Ackling Dyke (2), nr Sixpenny Handley, Dorset, United Kingdom. Reported 22nd August

Map Ref: SU017170

This Page has been accessed
Hit Counter

Updated Saturday 6th  September  2014


24/08/14 22/08/14 23/08/14 22/08/14 25/08/14 06/09/14

Images of a “unicursal hexagram” and “face of a sting ray” were drawn in crops on August 22, 2014 near Ackling Dike, within the much larger landscape image of a “blue spotted sting ray” 

The “unicursal hexagram” of Aleister Crowley was drawn in crops on August 22, 2014 near Ackling Dyke (see Why should the crop artists bring our attention to such a strange spiritual symbol?  

This particular “unicursal hexagram” was overlaid with the “eyes” and “gills” of an oceanic “sting ray”:  

We can also see the schematic image of a “sting ray” in the landscape around this crop picture, which was why the field was chosen:  

Many circles or “spots” from a nearby barrow suggest a “blue spotted sting ray” from the Indian Ocean:  

A “face of the crop artist” may be seen within one of those nearby “spots”. He has “signed” his work, but who could he be?  


Two different crop pictures from Sixpenny Handley in 2014 fit together so as to produce the complete “Thelema” symbol of Aleister Crowley: 

Such a strange puzzle! Why draw the “Thelema” symbol of Aleister Crowley in crops, along with the image of an oceanic “sting ray”? What might the crop artist be trying to express by showing us these field images?  

“Invoke me under the stars! Love is the law, love under will. Nor let fools mistake love. There is the dove, and there is the serpent. Choose well!  My prophet has chosen, knowing the law of the fortress, and the great mystery of the house of god” (see  ).  

Perhaps in order to understand this crop picture, we need to consider a second and overlapping landscape symbolism: namely the surrounding image of a “bullet ridden airplane”, which may refer to flight MH17:

Is the crop artist telling us that he will be like a “sting ray”, and will attack the evil perpetrators of such a terrible airplane disaster, out of “love” and out of his own personal “will”?  

The number of “spots” near this crop picture seems to be 18 (see Might those 18 spots symbolize “18 days” from August 22 until a much-discussed date of September 9?  

Finally, will the crop artists just observe as travellers through space and time, or will they act  to reset history like in “Fringe”?

SEPTEMBER (a time traveller): “We are one of countless possible futures for humanity. Our technology has afforded us the ability to travel within and outside of time, so that we may observe our beginnings.”

PETER: “But you've done a lot more than observe!”

We humans of the 21st century wait to see what happens next.

Red Collie (Dr. Horace R. Drew)



Discuss this circle on our Facebook

Crop Circles-UFO's-Ancient Mysteries-Scientific Speculations

Stunning support, within this formation, for the MH370 hypothesis - by Neil Hudson Newman

Important preliminary Note

If this analysis is validated by others, it will mark a turning point in our perception of the crop circle phenomenon, which has always been treated contemptuously by mainstream academia. It will also raise a number of serious questions, pertaining to the missing Malaysian Airways' Flight MH370, which the investigating authorities will no longer be able to just brush aside. 


The two marks of authenticity

I'd first like to thank the Crop Circle Connector for my use of their photographs. And in one of them, below - Fig. 1 - I've labelled a number of its dominant features so I can demonstrate how they enable us, with flexible thinking [always needed for this type of work!], to infer the value of one of the pivotal factors I expect to identify in a genuine crop circle: 6371

As readers of my earlier work should know, this is the geometric mean radius [in kilometres] of the ellipsoid employed as the WGS 84 earth model, which is accurate to the nearest metre. I have also discovered that a sphere of this radius is the model that must be used for geodetic calculations involving crop circles1 - where the WGS 84 Zero Meridian has to be maintained.  

Please note that, below [and subsequently], expressions of the form 'Np' represent 'Nth prime' e.g. 10p ≡ 10th prime [= 23], where 1 must be seen as the 1st prime [as stressed in the past]: 

Fig. 1 

Having recognised that the formation displays this simple link to the factor I consider to be an important mark of authenticity, I decided that the creation deserved my continued attention. 

