April 22, 2012 -- Nancy Talbott

[Goggs Mackay]

Jeez Mike, this gets worse and worse for Nancy being a complete mug - I had no idea she was supporting a Meier-type fraudster.
Few things I've noticed about his 'apparition' photos that scream fakery, if the first sight alone is not enough and they are the following:

For starters, all the 'apparitions' photos on the BLT site are of human figures but funnily enough, you never see the whole body, some portion of the legs being out of frame. (wonder if that's because someone is holding a picture in front of the camera?)

For all photography buffs - if you focus say on your TV set and remain so whilst bringing a finger up in front of the TV, you notice the finger is out of focus as long as you are focussing on the TV. All these apparition photos look to me like a small cut-out picture held close to a lens, making them out of focus.

(while I remember, Nancy reports that Robbert, in 2005 was still unaware of what 'googling' meant - a guy his age? I don't buy it. It also states that until 2005, Robbert did not even have access to a computer! What? A young man in a wealthy modern European country? He must have been the only guy in all Holland not to be able to access a computer in 2005! Come on, that is so thin it beggars belief - yes, I suppose it does just that. It beggars belief)

Then there is an in-depth explanation as to why the photo soldier cannot be a copy of the soldier in the book - examining small details to see if they overlay etc - but every single one of those points can be explained by there being a cut-out held in front of a camera that is slightly warped or indeed slightly in motion, resulting in an imperfect match and slight mis-shapen features - it also explains the slight blur in the photo soldier.

I wont bother with any more because it is just a sham, it's shite and an affront to intellect. I can't believe I never looked at this shite before - I always though Nancy tried to back up her crop circle research but really, If she falls for this rubbish she is no better than a Meier follower.
And whatever anyone says about Meier - everyone agrees that at least his early UFO phots were damn good fakes - so good in fact that I find it hard to believe Meier had anything to do with the wedding cake photos.
You know what? If I am sad, I only need to think of Michael Horn trying to justify the wedding cake photos and then I am not so sad!

I am really starting to see why people get so burnt out by all the shite in this field. I have no doubt there are real unexplained objects in the sky but it is really tiresome to have to put up with hoax after hoax.
I say that hoaxing UFO photos should be a crime punishable with imprisonment - in a prison where the men are hard but 'not fussy'.

 

[Gene Steinberg]

Well, I'm never surprised to see Jon Stewart ragging on anything.

 

[Gene Steinberg]

I see differences, but you can do anything in Photoshop, so it doesn't matter. Pixels are clay.

 

[Gene Steinberg]

I've moved some posts from The Question Bank to here, where they are more appropriate.

 

[mike]

heres another shot

Second and third pictures, clearly the same picture

The whole red dots dont match stuff as has been pointed out is just silly
Just look at the white points. Tops of binocs (three white points in perfect sync), belt buckle, collar, epaulettes, buckle above thumb

 

[mike]

The whole no access to computers bit is strange too

What? A young man in a wealthy modern European country? He must have been the only guy in all Holland not to be able to access a computer in 2005! Come on, that is so thin it beggars belief - yes, I suppose it does just that. It beggars belief

Title: How Teachers Use Computers in Instructional Practice--Four Case Studies in a Dutch Secondary School.

Computers and Education, v21 n1-2 p1-8 Jul-Sep 1993
Describes a study conducted in the Netherlands to provide an understanding of how secondary school teachers actually use computers in the classroom. The use of classroom observations, interviews, and teachers' diaries to determine factors affecting the extent and type of use of computers is explained, and a model of factors is presented

Considering the report was published in 1993, i think its likely he would have been exposed to computers in school, and i bet the local librarys all have them for public use.

The OBA Library as Part of Amsterdam’s Knowledge Landscape

At 28,000 square metres spread over 10 levels, the OBA is the largest public library in Europe and an excellent spot to spend a couple of hours. It is open 7 days a week from 10 in the morning till 10 at night and, thanks to its central location, receives 2.5 million visitors a year and around 7,000 visitors per day. The library offers access to a large selection of Dutch and international literature, press and study materials for an annual fee no higher than 50 Euros. Young customers of up to 19 years old are offered free membership. There are over 1,300 seats spread all over the building, including 600 computer and internet points and 50 multimedia workplaces. The library has 7 education and meeting rooms with the capacity to receive up to 75 people. Six smaller OBA library branches are scattered around the city.

