrot set was Cambridge students
wasn't it. Its obvious really, that's what that was - and I
should think people along the same sort of lines were doing the
other complicated ones as well.  I think it was getting a little
bit out-of-hand really, 'cos I mean Dr Terence Meaden completely
disbanded the pictograms in the end. 
SVAHN:  Have you done any circles this year ?
BOWER:  No. We're retired now [laughs].

SVAHN:  And you're not planning to write a book or something ?
BOWER:  Well yes, we'll probably write a book. Its taking time
but I suppose its just as well that we didn't launch a book on
the market in September because there's not very many people that
have accepted our story, so I think [sic] and if we can prove, I
suppose one day we will have a meeting with these people to show
them and explain to them. You see, at the demonstration we did at
Chilgrove, we offered them a meeting with all of them - in camera
- to show them everything that we'd used - show and tell them
everything that we'd done - but they refused !

SVAHN:  Which ones ?
BOWER:  That was Mr Colin Andrews and Mr Pat Delgado. They said
they didn't want anything to do with it in camera at all, but I
suppose really, when you think about it, I suppose really they
didn't want egg on their face  really, did they, because this is
what it will amount to, its what they've made of it over the
years. I've no objection to what people can find in the circles,
if they say there's energy there or they get some bit of pleasure 
from it; but its the conning of the people out of all this
money - I mean its a very lucrative industry now, with all the
books that have been published and the meetings and things. I
mean we have a three day [CCCS] seminar in Winchester shortly,
that's # 160 each to attend that, but I mean its a lot of money,
and you get people coming from America and overseas, there's all
their air fares, their hotel expenses, because they've been made
to believe that this is something genuine. We've tried to tell
them that its NOT something genuine at all its US, this is US
that's done it ! 
SVAHN:  So how do you feel about the accusations that you are
agents and government spies ? BOWER:  [Incredulously] Yes ! I
know, its incred-ible what we hear and what we read about I mean
its a ... its given me a good insight into the human being since
this has all taken place because I really didn't expect anything
like this, with all the remarks that have been passed and the
lengths that they've gone to. And I hear that they even got in
touch with the CIA in America and all this business, its
ridiculous really isn't it ! But there you are, its what THEY'VE
made of it, not what we've done. We've not conned anyone out of
any money whatsoever and we're very sad to think that its reached
these proportions, and its even getting greater by the day isn't
it really. But no one wanted to accept our story simply because
being a lucrative industry they were a little bit reluctant to
let go of it I suppose. 
SVAHN:  What about this curious little thing the 'MBF Services'
here (that) I've heard about ? BOWER:  That was just a joke as
far as the Editor was concerned. It was just something that he
put on the bottom of the story.

SVAHN:  Do you know what it stands for ?
BOWER:  No !

SVAHN:  I've heard (that) it stands for Not Another Circle on My
Bloody Farm. BOWER:  [Laughs]  Oh is it ! Well that could be, but
They won't believe that. 
SVAHN:  Its fictitious ?
BOWER:  Yes, oh yes, of course it is, yes. But They don't  want
to believe anything at all, I mean to take for instance the story
of the grasshopper warbler, which is a bird - a bird that sings
in this country - you might have them in Sweden I don't know -
but I'm also a wildlife sound recordist, and I've spent many
years going out in the evenings recording the sounds of wildlife
for posterity, and I'm quite conversant with different sounds
that birds and animals make. Well David and I attended a meeting
in Winchester one evening which was being put over by the so-
called researchers, and during the evening's programme after
showing some slides and things, one man [George Wingfield, PF] 
related the story of how he heard this strange sound, which he
thought was alien, and I knew immediately what he was listening
to, he didn't play the tape at the meeting he just spoke about
it, and I've been in the countryside at night and I've heard
grasshopper warblers - which is a trilling noise - and this bird
sings all night in the cornfields, and I've also heard it at
Cheesefoot Head, where, apparently, these researchers heard it at
the time, but the story goes that several members of the society
walked down into this cornfield this night and they heard this
sound and one man [George Wingfield] actually spoke to this bird
and asked the bird for him to make a circle for him:  "Will you
please make me a circle". Well, I mean its absolutely ridiculous
really isn't it, but anyway they went back and they got a tape
recorder and they made a tape recording of this bird song and at
this meeting in Winchester, when it was question time at the end
of the meeting, I went up to the stage and I said"If you don't
mind me saying so, " I said, "... I'm a wildlife sound recordist
and I think the sound that you heard that evening was a
grasshopper warbler." Well, they almost threw me out of the hall
'cos they didn't want anything to upset what they thought it was.
Anyway, since then, this chappie [Ken Brown] has written away to
the British Library of Wildlife sounds in London and asked them
for a copy tape of a grasshopper warbler song, and he asked these
researchers to have a meeting one afternoon to bring their tape
that they'd recorded and play it alongside the tape that he'd got
from London, and of course they're identical, its the same bird;
and they STILL wouldn't believe that, so they said they'd have to
have it analysed properly, which he did and they STILL don't
believe it at all !! 
SVAHN:  Are there any people in the circle research business that
you think are doing a good job ? BOWER:  Well they're all doing
research but I mean if they were to listen to us they wouldn't
need to bother anymore would they really. It seems ridiculous for
me for it to carry on, but as I say, if they're happy doing that
and they're not conning people out of a lot of money OK, let them
carry on, but I'm a little bit sad to think of the proportions
its got to over the years and little did we think when we made
that first circle that night that it would ever get to these
proportions, and I don't know where its going to end.

SVAHN:  What about the Australian circles, I understand that you
lived in Australia ? BOWER:  Well I lived in Australia from 1958
to 1966, which was eight years, and of course there was a report
of some UFO nests in Tully in Queensland I think, and I've always
been interested in that sort of thing and of course when Dave and
I were on the hill at Winchester one evening I remarked about the
saucer nests that were found in Queensland and I said "Let us put
a circle in the cornfield" and of course there it was... 
SVAHN:  But you never made any circles in Australia ?
BOWER:  No, no, it didn't even enter my head then.

SVAHN:  It was an inspiration for you ?
BOWER:  That's right, yes.

SVAHN:  The first one, the very first one in 1978, where was it ?
BOWER:  That was at the bottom of Cheesefoot Head near
Winchester, that was the first one, that was quite a bit of fun
on our hands and knees that night, wondering the next day whether
it would be in the newspapers but it was 2 years before we got
any publicity at all. 
SVAHN:  Do you understand people that ask you for evidence all
the time, they want to know proof of what you are saying ?
BOWER:  Well of course this is what they are asking, we would
have been able to tell them a lot had they accepted the meeting
we offered them last year at Chilgrove, which they refused, but
we will eventually have a meeting with them so that we CAN show
them once and for all, but it seems to me  the type of people
that we're dealing with they're not going to believe anything at
all ! I think WHATEVER proof you give them, you can give them a
demonstration, which we've done, and they say "That's rubbish",
but you can show them all the items of tools and things you've
used, the sticks and the so-called things, and they still don't
want to believe that. They only want to believe what THEY want to
believe - which is bringing them in lots of money.

SVAHN:  But you say you can remember nearly every single circle
you have made, or most of them ? BOWER:  I can remember, even to
this day, every location that we went to over the thirteen years.

SVAHN:  So you could produce a list ?
BOWER:  I've got a map, I've got a map with a red spot for every
location and if we ever do have a meeting with these people I
shall ask them to bring the same map and for them to put a red
spot on every location that they know of - they've got records of
all this - and then someone can compare the two maps.

SVAHN:  Would it be possible for us to see the map here ?
BOWER:  No, I don't want to show that because I've not shown
anyone at all yet. It will be eventually  shown, when we have a
meeting with these people, because we're not going to take this
laying down so-to-speak. We're going to show and convince these
people, if we can, that it WAS us that started this and the story
that we broke to the world last September [1991] is absolutely
true ! We can answer any question they would like to put to us,
we've got nothing to hide. Had we been making this up - which a
lot of them said it was a hoax story - had we been making this up
we'd have to be the finest actors in the world ! How can we be
confronted on TV and asked all sorts of questions if we didn't
know what we were talking about ? We've got nothing to hide at
all.

SVAHN:  But of course the map may be useless if you wait too
long, you have also have the chance to accumulate facts about the
circles...
BOWER:  Well no I'm sure there's lots of  formations whose
location has never been published in the books. Its no good
saying that you could have looked at all the books that we've
published because every circle that's been recorded hasn't been
put in the books. There's been lots and lots more and we know for
a fact that there's lots of circles that we've done that there's
never been any mention of at all in any of the books that have
been published.

SVAHN:  How many could that be ?
BOWER:  Well I don't know off hand. I haven't really gone into it
really, but there are quite a few, there must be. I mean Colin
Andrews has got a databank in his home of all the locations of
everything that they've looked at, we don't know of that
[information],  but we know what we've done and we can show what
we've done eventually and if they don't want to believe it, well,
what can you do ? We've got to show them, all we can do is answer
their questions, show them these things that we've used. If they
don't believe that well I mean you can see what sort of people
we're up against.

SVAHN:  But you never brought a camera or anything else to
record what you were doing ? BOWER:  We used to go up the
following evening to look at what we'd done the night before,
because you couldn't see in the dark of course. We were quite
thrilled when we were getting towards Winchester to have a look
at the punchbowl to see what  we'd done, and then of course if it
was useful we'd take a photograph of it.

SVAHN:  Were there any circles that you were NOT satisfied with ?
BOWER:  Sometimes they would go wrong and sometimes it was so
dark - there were only two occasions in the thirteen years that
we were doing circles - that it was so dark that we couldn't see
our feet - and we got into the field and we couldn't see our feet
- and we got into the field and we just couldn't see what we were
doing and we gave it up - but that was only two occasions. The
rest of the time, when we started doing some of the complicated
pictograms, you'd have to think a little bit more what you were
doing then; and sometimes  you would go in the wrong direction
and you would realise then, once the corn was down you couldn't
pull it up anymore, and then we would either have to tread it
down in some sort of a pattern - but there were several occasions
when that happened.  SVAHN:   Can you mention any sites ?
BOWER:  Well there was one at Pepperbox Hill near Salisbury. We
were doing the flower pattern then, which was the petals...

SVAHN:  Which year was that ?
BOWER:  That was last year [1991].

SVAHN:  And what went wrong ?
BOWER:  Two of the petals went wrong I think so we had to more-
or-less tread it down and we weren't very happy with that; and on
another occasion I think we were doing the four satellites when
the string got caught up with the top of the corn and gave us a
false reading on the string and we finished up doing five
satellites instead of four, but when you go back to look at it
the next evening you're pretty disgusted so you get away as
quickly as you can really.

SVAHN:  What about the Celtic Cross ?
BOWER:  That was the Wiltshire chappies did that [the United
Bureau of Investigation], we did the four satellites - North,
South, East & West, but the Celtic Cross - I don't know whether
they refer to that as the Celtic Cross do they ? I think its just
three [outer satellites], or just four ?

SVAHN:  [Showing Bower a photograph] I meant this one.
BOWER:   Oh, that's what they refer to as the Swastika.

SVAHN:   Oh yes the swastika. Was it by your 
hand ?
BOWER:   Yes, we were the first ones  to do that, but that
......... and we found the field in Wiltshire, we waited there
and we made the mark around first of all with the string, and we
put four markers in a cardboard cut out on the end of a stick,
which was the North, South, East & West, and then  we had to go
directly to  cross it, and the first way we went we went crooked,
and we said we've got to do something about that now, so we just
trod it down into sections, and then after that when the crop
circle book 'The Corn Circle Enigma' [sic !] was published, lo
and behold the circle that we did was on the front cover ! But we
were told later than that that there were two of these [swastika]
circles of the same design in that field and we assumed then that
the photograph that was on the front cover of the book was the
people from Wiltshire [the U.B.I.] that had copied our first
attempt and they made a better job of it than us and that was
what they used, but our first attempt went wrong. 
SVAHN:  The most famous - at least abroad I think - is the 1990
Alton Barnes [formation] . BOWER:  Yes it was quite large it
generally consisted of corridors and circles really and outcrops,
but I've a funny suspicion that the farmer that charged a pound
to go in to that field two years running had something to do with
that. I won't say for sure but it seems very strange to me that
he would charge a pound to go into the same field two years on
the trot. Whether anything is going to happen this year I don't
know ! 
SVAHN:   So you didn't make that one ?
BOWER:  No, we've done nothing in the Beckhampton area at all.  
SVAHN:  This year [1992] (there's) a snail in the Alton Priors
field.... BOWER:  Is there ? No, we're not doing anything like
that. We're not doing anything this year.  SVAHN:  And they are
charging a pound [for entry]
BOWER:  Are they ? Already ? Oh, I didn't know that. That's news
to me. I think its looking a little bit ridiculous isn't it. Once
yes but not twice or three times. I mean the year the farmer at
Alton Barnes charged a pound to go in we went up the road three
quarters of a mile, there was another farmer charging a pound
to go and see some triangles, and another mile up the road from
him was another farmer charging a pound to go and see what he had
in a field, so it was becoming a bit of a racket really.

