| THE BRIDGES OF AVALON |
 |
| MISSION STATEMENT |
|
| THE FOUNDERS |
|
| PUBLISHED MATERIAL |
|
| PERSONAL WRITING |
|
| FIELD STUDIES |
|
| RESEARCH |
|
| RELATED SITES |
|
| RESEARCH LAB - SERVICES |
|
| CONTACT TAF |
|
| HOME PAGE |
An Evaluation of Soil Properties Abstract: Under close examination, some of the events known popularly as "crop circles" have displayed unique and surprising alterations of soil and crop structures suggestive of a genuinely unknown mechanism of formation. The project reported herewith consists of an examination of soil from the location of a 2003 season crop circle in the US. Sampling and analysis were performed in April of 2004. Results of both magnetic component extraction and commercial agricultural soil analysis are discussed, along with considerations for future analytical protocol. Introduction: One of the most intriguing North American crop circles of the 2003 agricultural season appeared overnight between 23 and 24 August, near Locust Grove, Ohio. This formation was quickly dubbed "the Serpent Mound Crop Circle" due to the noteworthy fact that it appeared in a soybean field less than a kilometer from the so-named ancient sacred site of the Adena people. Investigation of the formation was prompt and received considerable media coverage, both locally and on-line. We were aware of the event within a few days of the occurrence, however with other projects prevailing, the opportunity to investigate the event ourselves at the time did not materialize. Summaries of the crop formation and assorted investigative findings by others may be found as referenced online at http://www.cropcirclenews.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=164. Analysis of crop and soil conditions has to date not been reported on by the original investigative parties, although plant, seed and soil sampling was performed. Claims exist as well that EM and nuclear radiation anomalies were observed, however details have also not yet been presented. The primary investigative effort for this formation was carried out by members of the recently organized ICCRA (USA). The formation continues to generate interest and speculation in the international crop circle community, primarily among those focused on the interpretation of geometric meaning involved with the formation. On 3 and 4 April, 2004, NR attended a weekend crop circle research conference held in Adams County, Ohio. This event was sponsored by ICCRA, and saw a variety of disciplines and facets of the phenomenon and its research represented. Following the closing presentations of this conference on 4 April, NR and several other attendees made a trek to the nearby field where the Serpent Mound Crop Circle had appeared over seven months previous. Observations were made of the site by NR, and will be recounted here. A small set of soil samples was procured, and later, a variety of test protocols were used to examine the chemical and physical properties of the soil. Our objective may be best established in the form of a question: what can we learn from the site of a claimed anomalous crop circle event, over seven months after its appearance, at the start of the next agricultural season? The Crop Circle Location and Its Appearance: From NR's notes: "On the afternoon of Sunday, 4 April, I arrived at the location of the former crop circle at about 14:30 local. Prevailing weather was cool (40°s F) and partly cloudy, and the field conditions were amenable to easy movement. Last rainfall had been at least 48 hours previous, so the soil was moist but not muddy. Several other participants of the weekend conference were at the site, including Dr. Charles Lietzau, Ted Robertson, Dan Deters, and two other attendees. Ted Robertson was very helpful in pointing out the location of the formation, still faintly visible on the ground in reverse, due to a higher density of downed stalks. The field had not been tilled or planted, and the soil surface was fairly compact and flat from the winter’s snow burden. The field of concern is an irregular plot bordered by Ohio SR 73, Brush Creek, and a minor branch of Brush Creek called Weasel Run (USGS listing). The formation had appeared toward the northeastern end of the field. The axis of symmetry of the formation appeared to be normal to the angle or path of Route 73, and at about a 60 degree angle east of north.