I soon concluded that, inside the circle, the structure is comprised of two symbolic images of an aircraft, superimposed upon one another and pointing in opposite directions, as illustrated in the symbolic Fig. below [where, for clarity, I've separated the individual drawings]: 

Fig. 2 

And it was clear that each craft displays a subtle manifestation of the 2nd mark of authenticity I expect to find in a genuine formation: a reference to the day of the year it was discovered, as per the calendar currently used in the country where the circle appeared i.e. August 22. 

There are 2 small circles, 3 forked stripes and 4 external vertices; and when these factors are juxtaposed in the order of increasing magnitude, as just described, they can infer 234, which defines the aforementioned day of the year i.e. August 22 was the year's 234th day. 

But I also couldn't fail to note that, when the 2 craft are considered together, they embody the means of generating another manifestation of the 1st mark of authenticity - as illustrated in the Fig. below: 

Fig. 3 

At this juncture, I concluded that the formation probably is authentic. I therefore scrutinised it even more closely, and I wanted to investigate one matter urgently. 

Does any tangible information exist that enables us to identify the aircraft that are apparently being depicted in those two symbolic figures? 

A familiar incident is exposed

It now came to my attention that if, in Fig. 1, I'd labelled the edifice's inner, external vertices as well as the outer, I'd have produced two lots of 6, and this arrangement could have inferred [with the application, again, of flexible (or child-like) thinking] the factor, 66. And as each set of forked lines possesses 6 legs, the two of them can likewise infer a 66. Furthermore, in both of these cases the product, 6 x 6p [= 11], can also generate a 66

Fig. 4 

These observations were of much interest to me because I knew that the repeated, inferred 66 has intimate links to one of the most perplexing aviation incidents of the modern era. On day 66 of 2014 [March 07, UTC], Malaysian Airways Flight MH370 disappeared without a trace, and although a time consuming and costly search operation was undertaken, the aircraft, and the 239 people on board [comprised of 227 passengers and 12 crew], were never found. 

I also knew that I'd uncovered a number of articulate and informative allusions to this event in earlier formations of this year, starting with the one of April 16, at Brimslade Farm, and continuing throughout the season2. So it would come as no surprise to me if I encountered further material pertaining to the Malaysian Airways incident. 

But were the apparent links between the number 66 - which we know was closely tied to the MH370 mystery - and this particular formation, with its two plane-like images, intended, or were they just the outcome of random chance? 

Fortunately, I believe the formation provides us with a simple way of resolving this dilemma and, in so doing, leads us to an extraordinary spectacle of ingenuity and precision. 

Knowing that the factor representing the day the formation was discovered, 234, is engrained on the edifice, it seemed logical to expect that this date would be linked in a meaningful way to the other date the same architects had apparently elected to highlight: day 66. And when I looked at the relationship between the two numbers, I was provided with a definitive answer! 

Firstly, the sum of 234 & 66 is, 300, which equals the sum of 23 & 277, the 2 prime factors of the key geodetic number 6371, which the formation highlights in the ways I've described i.e. the product of 23 & 277 had yielded the 6371 in the computations shown in Figs. 1 & 3. 

Secondly, the difference between 234 & 66 is, 168, a number whose digit sequence, 1-6-8, is linked unambiguously to the flag of Malaysia, which adorned the Boeing aircraft involved in Malaysian Airways Flight MH370. The flag is illustrated at the bottom of the following Fig., but I've added a number of relevant facts about it, including its link to the cited 168

Fig. 5 

Clearly, then, within the blue box that occupies the flag's upper left area, an arrangement can be seen, which comprises a symbolic image of 1 crescent moon, whose extremities isolate 6 of the adjacent star's points [which I've marked with white spheres], leaving the remaining 8 points [marked with red spheres], of the 14-pointed luminary, outside the moon's embrace. 

In other words, the flag's conspicuous insert displays the sequence 1-6-8, which can infer the number we've now derived from the formation: 168. But it's also the case that this sequence, 1-6-8 [→168], can be inferred from the flag in an additional way: the 1 blue insert straddles 6 red & white stripes and is disposed alongside the remaining 8 of them. 

These links between the Malaysian flag and the 168 days timespan that separated the MH370 incident from the day the formation was discovered, when considered in relation to my earlier findings, left little doubt in my mind that the crop circle architects were again wanting to shed light on the tragic and mysterious loss of the Malaysian aircraft. 