SVAHN:  You never made (any) triangles of such things ?
BOWER:  No. We didn't go much on triangles really [laughs]. 
SVAHN:  What about the eye witnesses who are seeing - in broad
daylight - wind coming in over a field and making circles ?
BOWER:  I've been on the middle of a hot air whirlwind, which you
get on summer days. In fact only this last  year I was on top of
Pepperbox Hill near Salisbury, the corn had already been cut and
it was layered in layers of... streams of corn/straw... and (on)
this very hot day, and this hot air whirlwind came right across
in front of me, it picked up the straw - larger than a motor
car - and it took it up to about two thousand feet in the air,
going round and round and round, and it was twenty minutes before
the last of that bit of straw fell down, and I think anyone that
remarks about being in the centre of a whirlwind, I think its a
hot air whirlwind which you get in summer months, I've seen the
whirlwinds pick up bails of straw and they're quite heavy and
this is what happens really., but there's no such thing as a
genuine crop circle.

SVAHN:  Isn't that too much to say really ?
BOWER:  No, we started it in 1978. Where's the photographic
evidence of anything like our circles before 1978? When you
consider all the thousands of aircraft that flew over this
country during the war years where are any photographs of any
circles that looked as clear cut as what we were doing. There's
plenty of circles that look like circles, but the storm damage,
the wind and the rain create those that looked like circles. Even
today there's been a lot of damage in the past few weeks with the
heavy rain, and a lot of them look like circles, but they're not
clean cut (like) what we were producing, and the walls of the
corn are perfectly straight all the way round you see, but a
whirlwind doesn't act like that, its ragged edges and rough.

SVAHN:  You sometimes see a little pyramid in the middle [of the
circle]... BOWER:  Yes, yes. We can leave all those, yes.

SVAHN:  And you've made them ?
BOWER:  Yes, we've done the little bits in the middle, yes. You
just go around with your stick, and instead of the ... going
round all-the-way, you just leave a little clump. We've left
sometimes just six stalks of corn standing. Yes, there's all
sorts of things you can do really. Its been quite a lot of fun
over the years, we've had a good laugh about it. We've had a good
laugh making them and we've had a good laugh at the so-called
experts and what they've made of it buts its become a little bit
overdone I think - as the years have gone by. I don't like to
see people conned out of money and taken for a ride because we
know what it is, its only flattened corn afterall, isn't it !

SVAHN:  You sometimes regret starting all this ?
BOWER:  Um, not really.  No, no. We've had a lot of fun out of
it, but as I say... I appreciate the amount of research and work
and expense that a lot of people have gone to, but we didn't ask
them to do that, its just what they've done on their own you see.
I'm just wondering whether after seven years - we'll say half-way
through the programme of doing circles - I'm just wondering
whether if we'd revealed it then, because I can remember saying
to David "One day, when we've got to release this News that its
US that's done it, I can tell you now, they're never going to
believe it"....

SVAHN:  And you were right ?
BOWER:  Yes !! And they're not believing it now. There's going to
be a lot of proof, somehow or another that we've got to produce.
We're putting our thinking caps on, there's got to be a lot of
proof shown to these people, 100 per  cent proof its got to be,
and I'm just wondering what their reaction's going to be in our
attempt because we're not going to give up. Although I say we're
retired we are not going to give up, we've got to convince these
people and the people that have been taken for a ride - they're
the people I'm more concerned than anything - not the
researchers, the researchers have done all this themselves. Its
all their expense for travelling around the countryside measuring
them up or when they start charging people exorbitant amounts of
money to go into meetings, and all this sort of thing. I think
its very unfair to think that people are believing what they
[the researchers] are saying and... its just not on, and I don't
like that. And so we've made up our minds that whether it takes
one year, two years or five years we are going to eventually
knock these people down because we've just got to, because it was
us who started it and we would like to finish it nicely. 
End of Interview

Readers will no doubt be interested to learn that in February I
finally met Doug Bower, the man who claims to have "invented" the
crop circle phenomenon in 1978.  Doug and his wife Irene visited
my flat to review the video of Svahn's  interview in the light of
Ken Brown's proposed book about the Doug and Dave story.  As this
was the first time I'd ever met two M.I.5 agents I must admit to
being a little nervous beforehand, but I needn't have worried - 
despite the despicable way he has been treated by the
"cerealogists" Doug Bower was friendly, amicable and every bit
the gentleman he has been portrayed by the press. There is not
the slightest doubt in my mind that Doug Bower is just the sort
of person to perpetrate a thirteen year UFO hoax and that he is
telling his story as he remembers it. His knowledge of the crop
circle story is so convincing that there can be little doubt
that during the mid 1980s myself, Meaden, Delgado and Taylor 
modelled our concept of what a "real" circle looked like on the
basis of Doug and Daves' creations.  This, of course, has very
serious implications for our claim that there is a genuine
naturally-produced crop circle.   During  this revealing
interview  Doug Bower repeatedly made clear his intense dislike
of what the "cerealogists" have been doing.  His references to
the "so-called researchers" and "experts" only serves to
demonstrate how much the cerealogists' have to explain to those
people who bought their books and the farmers whose land has been
repeatedly invaded by true believers in the crop circle mythology
that Flying Saucer Review's "consultants" created in the 1980s.
Doug's vow that he and Dave started the phenomenon and they would
finish the phenomenon must strike fear into the hearts of those
researchers who consistently denied a prosaic explanation and
instead led the public to believe in a damaging supernatural
mythology. 

It was clear too that although Doug and Dave attended BUFORA's
1987 Crop Circle Seminar at the London Business School neither
man had any idea that some researchers had consistently argued
for a rational solution. I was very surprised to discover that
Doug and Dave really had little concept of the "politics" of what
was happening during the 1980s. Doug Bower was quite astonished
at the vicious tactics that had been employed by the
"cerealogists" to silence their opponents and deceive the public. 

There are a number of claims made in this interview which require
proper comment. Firstly, Doug gives a graphic account of the
cerealogist's Waterloo - the Sevenoaks  demonstration  and the
Chilgrove media circus. This account doesn't seem to differ
substantially from anything that has been published elsewhere. 
Of course, Pat Delgado's claim that it was "too dark" to reach a
proper conclusion about the Sevenoaks formation is quite
untenable. Even on a stormy summers day at half past four in the
afternoon it would have been perfectly light.   More
controversial is Doug's claim that his hoaxing caused "no damage"
to the crops. Readers will know from our previous issue that some
farmers believe that they suffer significant loss of income as a
direct cause of the crop being laid down. Doug Bower disagrees,
claiming that it is the hundreds of subsequent sightseers whose
trampling causes the damage. This sightseeing, according to Doug,
is due to the cerealogists leading the public to believe that
circles are a genuine anomaly. Perhaps readers might like to
comment  on this claim ?

A more interesting revelation concerns Doug and Daves' offer to
meet Colin Andrews and Pat Delgado after the Chilgrove
demonstration to prove their case. This would have included a
showing of Doug's scrap-books, the map they have which proves
their claim as well as their circle-making equipment and designs.
Andrews and Delgados' refusal only lends added weight to Doug and
Daves' astonishing claim.

Clas Svahn was well briefed prior to visiting Doug at his home in
Southampton. I had already told him that according to John
MacNish the mythical  MBF Services "press agency" was simply an
office joke at TODAY Newspaper. Allegedly MBF stood for "Not
Another Circle on My Bloody Farm". This is strangely
contradictory to the explanation offered by Lloyd Turner in "The
Circular" (April 1992 page 31).  Despite this it is clear from
Doug's manner that the mythical MBF Services was just a joke as
far as he was concerned - further proof that  George Wingfield's
allegations of a government conspiracy were desperate
fabrications based on flimsy evidence.

Throughout my eight years of research I have learnt time and time
again how the most committed "cerealogists" treat people who dare
to oppose their bizarre but lucrative fantasies.  Doug Bower
paints a graphic picture of the way  George Wingfield reacted
when he tried to point out that the Operation Whitecrow sound was
nothing more innocuous than a small bird.  Doug Bower's
description of this event  and the cerealogist's denial of the
facts is also discussed in Ken Brown's article "White Crow &
Grasshopper Warbler" ("The Cerealogist",  issue 6,  pages 3-4). 

I just love the story of the "swastika" on the front cover of the
CCCS book "The Crop Circle Enigma".  We hope to check with the
U.B.I. whether or not they were responsible for the formation or
whether it was Doug and Dave's original effort that was used.  We
know that the U.B.I. sometimes copied Doug and Daves' circles
because in Schnabel and Irving's article in "The Independent"
magazine (29 August  1992) they recount the story of how Doug and
Daves' suspicions about a rival group of Wiltshire circle-makers
in the Avebury area led to their creation of the message
"COPYCATS" during 1990. 

Finally Doug makes the claim that wind-produced vortices cannot
be sharply defined and that there are no photographs of pre 1978
crop circles. Of course this is really the critical issue for the
survival of the phenomenon, for if no photographs or contemporary
accounts of pre 1978 circles existed Doug would be fully
justified in suggesting that he and Dave Chorley actually
invented the phenomenon in 1978.  As Doug Bower admits to basing
his hoax on the 1966 Tully  event (which, according to the
evidence uncovered by Jenny Randles in her recent trip to
Queensland, was certainly not the first circle to appear in the
Tully area) this claim is immediately shown to be suspect.  It
also makes assumptions about whether or not historical circles
exhibited the same morphology as their modern-day counterparts
and whether or not historical crop circles would attract the same
degree of attention prior to the development of the UFO myth in
1947.

More intriguingly Doug queries the similarity between circles
seen forming by witnesses and those that he and Doug created. The
latter, he claims, were always sharp edged, whilst the former
were always poorly defined.  This, too, can be challenged, for it
could be argued that if Doug and Dave mimicked a natural sharp-
edged anomaly, then their fakes would be very difficult to
distinguish from "real" vortex-produced circles.   
I have shown Doug the three pre 1978 photographs I have of crop
circle events (Wokurna, Bordertown and Rossburn) and Doug had to
admit he was both curious and surprised.  I also described some
of the historic eye witness events listed in previous issues of 
The Crop Watcher, cases which have been repeatedly suppressed by
other research groups. Doug Bower was totally unfamiliar with
this  evidence or the consistency of what the eye witnesses claim
to see. It will be interesting to see if Doug changes his mind
about having "invented" the phenomenon or whether he will
continue to claim that naturally-produced circles exhibit poorly
defined edges and/or no swirl pattern.  

If you want a copy of this 45 minute interview send US $ 30  to
AFU, P.O. Box 11027, S-600 11 Norrkoping, Sweden. Payment
preferably should be by IPMO or to Swedish giro account 49 07
14-3. I can guarantee that you will be impressed. Clas Svahn
comments on this interview and his 1992 visit to England in the
AFU Newsletter, 36, available from the same address.

Book Review

UFOs and How to See them

(Anaya Publishers,  1992,   # 14.99,   144 pages)

by Jenny Randles

This superbly illustrated book is a must for anyone interested in
UFOs. With over 30 colour plates and another 70 black & white
plates this is one of the most  glossy and attractive books on
the market.  It introduces the subject of UFOs to a general
audience, particularly to those who have sightings to report and,
more importantly, to those who would like to have sightings.  All
the major components of the UFO controversy are dealt with in
Jenny's usual lucid manner. 

Jenny begins with a brief trip through UFOlogy's  chequered past,
incorporating Ezekiel's sighting of a "whirlwind" (which Jenny
complains has been "hijacked by the experts to establish their
own version of the truth"), Foo Fighters, mystery airships  and 
ghost rockets.  Enter Kenneth Arnold  ! The late 1940s and early
1950s were a critical time in the development of the UFO
mythology that dominated the subject in years to come, and Jenny
treats this well. 

Part II is devoted to identifying UFO sightings,  Jenny's
favourite pastime ! All the major IFO stimuli are dealt with,
most with photographs. There is also a  flow diagram to assist
witnesses to explain their own sighting.  In this way the book
serves a useful purpose.  Jenny completes Part I with a short
introduction to  Skywatching - something that Jenny considers "a
very rewarding pastime, if properly organised, and if entered
into with the right expectations".  In this section Jenny 
touches on  the kinds of theories that may be capable of
explaining naturally-produced UFOs -  Persinger transients,
earth-quake zones, and the passage of  frontal systems.  As this
book is intended for a general readership rather than the
seasoned UFOlogist these topics are dealt with all too briefly. 
Part II Hotspots examines 'The Most UFO-Haunted Places in the
World'. This is a selection of some of the more intriguing cases
reported in the literature, including the Gran Canaria 1976
sighting, the McMinnville 1950 daylight disk and the celebrated
disappearance of Frederick Valentich.  Even the Ilkeley Moor
entity photo gains an appearance on page 108.  Usually Jenny
touches on possible explanations for these cases but all too
often cases are presented but explanations glossed over.  In my
view this only encourages readers to believe that UFO sightings
must be alien.

Several times throughout the book Jenny introduces crop circles.
There is an entire chapter devoted to this subject and I
recommend all serious researchers of the subject to examine Peter
Horne's photograph on page 83. This is the montage we discussed
in CW3 and CW4 of the 1972 circle discovered at Wokurna in South
Australia.  Proof perhaps that crop circles predate Doug and Dave
?

