• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

Colin Andrews - Crop circles and New Age 'energy'


Jimi H.

Paranormal Adept
Mr. Andrews pushed all my New Age-radar buttons, and not in a good way, I'm afraid.

First of all, he didn't get anything scientific right.

For instance, as is typical with New Age thinking, his understanding of 'energy' is not how science understands energy. To explain briefly what I mean:
When a ball is kicked into the air, it has a certain amount of potential energy when it reaches the maximum height and starts dropping. That's because of gravity's pull on its mass. The ball does not have any tangible 'energy' in the sense that you could take the energy and put the energy in a box and give it to someone else to make an energy field or anything like that. That's pure science fiction.
Just like the 'energy vortices' of Sedona is fiction, and impossible to deal with in a scientific manner because, well, it's simply unscientific. Energy is a potential, it's not a 'thing'.

Oh and about vortices, Andrews explains that a plasma-vortex may be used to push down some rows of corn. But hey, this is not Star Trek, this is a corn-field.. And where's the evidence? I honestly think it would be easier for the aliens to use a board of wood and a string than to use a 'plasma vortex' to do the same job, I cannot fathom how one might flatten corn with a vortex of plasma, or why it would make any sense to use such a device, from an energy conservation or mechanical point.

Yes, I admit I get annoyed by frivolous argumentation and ask myself: how can someone investigate for years and years and claim to be scientifically oriented but then not get the most basic scientific concepts right? Answer: Because it's science from a New Age viewpoint. But the truth is, New Age is decidedly anti-scientific, while it arguably exploits and perverts scientific language. If they just said 'God', that's fine, that's honest, but distorting the scientific language to speak about energy, in its broadest sense, is uncool.

I guess this introduction suggests where I come down on his crop circle conclusions, as presented in the interview: To me, he did not make any conclusions based on anything tangible, he just rattled off theories about energy this and consciousness that. So, if he investigated that many circles, I think he either found nothing of actual interest, or he focuses on the wrong things when it comes to presenting it in a scientific manner.

About his childhood dream and later regression, it again revealed his unscientific bent. He said that the green circle of super-growing grass in his backyard was evidence of his dreams as a 5 year old. But that's wrong. The info about what happened in his dream, as recalled in regressive hypnosis did not originate in his 5 year old mind, it originated in his paranormally/New Age infused adult mind, and his mind has no doubt been brewing on those dreams ever since he was 5, so it's hard to imagine what his subconscious might have formed.
I think the extra green spot in his garden is a sign that some previous owner of the house had a round chickencoop in that spot, or some other natural fertilizer was dispensed at a previous time. Or, it's a patch that was seeded with a seperate breed of grass seeds from the rest of the garden, perhaps because a round building was taken down and new grass seeds had been strewn. Of course, it may be discussed in his book, I don't know.

Also, if he was told by 'them' that 4 common plants revealed the truth about the coming environmental catastrophe, what has he done to follow that lead, to carry that truth to the world and get it investigated? Really, I think the aliens would be better off just giving it up, instead of speaking in riddles like Gollum, no?

I'm sorry to be so harsh, but this is how I see it..

-edited for spelling and unnecessary banter
 
Last edited:
Enjoy the show, guys, but after trashing Art Bell (fine), you present a show on crop circles?
Come on guys, this is a non issue. Zzzzzz.
Gold Standard?
Let's aim higher.
 
You'll notice that we had far more questions about this episode from forum members than most any show we've had in recent months. Whether you accept crop circles as anything unusual or not, it's a subject that should be discussed.

There are legitimate questions raised about the presentation. Andrews is a nice guy but a difficult interview, because he just talks and talks and talks, and there's very little room to ask, "but what about?"
 
I admire Jimi's thorough attempt to critique Colin Andrew's life but I couldn't disagree more with his conclusions. I'm also sure that Jimi has no idea who the circle makers are. In-the-box scientific protocols won't get you there.

It was a real pleasure to hear Colin expound on a lifetime of experience with puzzles that still evade our understanding. Could some crop formations be music, or elements of a musical composition? Are the formations, in some cases, just artwork? My head is still reeling from all the ground that was so rapidly covered. Colin must return before long to tell us more about government interest in the formations. Why are intelligence agencies and military units so interested? Why is the Royal family so interested?

