Planker MATTHEW WILLIAMS objects to the version of events surrounding man-made circle shenanigans from last summer as told in ‘UFO Magazine’ and summed up recently by Marcus Allen for Swirled News…
Wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong.
Firstly, the farmer who's land the circle appeared on is not so! He is not the farmer who’s land the circles were put on. He is a worker of the farmer who's land it was put on. The real farmer lives one mile away and told us not to talk to his worker because he "exaggerates". The farmer’s name is Alan Smith. He is not a fan of circles, but agreed to the project to help show people what circles are about. His worker tried to turn the circles in his field into a story which revolved around himself and his family seeing UFOs, as we were warned he might.
Secondly, Linda Moulton Howe and her exaggerations go as far as accusing myself of being a CIA agent. If this were true would I not also be American? No, Mrs Howe, I am British, which would mean I would have to work for MI5 or MI6, doesn't it? As far as her being harassed goes, she was invited to come out and see a circle being made. She accepted the invitation and was seemingly impressed by a number of aspects of the work we did. When we met her at The Ship Inn she expressed no hurt at our being there until the very end, when she accused me of being a CIA agent. Why did she not turn down our invitation to see circles being made if she was so offended by being harassed? This sounds like weak excuses to me. As my friend pointed out to me, a question for Mrs Howe would be "What is the CIA’s interest in crop circles?".
These stories are usually blown out of all proportion by those who get their info third hand. David Cayton [co-author of the ‘UFO Magazine’ article] is a third hand source. Sadly, my respected friend Marcus Allen is a fourth hand source. He is supposing that the report in ‘UFO Magazine’ bears any relation to truth in the first instance. Marcus has not bothered to check details with any of us in the article. The truth as portrayed in the Cayton article is based on how Cayton likes to see it. Cayton did not contact any of us either. Is this good journalism?
Still, as the hack press journalists from the dailies say, "never let the truth get in the way of a good story". ‘UFO Magazine’ should have sought our comments before going to press with this very inaccurate report.
Cayton reports Milk Hill as being 1000ft. It was barely 700ft - a major flaw. I will let you guess the rest.
SWIRLED NEWS REPLIES:
Actually, arguments still continue as to the size of the Milk Hill spiral, but it would seem to be at least 780’, as measured by researcher Charles Mallett. Some say, because of the way that measurement was taken, that in fact it was bigger – nearer 850’. A definitive size continues to elude.
As for the rest of Matthew’s assertions, WE have made no allegations - 'UFO Magazine' did. All those involved still seem to be sticking to their version of events, and we’ll leave it to them to sort out. See also Peter Sorensen’s letter – Ed.