Archive | June 2016

A Beginner’s Guide To Circle Killing

In an odd way I’m relieved that someone other than Matt Williams is being a muppet at the moment, as it gives me something else to write about. Matt is getting rather tiresome, and my posts do start to feel like a broken record at times. He has dominated this blog too much of late.

Some of you will be aware of a new crop circle Facebook page, entitled Clandestine Esoterical [sic.] Mysterious Universe (and which came up in my post Staggering Hypocrisy # 2 – readers of that post will see that Matt Williams and I agree on something). Here’s CEMU’s most recent Facebook post:-

CEMU 30 June 16

This is the second time they’ve done this, post pictures of a circle with the location withheld, and hold competitions to guess the locations from cryptic clues. And the purpose of this exercise is what, exactly, gentlemen?

“We have been informed…” they say. No they haven’t. They made it. Make a circle, tease its location, turn it into a guessing game. What is the point of that?  And with the game becoming the focus, the circle itself is relegated to an afterthought. Will anybody care about this circle by season’s end? Will it even be remembered?

Have you guys forgotten the essential tenets of circle making? As I’ve quoted elsewhere on this blog from ‘goatboy’ on the Crop Circle Connector forum, “Enter field. Make circle. Leave field. Shut the fuck up.” And that’s really all there is to it. Once you’ve made the circle you have to distance yourself from it totally, allow it to succeed or fail on its own merits. Teasers and guessing games do it no favours at all, and only draw attention to the fact that you made it.

No one cares about circles they know are, or which can be proven to be, man-made. People like mystery. People like circles that have mystery. It’s in that ambiguity, that space between, that circles thrive. At the end of the season, Clandestine Esoterical [sic.] Mysterious Universe’s circles will just be remembered as “that bunch of hoaxers who played games about the locations of their hoax circles”. No one will give a damn.

Advertisements

Staggering Hypocrisy # 3

Ah, Matthew Williams, the “gift” that keeps on giving…  In my last post, I highlighted Williams’ criticism of the Clandestine Esoterical Mysterious Universe page, and his accusation of their making then self-promoting circles, and in the process killing any mystery. Within days, on 24 June, that piece-of-crap shark crop circle appeared at Hackpen Hill. An article appeared on The Plymouth Herald website the very same day, featuring an interview with Williams in which he celebrated the circle as circle maker support for the EU exit.

http://www.plymouthherald.co.uk/crop-circle-celebrating-eu-referendum-result-discovered-in-wheat-field/story-29439401-detail/story.html

shark 1

shark 2

shark 3

shark 4

shark 6

I hate crop circles like this. Clearly a joke, proclaiming their “look at us, aren’t we clever!” hoaxer nature, taking the piss not just out of themselves but the poor farmer whose field it happens to be,too. Unsurprisingly, Williams loves it.

The interview with Williams, although short, is so stuffed full of crap it’d need an industrial-strength laxative to clear it out.

“…a massive crop circle.” – No it isn’t. Judging by the tramlines, it’s barely 150′ if that.

“Local Matthew Williams, 45, was stunned when he discovered the cheeky circle while out flying his drone.” – No, he didn’t. The people who made it told him it was there.

“It clearly shows proud British fish swimming free despite being circled by EU sharks.” – No it doesn’t. It clearly shows two sharks, around a Celtic trinity symbol. Who says the centre motif represents fish? Nothing “clearly” about it at all. For all you know, it could “clearly” show sharks circling followers of Celtic faiths or Wiccans (who use said symbol for spiritual reasons). My personal theory is that shows a sharknado, with the trinity symbol representing the eye of the storm. Or is it “clearly” because that’s what your mates told you after they made it?

“The three fish in the middle represent Britain, staying strong and representing the terrifying Eurocrat sharks” – Do they now? Besides, see above – it isn’t even clear that the centre motif represents fish, let alone symbolises Britain. And let’s say it does symbolise Britain – what has that got to do with fish? Fish are not a thing synonymous with Britain, therefore the symbolism is far from clear. And “terrifying Eurocrat sharks”? Matt, have you been reading the Daily Mail again?

[Addendum: Since first posting this article, it has been pointed out to me that the triquetra is both a Celtic symbol and early Christian one, and can thus be seen as representing Celtic Christianity. In this context, the triquetra can also be seen to symbolise fish. My thanks to Nurit Nardi].

[Addendum # 2: I’ve since also been informed, by a source close to the maker, that the ‘sharks’ circle had nothing to do with the EU exit at all, and that this is merely Williams’ interpretation of it).

Williams has used circle forums to promote his support of the EU exit, and the political party UKIP, previously, but this time round he doesn’t just take the biscuit, he scoffs the whole packet and leaves the wrapper behind for everybody else to see. Here’s a screenshot from when he was helping UKIP in local elections, in April 2015:

mw ukip

Williams’ support for UKIP was praised by Mike Davies, who as some of you may know is the former husband of Sue Davies. Sue is a close associate of Andrew Pyrka and Report A Crop Circle Formation, and “totally not co-admin of Crop Circles The People The Mystery The Truth”.