Jenny's discussion of UFO photographs  is rather brief for my
liking. Too many of the photographs in this book are known to be
dubious at best, yet only 7 pages are devoted to the illusion of
authenticity generated by photographic evidence.  Finally Jenny
introduces the six most commonly reported UFO shapes, something
the US Air Force had great difficulty doing thirty years ago in
Project Blue Book's Special Report #14 .  Here Jenny sensibly
suggests possible explanations for IFO sightings.

I suppose if I were to criticise this book at all I would
question whether or not UFOlogists need a book which, by its very
title, seems destined to produce more IFO reports to swamp the
UFO "message". I also feel that some of the cases are presented
in such a way that the reader is left in no doubt that some UFOs
must be alien in origin and that a more prosaic explanation is
still out-of-the-question. I doubt whether Jenny meant to give
this impression, but it is a criticism which will nevertheless be
made.

Anaya Publishers, Freepost (NW5  630), London, NW1  0YW. # 14.99
incl p&p in the UK, add # 2.50 if you live elsewhere.






Is there a Skeleton in YOUR Cupboard ???
(If your name is Colin Andrews then YES you do !)

This is a new series of articles containing previously
unpublished documentary material from The Crop Watcher's vast
archives.  We begin this series with a peep into the flurry of
correspondence between Paul Fuller and Colin Andrews in early
1988,  more than a year before Andrews launched the best selling
"Circular Evidence" onto an unsuspecting market. This
correspondence arose after an astonishing article by Andrews in
Flying Saucer Review claiming numerous links between crop circles
and UFO sightings. Although I had known Andrews for nearly two
years this was the first time that I realised that Colin Andrews
adopted a pro-UFO explanation for the phenomenon. On February 8th
1988 I wrote a  five page letter to Andrews appealing to him to
reconsider his position. Here are some excerpts from that first
letter:-

"Dear Colin, I was concerned to read your recent article in FSR
about the circles and feel I must write to you to warn you about
the damage you are doing to your own credibility and that of
UFOlogy's credibility in general.

"As you know, I too believe that there are previously
unrecognised phenomena in the UFO data, indeed I would be the
first to stand up and say so if given the opportunity. However, I
think my approach to the investigation and evaluation of UFO
reports differs considerably to your own, as illustrated in your
FSR article, and this is my primary reason for writing to you.
.... 

"What I found disturbing about your article in FSR was your
unquestioning acceptance that every UFO report you discovered
represented 'real' (or 'paranormal') UFOs. This cannot be so,
and I must ask you to reconsider your position carefully." 
After discussing the Cornishmen's hoax at Cheesefoot Head in 1986
and the Westbury 1983 hoax I stated:

"I was disappointed to read in your article that it was a 'sad,
sad fact' that the 'Tornado & Storm Theory just won't stand up'.
Apart from not knowing the name of the theory (the vortex
theory), or describing it in any detail so that your readers
could judge the theory for themselves, I wonder why you
deliberately ignored the eye witness accounts of stationary
vortices creating circles. Terence cites two in his Journal of
Meteorology (the Melvyn Bell report and Arthur Shuttlewood's
report), I remember that last year a correspondent wrote to the
'Daily Telegraph' and described their observation of a vortex
bouncing across a field close to their home in the Malvern Hills
[actually at Ross-on-Wye in Herefordshire, PF] creating two
circles."

As you can see, I already feared the worst ! Sadly, Andrews
failed to respond to this letter, perhaps fearing a prolonged
argument, so on March 7th 1988 I wrote again, enclosing a copy of
the BUFORA/TORRO Survey Report into the Incidence of
Geometrically Shaped Crop Damage. In my brief covering note I
stated "As you know, I am currently writing several articles
summarising BUFORA's involvement and research into the phenomenon
and I intend sending the report to interested scientific bodies
in the very near future. For this reason I would appreciate some
response to my letter of February 9th and the issues I raised". 
Andrews replied by return of post. This letter (dated 9th March
1988) stated:  "Dear Paul, thank you for the TORRO/BUFORA survey
document. I will study the contents in the next day or so.

"It is not my intention to comment in the contents of your letter
of 9th February.  "I am receiving more reports of similar ground
markings from other countries, hitherto not known. I have two new
sites in this country and a superb eye witness report of a
clockwise circle forming within a few meters (sic) of a Person
(sic) out for a walk with a dog.  "It has been a very busy
winter, we await summer with baited breath. Once again, thanks
for my copy, I do appreciate it.

Yours Sincerely "

This is the first proof that Colin Andrews knew of eye witness
testimony and proven hoaxes before he wrote "Circular Evidence"
in 1988. My response, dated 17th March 1988, read as follows:-
"Dear Colin, thank you for your letter of March 9th. I am sorry
you feel unable to deal with any of the points I raised in my
letter to you. Quite apart from the time it took to write my
letter I would have thought it was in everyone's interests for
yourself and Pat [Delgado] to deal with our difference of opinion
in a mature and responsible manner rather than to disregard
eachother's viewpoints and research in this way.

"I am particularly concerned about your personal interpretation
of the circles phenomenon because I have been a member of BUFORA
for over ten years now and I have seen what happens to other
UFOlogists when they make quite sensational claims about our
data. I cannot understand your support of a UFO link with the
circles when so many of our reports turn out to be simple
misidentifications and when such a low proportion of circles have
associated (and perfectly explicable) UFO sightings. Do you not
consider that you have a duty to UFOlogy to present our subject
in its very best light, and that by ignoring all the evidence I
have presented to you in my letter you are not running a very
great risk of discrediting our subject altogether ?

"Returning to your FSR article, I was sorry to see that you 
claimed that I said that 'No UFO sightings have ever been made in
connection with the Goodworth Clatford site'. I certainly don't
remember saying this because I knew of the 1985 sighting by a Mrs 
Jones in Stockbridge (it is afterall described in 'Mystery of the
Circles' as a misidentification of Venus).  "Furthermore, I was
surprised that Gordon Creighton should consider Archie Roy's
withdrawal from circles research to be ominous. I interpret his
action as resulting from his realisation that natural vortices
were fully capable of producing such effects and that established
scientists had been investigating the phenomenon with this in
mind. His action only serves to emphasise how the scientific
community reacts to sensational claims by the UFO movement
(thereby resulting in a dismissal of all our data).

"I hope you were open minded enough to watch Q.E.D. on TV this
week. Again this showed some of the remarkably stable vortices
which can be created by topography (and aircraft !) and how
whirlwinds often remain motionless and operate in pairs. I have
this week obtained Corliss' 'Tornadoes, Dark Days and Anomalous
Precipitation' - it has some very interesting reports which
Terence has not sent me, for example waterspouts with double
walls and whirlwind with double sheaths. Furthermore there are
many accounts of natural phenomena (eg clouds) which were
precisely defined.  Clearly we have much to learn about a whole
range of anomalous (but obviously) meteorological phenomena.

"As I pointed out in my last letter to you, I am currently
writing up all my circles involvement over the past 3 years for
the UFO literature. I have sought the views of my colleagues on
the National Investigations Committee (some of whom have been
investigating UFO reports for far longer than I have) and they
are unanimous that I should continue to put over our view that
the postulated UFO link with the circles is, at its very best,
quite dubious. For this reason I again invite you to comment in
detail on my previous letter to you, Yours etc"  Well, I suppose
I was just asking for trouble really, for Colin Andrews has NEVER
explained to me why he refused to answer the issues raised in
these letters. He has NEVER justified why his series of best
selling books make no mention of the eye witness testimony
mentioned in my letter of 9th February 1988.  Perhaps more
damaging was the article in Flying Saucer Review Vol 31 No 1
(remember them Colin ?), which was published in March 1989, just
before "Circular Evidence" was unleashed on the world. This
article, which discussed rumours about the A.P.E.N. hoax,
constituted an actionable breach of confidence by Andrews and was
written by an anonymous "John Squareman". It stated:

"It has recently been learnt that, in a letter addressed to Mr
Colin Andrews on February 9th 1988, by a Mr Paul Fuller of
Romsey, Hampshire, widely known [eh ???] as Britain's second-most
important and second-most prominent expert on the UFO Problem
[I'm flattered Gordon], Mr Fuller has indicated that he has
secured the 'Scoop of the Century'. .." 
This disgraceful article is a second proof that Colin  Andrews 
received my letter of 9th February 1988 and, in addition, it is
proof  that he read my letter to the very end.  So, why did these
eye witness accounts and the 1983 Westbury hoax not appear in
Andrews' allegedly "definitive" book that he wrote during 1990
with Pat  Delgado ? 
>From these documented facts we can conclude that :-

(1) Yes, Andrews fully knew that there were alleged eye witnesses 
to circle-forming events more than a year before "Circular
Evidence" was published. He even admits to independently
uncovering an eye witness account that has NEVER appeared in his
public promotion of the subject. Why not ? We invite Andrews to
comment.

(2) Yes, Andrews also knew about the 1983 Westbury hoax by the
'Daily Mirror'.  This too has NEVER appeared in his public
promotion of the subject. Indeed Colin Andrews went out of his
way to DISMISS hoaxing as a possible cause for the phenomenon in
numerous media interviews. 

This deeply embarrassing evidence proves that Andrews must have
temporarily forgotten about the contents of my letter of 9th
February 1988 when he was interviewed on the "Gloria Hunniford"
show on 3rd August 1989. We discussed this episode in "Crop
Circles, A Mystery Solved" (page 79):-
Randles: ...[one of the] real reasons why we believe that
[circles are being formed by natural forces is] because there are
EYE WITNESS ACCOUNTS - which [Andrews and Delgado] studiously
avoid mentioning in their book - of people who have actually SEEN
circles being formed in daylight by wind vortexes [sic]

Hunniford: Let me stop you there, Jenny. Now what about this
point, Colin ?  Andrews:   There are so many, aren't there ? I
mean the lady just doesn't...  Hunniford (interrupting): Well,
let's take that eyewitness report and the weather aspect. 
Andrews:   Yes, indeed, there's ONE eyewitness report.

Randles (interrupting): There's more than one, MANY more than
one.  Forced to discuss this most unwelcome evidence Andrews went
on to state that "... I must say, Gloria, this is very important,
the only one ... isn't it a strange coincidence ? ... [was] an
employee of Dr Meaden's. We're not prepared to accept one
eyewitness account".  Andrews has never publicly withdrawn this
inference or corrected this error.    Now that the crop circle
circus is over we think its high time Colin Andrews publicly
apologised to everyone who has bought his allegedly "definitive"
book "Circular Evidence".  Andrews must  apologise for knowingly
omitting proof of crop circle hoaxing, for knowingly omitting
proof of multiple eye witness testimony, and for slandering
people who merely report seeing events which appear to contradict
Andrew's previously stated support for an exotic UFO-related
explanation.  It seems that some UFO researchers never learn. By
suppressing  evidence which we can prove Andrews was aware of
Andrews helped to spawn an international fraud which now involves
many dozens of hoaxers all over the world. We think its time
Andrews apologised.

SIGAP - Isn't it time you owned up ?

Readers of BUFORA's 1989 report "Controversy of the Circles" will
recall our controversial analysis of the Mrs Jones case from 1985
(described on pages 57-58). Briefly, according to SIGAP's version
of the story,  Mrs Jones reported seeing a large central light
surrounded by four satellite lights from her home near
Stockbridge in Hampshire. According to the SIGAP team this
allegedly coincided with the discovery of a quintuplet formation
just a mile or two away.  

Sadly our suggestion that 94 year-old Mrs Jones had merely seen
the planet Jupiter shining brightly through broken cloud cover
didn't go down too well with certain UFO groups. I know this
because in 1987 I had been threatened with an action for slander
by three of Flying Saucer Review's su-pporters for daring to
question the standard of investigation into this relatively
innocuous case. This was not to be the only time that Jenny and I 
would discover how the "dark gods" at FSR would respond to our
attempts to find reasonable explanations for crop circle events. 

Shortly after publication of  "Controversy" Mrs Jones' daughter
contacted me to correct errors of fact in the account the SIGAP
team were publishing. The most important error was SIGAP's claim
that the "UFO" had resembled five stationary lights in the form
of a quintuplet formation. In fact she had observed a mass of
SWIRLING lights, so why did SIGAP report stationary lights formed
into a quin-tuplet shape ?  Of course this is yet another early
crop circle case which Doug and Dave lay claim to having created,
so any UFO-related explanation seems desperate in the extreme.
Like so many other  UFO cases something perfectly identifiable
was mis-represented (presumably by accident) and turned into
something far more exciting.  Now SIGAP, isn't it time you owned
up and apologised to the international UFO community ? 
(SIGAP = The Surrey Investigation Group into Aerial Phenomena) 
Gloucestershire Earth Mysteries has just published an interesting
letter from Pat Delgado.  Thanks to Danny Sullivan  and Jo-Anne
Wilder for allowing me to reproduce his letter in full:-  "This
is to give a light resume of part of the overall crop circle and
other associated situations as I see it in January 1993.

It is because so many phenomena are inter-related that it is
impossible to isolate and pursue just one, progress made along
any one avenue of thought automatically opens doors on either
side. Through any of these doors are further similar networks and
so on ad infinitum, hence the chaotic universe.

There have been a great many changes in time that has passed,
changes in people, attitudes and events, some inevitable others
significant in their own right.  During the autumn of last year I
could foresee the pattern of events and situations that were to
take place this year. Consequently I decided to observe from the
side lines and to become involved with visits to crop circle
sites on a limited basis, even so, I met many old friends and
made many new ones.

