CIRCLE SURVEY 2003-2004
to learn about the amount of man-made crop circles in the period of
Results of the Survey
I have now updated the survey results to include entries
that didn't make it to the previous results. Also I've added graphic
charts to display the results better.
Here are the percentages of manmade, non-manmade (genuine)
and non-detected (can't say) formations, summing up all 112 UK formations
selected from the years 1996-2003.
Total number of participants 27.
You can see that the number of genuine formations
is just slightly larger than manmade ones. So the general opinion
of 27 people is that 48 crop circles out of 112 are made by something
else than people plus 25 more possibly so. Although this is meaningful,
more meaningful is the following:
Total number of reseachers 13.
This chart shows the opinions of researchers. You
can see that the percentages of genuine and manmade formations are
very close to each other. This might be a disappointment to some,
but consider this: People who consider themselves experts on the
crop circle phenomenon have the opinion that more than a third of
the crop circles in England during 1996-2003 were made by some other
force than human beings. In other words, out of these 112 formations
(representing just a fraction of all formations during that period)
they consider 39 formations to be genuine in this sense.
Now let's compare this to the results of crop circle
enthusiasts and amateurs:
You can see a clear difference here. Amateurs who
have no idea of how complex crop circles can be made by human beings
are more inclined to see them as the creations of some other force.
It is also noteworthy that amateurs' opinions are more defined: Although
I emphasized that you should consider a formation genuine or manmade
only if you have apparent reason to think so, only an average of 18
% of the formations was placed in the cathegory of "can't say"
by this group. The corresponding result for researchers was almost
28 %. This, in my opinion gives more credibility for the researchers
and indicates that they have a healthy level of criticism; it is not
a piece of cake to determine the origin of a crop circle if you have
not done good research on it.
Finally, here are my own results, which are not too
far from the general opinion of researchers. I have placed more formations
in the man-made cathegory, but I'm pleased to find that my expectations
for the amount of genuine formations was matched by the average opininion
of other researchers.
However, the researchers were far from unanimous.
Number of participants: 24
Participant personal information
Holistic approach 17
Spiritual approach 5
Scientific approach 3
Other European 11
Under 20 years 1
20-39 years 11
40-59 years 13
60+ years 2
Average opinions on crop circle origins (as
(See opinions on all plates starting from next
|Genuine crop circles (options 1 and 2)
|Manmade circles (options 4 and 6)
|Genuine with half of "can't say"
|Manmade with half of "can't say"