And as I knew that the factor 14, which has a conspicuous role on the flag, is unambiguously [but curiously!] related to that Flight's most profound statistic - the sum of the first 14 primes, 1+2+3+5+7+11+13+17+19+23+29+31+37+41, 239, was the number of its human occupants - I was keen to identify what other secrets this formation holds. I particularly wanted to know what the symbolic images of the 2 aircraft flying in opposite directions means. 

The unveiling of a breath-taking dimension

In previous analyses of crop circles, I've been involved with, a link between a formation's day of discovery and some other relevant day of that year, such as the one we've been discussing, has often been matched with an emphasis of a similar relationship between the year involved and another year of interest [again as per the calendar we are now all familiar with]. 

So knowing that the difference between the number we use to define the current year, 2014, and 66, which the formation highlights in the ways I've described, is, 1948, I was curious as to whether that year, or the number associated with it, has a relevance in the current context. 

Although I was aware that 1948 was the year that the State of Israel was formed, I could not imagine how that distant event could have had a bearing on the fate of Flight MH370. I knew, of course, that Malaysia is a predominantly Moslem country but it seemed unlikely that Israel would have perpetrated a covert act of aggression against it, especially one that resulted in the deaths of 227 international passengers. I therefore focussed my attention on the number 1948

I then discovered that the first three digits of the 1948th prime3 - 16883 - replicate the '168' I'd found in the formation. Furthermore, it was evident that the whole expression exhibits a clear concordance with a digit sequence that can be read from the complete Malaysian flag. Indeed, I concluded that as the relationship is actually transparent we must have been invited to find it - as explained below, where I start by showing a repetition of the insert provided in Fig. 5: 

Fig. 6 

To read the 168 we had to travel from left to right i.e. we started at the 1 I'd positioned in the crescent moon, and then moved to the 6 star points placed to the right of the 1, finally moving to the 8 star points placed to the right of the 6. 

But if we'd continued moving in that direction we'd have left the blue box and entered a 2nd part of the flag, directly alongside, which is characterised by its set of 8 red & white stripes. So our brief journey, from the left of the flag to its right, has taken us past structures that are clearly linked to the numbers 1, 6, 8 & 8 in that order, which could infer the number 1688

However, although it would no longer be possible to move from left to right, within the flag, we know that a 3rd part of the structure sits directly beneath the other two, as depicted below, where I've isolated that bottom section and placed the cited 3 in it; I've also inserted the other two numbers in their respective positions [whilst removing the images from the blue box]: 

Fig. 7 

So by reading clockwise from the upper left digit, 1, we can infer, 16883, which we know is the 1948th prime, where the 1948 was derived from data I'd acquired from the formation. 

And my belief that the crop circle was stressing this 16883 was backed when I reconsidered the arrangement shown in Fig. 1. The numerical labels of the 10 depicted enclosed areas of the formation add up to 55 [= 1+…+10], and 55p [= 251] can be expressed as, 168+83

Fig. 8 

Surprisingly, I discovered that this elementary link between the formation's 10 areas that are enclosed between straight lines, and the cited 16883, holds the key to this number's meaning. These areas embody subtle links to the values of the geographical coordinates of the point I'd located in the Bay of Bengal - 20° N  90.18° E - in the context of the missing Flight MH3704

Firstly, 2 of the 10 enclosed areas also contain enclosures i.e. each of them encompasses one of the small circles I cited earlier. And the product of these 2 linked numbers, 2 & 10 i.e. 20, is the described value of the point's latitude [in ° N]. 

The link to the value of the point's longitude [in ° E] is just as definitive but as it entails more stages than the above process I've presented it in the Notes5

Confronted with the possibility that the 5-digit number, 16883, somehow links the crop circle to the described point in the Bay of Bengal, I decided to estimate the WGS 84 coordinates of what I considered to be two points of interest in the formation, the two aircraft's front tips, so I could compute their huge displacements from the minuscule spot in the ocean. 

