2.
The next circle is defined by an enclosed pentagon.
2.
The next circle is defined by an enclosed heptagram.
4.
The next circle is defined by an enclosed octagram.
5.
And finally, the smallest circle is defined by an enclosed nine-pointed
star.
So the "extra" circle can be used to show
how the positioning of both the tumuli and the crop circle (and
even the size of the formation) are based on pure euclidian geometry!
Can this be a coincidence? If we just talk about
the tumuli, what is the chance that they would be accidentally
positioned inside a circle, so that their locations are based
exactly on a seven-pointed star, an eight-pointed star and a nine-pointed
star - in that order (from outside in)?
Well,
if that's not a coincidence, the following must be. The horizontal
black line shows the direction of the tramlines (they're not visible
because the image has been reduced so much in size). The tumuli
are located along the blue line. The angle between these is 20
degrees.
Incidentally, this coincides with the angle of one
of the star points (thick red line), when the nine-pointed star
is placed to an "upright" position compared to the tramlines.
20 degrees of course is one18th part of a full circle
(360 degrees), and it is also the angle of each point of the nine-pointed
star. However, I guess we are not supposed to believe that the
farmer, when making the tramlines, was aware of the geometrical
positioning of the tumuli??
Conclusions
Did the creators of the crop circle make the necessary
measurements to have this outcome? Where they guided to start
their work at the correct spot? Is it all a coincidence? Have
I made a mistake in my studies?
Perhaps the crop circle is genuine. If so, then
we should accept at least the fact, that genuine crop circles
are not always very tidily executed. What ever is the truth, I'm
quite satisfied with the "controversial" results of
my research on this crop formation. To me it is one more sign
of the multidimensional nature of the phenomenon: No matter how
apparently a formation seems to be man-made, it does not necessarily
lack a hidden geometrical intelligence.
I'm prepared to believe that the pattern was laid
down by the hands and feet of mortal human beings, but they unwittingly
took part in a co-operation with "higher" intelligent
forces. I'm likewise prepared to believe the pattern was created
by these higher force alone. Yet it was in co-operation with the
landscape features - most obviously those created by people. So
either way you look at it, it's a co-operation. Isn't it just
marvelous? :)
Martin Keitel, Aug 5, 2003