“NEW” PHOTOGRAPHIC EVIDENCE FOR A COMPLEX PHENOMENON PRIOR TO DOUG AND DAVE (Dieser Artikel liegt bis auf weiters nur in Englisch vor...)

By Andreas Müller with historical photographs by David Kingston
September 2, 2006

Update: 06.09.2006

PRELIMINARY AUTHOR'S NOTE
Since the following article went online on September 3, 2006, it has
generated a huge feedback of interest and comments.

I have in the interim, however, discovered that two of the photos - Fig 8 and Fig 9 - actually feature formations from a later period (albeit in the same locale!) then that originally attributed to them in the article. (The chapters about Fig. 8 and 9 had been already taken out of the article to avoid further confusion.)

Although every attempt was made to ensure the photos David provided had not been confused with others from a later period, unfortunately in this instance a mistake has been made.

David acknowledged the error and in another long consultation with him about this situation he has given me absolute assurance that there is no confusion with regards the three other photographs featured in the article ie. Fig 2, 3 and 7.

Update: 06.09.2006...a few ours later:

E-mail by David:
"Since our telephone conversation of yesterday I have received numerous ABUSIVE and HATE emails. Calling me a confidence trickster, a liar, Those are some of the milder language that was used.

It has deeply upset me and I haven't been able to sleep, I usually go to bed early. My telephone has rung twice and there was no one there. As a result, my health not being too good I am instructing you to remove ALL of my photographs from your web site.

I appreciate your article was important to you and I am sorry for any inconvenience this will cause you but I CAN NOT take any more of this. PLEASE remove my photographs now."

With respect to David, his important research and contrubution to the research of the phenomenon I have respected his wish and took the article ofline.

Update: 15.09.2006
Author's (A.M.) Reply to some raised questions on the article within the cropcircleconnector -forum:

http://cropcircleconnector.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1772
http://cropcircleconnector.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1775

I have read some of the forum follow up to my article on the forum and I would just like to clarify a few of the points raised. I apologise for not being an active forum member, however I hope this post will answer some of your queries. I am always happy to answer emails where possible and I can be contacted through my website.

Firstly, I am sorry that my original article needed to be amended after just a few hours on line. However, I must point out that it was me that discovered that David had mistakenly attributed photographs of two later formations to the earlier one's he had meant to illustrate - rather than my attention being drawn to them by forum members. Although I had spent many hours searching through archives to ensure that a mistake like this wasn't made, unfortunately on this occasion I didn't notice the error until after my article had been posted. However as soon as I had spotted the error I updated the article immediately and posted a note informing all forum members that a change had been made. It is a small point but I feel to mention it. (I hasten to add that I would have corrected the error whomever had alerted me to it!)

Another point raised - I don't know how seriously - was that the article was timed to coincide with the publication of THE FIELD GUIDE and that its purpose was to discredit some of the research contained within. I assure you the timing of my article and the publication day of THE FIELD GUIDE were completely coincidental. (As I understood it the book was due to come out in August anyway.) The only element of timing to my article was to try and coincide it with the 15th anniversary of the D&D story breaking.

Furthermore - just to clarify this point -  David and I were NOT co-authors of the article. I (A.M.) wrote the article based on information and photos I received from David. He had already published the 1976 now so-called "RAF Intell." aerial on his own website and had already shown the other photos publicly during his talk at this year's (2006) Glastonbury Symposium. I simply took David’s information and photos and put them into a context of the history of the geometrical evolution of the crop circle phenomenon and in the context of claims by D&D.

Although every attempt was made to ensure the photos David provided had not been confused with others from a later period, unfortunately in this instance a mistake has been made. David acknowledged the error and in another long consultation with him about this situation he has given me absolute assurance that there is no confusion with regards the three other photographs that were featured in the article i.e. Fig 2, 3 and 7.

Finally it was Davids own decision - NOT MINE - to instruct me to take the photos/article offline because he said that he received as he called it "numerous ABUSIVE and HATE emails". Something he simply does not want to deal with.

I myself would have liked to keep the corrected version of the article online but I have to respect David’s request to take it off, as my article was a discussion about his photos and information. As far as I am concerned, at present the article itself is okay although I do now share some forum member's concerns that at least slight caution should be taken, as it appears that David had slightly muddled dates and photographs in the two cases mentioned. This happened – I am sure of that – with NO intention to deceive or to put out wrong information.

I still think that the remaining three pictures featured in the article are highly interesting and are worthy of further research and discussion as I, at least, have been unable to find any information about those formations elsewhere, whatever their date. I hope David will rethink his request in the future and if he does I will put it online again. If anyone is able to shed any further light on any of the information raised in the article then I would be glad to hear from you. Similarly anything I discover will be posted on my website.

I also want to make clear that the answers I gave in a previous post about some question raised against David’s points, were posted by me out of memory of what David told me on a Telefone talke we had. He allowed me to put it onto the forum – as he simply is not using the cropcircleconnector-forum. As said beefore I am not Davids PR-agent, theerfore I might have misinterpreted some of the information I got out of our telephone-conversation (for example about his RAF history and reason for not going public with the pictures already beforehand...). So if you have reasonable and honest questions to David you should ask him directly about this - rather than starting to speculate on this forum. He has a website and runs an annual conference. During my personal conversations with David all of my questions had been honestly and satisfactory replied by him.

Finally, I must just add on a personal note, that I have found David very open, honest and sincere in all my communications with him. I have no reason to believe that the misattribution of the two photographs was anything other than a simple genuine error.

Andreas Müller