There is no doubt that the hoaxing element has created some
confusion, but it is amazing such a high percentage of people see
that as the natural progression of humanity.  Beneath the
maelstrom of manual replication and the insincerity it brought
with it, the true simple crop circle phenomenon continues as
serenely as ever as it probably has done for thousands of years.

Not only have we seen the evolution of crop circles keep pace
with the expectations of ascending interest but parallel with
this and because of it, has been the expansion of the human minds
in many directions. This is a minor miracle in itself because it
has elevated many thousands of people's thinking capacity to
heights unattainable by usual mundane standards.

Regardless of how crop circles are created, the proof  is
everywhere that they touched a nerve that caused a world-wide
explosion of curiosity and lateral thinking unequalled in
modern times. The latent and enormous desire for people wanting
to unit and communicate about subjects orthodox science cannot
explain has been made blatantly obvious. Because the door to the
hitherto unexplained has been flung wide open, it can also be
said that some religious, political and security factions are not
without some concern as it may be seen that a certain amount of
'control' may be at risk.

Some crop circle groups have petered out, possibly through the
inability to see beyond crop circles or not recognising the
mandatory requirement to embrace a wider scope of mysteries that
run parallel to the original subject. I am sure that at whatever
level people are aware of crop circles their minds have benefited
to some degree of positive expansion.  Again this year many
people have experienced the continuance of inexplicable sights
and sounds, both in and away from crop circles. My analysis shows
that mysterious phenomena can occur almost anywhere at any
time. It would be true to say that certain categories of
phenomena are associated with certain localities and this may be
related to expectancy. Photography also continues to reveal
anomalies that defy the experts and specialists. There are
individual prints of crop circles developed from an otherwise
perfect roll which have all-over hues or bands or blobs of red or
blue. Other photos have captured mysterious objects in the sky or
at ground level. Tape recorders are continuing to record a
variety of strange sounds in and out of doors.

It is not uncommon at the beginning of each year to wonder what
the future holds and the crop circle subject is at the forefront
of many people's minds. Of course we can only wait and see
despite the attraction of speculation. Whatever occurs we should
accept it with an open mind and realise we are witnessing, not
only the evolution of this particular subject, but the evolution
of mankind and all of its confusing facets.
It is a wonderful thing to communicate in this way through this
publication [GEM], it provides the opportunity to progress
together in seeking a broader awareness and the truth."   Pat
Delgado.

So, if I read these musing correctly, Pat Delgado now accepts
that crop circles have been around for "thousands of years" and
(presumably) he too accepts that there must be a natural solution
for the non-hoaxed formations. As for the rest of this letter, if
any readers have the slightest clue what this Delgado is talking
about I'd love to know. Please write to the Editorial address on
page 2 so that we can enlighten everyone.  Our thanks to GEM for
allowing us to reproduce this letter.  

Also  in GEM 15 there is the following letter from BUFORA's Doug
Cooper:-  Berry Pomeroy Hoax Exposed

"I have reason to doubt the authenticity of the crop circle
formations at Berry Pomeroy, South Devon last year. My reasons
are based purely on my findings, having researched the events
surrounding these formations and a certain gentleman called Peter
Glastonbury (PG).  During last summer, starting in June, a number
of formations of laid crop were found at Berry Pomeroy by PG. PG
lives or rather did live at a place known as True Street House
which is adjacent to the field where all the formations were
found. The first formation (a dumb-bell) cam to my notice via a
local TV report (8th July). During this report a discussion took
place between a reporter and PG who stated that at the time of
the dumb-bell's formation three motorcycle accidents had taken
place and in each case the rider had been killed. He also stated
that two hay barns had caught fire within the area at the same
time ! 
I contacted PG that evening and visited Berry Pomeroy on July
13th. On arrival PG escorted us to the formation and told us
about the three  accidents and the barn fires. On inspecting the
dumb-bell I was not impressed and it was my impression that the
formation was man-made. Whilst at Berry Pomeroy PG informed me of
another dumb-bell he had found at a place called Guzzledown, near
Broxham. Again on visiting the site I got the impression it was
man-made. Some two weeks later this formation was mysteriously
visited and the letters FT were added to the top of the circle.
What FT meant is anybody's guess, but in view of later events,
i.e. an article that  appeared in Fortean  Times, October 1992, I
assume there has to be some connection !

During the next few weeks a number of other circles/formations
were found at Berry Pomeroy, all by PG. There was even one found
in a field that I had suggested to PG would make a good site -
I'll say no more than that !

Because of the extraordinary claims made by PG, i.e. the 
accidents and the fires, I wrote to all the local Police, Fire
and Ambulance services seeking confirmation. Needless to say, I
did not receive any confirmation from these agencies and have to
conclude the whole story was a fabrication by PG.

There is also the case of the so-called mysterious photograph
depicting a 'bright star-like formation' over the first dumb-
bell. This photo was published in Fortean Times, October 1992,
with a report from PG concerning the accidents. In August 1992 I
was informed by PG that he had been involved in the production of
a similar 'star formation' on the front cover of Kindred Spirit
magazine. Some time later during a telephone call PG told me he
knew how to produce the type of effect seen on the photograph,
simply by double exposure and light enhancement. I then of course
asked him if he had faked the photograph, but sadly he still
insisted that it was genuine."

Once again it seems clear that UFO hoaxers already know what kind
of "effects" UFOs are supposed to leave behind - in this case
some kind of residual energy field. This same motif crops up
(sorry) in most of the popular crop circle books (it even crops
up in our own book, but that's a closely guarded secret). 
Taylor's photographs of "two black-ribbon darts" (described on
page 98 of "Circular Evidence") demonstrates that Taylor also
knew what UFOs are supposed to be capable of doing.  

Regular readers will know that in addition to Fortean Times'
promotion of Glastonbury's photograph The Cerealogist also
promoted this hoax on page 9 of its Winter 1992 issue. I suppose
this just goes to show that  in anomaly research nothing has been
learnt from the lessons of history. I gather too that John
Michell was none-too-pleased at the suggestion in GEM that
whoever created the Barbury Castle formation did so as some kind
of "wind up" aimed at himself. This is something which one or two
other researchers (not connected with CERES) have also suggested
to me. Now what kind of so-and-so would do something like that ? 
A sociologist perhaps ?

If you want to know what's going on crop-circle wise in
Gloucestershire I suggest you obtain a copy of GEM as Danny and
Jo-Anne are both on the boil. See the address on page 36. 

Ted Phillips' Physical Trace Catalogue

Part 1

I am very grateful to Mark Rodeghier of the J. Allen-Hynek Centre
for UFO Studies (CUFOS) for allowing me to reproduce the
following cases from Ted Phillips' celebrated Physical Trace
Catalogue. The catalogue was published in 1975 by CUFOS and its
proper title is "Physical Traces Associated with UFO Sightings, A
Preliminary Catalogue".  
Ted Phillips was born in 1942 and has lived all his life in
Missouri. He is still alive today and his career in UFO research
stretched from the late 1960s to the mid 1980s.  Phillips had a
varied career and at various times was an inspector for the
Missouri State Highway Department, a professional photographer
and also an amateur  jazz musician. According to Ronald Story's
'UFO Encyclopedia' Phillips investigated more than  five hundred
UFO cases in his first twelve years of UFO research.  His
position statement (written in the mid 1970s) concluded "I
believe, after thirteen years of investigation, [that] the data
indicates a non terrestrial origin."

This summary is based on only a partial listing of the catalogue
as many of Phillips' cases appear extremely dubious in nature.
Cases from the early 1950s are particularly unreliable because
many of the early UFO books were written by people who
automatically assumed that they were describing encounters with
alien spaceships.  Jenny Randles tells me that  cases reported in
the "hysterical" Spanish and South American media should be
treated even more skeptically because these cases were often
complete fabrications ! Furthermore many of the early cases have
no proper source, eg  Phillips quotes Vallee describing cases
which appear to have been anecdotally reported to Vallee.  This
means that we often have no idea whether or not a specific case
was investigated by anyone let alone whether it was a
contemporary investigation or whether the investigator was in any
sense someone capable of undertaking an objective scientific
evaluation.

In addition to these problems we have a major definitional
problem concerning cases which feature circular ground traces
because of the current confusion which exists over  the
authenticity of  the archetypal crop circle. Doug and Dave claim
to have actually created the phenomenon of a sharply-defined
swirled circle, but they apparently based their hoax on the Tully
reeds circles, which themselves were sharply-defined swirled
circles. Given this regrettable fact what do we include in our
definition of a crop circle ? Do we include roughly circular
shapes of depressed but not swirled circles or do we stick to
sharp-edged circles ? How about burned circles or circles where
the crop has been denuded or completely removed ? Given these
problems its probably wise to merely highlight all cases
involving circular traces but not assume that they are
necessarily caused by the same causal mechanism. It is quite
possible that there may be several natural circle-forming
mechanisms which all create different types of circular ground
trace. One of these mechanisms could still be Meaden's postulated
plasma-vortex but it is wise not to assume that any particular
category of  circular ground trace must be caused by the
postulated plasma vortex. In any event we will be trying to track
down case material referred to by Phillips and will report back
in a later issue.  
Cases are listed in date order and each case has a unique case
number,  the location, a brief summary and  (usually) a primary
source.  Some have local times noted.  CUFOS only have one copy
of this catalogue left so please do not write to CUFOS requesting
copies of this case material.  CUFOS can be contacted at the J.
Allen Hynek Center for UFO Studies, 2457 West Peterson Avenue,
Chicago, IL 60659, U.S.A.  

Case 013: June 12th 1790  FRANCE, Alencon
Time 05.00

Several farmers caught sight of a large globe which was
surrounded by flames. A whistling sound was heard. The object
slowed, made some oscillations and moved toward the top of the
hill, unearthing plants along the slope. The heat was so intense
that grass and small trees started burning. In the evening the
sphere was still warm. Witnesses: 2 mayors, a doctor, 3 other
authorities, in addition to the dozens of peasants who were
present. A kind of door opened and a person came out of it. The
person was dressed in a strange way, wearing a tight-fitting suit
and, seeing all the people, said some words that were not
understood and ran into the woods. The sphere exploded
silently, throwing pieces everywhere, and these pieces burned
until they were powder. This report [is based on an earlier
report made] on June 17, 1790,  by Police Inspector Liabeuf.
Source: Vallee III, p60.  [PF Notes: This case has always
attracted more than the usual amount of skepticism, although we
are not aware that it has been exposed as a hoax. Quite a few of
Vallee's original folklore cases were later exposed as dubious or
hoaxed, but this case sounds like something straight out of Jules
Verne - perhaps we have a retrospective hoax ? Also, were there
really Police Inspectors in 18th century France  ? I thought 
Peel didn't found the first police force in Britain until the
1830s so how can we have a French Police Inspector in 1790 ?]

Case 683: 1842 U.S.S.R., Orenburg

"Small metal objects, perfectly hexagonal, fell out of the sky
after a 'strange cloud' was seen hanging over the town for a
considerable time" (UFOs from Behind the Iron Curtain, page 278).

[PF Another weird case ! Sounds a little bit like the infamous
First Fourth Norfolk Regiment that allegedly disappeared inside a
strange cloud during the siege of Gallipoli in 1916. This too was
a retrospective hoax that has only recently been admitted to.
On the other hand Charles Fort's books were full of  'strange
clouds'  that did peculiar things.  Its a pity there isn't more
information. Difficult to evaluate.]

Case 006: Date Unknown. U.S.A., Silver City, NC.

The mystery circle, as it is called locally, has not for many
years produced plant growth. Transplanted grass has died. It is
said that insects, birds and animals avoid the area, which is a
40-ft circle. (Skylook)

[PF This doesn't sound like a crop circle at all.]

Case 007: Date Unknown. U.S.A.

A Mrs Fulton saw an occupant with a large head as he sat down on
the rim of a round object. The object suddenly glowed and gave
out rays of yellow light. The bottom revolved anti-clockwise and
the object rose vertically at a high speed. It left the smell of
hot pepper in the air. Three weeks later every tree in the
orchard was dead. (Personal files)  [PF Another entity case which
sounds very much like a hoax. If there were physical traces - as
alleged - why has this case not been published elsewhere in the
literature as a classic CEII/CEIII ?]

Case 008: Date Unknown. U.S.A. Darrington, WA.

UFO landed, bark on tree trunks damaged, trees spread outward. No
other details. (UFO-INFO).

[PF Not enough detail to comment on really]

Case 014:  December 7th 1872. ENGLAND, Banbury. Time: 10.00  At
King's Sutton an object resembling a haystack flew on an
irregular course. Sometimes high, sometimes low, it was
accompanied by fire and dense smoke, and produced the same effect
as a tornado, felling trees and walls. It vanished suddenly.
(VALLEE III)  [PF This sounds like a haystack caught in a vortex
!]

Case 015:  July 1880. CANADA, East Kent, Ontario.

