Bishops Cannings, Wiltshire 08.06.09 - Barley
This beautiful and inventive formation was quickly smeared as man-made, as always without a shred of evidence.

During the 1998 crop circle season I was approached by John Vidal, a journalist with the Guardian newspaper who wanted to put together an article on the crop circles. I was a Guardian reader and I knew John Vidal’s work. He reports for the paper on environmental issues and he had written some outstanding material.

The hoax claimants were very active at that time. They would produce trademarks and logos for advertisements - making substantial money. They would simulate crop circles for debunking documentaries, again making a great deal of money and they would produce the occasional “hoax”.

I have no evidence that they were paid for this, but in any case, their endeavours in this area were pathetic and readily identifiable. Certainly, though their skills at stamping and manipulating crop had improved year by year, their design skills were shockingly limited.

They relied for their success on the two dominant characteristics of the average croppie. First, their poor discernment in visual and material matters; any area of flattened crop could be considered a beautiful formation. Second, their absolute belief in the veracity of any sentence which containing the words “hoax” or “man-made”.  

It is the latter one which they so skilfully exploit. Whenever did you hear of a confidence trickster who was not plausible? They are very good at persuasion and, over the years, I have seen many good people turned by their lies.

Because of  this I made it clear to Vidal that I could help him only if he undertook to stay away from the hoax claimants. I could only speak honestly but I knew that my adversaries were utterly without conscience. They would lie as necessary.

Of course, John Vidal gave me the assurances I was seeking but, in reality, the article when published was, essentially, a hoaxers manifesto. Vidal became their mouthpiece and believed and reported only that which they told him.

I must confess here that I was warned. “Don’t trust him” my friends said. “He’s a journalist. They’re all the same. He’ll stitch us up.”  In my optimism and naivete I trusted him.

They were right. It was a complacent, prejudiced and disgusting article and I wrote a sharp letter to John Vidal complaining of his deceit. Of course, there was no reply.

We move forward to the present. A few weeks ago I was called by a photographic agency called “Picture It Now”. They said that they could help me publicise my book, “The Bones of God” and they wanted to know if they could use the images. I gave them Steve Alexander’s number and they approached him to secure the pictures, suggesting throughout that they intended to promote “Bones”.  (We should note here that Steve, having been caught before in this kind of scam, normally works through his own agency who have been well briefed.)

Imagine, then, my horror when on Friday 5th June, eleven years after the first disaster, the Guardian published another Vidal article debunking the circles.

It was as sloppy a piece of journalism as the 1998 article. That it was essentially no more than another piece of spurious propaganda by an enthusiastic mouthpiece and tool of the hoax crew was confirmed by both the lies and the language. We were told (and this will come as a surprise to many readers) that “the last two summers have been terrible”. The reason for this, again we are told, is the death of three people, who, by implication were hoaxers. Both of these statements are untrue and Vidal should be ashamed  for accepting them unchecked.

The source of this nonsense is confirmed by the language. We are referred to as “believers”, a pejorative word used only by hoaxers. And, as always, there is a cheap shot implying that our interest in the phenomenon is financial. It is suggested that a good aerial picture can make tens of thousands of pounds. Both of these are foul lies. Every crop circle researcher I know is under financial pressure and - as a journalist - Vidal should know (or could quickly find out) the market value of a single aerial shot. Meanwhile, if our activity is to be condemned by its commercialism, why did this investigative reporter not point out that the “circlemakers” earn substantial sums trivialising the circles for advertising projects for the likes of Nike, Pepsi and Big Brother. Shame on him. Shame on them.                                     

Then, a week later, the Express, another national daily, published an article so sloppy and so transparently inaccurate that it could curl the hair of a discerning reader. It informed us for example that the Silent Circle Cafe was owned by the Wiltshire Crop Circle Study Group. I am sure that both Francine Blake and Charles Mallett will be enlightened by this.

What is happening here and what can we learn?

This season has started explosively in both number and quality of formations.

The newspapers initially published pictures with little comment but, as the phenomenon became more insistent and more undeniable the debunking began.

Whatever the Crop Circles might mean or suggest or imply there can be little doubt that they are now knocking more insistently on our door. Does the fact that two major British daily newspapers have taken the time and trouble to publish scoffing pieces suggest that there might be a media conspiracy to belittle the phenomenon?

Ross Holcomb has said that a lighted match will start to illuminate the darkest of rooms. Each year, our own dark space is illuminated by the arrival of circles. Many of us cannot stand the glare, avert their gaze and simply deny the evidence of their eyes. I pity them.

I pity the sad fakers and liars whose greatest skill is deception and whose highest aspiration is the delusion of others.

Most of all I pity those supposed members of this community who themselves cannot stand the glare and who, for their own comfort, promote lunatic and unjustifiable fantasies about man-made circles and paranoid fantasies about others in the community.

Every time they pronounce “man-made” they are trying to strike a darkness match to defeat the brightness. Every time they say “hoax” they are trying desperately to add a little gloom. They cannot win. They have already lost.

Remember the first axiom. EVERYTHING you ever hear about a hoax is a lie. When you next hear some saddo condemning a formation, challenge him. Simply ask him to prove it. He never will. He never can.

MG