Colin exposed us to much wisdom and this profound statement led me to quickly run for a pen to write it down: "This is no time to be led. This is the time to lead our leaders." Colin Andrews, like Ray Stanford, is one of those thinkers and doers that stands above the crowd.

Good job, Gene and Chris, for gleaning much new information from Colin that most of us had not known.

From Lucy Pringle 2010.jpg
 
So are you looking for hits (ratings) or relevant information?
I think you already answered. :-(

You'll notice that we had far more questions about this episode from forum members than most any show we've had in recent months. Whether you accept crop circles as anything unusual or not, it's a subject that should be discussed.

There are legitimate questions raised about the presentation. Andrews is a nice guy but a difficult interview, because he just talks and talks and talks, and there's very little room to ask, "but what about?"
 
Apparently not, if he thinks crop circles are anything other than man made.
Let's travel all the way to wherever and draw on their crops? Am I really typing this?
Like I said, I listen and enjoy, but this is crap. You know it. We all know it.
There are more important topics, and I realize you have to fill the hours, but wow.
GOLD STANDARD. Beyond reproach is the goal with this tag.
 
I do listen every week. I form opinions. Do not accuse me of trolling.
Be nice. I said I like the show, and this topic is crap. This is not an attack, just an opinion of one of the many topics discussed.
 
It's the guest's viewpoint that crop circles are largely man-made, but inspired by outside forces. You did realize that, right?

I think that is the last refuge for the Crop Circle Researcher/Believer. After the "alien cause" has been eliminated and all you have are man-made works of art, you have to reach for some other justification to continue your fascination with destructive crop graffiti. I think they are "inspired" by people's fascination with them and that is about as far as it goes.
 
To put a finer point on it, I just feel like this is the realm of your Art Bell fan.
I want you to be as aggressive with everyone as you are with say thirdphaseofmoron, etc.
I am on your side, for chrissakes.
Crop circles stories show us nothing. Garbage.
 
Crop circles are believed, by some, to have a UFO-related cause. Andrews is the original crop circle and doesn't take that point of view. In any case, we aren't going to avoid a subject because some listeners don't care, nor will we necessarily put on guests that some people suggest. This is the sort of balance you have to strike when you have limited time and lots of ground to cover.

Our so-called Bell bashing was focused on two areas: 1. That he stole the name of Don Ecker's show without any explanation or apology. 2. That he concentrated on recreating the past rather than figuring out what actually had happened in the years he was away from show business.
 
So at the least we can consider them to be works of art even if the supposed paranormal factors are out of the picture.
Yea, maybe you guys should subvert and invite some known crop circle makers, and ask them about why they do it, and if they believe art comes before corn! :) And if they know about situationist humor?

- I just Googled: ¤ c i r c l e m a k e r s ¤
"In short, Dickinson came to the crop-circles armed with post-Situationist theories of art and social intervention, modern media theory and a post-conceptualist critique of the art institution, and not just a love of the English countryside and folk art and a passion for a 'good joke'. .. to re-think crop-circle making as the basis for an enquiry into the conditions of modern mythology. "

I've previously gathered that situationist humor is about taking part in an event with the secret agenda of creating a kind of social work of art (creating a new mythology seems to go against the enlightenment project I though situationism was supposed to be), or actually to destroy something from within, to expose it to itself and society. I imagine crop circle situationists are of the former kind, they want to create rather than destroy. But I guess they are the graffiti artists of the countryside, as they destroy the corn, for the sake of 'art'. And I wonder how deep the situationist conspiracy runs altogether:)

Despite my attitude, I thought the interview was informing as an update on a big story like the crop-circles, and if he's a main figure, well, then we get a sense of what may be informing crop circle believers. But I did get frustrated at times, because his only real evidence was something that happened to himself, according to himself, scientific results and unbiased conclusions were not pressing on his mind.
It's very hard to know what really happened when a corn circle was supposedly 'designed' by his thoughts. Or if anything really paranormal happened at all. Or if he can repeat it, of course, with video-surveillance of nearby fields, then he would certainly get an audience! :)
 
So at the least we can consider them to be works of art even if the supposed paranormal factors are out of the picture.

Many of the things that are cited as paranormal aspects sound a lot like things that "artists" experience in the way of inspiration and muses.

Jimi's idea to have crop circle makers on is great. I've suggested that you guys get Matthew Williams on the show on and off for years now.
 
Back
Top