David Muckle and W.R. McKay heard a sudden loud report. They
turned to see a cloud of stones flying upward from a spot in a
field. They examined the spot, which was circular and about 16
ft. across. There was no sign of an eruption nor anything to
indicate the fall of a heavy body there. The ground was simply
swept clean. (Scientific American, July 10, 1880).  [PF This is
the classic case discussed in all our work as an early account of
a sudden explosive vortex creating a circular ground trace. It is
listed along with other accounts of explosive vortex events in
Corliss' "Tornados, Dark Days and Anomalous Precipitation"] 
Case 040: September 27, 1950. U.S.A. Philadelphia, PA.

Police officers John Collins and Joseph Kennan saw an object 6
ft. in diameter float to earth in an open field. They approached
the object with flashlights. Collins tried to pick the object up,
the part touched by his hand dissolved leaving a stick, odourless
residue. Within a half hour the entire object had evaporated. A
spot remained at the site. (News slips).  [PF This sounds to me
more like some kind of industrial pollutant rather than a
spaceship ! Jenny Randles has informed me of some fascinating
work by Louis Frank (summarised in a paper by Frank, Sigworth and
Craven, International Geophysical Research Letters, 1986). Frank
was intrigued by abnormally high water vapour levels in the upper
atmosphere as well as by UFO reports and reports of strange
things falling out of the sky.  He postulated that every day the
earth's atmosphere is struck by thousands of mini comets - comets
composed of inter-stellar ice but only a few metres in size. Such
comets would presumably evaporate in the upper atmosphere, where
they might be mistaken for UFOs. A few might conceivably reach
the lower atmosphere where they might behave in the manner
described in this case. Frank's controversial theory has been
widely debated in the scientific press and has attracted a good
deal of skepticism. I've not heard of Frank's theory before so
perhaps it is wise to reserve judgement.]

Case  047:  1952 U.S.A., Lamonte,  MO.

Former director of the Sedalia ASCS office was contacted by Joe
Thompson and asked to look at an unusual area on his farm which
had appeared overnight. He found a perfect circle 16 ft. across
with the plants wilted and dead. The soil was examined and no
cause could be found. (Personal files).

[PF Another inconclusive case]

Case 815:  June 1952. U.S.A. Little Spring Creek, TN

Marks of legs and center spike in chirt (sic), along with small
heelless footprints. Around 11 p.m. man hears strange sounds and
weird music, sees a shiny thing on the ground, with bright lights
coming through an open door. 4 or 5 men, 4.5 to 5 ft. tall
dancing and singing  in high-pitched voices. Object aluminium
coloured, glowing orange and blue in spots, some of which were
too bright to look at directly. Rotating lights on translucent
ball at top. Object on 4 legs, each with a ball at the end, and a
center spike. Stood 3-4 ft. off the ground, 7-8 feet thick at
center, like 2 saucers stuck together. Men reloaded object,
advanced toward witness with things in their hands that looked
like guns, but stopped, apparently unwilling to cross a creek.
men walked up ramp or steps into object, which rose vertically in
a twisting, cork-screw motion, glowing brighter as it rose. 
(Stanley L. Ingram "Recent Sightings" page 65 in "Unidentified
Flying Objects Over the Tennessee Valley" by W.A. Darbro and
Ingram, South Publishing Co., Huntsville, Ala. 1974. Via Fred
Merritt).

[PF Well ! This is a classic early close encounter case that
exceeds the boggle threshold by some way.  I don't like single
witness entity cases, particularly ones where the entities,
despite having travelled from goodness-knows-where, were
incapable of crossing a creek ?  It could so easily turn out to
be a hoax .]

Case 704:  July 15th, 1952. GERMANY,         Gleimershausen. 
Former Mayor Oskar  Linke and his  12-year-old stepdaughter saw a
landed  circular object and occupants. Witnesses moved to within
30 ft. Object was 50 ft. across with two rows of holes along the
side, each about 1 ft. in diameter. A black cylindrical tower was
seen at the top center; it was about 10 ft. high, went through
the disk and the object was resting on it. Object slowly
ascended, whistling sound was heard. Several people in a nearby
village saw it flying overhead. A circular depression where the
tower had rested was found. (The New York Enquirer. 07-21-52).

[PF. Another awkward case. Its difficult to come to a rational
solution unless we conclude that "it can't be therefore it isn't"
!]

Case 676: August 6th,  1952. U.S.A., Lumberton, NC.  Time: 21.00 
James J. Allen, 51, saw a round object 8 ft. long, 6 ft. high
land within 10 ft. of him. Small occupant seen. Footprints found.
(The Robesonian, Lumberton, 08-07-52).  [PF. Not really enough
information here. ]
Case 052:  May 20th, 1953. U.S.A., Brush Creek, CA. Time: 18.30 
A miner, John Q. Black, saw a silvery disk, 7 ft. in diameter and
6 ft. thick land on a sandbar within 50 ft. of the witness. He
saw a creature about the size of a midget get out of the craft,
scoop up water in a shiny pail and hand it inside. The witness
and his partner John van Allen saw marks in the sand about 1 ft.
wide that looked like "elephant feet". ("The Humanoids", p. 146)

Case 051: May 30th, 1953. NEW ZEALAND, Christchurch. White
filaments seen coming to ground at time of UFO sighting.
(Stringfield).

Case 826: June 20th, 1953. U.S.A., Brush Creek, CA. Time: 18.30 
Incident identical to that of May 20th, 1953. (Humanoids)

[PF The standard explanation for these "Angel Hair" cases is that
spiders' cobwebs have coalesced and then disintegrated.  The only
real question is how the spiders' webs coalesce at cloud level].

Case 053: June 24th, 1953. U.S.A., Hampton Bay, NY. Time: 00.18 
Woman saw a round object 100 ft. in diameter. Lighted red band
around the middle, oscillating motion. Noise similar to swarm of
bees. Four portholes seen in top section along with red lights.
Seen for 3 minutes. Two days later a yellowish moss was observed
at the site. Object hovered over water.  (VALLEE III).

[PF: I think it was John Keel who first drew attention to the
"swarm of bees" sound frequently heard during close encounter
cases.  The trace is not very typical of a CEII and may not even
be related to the object seen.]

Case 054: July 2nd, 1953. SPAIN, Villares des Saz.  Time: 13.00 
Maximo Munes Olivares, 14, saw a "big balloon" on the ground 
when a faint whistling sound attracted his attention. It was
metallic. Three dwarfs emerged, they were dressed in blue. they
re-entered the object, which glowed very brightly, made a soft
whistling sound and went off "like a rocket".  Footprints and
four holes 2 in. deep forming a perfect square of 14 in. were
found by police. (VALLEE III)

[PF. Another single witness entity case.  Don't forget Jenny's
comments about a "hysterical" Spanish UFO press. The traces -
even the case itself - may have been fabricated by the witness or
the newspaper.]

Case 055: August 17th, 1953. MEXICO, Ciudad Valles. Time: 18.00 
Salvidor Villanueva, 40, noted failure in his auto engine. As he
tried to make repairs he was  approached by two men, 4 ft. tall
wearing gray coveralls and carrying helmets. An object 40 ft.
across, disc-shaped with  a dome and humming sound was seen. It
ascended vertically at high speed. Bushes and sticks were found
broken at the site. This formed a circle 40 to 45 ft. across.
(FSR 1-70)

[PF Sounds more like a hoax to me !]

Case 056: August 18th, 1953. U.S.A., Ashboro, NC.
 
Mr. and Mrs. Ralph Dixon found a perfect 18 ft. circle in their
front yard. The circle had a substance that appeared to be some
kind of powder and had a burned odour, although it did not kill
or scorch the grass. (George Fawcett)

[Again not very convincing evidence of a crop circle]

Case 057: September 4th, 1953. FRANCE,  Tennerre. Time: 21.30  A
woman saw two objects on the ground and 3-5 ft. tall men running
towards the object. They had large heads and wore helmets and
boots. One entered the elongated object which was 18 ft. wide. It
took a vertical position resting on a tripod and took off with a
spherical object into which the other two creatures had gone.
Traces  were found. (Vallee III).  Case 059: November, 1953. 
NORWAY, Gjersjoen Bridge.

Mr. Tygve, Mrs. Buflot and a neighbour saw an object rose from
behind a hill and follow their car, stopping ahead of them just
above the ground. They stopped, and felt "pricklings" until the
craft took off vertically. A watch stopped working, and numerous
people vouch for the fact that the paint on the car changed from
beige to dark green. (Vallee III). [This sounds a promising case.
The "pricklings" may well be due to the presence of static
electricity. There are numerous cases on record where the UFO
followed a vehicle - this could be because the car was
electrically charged by the proximity of a natural electro-
magnetic field. There are also plenty of cases where car bodies
apparently changed colour, although it is not really clear if
this was just a temporary illusion (eg at night) or a real effect
witnessed in daylight. We'll try and find out more details (Clas
do you know anything ?)]. 
Case 061: December, 1953. CANADA, Sherbrook, NS.

Witness saw two "indescribable" shadows, a while later a large
round object took off some 350 ft. away with a blue-green light.
Police found broken bushes as evidence of an enormous weight.
Animals reacted. (Vallee III)

Case 062: 1954. MEXICO. A flying object was witnessed by many
citizens. It was watched by all at a distance of less than 50 ft.
until it finally left, leaving behind a circle of flattened corn.
To date nothing grows in the circle. (Data-Net)

[PF At last, something which sounds like a crop circle ! We will
be trying to find more information on this case for a future
issue. The lack of a precise date and location is not very
encouraging. It could be the "1953" case we published in our
historical list in CW14]  Case 063: 1954, CANADA, Vivian.

Circular area devoid of plant growth to date (1971).
(H.H. McKay)

[PF Again this doesn't sound like crop circles as we have come to
know and love them .]  Case 662: January 4th, 1954. FRANCE,
Marignane Airport. Time: 21.00  Witness saw a round object
landing, trace found. (MUFOB)

Case 663: February 1954. U.S.A., San Bernardino, CA. Time: 19.00 
Engineer A.P. Wheeler driving when he saw a metallic object
resting on the road ahead. He stopped  10m from it. The object
was a disk on which a hatch was seen. Object ascended disturbing
gravel below. Object disappeared in 30 seconds. (MUFOB) 
Case 789: May 20th, 1954 ENGLAND, Bruton, Somerset.  Time:  02.00 
Nigel Frapple, cycling home from a dance, saw first a terrific
light in a field and then a huge circular metallic object, 50
ft. across, with a brilliant  flame-coloured light coming from a
central cockpit, hovering 20 ft. above the ground about 80-100
ft. away. After a minute it moved off towards the northwest,
climbing and increasing speed. There was a slight swishing sound
heard. The same sort of object was seen near Ringwood in
Hampshire the same night. The next day Mr. Frapple and a reporter
examined the field and found "grass pushed flat in an area 100
ft. in diameter, and scorched in places". (The Humanoids) 
[PF This is one of the early classic crop circle cases, often
referred to as the Redlynch case. Like many of the earlier case
the trace was in grass, thus disqualifying it as a crop circle
according to some researchers]

Case 065: June 21st, 1954. CANADA, Ridgeway, Ontario. Time: 
01.00  Mr. & Mrs. Guy Baker reported a round object some 50 ft.
in diameter. They reported a dome and multi-coloured lights. The
Baker car would not start during the observation. There was a
large, brown circular area where the object was seen. (VALLEE
III)  [PF. Again, probably not a crop circle, but interesting
nevertheless.]  Case 097: December 12th, 1954. BRAZIL, Campinas. 

A lady observed three UFOs, dull gray, emitting a strong light as
they dived low over her house. A liquid substance dropped from
one, like a silver rain. She ran to the spot where it had fallen
and found a brilliant glowing stain, spread over the cement near
the washing tank. The stain was quite hot. The material was
analysed by Chief Chemist, Dr. Visvaldo Maffei, Young
Laboratories, 584 Francisco Deodoro Street, Campinas. "The sample
analysed is a combination of chemically pure tin-88.91 % and
oxygen-11.09 %." (FSR) [This is another peculiar case which
sounds potentially explicable. We'll get back to you on this one
!] 

Case 098: December 19th, 1954. VENEZUELA, Valencia. 

Jose Parra, an 18-year-old jockey was training when he saw six
small men loading rocks into a disc hovering near the ground. He
tried to run but a violet-coloured  beam from a device held by
one of the men stopped him. Footprints were found. (FSR) 
Case 099: December 29th, 1954. FRANCE, Bru. Time: 21.00

A Mr. Gamba saw an oval red object 175 ft. away.  When he tried
to approach it, he found he was unable to move. As soon as this
"paralysis" subsided, he ran to get his brothers and came back to
the object, which turned white, then red. It rose and flew away
toward the east. It had been on the ground at least 15 minutes.
Traces were found, as if the ground had been dug up. Small trees
near the river were found damaged, as if they had been cut with a
knife. (VALEE III)

Case 101: 1955, U.S.A., Elking, AK.

Frank Huson reported the following incident which took place on
his farm. After a heavy rain, 'I walked up to an almost perfect
circle, which was formed by the peculiar disposition of the dead
weeds that had been uprooted. Inside this circle, no weeds stood
at all. The uprooted weeds, where they were thick, were lying
along the outer rim of the circle, against the weeds that were
still standing, as if they had been pulled up, and moved by some
force. The ground was soft, and there were no marks showing that
anything had sat down there. This circle was about 25 ft. across.
(Lucius Farish)

[PF.  Well, what an intriguing case. What a pity it only involves
weeds rather than mature vegetation. It would be very easy to
read too much into this case so again we will try to find out
more before coming to a conclusion.]

