The biggest problem with the circles is that many true believers see aliens at work; while the skeptics see it all as the work of people - but without the need of an outside force guiding them.

So what happens is that the issue of investigating the guiding force behind the human angle very often gets overlooked by both the believers and the skeptics.

It could indeed be something sinister at work; but the one thing I know for certain is that a comprehensive in-depth study (maybe even a book) definitely needs to be done that addresses all of the human-angles - not just the “hoaxing” and “artwork” angles; but more specifically the anomalous experiences that the circle makers have too.

Investigating and trying to resolve the latter could be the key to resolving it all.

In any criminology question (damage to a field) or sociological attempt to determine why a behaviour persists or why someone commited an act you have to determine target, opportunity and desire. So there are fields all over Wiltshire and North America where you can create a crop circle. (Target) Opportunity is harder but those farmers don’t watch their fields constantly. (Opportunity) But what is the desire? And if people are being subconsciously driven to do this the question is. What is the motive of the force driving them?

Is it just the desire to create something beautiful or confusing? Is this a case of serious agriculture graffiti?

Or is it something more sinister? Are practitioners of dark earth magic disrupting farm fields for their own unknown and possibly dark desires? Why not buy your own wheat field and destroy it?

I am not an expert on Tulpas but where I grew up the Native Americans had a legend about the Skinwalkers who would do this kind of prank. Disrupting farm fields and even the ancient accounts of possessions and animal mutilations pointed at the skinwalkers. If there is anything disturbing about these things it is why a human would feel “compulsed” to do them.

We do conjure these things up and we are responsible for bringing them into our existence in the form that we specifically interpret them (the Greys, the Blondes of Contactee lore, goblins, Mothman, Owlman, etc.).

But, that they have some form of existence in a realm that has to be accessed - and has been via the work of people like Strassman, McKenna, Parsons, etc.

Although what this realm actually is, is admitted speculation. But I don’t believe these things exist there in the physical sense that we understand it, or in the way that we see them in our world.

But that when we link with them, they can cross the void, if you will, and manifest - in true Tulpa style - according to our subconscious imagery and expectations.

So, in my opinion, we are creating them Tulpa-style in terms of appearance, etc. but we are forming (or perhaps being manipulated to form) them in an image that is socially acceptable to the era in human history that we are in.

The Tulpa supposedly thrives on emotion, so it’s possible that we are somehow being subconsciously encouraged/manipulated to open the door and conjure these things into our world, where they can go on a feeding frenzy.

And, who knows, maybe when the door is open it allows Tulpa/thought-forms that exist in their original form to come through en masse and that then exist in some form of quasi-limbo in our world until people begin to see them, and they begin to develop into an archetypal Tulpa image - the alien, the pixie, the apeman, etc.

The second is that they already exist in some way, entirely independent of ourselves, and that our thoughts only bridge the gap between where they exist and our own world so that they can come through.

Which of these two scenarios is it, or is it both?

The issue of the nature of the formations, etc., is a good one.

Certainly Mandalas feature a lot. There have been various formations picking up on imagery and designs from ancient cultures, etc., too.

I think the most significant thing is that whoever - or whatever - is making the formations primarily wants us to think about the designs.

Now, if some circles are made by people, then this raises the question of under what circumstances are they receiving the images?

It’s intersting to speculate that perhaps in our subconscious there are indeed archetypal images/imagery that perhaps manifest in the formations made.

What I think is that he creates (unknowingly in his case) Tulpas that ‘appear in the sky as an orb’ and then move on their own accord and last for the energy that they have. As far as taking on shapes; they have to be some shape to be a space to begin with - so yes. Could they be ‘charged’ in a sense with `consciousness’ — yes.

Is any of this different in any way from what Ted Serios (could be mis-spelled) did in the 1950’s when he projected his thoughts onto film and even motion picture film. I think not.

I will admit that the issue of structure changes is an intriguing one, and is one not easily explainable by the human theory.

I am, however, aware of certain human makers who have sprinkled iron filings and other products into circles to confuse matters re. taking readings, etc.

Whether that’s a connection or not, or whether that would have any bearing on matters, I have to be honest: I don’t know.

It’s clear that very creative humans with an adventurous artistic sensibility have been making beautiful works of art in cereal crop fields for many decades, if not centuries. I have read before about the unusual experiences that many circle makers have had while engaged in their art, as you point out here. I wonder if that is somehow related to the alterations to the soil and plants in such circles, as documented by Wm. C. Levengood of BLT research.

The findings of investigations carried out by BLT research are intriguing to me, and seem to suggest that there is something happening, in at least some crop cirlces, that is not easily explained by what we know for certain about their creation.

While it is possible to make breathtakingly complex and precise patterns in cereal fields with a handful of hearty souls, plus some rope, a measuring tape, and some flat boards, I wouldn’t think that these things could be reponsible for the chemical and structural changes in the plants and soil that Levengood has documented in more than a few cases. Any thoughts on this issue? Thanks for a very entertaining blog, BTW.