By comparing, with a Google earth image, the following Crop Circle Connector photograph, I obtained the provisional estimates shown below, where I've now highlighted the tips of the 2 aircraft and labelled the points 'A and B' [I'll explain the significance of the 'O' shortly]: 

Fig. 9 

Although I knew that the quoted coordinates are likely to contain errors, when I computed the accurate displacement [measured on the surface of the cited spherical earth model] from each point to the one in the Bay of Bengal, I could barely believe my eyes. The 2 dimensions were as follows [where each is expressed to the nearest 1/10th metre]. 

A→the Bay of Bengal point = 8441.5104 km.   B→the Bay of Bengal point = 8441.4688 km. 

So this revealed that a point exists, along the axis joining the plane tips, whose displacement from the ocean point can be expressed as, exactly ½ of 16883 km, that point being the above cited O, of coordinates: 50.952402° N  1.976982° W. And this O splits the axis in a 1:3 ratio, at a point of interest: where the 1st set of 3 forked lines starts [when viewed from that end]6

At a stroke, then, I'd established not only what the number 16883 means, in the context of the formation, but also why the edifice's 2 symbolic aircraft were pointing in opposite directions. 

16883 km is the exact distance that would be traversed by a hypothetical vehicle flying from O, in the formation, to the point in the Bay of Bengal - and back again - along the same great circle of the described earth model, as depicted below, where I've disposed the two-way flight path on a Google earth image: 

Fig. 10 

Although the quoted coordinates for the 3 formation points, A, B & O, are only estimates, the possible errors involved will be counted in metres [or less] and not tens of them. We can say, therefore, that a great circle arc - of length 8 million, 441 thousand and 500 metres exactly i.e. 16883/2 km - centred on the Bay of Bengal point, would definitely intersect the formation. 

And as both the latter structure and the Malaysian flag are closely linked to the factor 16883, in the ways I have shown, we can be assured that the crop circle makers, who had conceived of the 2 symbolic aircraft facing in opposite directions7, were making a clear statement about the described aquatic point, as summarised below. 

The point in the Bay of Bengal is closely linked to the missing Malaysian Flight MH370 [which concurs with what GeoResonance had suggested, shortly after the event]. 



Such calculations, ref. the cited sphere, can be undertaken online or with apps for Mobiles. 


My article on the Brimslade Farm formation, dated May 23rd and entitled, Echoes of missing Flight MH370: Part 1, was published on this site. A second article, ref. The Temple Farm [2] formation, was dated July 02, A new set of authentic-looking echoes of the MH370 disaster, which cannot be ignored. And a third, ref. the Hackpen Hill formation, was dated July 10, More support, within another formation, for the MH370 hypothesis. But most of the articles I've written this year have not been published because I've put them to one side after one or more other circles have appeared. In all of the formations I've studied, however, references to the MH370 incident have been conspicuous. 


Long lists of primes are readily available on the Internet or, Mobile apps. But as stressed in previous articles, care must be taken when using them because they all [as far as I can see] fail to count 1 as the first prime. These sources will therefore state that 16889 is the 1948th prime, but that is actually the 1949th. The 1948th is as I've quoted in the text: 16883


The quoted coordinates, of the point in the Bay of Bengal, were first identified in my article on the Brimslade Farm formation [referred to in Note 1, above] but I encountered repeated references to them in subsequent formations. 


The 10 enclosures comprise 8 triangles and 2 quadrilaterals [where the 2 circles are located], and the sum of their internal angles is, 2160° [= 180°x8 + 360°x2], which can be expressed as the product of 4 small primes, 3x3x3x2, and 40°, where 40 exhibits a unique relationship with the highlighted 20 i.e. 40p+20p = 234 [= 167+67], the day the circle was found. 

But the product, 40x3x3x3x2°, can infer, 40px3x3x3x2°, which yields 9018° [= 167x33x2°]. And when this angle is divided by 100, which can be inferred from the relationship between the 10 and 2 i.e. 102, we obtain, 90.18°, the cited value of the point's longitude [East]. 


The relationship between points A, B and O can't be reliably defined because the coordinates of A and B [and hence of O, also] were estimated. Clearly, individual positional errors of just a few metres would change it. 


The arrangement can actually infer 16883 independently

Fig. 11 

© Neil Hudson Newman MSc. [Construction Management]; 05 September, 2014





Mark Fussell & Stuart Dike