Case 790: March 30th, 1955. U.S.A., near Tuscon, AZ.   Time:
03.15  Andy Florio, a musician, was driving from Tuscon to El
Paso on Highway 80 when he saw a "disc-machine "... at least 100
ft. in diameter, 25 ft. thick, dirty gold or bronze with circular
openings around its rim from which amber-coloured lights
protruded. Bluish-green lights were "shining and flickering
upward" from its roof. "It made the sound of electrical humming
with stronger and softer volume. It yawed, swayed back and forth
and turned over on its axis once as I stood out of my car on the
driver's side ... It tipped over on its side and shot a
brilliant, blinding white-coloured  beam of light at me, 
bubbling the dome of the paint on the car as well as burning my
elbow." Mr. Florio felt a needle-like tingling sensation and heat
all over his body and nausea a few weeks later. The radio
stopped, lights dimmed and the motor chugged at a speed of 12-15
miles an hour "as though it might stall any second." When he
arrived at a garage in El Paso the next afternoon, "half the acid
was gone from the battery, I was running on three plugs, and my
radio was burned out completely." (Modern People, Oct. 27, 1974
and personal communication to CUFOS)

[This is a good CEII report with valuable clues about the nature
of the natural energy forces involved. Again note the reference
to a "tingling" sensation and the affect on the car bodywork. We
will be searching for more information about this case and will
report back on what we find.]

Case 521: July 22nd, 1955. U.S.A., Cincinnati, OH. Time:  17.30 
Mr E.M. had been mowing his lawn and kneeled down near a peach
tree, when suddenly "a peculiar liquid substance dark red in
colour began pelting me and the tree". He looked up and saw a
pear-shaped object about 1000 ft. high moving slowly from west to
east. As he watched, his hands and arms began to burn painfully,
but washing them immediately eased the pain. When Mr. M.  went
out and examined the peach tree the next day, he found that most
of the leaves  had turned brown and fallen, the twigs and limbs
were brittle, the peaches seemed "petrified" and the trunk had
turned so hard that a nail could be driven in only with great
difficulty. The grass below the tree had also died. (C.R.I.F.O.
Orbit, Sep 2, 1955) 
Case 105: August 6th, 1955. U.S.A., Bedford, Indiana.
Semicircular imprints. (NICAP)  Case 251: October 1955.
AUSTRALIA, Port Augusta; Case 107: October 2nd, 1955. U.S.A.,
Uhrichsville, OH; Case 108: October 10th, 1955. U.S.A.,
Cincinnati, OH and Case 109: October 27, 1955. U.S.A.,
Cincinnati, OH.  All listed as 

White filaments seen falling to ground at time of UFO sighting.
(Stringfield)  [More "Angel Hair" spiders' cobwebs]

Case 111: 1956. FRANCE. Circular trace found.

Case 110: 1956, U.S.A., Stover, MO.

A bright light was seen ascending from a wooded area. When
neighbours investigated, they found the ground blackened in a
circular area 56 ft. across. Several small trees were broken and
pushed outward from the blackened area. In 1968 a bright light
was seen again in the same place. (Personal files)

Case 706:  Summer, 1956. U.S.A., Nellis Air Force Base, NV.  Gear
marks in triangular pattern, individual impressions similar to
Case 247. 100 ft. diameter domed disk with three circular landing
gear. Car stopped. (Lorenzen, Coral and Jim, "Flying Saucer
Occupants" Signet, New American Library, N.Y., 1967, page  29.
Via Fred Merritt)  Case 112: Fall, 1956. U.S.A.,  Bethel, CT.

Danti Vaghi and a friend found a circle of grass 18 ft. in
diameter in a field just off Federal Road C. In the center, a 3
ft. circle of grass stood intact. Around the outside of the
burned area, the grass still contained traces of nickel and
chromium. (Bethel Home News, 11-25-69)  [PF Some confusion exists
in the UFO literature over the alleged "burning" inside circles. 
This is sometimes wrongly assumed when plants rot and turn
black. It would be interesting to find out who analysed the
grass and found such interesting metals. Were these metals
already present before the circle was formed ? We'll be trying to
track down more information]  OK folks. That's enough to keep you
going for the next couple of months !  Now you can appreciate the
sorts of problems UFOlogists have when they investigate close
encounter cases.  What would YOU do if a witness claimed that he
saw a spaceship land, disgorge four little entities and then
leave behind a circular trace whilst firing a ray gun at you ? 
Fear not, for we UFOlogists are searching for the answers.

Swangate Update

Regular readers will already know about the infamous Swangate
Hoax which has formed the basis of a number of articles in The
Cropwatcher.  This hoax has been renamed "Schnabelgate" in some
magazines.  It is not my intention to keep on devoting page after
page to this non-event, but nevertheless claims and counter-
claims are still being made as perpetrators  and victims attempt
to defend their respective corners. Here's all the latest
developments:-

A. HUFON REPORT

The Houston UFO Network's "HUFON Report" (April 1993) has
published the following letter from George Wingfield:- "Bill
Eatwell has mailed me a copy of a letter from Jim Schnabel which
he sent in response to a piece which I supplied for HUFON Report.
There are so many wild allegations and untruths in his letter
that I will not bother to respond to each one separately but I
feel that I must make a few observations.

What was printed in HUFON Report was the transcript of a
telephone conversation which Schnabel had with Armen Victorian,
and its accuracy has never been contested before (though part may
have been omitted since the conversation was incomplete). There
was also a short commentary by me. If Schnabel now claims that
the conversation was a "send up", as I had noted in the published
commentary, he has  absolutely no reason for complaint since it
was he who said these things. To bemoan that he was lying to
Victorian, and that every-one should have known that, and simply
accept what he says now is the truth, is really a most curious
complaint ! (It is also, as far as I can see, his only way out of
this most extraordinary mess which he has gotten himself into).

I commented that, in the taped conversation, Schnabel "reveals
his role as a paid government agent" and, whatever the validity
of the tape's content, I would not modify this assessment, though
I have no proof that he belongs to any particular group or
organisation.  Throughout 1992, he pursued this objective,
engaging in extensive circlefaking and attempts to mislead and
confuse CCCS and other circles researchers. Andrew Collins, the
respected author writing  in Earthquest News (Winter 1992), says
of Irving and Schnabel: 'They have used devious methods and
misinformation to achieve their goals and these have been
questioned on a number of occasions. They have even been accused
of creating hoaxed formations themselves, an accusation they have
never publicly denied, knowing that the screen of controversy
will allow them to increase their disinformation project and
cause further consternation among crop circle believers". Collins
should certainly know since he is a close friend of Irving, or at
least he was last summer.

Whether the infamous tape was itself intended as disinformation -
- a subtle blend of truth and fiction intended to mislead and
confuse -- is obviously open to speculation.   In Schnabel's
letter to HUFON  Report there are many outright lies [my
emphasis, PF] such as: - (1) the suggestion that I've said
Michael Green "practices  black magic" (absurd), (2) Claims  that
I have accused all sorts of  people of "espionage activity"
against me (ridiculous !), (3) "How can we get Schnabel?" (not
something I ever said to Irving), (4)  "that MUFON was part of
some conspiracy" (never!) (5) that "government agents were
following me to  crop circle lectures" (preposterous!), (6) etc.,
etc.

What I commented on,  regarding Schnabel, is there on the tape
and these things were things which he undoubtedly said, whatever
his explanation now. His claims about me are mostly total
fabrication [my emphasis, PF]. As for him being a "journalist for
several years", one must take that with a pinch of salt, since it
is based on a mere handful of articles which he has written for
newspapers. Less than six months ago he used to say  that he was
a student doing a Ph.D. course at Bath University, a description
he now seems to have been abandoned [sic]. There is no way that
he earns a living for himself  from journalism and, unless he is
a man of some personal wealth [sic]. One might easily wonder who
finances his activities in this country.

Perhaps Mr. Schnabel would like to give, for once, a straight
yes/no answer to the following questions: (1) Was he one of those
involved in making the large elaborate crop formation near
Froxfield (approx. O.S. Ref: SU273683) on the night of August 8/9
? (2) Does he have links with either of the religious groups, Pax
Romana or Opus Del ? 
This would provide a useful true/false result for further voice
stress analysis. Sincerely, G.W."  B.  MUFON  UFO  JOURNAL

A further round of correspondence has appeared in MUFON UFO
Journal No 298 (February 1993). In it Wingfield accuses Schnabel
and Irving of trying to "suppress a commentary and transcript" of
the Swangate tape that was about to appear in The Circular.
Strange, but I thought it was Michael Green who suppressed this
commentary, not Schnabel (obviously just a minor point George). 
Wingfield goes on to repeat his allegation of a secret government
meeting in September 1990 which allegedly decided to "debunk" 
crop circles in order to keep the ugly truth from the public. I
am sure that regular readers will agree with me when I state that 
to date Wingfield has published not one shred of tangible
documentary evidence to support this claim, despite the fact that
I challenged him to do so in CW9 (January/February 1992). In the
subsequent year Wingfield has continued to accuse anyone who
dares to suggest that numerous crop circles are hoaxes of being a
government agent ! We again challenge Wingfield to publish the
name of  the building where this Ministerial meeting allegedly
occurred,  the names of those present and the name of his
informer.  If necessary I will be happy to undertake a written
confidence.  My own enquiries produced denials from two of the
three Departments allegedly involved (the third never answered). 
Wingfield goes on to describe his April 1992 lunch with "four
gentlemen from the CIA" and his lecture to the U.S. Department of
Agriculture in Beltsville, MD.  This, in Wingfield's view,
confirms the US Government's "interest" in the crop circle
phenomenon. So, not only are there government agents trying to
keep the awful truth from the public but they go and give
themselves away to Chief Spy Hunter George Wingfield over a pizza
!!!  Next Wingfield accuses Schnabel, Irving and other un-named
researchers of faking a series of "at least 15 formations,
principally with a view to fooling and discrediting researchers
from the Centre for Crop Circle Studies". Now who on earth would
want to do a low-down trick like that ???

According to Wingfield Schnabel has "already admitted to his
circlefaking on a British TV program". Of course, regular readers
will know that Schnabel did no such thing on the "Equinox"
documentary, but this doesn't seem to have deterred Wingfield
from then alleging that Rob Irving accidentally produced a tape
recording where he admits to having made a formation at Alton
Barnes... "This may be used in evidence when charges of criminal
damage are brought by farmers against them".  

Wingfield finishes this series of serious defamatory allegations
by stating that "No one has actually said that [Schnabel] belongs
to the CIA, XYZ, or any other organization, but his curious
behaviour might well make one think so. Since he and Mr. Irving
have offered us little but hoax and deception [my emphasis, PF]
in 1992, it is hard to see his denials and disclaimers in the
Journal article as being different from what he has given us
already."  In his response Schnabel denies Wingfield's charge of
being a Catholic, an anti-paranormal zealot and an operative for
the CIA. He also accuses Wingfield of being "disingenuous" [what
a super word Jim] over his accusation that Schnabel and Irving
faked a series of 15 formations.  Schnabel denies admitting
(either on tape or the Equinox programme) that he was involved in 
circlefaking.  This fascinating argument seems set to run and run
for some time ....

C. Info-Paranet Newsletter Vol 1 No 630

This is part of the MUFON bulletin board system which can be
dialled up if you have a modem and a decent PC.  Henry Azadedel
has an article entitled "Disinformers, Deceivers and their
Legitimate Supporters" which was published on March 11th 1993 in
response to Schnabel's original MUFON UFO Journal article
"Confessions of a Crop Circle Spy". In this article
Henry/Victorian/Ntumba blames the publication of Schnabel's
article on Walt Andrus (International Director of MUFON) whose
"interference in this instance was the result of a long-standing
difference of opinion that exists between myself and his
management of MUFON." Victorian then alleges that Dennis Stacy,
Editor of the MUFON Journal, faxed a "ridiculous letter" to
Wingfield, but later apologised for being "drunk" when he wrote
it !  
Victorian continues his attack against MUFON...

"Equally condemning is the attitude and supportive platform MUFON
provides for self confessed tricksters like Jim Schnabel and
Robert Irving, who boast about what they have done and still do.
Which, in a sense, is very much reminiscent of what OSI did
through Bill Moore, for a decade, to the field.

"It is known by everyone in crop circle research that Irving-
Schnabel's joint covert activities have caused enormous damage to
both the farmers, who are desperately seeking for legal means to
prosecute the two [let's see some proof then. PF], and the crop
circle researchers themselves, whose research has suffered
irreparable damage." [quite !] 
Readers will no doubt be shocked to learn that Schnabel had
allegedly misled "leading" cerealogists [who, George ? Henry ?]
by "falsely" claiming to be a student studying sociology at
Lincoln College, Oxford. Having seen copies of some fascinating
correspondence from Michael Green to the Head of Schnabel's
former college at Oxford I can personally vouch for the falsity
of Henry's accusations, but Henry goes on....