 

[trainedobserver]

Would any PhDs or those working on them care to comment on the PhD-equivalency issue?

 

[Digital Trickster]

I guess someone has to take over for Billy!

 

[trainedobserver]

Also, regardless of whether the phenomena is real or not, Doug and Dave claimed ownership of so many circles they would have been having to make them at a ridiculous near impossible rate.
...

Many landowners and farmers came forward in the 90's to say that they had experienced circles going back some decades

Is that from Alien Agenda as well? It's been a while since I read that, and I don't have a copy.

I don't know if they are all fake or not but I am pretty sure that Doug and Dave were not responsible for all they claimed which is strange enough - why claim such a thing if there is no truth to non-human made circles.

That seems to be a bit of straw-man argument or is it Non-Sequitur or both? It seems to assume that Doug and Dave had some knowledge that there were non-human made circles. There really isn't anything to suggest that. Before Doug and Dave there were "saucer nests", essentially circular depressions in crops. They were artists and brought an element of design to the things and made them for some time before they were even noticed. Others have picked it up and evolved the art form. Often modern crop circle makers were believers in non-human crop circles to begin with and then become makers themselves after having learned the truth.

The only way to convince yourself is to look at the evidence. I strongly urge you to examine the evidence presented by actual crop circle makers rather than organizations or individuals who would have to find something else to do if crop circles were not mysterious.

I do think that there are good examples of unexplainable or at least suspicious "saucer nests" in crop or soil and there are several good UFO cases that include them. These are where something has appeared to land. I do think, based on evidence presented by crop circle makers, that complex crop circles are made by human beings.

 

[Goggs Mackay]

No, you are right in whatever Doug and Dave did or did not do has nothing to do with whether there are really any 'real' formations. I just find their story to be B.S so they are either just attention seekers or something more sinister.
My mind is not made up on the whole issue. When I first heard of them I was interested, then I thought they were all hoaxes, then I thought some were maybe real and on and on.

My point really is that even if there are people who claim to be making the formations and giving reasons why - that does not actually prove every formation is made by a hoaxer any more than people who hoax ufo's solving the whole ufo mystery. Having hoaxers and real formations is not mutually exclusive I suppose I am saying. H

However - having never seen either a crop formation or a UFO, I am relying on the work of others. There is probably no substitute for actually going and doing the work yourself!

Nancy Talbot is gone for me - I realise she is saying that she was around when these photos were taken etc but people have been taken in by frauds throughout history. Her saying she believes the photos are not fake does not make it so. I think she is just a believer now and I am disappointed!

 

[trainedobserver]

I just find their story to be B.S so they are either just attention seekers or something more sinister.

I just had to laugh buddy. They were artists doing weird things that artists do. It fits so perfectly with the personality type that it makes complete sense to me. They made circles for years, although they were not the only ones doing it since others quickly picked up on it, with no recognition whatsoever. Nor did they seek it. One reason being, it was and still is, illegal.

Having hoaxers and real formations is not mutually exclusive I suppose I am saying.

Your language betrays your predisposition. Crop circle makers are not hoaxers. They are the source of the "phenomenon." They are not making claims about their work generally speaking. They anonymously produce them. Crop circle researchers are the ones making "claims" about the crop circles.

 

[Goggs Mackay]

Yeah, that is a fair point. I should not associate circle makers with hoaxers as that does assume there is a real phenomena.
You also make a fair point about D&D in that they were artists making circles and people copied them. But they claimed ownership of hundreds and hundreds - at the very least they exaggerated their own claims to 'big themselves up'.

I find this a strange one though, I am still not convinced either way. Don't you think there is a parallel with the ufo debunker mob? They would claim to have explained any and all ufo sightings and is it possible there are just circle 'debunkers' - I suppose I am very wary of any skeptical (debunker) argument because the debunkers in the ufo field to my eyes consistently bend facts, ignore facts and outright talk bollocks?