Apart from the purple strewn ring pathways, the form of the central "vesica" or cat’s eye shaped region of the formation could be easily seen, as well as the larger outlying swirl circle to the north of this feature. No EM or nuclear surveying was performed, as the appropriate equipment was either not present or had not been properly calibrated with a standard. Our interest lay mainly in a careful examination of the soil of this formation, and procurement of samples. This was what I busied myself with." Soil Sampling:
At each location, we used a wooden spoon to procure approximately 500 ml of soil from both surface (from 0 to 2 cm depth) and an equal amount from a depth greater than 3 inches, or 7.5 cm approximately. Each soil volume was sealed into a ziplock plastic baggie and labeled on the outside with black permanent marker. Thus, a total of fourteen soil samples were taken from the formation site. The selection of sample sites, while extemporaneous, also provided inclusion of three primary zones that we believe are critical to understanding crop circle dynamics. The necessity of controls is obvious. We also need to understand differences, if any, between the affected soil in the downed regions within the formation and non-downed regions also within the formation. The sampling procedure followed should be considered a valuable training exercise and proving ground in addition to its primary objective. Even as the samples were taken, at least two points for future improvement in protocol were seen and noted! C. Lietzau pointed that without washing the sampling spoon between each sample, cross contamination could occur that could potentially skew quantitative analysis or chemical assaying. This was acknowledged. To enter this as a viable error source into our results appeared to be the most viable option for now. We thus observed and approximated the typical amount of clinging dirt from sample to sample, given a physical wipe, and entered this as a maximum contamination figure of one half gram (500 mg) dried soil per sample, to be compared with the final dried weights of the samples proper. A better sampling device may also be in order - wood was used to prevent ionic migration from metal spoons or spades - however a device like a core sampler fabricated from ceramic or Teflon might provide the ultimate in sample integrity, also delivering samples at different core depths. Field History: On 18th April, we spoke with Mr. George McCoy who farms the field in which the crop circle had appeared. George was helpful and knowledgeable, and provided us with some quality information for our understanding. The field in question has been farmed no-till for at least six years. The crop seed used for 2003 was Roundup Ready soybean, purchased locally. (Monsanto designation listed as "glyphosate-tolerant soybean line 40-3-2") Going back in rotation we find corn, hay, and soybeans in that order. Herbicides used included Roundup and Atrex. In 2003, Roundup was applied twice. George acknowledged that the region of the field closer to Weasel Run had zones that were quite iron rich and reddish, as we noted in our "furthest" control soil samples. To his knowledge, no houses or outbuildings had ever existed on the field property, however to the northwest was a location said to have once supported an historical Indian (Shawnee) village. We would presume that the region of the field would also have - in centuries past - been frequented by the Moundbuilder peoples. Soil Analysis Part I - Magnetic Particle Extraction: A. Procedure: All soil samples were transported to Gibsonburg in their respective baggies. Dessication of the samples was performed in NR's garage attic, a warm dry undisturbed location. Each soil sample was emptied out onto a pencil labelled paper plate, and the original transport baggie was placed next to it open. Paper towel squares were gently placed over each plate to afford dust shielding. Each sample was carefully screened by hand for worms, which when found, were transplanted into NR's garden. (A zero casualty experiment is a good experiment!) Soil samples were allowed to air dry for eight days, until no discernible moisture could be seen and felt upon breaking open clods. All samples were re-packed into their respective baggies and transported to our Toledo lab location.
For each sample, we then decanted slightly more than 150 ml of the sieved product into a separate beaker, and tapped down to a precise packed volume of 150 ml.