"Then Schnabel published the most damning article in the
Independent Magazine in December 1991 about crop circles and
their researchers; and his true quest emerged. It became
immediately clear that Schnabel, by employing outright deceitful
tactics [my emphasis, PF], had fooled everyone about his genuine
intentions" [careful Henry, how do you prove someone's "genuine
intentions" ?]. Schnabel's honourable letter of apology to the
Beckhampton Group for his exposure of the hoaxer "Ron Smithers"
is then published in full  to further support Armen Victorian's
actionable allegations:-
"This was the beginning of an intensified campaign of
disinformation by Schnabel and his colleague Robert Irving. In
the following months they published more similar articles [????
PF]. Together with Robert Irving [sic], they donned camouflage
clothing and, with the help of the night, they created utter
havoc in the farmers fields and, thereby, further confusion
amongst the crop circle researchers about the number of hoaxed
formations in existence.  Ken Brown, who is currently writing a
book about the Doug and Dave affair, told me that several
meetings had taken place between Schnabel/Irving and Doug and
Dave, the former keen to further his knowledge of how to advance
hoaxing techniques." 
Doesn't this too sound like one more "cerealogist" who accepts -
at least in part - Doug and  Daves' claim of mass hoaxing ?
Victorian then claims that Jill Freeman, the Editor of the
"Equinox" crop circle documentary, told him that Irving and
Schnabel admitted to making "several"  crop circles by "illegally
entering into farm land and causing damage (to) crops".  Well,
several High Court Libel Actions later Victorian turns his
attention to Robert Irving. According to Victorian's research
Irving was "allegedly a member of the Second Church of Satan  in
the USA, or Friends of Hecarte in England, and his views on black
magic are widely known in England through a number of anonymous
Satanic letters he has written to a number of crop circle
researchers." Victorian goes on to allege that Irving carries a
very large knife with him "at all times" [he didn't the last time
I saw him, PF]  and that he admitted to being paid by an un-named
"foundation".
Like George it seems that all of Henry's spies also declare their
membership of shadowy intelligence agencies.  

Finally, and this is his coup-de-grace, Victorian publishes a
letter from an un-named American researcher who allegedly
encountered Irving in the Waggon & Horses.. This un-named
researcher states that:-

"Out of curiosity, I started up a conversation about the corn
circles. I wish I hadn't...  The guy with the hair (dressed
black) name was Bob (maybe Rob) Irvine (Bob Irving - author). He
was a psychopath. Suzie [his partner, PF] wanted us to leave,
because he was becoming very annoyed with my questions. I am of
the opinion that this guy had something very wrong with him, in a
psychological way. A nutter...

I don't know whether this means anything to you but I would stay
well away from this idiot, he seems dangerous to me.  Have you
heard of him ? "

Victorian ends his article by stating that in his telephone
conversations with Schnabel "His use of certain words left no
doubt in my mind about the length and the depth of the problem we
were faced with.  Some of the vocabulary he used is used only by
Intelligence officers or their recruits. In the course of  over
two decades that I have been engaged as a researcher within
Intelligence, only those  who have had an intelligence or related
career used terms such as "Burnt Out" in the context of their
conversations: "Its extremely  strenuous work and, you know,
sometimes people become BURNED OUT after only a few years...". He
also alleges that a voice-stress analysis conducted by an
"official government body in the U.S. has proved beyond any
shadow of doubt that he [Schnabel] spoke the truth in his
telephone conversations with me." Unfortunately Victorian doesn't
name the organisation that has apparently carried out this
irreproachable method of proving researcher's links with shadowy
intelligence agencies.

Victorian ends his article with a mighty swipe at Stacy and
Andrus, accusing them of being "punch-drunk editors" and "sleazy
directors" who have betrayed UFOlogy and left "the Schnabels
and Irvings [to] slaughter what is left of the field."  
Phew ! We'll keep you informed about this one....

D.  UFO Magazine

In vol 11 no 4 of "UFO Magazine" (the official publication of
"Quest International Publications Ltd"), Victorian goes on to
allege that Rosemary Ellen-Guiley of the Centre for North
American Crop Circle Studies (NACCS) is a member of a secret
group of intelligence agents known as the Aviary. The members of
this group are shown in the panel  at the top of this page.   
Now I presume that the three CIA operatives and David  Lemmons
are the four people George Wingfield went out to lunch with on
his trip to Washington D.C. last September.  It seems that these
secret undercover agents were foolish enough to declare their
membership of the CIA over a meal !!! Rule 1 for Spies - Never go
out to lunch with George Wingfield. 
"UFO magazine" also discusses a claim made by Victorian at the
September 1992 Quest Conference in Leeds (the one when Schnabel
challenged him about his conviction at the Old Bailey for being a
rare orchid smuggler).  I am very grateful to the IUN's Allan
Scathes for sending me a transcript of part of Victorian's
lecture at this conference. In it, Victorian plays a tape
recording of a conversation he has with someone who allegedly was
responsible for  archiving U.S. Presidential orders.  This person 
apparently confirms Victorian's suspicion that the MJ-12
documents (about the recovery of an alien  spaceship at Roswell,
New Mexico in 1947 by the U.S. Government) were apparently faked
[oh god,  how on earth can you go on living ?].  

E.  The Aquarium Conspiracy

This is another Paranet Bulletin Board article which is doing the
rounds - and its a real scream !!! The authors are Dan Smith and
Rosemary Ellen Guiley, both Directors of the Center for North
American  Crop Circle Studies, and they begin with "We stand
accused, according to various rumors that are circulating, of
being key figures in one of the greatest conspiracies ever to hit
the paranormal field. Well, golly, ... shucks, folks...". This
must be the most bizarre item I've seen for some time as both
seem quite happy for these rumours to continue swirling around
("Those who love rumors will continue to believe in them and
spread them, regardless of what we say"). Even more bizarrely,
both turn out to be members of  a group of eschatologists -
people studying the end of the world -and their project is "like
a Manhattan Project going on behind the scenes of alien grays 
and praying mantises having sex with humans".  Well, some people
get all the luck don't they ! It seems that crop circles are just
one part of a great "eschaton event" which is about to hit us...
"The Manhattan Project relative to the eschaton is a global
civilian network of people who will serve as a lightning rod for
the cosmic energies coming in during the consciousness
revolution. They will be looking to channel these energies into
expanded realities. Thus, they will provide a degree of
protection for those people who can find their places alongside
the network. Outside of the network there will be greater levels
of trauma and confusion." . You can say that again !  Turning to
now infamous "Lunch", this is what they have to say:  "Now
Wingfield comes along to stir the pot even more, talking about a
CIA lunch we three were at last year, showing in his lectures a
slide of Rosemary seated next to a member of the Aviary. The
implication is that this was the Big Approach to Compromise
George. Sorry, George, it ain't so..."

Apparently "The Lunch" was organised by Dan Smith as part of a
"networking effort". This took place on April 15th, 1992 at a
restaurant in Arlington, Virginia. "Besides ourselves and George,
participants included George's wife, Gloria, three employees of
the CIA and an outside colleague of theirs. None of us knew in
advance what would be discussed. Conversation centred on
eschatology, crop circles, and an explanation of the Aviary given
to George by 'The Pelican'... Afterward, George wondered what it
was all about. The answers are obvious, but they won't be found
in rumours....".

If readers wish to find out more about the "eschaton event",
write to P.O. Box 4766, Lutherville, MD 21094,  U.S.A.  Don't
forget to take your new reality with you.  F. The Circular
Interview

Finally, someone has kindly sent me a copy of George Wingfield's
editorial - the one Michael Green chopped from The Circular after
it had been printed.  I won't waste any more space on this long-
running farce, but the key statement is in paragraph three:  "In
the following candid-interview Schnabel reveals his work as a
paid disinformation agent working for an unnamed western
intelligence organisation."

This directly contradicts Wingfield's statement in his letter to
the MUFON UFO Journal, where he claims that "No one has actually
said that he belongs to CIA, XYZ, or any other organization, but
his curious behaviour might well make one think so."  
Presumably Wingfield forgot about this allegation (which, rather
fortuitously was never published) when he wrote his letter to
MUFON UFO Journal in January 1993.  The photographs that would
have appeared with this Editorial are (1) Jim Schnabel walking
away after receiving his prize for coming second in the
Cerealogist's circlefaking competition at West Wycombe, (2)  a
photo of Robert Irving, and (3) a photo of the Froxfield
formation.  Reading through Michael Green's ditched editorial for
the October 1992 issue of "The Circular" one is left in no doubt
that the Schnabel-Irving  Swangate hoax was accepted in full by
the CCCS hierarchy.  Of course, an organisation whose leading
illuminati fall for a hoax of this nature can never claim to be a
scientific research group genuinely seeking the truth behind an
anomaly, but Green still has a dam good try.  Despite his group's
demonstrable suppression of every single scrap of evidence which
proves that 

- most circles are man-made hoaxes (ie direct 
       confessions, multiple arrests, etc) , and that 
- a few may be created by an ill-understood 
       meteorological phenomenon (eye witness 
       testimony, etc),

Green continues to claim that CCCS is an organization conducting
proper scientific research in the grip of "well-funded, 
organised  activity" by a "highly proficient international
group... The CCCS has no doubt that further well-orchestrated
attempts will be made to destroy the crop circle subject in
public perception as a genuine phenomenon."  
Summary 

This  astonishing sequence of claim and counter-claim is all part
and parcel of how a small minority of so-called researchers
conduct themselves.  The crop circle conspiracy game has now
taken on new significance as a small group of alien-intelligence
believers at the very heart of the CCCS try to deny the reality
of mass crop-circle hoaxing. A variation on the MJ-12 Hoax is 
being invented in order to keep the crop circle myth from dying.
No opportunity is being spared in this bitter struggle to deny
what Schnabel and Irving discovered during their under-cover
activities in the Beckhampton Crop Circle Group.  In years to
come the untruths promoted in these sources will be used to
perpetuate a belief that crop circles have some exotic paranormal
causation.  The winners in this battle will be the flying saucer
believers who created the crop circle myth in the first place.
The losers will be the farmers and those people who pay good
money to buy books which suppress the slightest hint of the
numerous documented facts which detract from the flying saucer
solution.  Readers may think that in my writings I have developed
a feverish fixation with criticising and discrediting certain
members of the CCCS.  I refute this categorically.  More than
half my subscribers are CCCS members and I know quite a few of
them personally. In general they are relatively sensible people
who don't hold sensational views, want to know what's going on 
and who usually behave impeccably towards those of us who support
a rational solution.  The problem I have with the CCCS relates
solely to the activities of a few prominent members who
repeatedly make untrue statements to the press, who accuse their
opponents of embellishing evidence merely because witnesses
report seeing things these "leading cerealogists" would prefer
them not to see, who falsely claim the credit for other
researcher's work and who keep the facts about hoaxing and eye
witness testimony from the public. In this way a very small group
of people have perpetrated an Anomaly Fraud, what Doug Bower
calls the "conning of the people".  Normally UFO frauds involve
small amounts of money made by conning thousands of people into
buying books. In  the case of crop circles we have something
completely different, for the cerealogists have created a
mythology which is encouraging mass trespass and criminal damage
by hoaxers.  In my opinion the public promotion of this Fraud
will ultimately have to be defended in a Court of Law if
researchers like Armen Victorian and George Wingfield continue to
incite mass crop circle hoaxing merely to  reinforce their own
peculiar views about the world we live in.  Paul Fuller.




The Independent UFO Network presents

UFOs: Fact, Fraud or Fantasy ?

AN INTERNATIONAL UFO CONFERENCE AT
SHEFFIELD POLYTECHNIC,  MAIN BUILDING, POND STREET, SHEFFIELD,
SOUTH YORKSHIRE (100 yards from the Sheffield Library Theatre)
on
14th & 15th August 1993

Speakers at this year's conference include

400 seat fully air-conditioned lecture theatre. Refreshments.
Book, magazine & memorabilia stalls. A chance to meet the
speakers and generally have lots of UFOlogical fun.  Be there or
be square !

Further details and booking forms from Stu Smith, 15 Rydal
Street, Burnley, Lancashire, BB10  1HS.  Telephone 0282 24837.
Please enclose a sae.

News from Japan

Jun-Ichi Takanshi has sent me an English translation of his
"Japanese UFO Science Society" magazine, no 93, which contains
the disturbing news that only 3 formations appeared in Japan
during 1992 - and one of those was a confessed hoax ! According
to Takanshi's records, crop circles first appeared in Japan in
1990 (although Professor Ohtsuki reports at least 13 Japanese
circles between 1979 and 1989). During 1991 and 1992 Takanashi
believes that more than 300 circles appearing at over 40
different locations. Then, "just as if the mystery circles in
Japan realized their illegitimate origin and realized their
defeat, wanted to make their last bow, (so) in 1992, they
appeared in only two places in Japan". 
(1) A Mystery Circle Shaped Like A Man's Figure Appeared in A
Pasture (at Fukada-Machi, Kuma-gun, Kumamoto Prefecture).

A passer-by found a mystery circle in a pasture owned by
Tokutoshi Nasu (62) on the afternoon of January 27, 1992.
According to the local newspaper (reporter?)  Kumamoto Nichinichi
Shinbun, the single circle was 3 metres in diameter in a field of
grass 30 cms high.  There was a 10 metre long track (c 10-20 cms
wide ?) stretching from the circle then splitting into two
"opened legs". This line is crossed by two "arms", which "give
the impression of a man lying flat on his back in the pasture,
with both legs and hands outstretching on both sides".  The
passer-by informed the "Education Committee" (school ?) of the
circle and it caused a "considerable sensation" in the town. The
formation bore a distinct resemblance to the stick man at
Roundway Hill near Devizes in 1991. Perhaps we have some jet-
setting hoaxers ??

