home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- From: rkrouse@netcom.com (Robert K. Rouse)
- Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,alt.alien.visitors,alt.paranet.ufo,alt.paranet.science
- Subject: Project Argus Report - Crop Circles
- Date: 17 Nov 93 05:52:45 GMT
- Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
-
-
-
- Project Argus Report by Michael Chorost
-
- from MUFON UFO JOURNAL #304
-
- 103 Oldtowne Rd.
- Seguin, TX 78155-4099
- (210)379-9216
-
-
- In the summer of 1992, Project Argus investigated one of the
- most remarkable mysteries of the century, the sudden and
- baffling appearance of hundreds of huge, magnificent shapes -
- dubbed "crop circles" - in the fields of England each summer.
- Made of grain flattened methodically to the ground in intricate
- pattens, they were a form of landscape art which quickly
- attracted worldwide attention. But the "artist" was unknown.
- Where did they come from? What agent or force routinely
- generated them ovenight? Could they be products of something
- other than human activity? It seemed appropriate to seek to
- answer such questions with the instruments and methods of
- science.
-
- Project Argus was preceded by at least three attempts to
- study the phenomenon with scientific instruments. There were
- the "White Crow" and "Blackbird" surveillance watches organized
- by Colin Andrews and Pat Delgado in 1989 and 1990, which used
- night-vision video cameras and human observers in an effort to
- capture the formation of a crop circle on film. And there was
- Project "Blue Hill," mounted by Terence Meaden in 1991 in
- conjunction with Japanese universities to detect evidence of
- "plasma vortices" (Meaden's proposed naturally occurring
- causative mechanism) by radar. The goal of all three was to
- record a crop circle event at the moment of formation. None
- succeeded as their organizers had hoped, although all came up
- with a small amount of equivocal data which could be interpreted
- as "hints" that a non-hoaxed phenomenon had been observed.
-
- Project Argus had the different objective of making a
- minute and extensive study of the soil and crops after an event
- had occurred. Without requiring prior assumptions about the
- agent which might be at work, it made a sustained and
- well-instrumented investigation of a large number of events,
- undeterred by the probability that some would be hoaxes (and,
- indeed, sampling from known and suspected hoaxes for
- comparison). It drew together a number of physicists,
- biologists, and engineers, several of whom were prepared to
- accept that we might merely be witnessing the traces of human
- activity and/or "blind" natural forces, but whom were ready to
- lend their expertise for no more than the cost of travel and
- accommodation.
-
- Briefly stated, the project's goal was to learn if some
- crop circles exhibited physical effects which would be
- difficult, if not impossible, to generate by casual human
- activity. Indications that there might be such effects in the
- form of short-lived radioactive residues in the soil and
- significant changes to the crops had turned up late in
-
- 1991, thanks largely to the dedicated work of Marshall Dudley
- and Dr. W.C. Levengood. Slenderly based though these
- indications were, it was a scientific imperative to follow them
- up on as large a scale as could be managed, using better
- equipment and a more exhaustive methodology.
-
-
- Project Argus was a joint effort initiated mainly by two
- organizations, the North American Circle (NAC) and the Centre
- for Crop Circle Studies (CCCS.) The CCCS was established in 1990
- in England with the aim of encouraging orderly scientific
- investigation. The NAC was established a year later in the
- United States, with the same goal. By the end of 1991, it was
- becoming clear that the two organizations had, between them,
- accumulated enough scientific expertise to design and carry out
- a joint research project. The CCCS gave the project 2,000 lbs
- as seed money and committed itself to logistical support, and a
- fundraising drive by the NAC brought the total funding to over
- $34,000 by May 1992. Significant contributions were made in
- particular by the Robert Bigelow Holding Corporation, the Fund
- for UFO Research and MUFON. Logistical needs such as housing
- and ground transportation were quickly arranged, and the project
- formally began its fieldwork in England on July 9th, 1992.
-
-
- Project Argus's array of experimental instruments and
- methods was as follows:
-
-
- * Electron microscopy to examine plant cell walls for
- evidence of unusual physical stresses or heat-related damage.
-
- * Gamma spectroscopy to examine soil for shortlived
- radioactive isotopes.
-
- * Gel electrophoresis to examine plant DNA for evidence of
- denaturation.
-
- * Fluxgate magnetometry to assess magnetic variations in
- soil.
-
- * Studies of plant cell tissue to assess the effects of the
- flattening force on the plants.
-
- * Seed germinatioll trials to test growth rates of seeds
- harvested within crop formations.