The wrapped magnet was transferred to an open plastic baggie that had been pre-weighed to milligram precision (Stanton Unimatic lab balance). The magnet was then removed upward, allowing the attracted contents to fall into the outer baggie. The magnet wrapping baggie was then also removed and discarded. The baggie containing the magnetic soil residua was then re-weighed and the net weight of the residue was recorded. Residue bags have been retained for our records and further work. Each sample of soil was treated identically, between 15 April and 18 April. The remainder of each sieved soil sample was set aside in labelled baggies for agricultural soil testing (next section). B. Results: Every sample tested produced a small quantity of magnetic residue. The sample size and balance resolution was found to be quite adequate for the protocol used and residue quantity recovered. We gave careful consideration to the question of proper units for expressing our results. Because of unknown and/or variable soil composition, we decided to express the content of magnetic particulates in the form of milligrams per unit volume (a derivative of planar soil area) rather than milligrams per gram, as has been the previous traditional unit used by W. Levengood. However, in order to provide a useful comparison, we measured the weight of several of our 150ml samples and designated a rough average of 180 grams per sample. Using this figure, we can then easily render the results in milligrams per unit weight (mg/g). The following tables and plot display our results: Table 1: Raw weight data
Table 2: Calculations for magnetic content
Table 3: Table 3: Sorting by sample type
As may be easily noted, a range of magnetic particle distribution exists, although a correlation to specific zones of the formation or control areas does not seem strong. Both surface and subsurface samples from site "G" contained dramatically more ferrous content than other regions. We noted by eye the reddish hue of the soil from this location, and acknowledge George McCoy's confirmation of the iron rich (oxidized) nature of that spot. While statistics may be applied to the raw data, our small number of meaningful samples would likely obfuscate any data treatment. We allow the data to stand as is, in a qualitative mode, or as a first order evaluation. C. Discussion: In previous research In a more general evaluation of previous work on soil analysis, we find that two very fundamental components are noticeably absent. First is a thorough (or at least stated) understanding by the crop circle research community as a whole as to what constitutes typical agricultural soil content. Secondly, there seems to be a previous lack of use of accredited agricultural laboratories that routinely do in-depth analysis of crops and soil. If we focus specifically on the concept of magnetic extraction, we must ask ourselves, "what do
we expect to find here?" The answer would seem to be "anomalous quantities and forms of magnetic media." The key
to this is the term "anomalous." What constitutes anomalous? In his discussion of the claimed H- Glaze found at
Cherhill, UK, 1993, R. Ashby disclosed the discovery of Fe3O4 magnetite in the form of an amorphous glaze and
micro-spherical species Under an optical microscope, we find that a portion of our extracted magnetic material from the Serpent Mound formation seems to be non-magnetic coating or dust on magnetic particulates, dragged along for the ride, so to speak. By performing a swirl in distilled water over a magnet, the magnetic residue from sample B-3 was washed and "refined". We find that about 30% by weight of the residue rinsed off, leaving a much purer collection of magnetic species to examine. We also note that aqueous separation may indeed prove a more viable and complete extraction method that we should consider in the future. Much of the material remaining consists of irregular grains ranging from 100 microns up to a millimeter in diameter of what appears to be natural magnetite Fe3O4. Some smaller darker grains of irregular shape may well be meteoric or from abrasion of plow points, discs, and harrows in the field, in years previous to the no-till farming. We also observed in our washed residue some number of spherical particles, from about 10 microns to perhaps 50 microns diameter. The fabled microspheres of crop circle lore? What are these structures? One valuable "forensic" clue concerning the possible origin of the crop circle microspheres came
to our attention recently
If the form of magnetic components in the soil is disregarded, do we find any evidence that in any of our sampled locations there is an anomalously high concentration of these particles in an absolute sense? Again, we must ask, "what constitutes anomalous?" In numerous lab reports by Levengood and Burke since 1995, a figure of "0.4 mg/g" is cited as being a maximum typical figure for magnetic species content in agricultural soil. The origins of this figure remain unclear and anecdotally referenced. We investigated this topic recently. What we have discovered is that soil science acknowledges a very broad range of possible magnetic
content in soils - entirely dependent on location and local geology! An excellent short resource paper by
Thorleifson Thus we come back to our questions about what constitutes the anomalous; do we find any anomalous magnetic material in our soil samples from the Serpent Mound formation? To the extent sampled, it would appear not. There does not seem to be compelling evidence that the magnetic materials extracted show a strong pattern of either quantity or form that relates directly to the crop circle formation. We temper this however with the statement that for true evaluation a far greater sample density with many multiple control positions would be needed. Soil Analysis Part II - Commercial Agricultural Testing A. Procedure: In March of 2004, we established contact with Mr. Mark Flock of Brookside Laboratories in New Knoxville, Ohio. Mark indicated that a thorough regimen of chemical / compositional tests were available for soil samples, and have formed a basis for agricultural science for many years. For a modest fee, approximately 50ml of sieved dried soil could be analyzed for chemical content, organic content, and cation exchange capacity. Mr. Flock was unfazed by the admittedly unusual circumstances of the samples, and has been most helpful in further technical discussion since. Approximately 75 ml of eight of the fourteen original soil samples taken from the Adams County location were packed and prepared for analysis by Brookside's technical staff. We hand delivered these to the New Knoxville facility on 23 April, 2004. The standardized test ordered for each sample was designated as the Brookside S001B protocol. B. Results: On 28th April we received results from Brookside, and made an initial examination of the numbers included. All data was conveniently recorded on two run sheets, copies of which are appended herewith as Example A and B.