 

[Goggs Mackay]

Can you point me in the direction of any videos made by circle makers, hopefully something quite complex - I'd like to see one being made in the short time reported. I have been looking but not getting anywhere?

 

[Voyager]

Can you point me in the direction of any videos made by circle makers, hopefully something quite complex - I'd like to see one being made in the short time reported. I have been looking but not getting anywhere?

Here is a good source of information: Colin Andrews Official Web Site. Crop Circles, UFO, Consciousness

 

[trainedobserver]

But they claimed ownership of hundreds and hundreds - at the very least they exaggerated their own claims to 'big themselves up'.

I don't recall seeing them talk about this, but it has been a while. I think it would be a fair bet that they made a large number of them. Many of which were never seen but by a few people. Also, I think that in the latter part of their career as makers they had some help.

I find this a strange one though, I am still not convinced either way. Don't you think there is a parallel with the ufo debunker mob?

At some point when you are looking at anything like this you become convinced of one thing or another about it. You can't stay on the fence forever. I'm just telling you my perspective as someone who looked into it thinking there was something to it, however after the months and years it became obvious. The dynamics between the makers and the researchers became apparent. Then, when the makers themselves began talking as never before, it was inescapable. Complex crop circles are made by people. Strange things may happen in them, during their making, and so forth, but I for one am convinced that the things are made by people. If some non-human made a complex crop circle it would truly be anomalous. I have yet to see one that did not have all the earmarks of being man-made however.

I would suggest:
Williams youTube channel - profanity warning
Circlemakertv.org - "Circlemakers explain their art and the magic that surrounds circles"

I would start here and complete all 18 parts. Williams' Circlemakers Documentary.
Then I would flip through Matthew Williams' youTube channel videos and start watching videos on circlemakertv.org that catch your eye. He has some new stuff up I've haven't watched yet. I honestly do think the truth is there.

Good hunting.

 

[Angel of Ioren]

Would any PhDs or those working on them care to comment on the PhD-equivalency issue?

Well, as someone that works in university admissions, I can tell you with confidence that a PhD equivalence is not a PhD. Does this guy have a Master's or a Bachelor's degree? If not, then he definitely does not have a PhD, unless it's an honorary one.

 

[trainedobserver]

Well, as someone that works in university admissions, I can tell you with confidence that a PhD equivalence is not a PhD. Does this guy have a Master's or a Bachelor's degree? If not, then he definitely does not have a PhD, unless it's an honorary one.

Nancy's response included:
"M.A. in Bioscience (1961, BallState University) and his M.S. in biophysics (l970, University
of Michigan) degrees."

 

[Angel of Ioren]

Okay - well at least that's something.

 

[Kieran]

heres another shot

Second and third pictures, clearly the same picture

The whole red dots dont match stuff as has been pointed out is just silly
Just look at the white points. Tops of binocs (three white points in perfect sync), belt buckle, collar, epaulettes, buckle above thumb

Thanks mate for posting this. This image proves Robert is a con artist.

How likely is it the German soldier would reappear 50 years later from his death and be in the same exact position as it appears in this photo? The soldier is marching to some unknown destination during the war ( hes not dead in the photo and likely did not die in the position show in the photo during the war or after it if he lived on) It does look like to me a cut and paste job. Nancy obviously has been taken in by this guy and unfortunately she probably will come here again and defend him because to do otherwise she be admitting to her gullibility.

I also don't buy Nancy claim Robert had no computer. (i think she said that) Holland has 100% internet connection in all parts of that country. Its rare to find a young man who never used the internet or a computer.

 

[Angel of Ioren]

So I'm listening to the show now - I can say with confidence (from an arm-chair no less!) that Nancy is either easily fooled, just craves attention, or is a complete liar. You want to see some much better evidence, go here: Reptilian Dove visits me. | The Paracast Community Forums

Also, ALL CROP CIRCLES ARE MAN MADE, so there are lots of people that know exactly where and when crop circles will appear.

If you think there's something to Robert's b.s. you are way too credulous. Up your skepticism dial a little. It'll do your body good.