(2)  Two Mystery  Circles Appeared in an Uncultivated Field in
Kakogawa City, Hyogo Prefecture.

On the afternoon of May 11th, 1992, around 5 o' clock, two
circles were found in an uncultivated field by Mitsuko Koyama
(68), who was walking her dog. The clockwise circles were both
about 3 metres in diameter and separated a metre apart. They
appeared in 20 cm high vetch/weeds and despite the fact that it
had rained the previous day there was no trace of anyone having
entered the field. The local newspaper reported the discovery
with a large photograph. However,  as soon as the circles were
reported two junior high school boys came forward and confessed
to having made the circles. Their families visited their
neighbours to apologise. The boys claimed that one stood in the
centre with a pole whilst the other attached one end of a short
rope to the bottom of the pole  and the other end to his foot.
The circles were created by trampling. 

(3) Six circles found at Kisen-cho, Rikuzen-Takada City, Iwate
Prefecture. A news cutting reports the discovery of six circles,
all about 1.5-2 metres in diameter, found in an uncultivated
field on December 7th from north Japan. The circles were
separated by about 2 metres and were discovered by a workman who
reported seeing similar circles in a nearby field  on December
6th. No photograph or details of these other circles was
published. Takanshi reports that these circles were "rough" with
no characteristically sharp edges. This, he concedes, could
indicate a natural origin.

Takanshi has promised to send us further information about the
Tanaka/Kikuchi eye witness case described in CW13.  In the
meantime he has sent me a colour photograph of a "tin can"
allegedly photographed by Roger Beard (exact spelling not known)
which was shown on Japanese TV on September 30th. This resembles
the film shown on BBC TV "Daytime Live" a few years ago which I
believe was taken at Westbury. If readers know anything more
about the Westbury film please let me know so that we can
determine the authenticity of  these films. Our thanks to
Takanshi for his help.

If you want a copy of this material write to Jun-Ichi Takanshi,
C.P.O. Box No 1437, Osaka, 530-91; JAPAN. 

News from John Stepkowski in Victoria, Australia. Keith
Basterfield reports that  despite its national collecting network
the UFO Research Australia team has received not one single
report of a crop circle during the 1991/92 growing season.
Obviously this doesn't auger well for a "natural" anomaly and
only lends credence to the Skeptics' view that all crop circles
are hoaxes.

Archie Roy Speaks on Crop Circles at the Edinburgh Science
Festival  According to "The Guardian" (April 22 1993) "The
Edinburgh Science Festival - which ends on Saturday - was always
marked by solemn irrelevance. Last night Professor Archie Roy of
Glasgow was contemplating the search for extra-terrestrial
intelligence and the awful thought that an advanced civilisation
on Proxima Centauri might be watching episodes of Saturday Night
Clive broadcast four year ago. "There is a sphere, expanding at
the speed of light and centred on the Earth, which is carrying at
the front of it the first instalments of Coronation Street and
also the very heavy Distant Early Warning radar signals. And what
another intelligent species would find is that the star we call
the Sun would be anomalously bright in the short wave radio
region; they would argue that this was unusual and they would
argue that this was unusual, and they would be able to detect one
year modulation as a result of the Earth going round the Sun."
After which, they might be looking for us. 
"They might even have left a message. At a different lecture
Professor Roy took up the theme of crop circles. 'So many people
have looked upon them as validating their pet theories - the
landing pads of UFOs, complex symbols of the earth's distress at
pollution and so on,' he said. 'Others, who are rather less
ambitious, think it could be hundreds of hedgehogs stamping
round in circles'."

If readers have any further details about Roy's lecture I'd be
very happy to publish selected excerpts to see how many eye
witness accounts/multiple arrests of hoaxers/historical cases 
were disseminated to the public by the CCCS' most famous
supporter.  FIRE IN THE SKY

Both MUFON UFO Report and The HUFON REPORT carry articles
reviewing  the Paramount Pictures movie "Fire in the Sky", which
is the movie version of the famous Travis Walton case of 1975. 
For those of you who are unfamiliar with the story, Walton was a
member of a logging team who allegedly encountered a bright light
in an Arizona forest. The "UFO" emitted a brilliant light that
struck Walton before lifting him up several feet in the air and
then slamming him down. In blind panic the loggers abandoned
their colleague and drove off in their tipper truck. Returning
only minutes later Walton has disappeared. Despite a widespread
search no trace of Walton could be found. FIVE DAYS LATER Walton
staggered into the nearby village of Snowflake and told his story
of being taken aboard a flying saucer. Then the fun really began
!

The case has been billed by Paramount as the "true story" of an
"alien abduction", a claim various members of CSICOP have tried
to have removed from bill posters advertising the film. According
to the HUFON Report, the film is less of a dramatic
reconstruction of  an alleged UFO event and more of a study of
the effect of Walton's claim on the local community and the
witnesses.  The MUFON UFO Journal (February issue) carries
Walton's own views on the way he was treated by the skeptics. 
"Fire in the Sky" will be released in Britain on June 25th. We'll
try to evaluate the case itself when the film is released. 
Police Helicopter Encounters UFO

The April issue of the HUFON UFO Report also carries a brief
description of what sounds like an important UFO case.  According
to the Louisville Courier-Journal, two police officers piloting a
helicopter encountered a glowing pear-shaped UFO the size of a
basketball which literally flew in circles around the helicopter,
which was flying at speeds of up to 100 mph.  According to the
account the UFO was first sighted close to the ground and
resembled a bonfire. Officer Kenny Graham shone a 1.5 million
candlepower spotlight on the light and it slowly floated up to
the helicopter's height (500 ft) where it hovered for several
seconds. "Then it took off at a speed I've never seen before",
Graham reported. The UFO made two huge counter-clockwise loops
and then approached the helicopter from its rear. As Graham
pushed the helicopter speed over 100 mph the UFO shot past and
then instantly climbed hundreds of feet into the air. Then the
UFO descended and flew near the helicopter before emitting three
baseball-sized fireballs from out of its middle towards the
helicopter. The fireballs fizzled into nothing. As the helicopter
banked away the UFO disappeared.  Intriguingly two police
officers on the ground also saw the UFO although only one saw the
three fireballs. Officer Joe Smolenski tried to chase the UFO in
his patrol car but soon gave up !   The encounter occurred at
12.30 am in the morning over the General Electric Appliance Park
(hmmm).  Curiously security staff at the Park only saw the police
helicopter, not the UFO. In addition nothing turned up on radar
at the local airport. Pilot Graham (39) had been flying for 11
years whilst his co-pilot Kenny Downs (also 39) had been flying
for 5 years.  Rick Lasher of the National Weather Service
dismissed  the possibility that the helicopter had encountered
a "lightning ball" or a meteorological fireball. It had been
snowing earlier in the evening but this stopped at 7:48.
Temperatures were in the 20s, the solid cloud cover was beginning
to disperse and no thunder or electric storms were reported. A
university professor ruled out a meteorite whilst a professor of
mechanical engineering ruled out any known aircraft. Instead he
suggested that possibly the pilots may have misconstrued
reflections created by the snow and heavy atmospheric conditions. 
Well, if the facts were as reported this would really be a
cracking case. However, The Crop Watcher's international  fame
and influence extends so far that we actually have two
subscribers in Louisville - Erik and Mary Albrektson - who have
kindly sent us the following information recalled from their
local press reports:-

"About 3 days after the enclosed article appeared, a local couple
contacted the paper and informed them that, somewhat to their
embarrassment, they were responsible for the incident. It seems
that this young couple had a fairly long and well established
history of constructing small hot air balloons from balsa wood
and plastic dry cleaner bags. They would assemble these items,
place several small birthday cake candles inside, and launch a
homemade hot air balloon. A rather odd hobby perhaps, but
nevertheless a hobby that was confirmed by neighbours. They
reside in the immediate vicinity of the incident. 
They reported that on the evening of the 'dogfight' they had
launched one of these balloons and then watched in amazement as a
police 'copter flew into the area and appeared to 'investigate'
the balloon. They saw the copter direct a high-intensity
searchlight onto the balloon, circle around and then fly off into
the night. They did not think the incident particularly
newsworthy until they learned of the UFO report some time later. 
The police officers have refused to back down from their story
that they saw something other than a small hot air balloon. The
entire affair totally disappeared from the papers with the
publication of the 2nd story. The impression was left that the
police department and particularly the officers involved were
extremely embarrassed and wanted to distance themselves from it
ASAP."

Well ! What an astonishing revelation.  Is it really possible
that two "veteran" pilots could really be fooled into believing
that they had fought a "dog-fight" with a small lighted laundry
bag ? If so this would extend the boundaries of professional
fallibility right off the end of the scale.  But let's examine
the report to see if we can see if the facts agree with the
explanation. To begin with the pilot's description of the way the
UFO slowly floated upwards as he shone his searchlight on it fits
very well with a small lighted balloon. We might speculate that
on reaching 500 feet the balloon would be caught inside the
horizontal cork-screw vortex that surrounds all aircraft as they
move through the air - this vortex would presumably suck the
balloon through two large loops, thus giving the impression that
the helicopter was being chased. After such violent movement the
balloon might have simply collapsed, thus accounting for the
UFO's rapid disappearance. In short the hot air balloon makes an
excellent explanation. But what about the 3 tiny fireballs ? And
would such a flimsy contraption remain fully-lighted when being
swirled around at 100 mph ?  We will keep you informed on this
one. Thanks are due to Erik and Mary for their kind help.

Miscellanea

Finally,  and I've wanted to say this for quite some time,  I'd
like to make it clear that we too never believed those vicious
stories about Jason Donovan, the well known "massive hetero-
sexual figure".  Jason is clearly a real man/stud and anyone who
dares to suggest otherwise deserves to have the pants sued off
them (??) in the High Court.  And as for John Major's Libel
action against The New Statesman, well if we can't comment on
things which have already been published elsewhere just what is
the world coming to ?  
THE CROP WATCHER

The Crop Watcher is an independent non-profit-making magazine
devoted to the scientific study of crop circles and the social
mythology that accompanies them. All articles are copyright to
the authors and should not be reproduced without obtaining
written permission from the authors. Articles appearing in The
Crop Watcher do not necessarily reflect the views of the Editor
or other contributors.  Contributors are always welcome to submit
articles for publication and will receive free copies of The Crop
Watcher in return.  Offers of exchange magazines are always welcome.

ADVERTISMENTS

High quality aerial photographs of crop circles available from
Richard Wintle, Calyx Photo News, Marlborough House,  26 High
Street, Swindon, Wiltshire, SN1  3EP. Telephone 0793-520131 and
ask for Julie.

Quality aerial photographs of the 1992 Wiltshire formations. 6" x
4" = # 1.25. Posters also available. For a full list and detailed
description please send a sae to Anthony Horn, 23 Sea View Drive,
Scarborough, North Yorkshire, YO11  3HY.

The Crop Watcher is printed by Northern Arts Publishing, Roper
Lane, Thurgoland, South Yorkshire. S30  7AA. Telephone 0742
883235.

SUBSCRIPTIONS

The Crop Watcher is published six times a year and costs # 1.50
to UK subscribers and # 2.50 to overseas subscribers. A full
year's subscription costs # 9.00 to UK subscribers and # 15.00
sterling for overseas subscribers.  Please make cheques payable
to "Paul Fuller" (not "The Crop Watcher").  Overseas
subscribers should not send cheques drawn on overseas banks. 
Cheques drawn on banks which are not part of the British clearing
system attract a commission of about # 10 per cheque. 
Subscriptions can also be sent via an International Money Order. 
A limited number of back issues are available.  All
correspondence should be sent to Paul Fuller, 3 Selborne Court,
Tavistock  Close, ROMSEY, Hampshire,   SO51  7TY. 
RECOMMENDED PUBLICATIONS

"Crop Circles, A Mystery Solved" by Jenny Randles and Paul Fuller
(Robert Hale Ltd), # 5.99 pb. A new and extensively updated
edition will be published in 1993.  MAGAZINES   FEATURED  IN 
THIS  ISSUE:

GEM, Gloucestershire Earth Mysteries, PO Box 258, Cheltenham,
Gloucestershire, GL53  0HR  (sample issue # 2.75).

HUFON REPORT, PO Box 942, Bellaire, Texas 77402-0942, United
States of America.  $ 2 plus p&p. per issue.

MUFON UFO JOURNAL, 103 Oldtowne Road, Seguin, Texas 78155-4099,
United States of America. Subscription  for UK residents $ 30 per
year for 12 issues.  Japan UFO Science Society Newsletter. Jun-
Ichi Takanashi, C.P.O. Box No 1437, Osaka, 530-91; JAPAN. 


Northern UFO News, 37 Heathbank Road, Cheadle Heath, Stockport,
Cheshire, SK3  0UP. Six for # 7.

Stop Press: Yes, we too have just read George Wingfield's
allegations about supporters of the "plasma-vortex theory" being
involved in hoaxing in  Tim Good's new book.  We will be issuing
a full statement denying these false allegations in our next
issue and are taking legal advice.