A number of subtle relationships seemed apparent, and on 29th April, we conferred with Mark Flock of Brookside in order to walk through the results, and consult his knowledge and experience base. There exist several cases where soil from within the formation differs from the control regions A and G, or a trend that would seem to relate was observed. This was more apparent on the surface soil samples than the subsurface. All of these cases were found among clay fraction cation species, and "extractable minors". This latter category concerns elements that are present in the soil in parts per million, and may include both compounds and ionic forms. The cation species wherein we see a trend related to the formation include: Calcium - a slight increase in saturation percent over controls (saturation percent indicating
the amount of a particular cation in the soil divided by the total cation capacity for that soil sample) In extractable minors, we find: Boron - a slight increase in ppm over controls. Mr. Flock indicated that in the table of exchangeable cations, a maximum value of 7% to 10% deviation may be expected in raw value (not the calculated saturation percent) among samples from a single relatively homogeneous field, from identical depths. Mark’s opinion was that disregarding the circumstances, the differences in the aforementioned five elements, while not dramatic trends, seemed significant and would at least be worthy of further investigation. The Ca deviation was of particular interest, as was the B (boron). Comparing the subsurface control samples with the single subsurface sample for area E (in the vesica shape) we find the relationships to be somewhat less clear. We also find deviations between surface and subsurface samples in the same locations. This was not surprising, in Mark’s view. We inquired with Mark as to whether the spread of values for soil components would be of use in predicting whether crops growing in those same areas the next season would be more lush and vigorous, or attenuated. He indicated that this was highly dependent on the crop planted. If the same crop were planted a second time, he felt that it might be possible that the increased Ca and B would promote better growth, but this was very speculative. We furthermore inquired as to whether Ca, Fe, and B could potentially leach into the surface soil from downed beanstalks over winter. Mark felt that in his experience, this was unlikely with no precedence to support it. Overall, Mark felt that George McCoy’s field was exemplary and fertile, and he was impressed with the high amount of Mn (manganese) present. One suggestion levied for Mr. McCoy was that the content of zinc (Zn) might need to be raised for optimum corn growth. C. Discussion: While commercial agricultural analysis has apparently been under-utilized by crop circle research,
we find at least one anecdotal account of a shift in the level of an apparently ionic species (Na) in grass
stems The shifting of cation species, if found to be a repeating property of crop circle soils must be considered carefully. If we apply deductive reasoning, we find that ultimately only three mechanisms can exist for this phenomenon:
Occam's Razor would suggest explanation number two as being the most reasonable. However, only repeated observation of trends and consideration of the properties of the included elements will clarify what biological and or chemical process would influence those particular components. We must also consider the remote possibility that the action of human visitors in the form of soil compaction from footsteps might be involved. This does not, however, easily explain the changes seen in the sample from location "C" - within the formation, but not downed. Conclusions and General Discussion: The success of this project must be considered at several levels. It is our opinion that our forensic approach to the phenomenon and the event is worthy of application toward future events of its kind. We examined selected soil from a claimed high strangeness crop circle over seven months after the event, and would conclude the following:
In addition to the analytical conclusions, we have found much of value in the learning and refinement of methodology. We also have noted a variety of caveats and shortcomings of protocol that must be addressed in any future experimental procedures of this type. What have we learned along these various lines?