MD racist

What a vile man… Mike and Sue, when they were still a couple, are known to have been members of the BNP. I’ve highlighted racism and xenophobia in the crop circle community in previous posts, especially with regard to the despicable persecution of Monique Klinkenbergh. Please see in particular my post ET Go Home.

dutch

RACCF racism

Keith Walkin, barely-literate-and-ignorant-views-for hire-extraordinaire, who some of you will know from the many Facebook crop circle pages he frequents, can’t resist joining in either, in his fondness for both Sue Davies and for her foul views.

10308240_716168051755403_4474016313474049460_n

10322833_716111665094375_2257568217427797145_n

Sue was of course also at one point shacked up with Roger Wibberley, who once referred to posters on Report A Crop Circle Exposed as “the lower breeds”. Roger has strenuously denied this, but his words were captured by Crop Circles Anonymous as can be seen here.

13595719_10209915355304378_1811578926_n

Jeez, this crop circle stuff can be nasty at times. I feel like I need to go and  take a shower after writing that lot.

Staggering Hypocrisy # 2

From Report A Crop Circle Formation, 19 June 2016 (screen captures courtesy of my friends at The Croppie – their article is well worth reading, too, and makes many of the same points I would).

clan2.fw_-1

clan3.fw_

Whack! Pop! Whack!

In my last post I likened dealing with Matthew Williams to playing whack-a-mole. No sooner has one dealt with one thing than the numpty springs up again somewhere else. Whack! Pop! Whack! Just after posting, the following article appeared on Yahoo.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/can-you-see-something-wrong-with-these-crop-115137141.html

yahoo matt crap

yahoo matt crap 2

yahoo matt crap 3

yahoo matt crap 4

Sigh. Is it even worth countering all this cobblers? Sometimes I really don’t have the enthusiasm, but I do think it important, if only for the historical record, that an alternative perspective is available. That is one of the purposes of this blog.

As I’ve mentioned before, a key element of Williams’ criticism of circles is his not knowing who made them or where they came from. There’s nothing wrong with these particular circles. They’re fine, and all par-for-the-course. The Silbury Hill and first Mere ones are rather lovely, and I also have quite a fondness for the East Field singleton.

Since Williams is so quick to criticise other people’s work, I think it worth taking another look at the calibre of circles he is capable of, from his nineties oeuvre.

1999 July 31 Avebury Janet_Ossebaard

1999 June 19 Silbury Steve_Alexander

1994 July 23 Steve_Alexander.jpg

1999july17silburyhill

1999april30woodboroughhill

1999june12allcannings

1999july21bishopscannings

Quite a difference in quality. Notice that I didn’t include the famed Bishops Cannings “Basket” of 1999. Williams’ claim to it is baloney. Sure, he may have been there, helping out, but that’s a long way from it being his circle to claim. A look at the aerials should easily demonstrate this. It’s in a whole other league compared to what we know he can muster.2013.01.11_20.53.46_-_Ulrich_Kox

Also of note in this article is the sentence “Despite having made circles himself for about 20 years, he’s steered clear of making them ever since he became the first person successfully prosecuted for the offence”, the two parts of which flatly contradict each other. Williams’ first claimed circle was in 1991. “About 20 years” takes us to 2011. Williams’ prosecution was in 2000. It’s been said before that his claim to have ceased circle making following his prosecution is a lie (it is), and this would seem oblique confirmation.

Whack! Pop! Whack! I doubt it’ll be long before the chump is back for more.

Staggering Hypocrisy

One would think that after the smacking he receives every season (literally so last year) Matt Williams would have gotten the point by now, but every spring the guy pops back up like a whack-a-mole. Making the same arguments which have been proven to be bullshit, and utterly oblivious to the fact that much of the croppie scene considers him a bollocks-talking troublemaker who has brought nothing but destruction to a subject they hold dear.

He seems to have moved away from talk of any Wiltshire boycotts this time round – perhaps even he’s having difficulty putting a pro-Matt spin on the fact that every single UK circle so far this year has been in Wilts. He’s also shut up about Monique Klinkenbergh and the “circles being cut is all her fault” lie he’s been spouting for the last three years, having finally admitted late last season and by-the-by that it wasn’t true. Is he going to apologise to Monique? No. Why? Because – in his words – “she’s a cunt”.

So what’s got him in a lather now? Circles he considers wonky. Same old. Matt, no one cares. What’s more, you don’t care either.

wonk 7 june 16

wonk 18 jun 16

Why do I say that? Because, Matt, if you really cared, you’d have posted a similar YouTube video and RACCF criticism regarding that piece-of-crap bird circle from last July, instead of heaping praise upon it as you did (see my post Flippin’ The Bird). These circles get ripped apart for alleged imprecision, whereas your mates can bang out any old shite and get patted on the back for it. It’s got nothing to do with wonky circles. It’s because these two 2016 circles weren’t reported to you. Because you don’t know who made them. Because you imagine them the work of people you’ve fallen out with. Because, Matt, as ever you’re more transparent than a window.

Even the Connector can’t help themselves this time round, as exhibited by their latest and breathtakingly hypocritical post:

june16-2016-fake1

I’m guessing the ‘RC’ initial here is Red Collie. It’d be too much to expect the Connector admins to actually put something together themselves instead of merely posting things other people send them. Collie, you do know that most of the other circles which the Connector gets the exclusive on are made by Matt’s mates and reported directly to him so he can photograph them, don’t you?