-
- * A scintillation counter and geiger counter to detect
- abnormally high levels of ambient radiation.
-
- * Various electromagnetic field detectors.
-
- * Visual analysis of "crop lays" for comparison of
- crop circles in different nations.
-
- * Recording of daily rainfall to correlate formation
- dates with weather conditions.
-
- * Recordkeeping of reports of unidentified luminous aerial
- phenomena.
-
- * Support of surveillance and surveying operations 0
- Recordkeeping of dates and locations of formations.
-
-
-
- The first six of these objectives were accomplished with
- instruments situated in laboratories in the U.S. an U.K., using
- samples collected and processed by the Project Argus team. The
- rest were performed on-site by team members using the
- appropriate equipment.
-
-
-
- SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
-
-
-
- Project Argus has not, at this writing, found the "smoking gun"
- clearly showing that some crop circles are not the product of
- human activity. But it has ruled out several previously held
- hypotheses and, potentially more importantly, discovered some
- apparent regularities which seem well worth following up. What
- it has found are the following (each is discussed in greater
- detail in the 115page Report on the Results of Project Argus: An
- Instruniented Study of the Physical Materials of Crop Circles,
- edited by Michael Chorost, and available from North American
- Circle (NAC):
-
-
-
- A. A greater incidence of microscopic "blisters" on plants
- inside crop circles than in controls outside them. It is not
- yet clear whether this is due to the fact that the plants inside
- the formation experienced a different regime of temperature and
- humidity than the controls, or to some more exotic cause (e.g. a
- "genuine" phenomenon). A number of unusual molds and types of
- cellular damage were also detected.
-
-
- B. No evidence of anomalous radioactive traces in any o the
- tested formations.
-
-
- C. No evidence of anomalous DNA degradation in any of the
- tested formations.
-
-
- D. Results indicating that further testing with fluxgate
- magnetometers may be productive, with due attention given to
- potential sources of methodological error. Experiments appeared
- to show that soil within many of the formations tested had a
- higher degree of magnetic flux intensity than the soil outside
- them. Notably, the one known hoax we were able to test did not
- show this effect.
-
-
- E. The possibility that there are significant anomalies in plant
- cell tissues and seed germination rates relative to controls.
- Due to the complexity of living plant systems, and the
- methodological difficulties imposed by collecting samples
- under highly variable conditions, this research has progressed
- especially slowly.
-
-
- F. Hints that testing with electromagnetic detectors may be
- productive. The ad hoc nature of the testing in 1992 makes it
- necessary to undertake better testing in future seasons.
-
-
- G. The continuing presence of complex crop lays in formations
- in England and Canada. Formations in both countries exhibited
- features such as standing stalks, underlying lays, off-axis
- centers, and plant braiding.
-
-
- H. Rainfall data suggesting that some of the formations in the
- immediate vicinity of Alton Barnes may have been made during or
- immediately after wet weather, which complicates the hoax theory.
-
-
- I. Several accounts of unidentified luminous events in the low
- atmosphere resembling those which have been described
- (occasionally with photographic collateral) in Dr. Terence
- Meaden's Jouirnal of Meteorology and John Macnish's video Crop
- Circle Communique.
-
-
- J. No success in photographic surveillance. A formation
- which was made within the theoretical range of the camera went
- undetected, probably due to low light and an unfavorable
- camera-to-ground angle.
-
-
- K. The continuing existence of the phenomenon itself, in
- considerable numbers. George Wingfield's database lists 197
- formations for Great Britain for the summer of 1992 (published
- in Report as Appendix 11).
-
-
- We thus have some potentially very interesting and
- significant data from our magnetic flux scans and electron
- microscopy, and it is our hope that outside scientists competent
- in these areas will review our data and make comments.
-
- The absence of positive data in the other test regimes does
- not mean that the phenomenon must be a hoax. As the old adage
- goes, absence of evidence does not mean evidence of absence. It
- is entirely possible that we were, in those cases, looking for a
- real phenomenon in the wrong places. There were thousands of
- tests we could have run, but we could only select a few out of
- that huge set. When facing the unknown, one must essentially
- start anywhere, since no prior research exists to indicate the
- most productive paths. In (probably) ruling out radioactivity
- and several other effects, the project did essential work which
- will save its successors considerable time and expense.
-
-
- --
- ============================================================
- "You can lead a horse to water but you can't
- make it drink"
- Author unknown
-
- ============================================================
- Robert K. Rouse rkrouse@netcom.com
- ============================================================
-
-