In the end, no firm answers are available from such a truncated study as this, nor were any anticipated. However, we are extremely intrigued by the hints of cation activity in the soil, and find in this modest evidence plenty of reason to sample future crop formations in similar - but far more exhaustive - fashion. Intuition is an important tool to the detective or scientific criminologist, and it was intuition combined with a respect and appreciation for the majesty of chemistry that led us to these results. And as suspected, we learned a lot along the way. It would be tempting to devote a closing ramble to the speculation of how the results of this study support this or that model of crop circles. We must refrain however - it would not be appropriate. Too many years and valuable scientific man-hours have been spent in presumption. For simple concepts or anomalies, this is not a major faux pas. Scientific Method is based on the acquisition of evidence to support or refute a hypothesis. However for phenomena as rich and complex as crop circles, the researcher / anomalist must be very open and accomodating of a continually re-adjusting body of evidence. Many good minds have felt frequently that something is looking back up our microscope at us here, with the faintest hint of a smirk. We would not dare to argue. So what then is our duty in this whole sordid affair? What should our mindset and methodology be? We are the detectives, sworn to use our intuition, our resourcefulness, our minds, as well as the good tools of science, to solve a mystery and solve it with all the tenacity of Sherlock Holmes tracking the elusive Professor Moriarty. We will prevail. We would like to thank the following individuals for their contributions and inspiration: Nancy Talbott, W.C. Levengood, John Burke, Jeff Wilson, Dr. Charles Lietzau, Ted Robertson, Roger Sugden, Delsey Knoechelman, Kelley Theofilos, George McCoy, Mark Flock, and Dr. Samuel Faile. References:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
by Levengood
et al, the distribution of anomalously high amounts of ferrous particles in crop circle formations is discussed.
Certainly, the notion that such a component to the phenomenon exists has become part of the prevailing crop circle
paradigm. Numerous other formation investigators have performed in-situ magnet dragging tests and have claimed
that their magnets are loaded with ferrous residue when they are done. We would suggest, however, that these tests
have often not been performed with a precise and documented protocol and sufficient controls. In discussion with
Nancy Talbott of BLT Research, we find that soil sampling and analysis has generally lagged behind plant stalk
sampling in procedure and treatment.
. In a number of unpublished research
reports, Levengood and Burke have repeatedly cited the observation of microspherical Fe or magnetic iron oxide in
crop circles, presumed to have been of meteoric origin. However, in order to ascertain the anomalous, we have to
first thoroughly understand what is not anomalous!
. Microspherical fly ash from coal
fired power plant exhausts, although now scrubbed by electrostatic and magnetic precipitation to a level claimed
to be over 90%, can contain up to 40% magnetic Fe3O4 - in the same shape and size as the better known glassy
sphere (aluminosilicate) fractions! In short - a large portion of fly ash emptied into our ecosphere over the
decades consists of magnetic iron and magnetite microspheres identical to those cited in crop circle studies.
Soils worldwide may well be highly loaded with these species, quite apart from (though not necessarily refuting)
meteoric origins. The US Clean Air Act of 1970 purportedly imposed limitations and controls on fly ash, as well
as SO2 and heavy metal fractions, however specific data relating to fly ash emissions by annual weight are
disturbingly difficult to find. We do find references that the annual US production of fly ash combustion
by-product is on the order of 50 million metric tons in recent years
.
describes the magnetic content in soil across
Canada as varying over an order of magnitude between .2 g/kg (identical to milligram per gram) and 5 g/kg. Thus
it would seem that the .4mg/g figure for maximum content in typical soil may actually be on the low end of a broad
range of soil variability. It would also seem that with the exception of control soil "G" in the near bottomland
zone closest to Weasel Run, the magnetic content of our Serpent Mound formation soil samples lies entirely within
a non-anomalous range of concentration.
. In previous analytical work done for BLT Research,
calcium carbonate and calcium oxalate have been encountered in soil samples from both crop circle and UFO landing
trace cases. The shifting in the relative saturation percents of calcium, as well as Mg and K from the Serpent
Mound crop circle soil samples should provide incentive for further similar testing, although we admit that little
can be concluded from this small initial effort. Access to and processing of soil samples from high strangeness
crop circle cases in 2004 and beyond will be essential.