A new debunking video about
Sarraltroff by some French debunkers and its associated media coverage:
could all of this be “fake news”? No reliable evidence for human
construction was reported there, and there are nine “red flags”
somewhat-obscure crop picture which was first found near Sarratroff in
France on the morning of June 11, 2018 has suddenly become very
controversial in late August of 2018. That is because a new debunking video
was just released by “DEFAKATOR” and other strange, eccentric channels on
YouTube. It has been given lots of positive coverage by the French
mainstream media, but so far no critical scrutiny. Here we will ask whether
any of its many (and sometimes outrageous) claims might be true?
I have made a careful
study of that video, as any capable scientist might do, and could not find
any reliable evidence in it, to support their claims of a
local human means of construction, using “rope and boards”. Also when we
study the details of their verbal claims and this video closely, we can see
nine “red flags”, which cast serious doubt on its veracity in various ways.
Here we will present and discuss those nine “red flags” in some detail.
As general background
information, some good aerial photographs or animations of the Sarraltroff
crop picture may be found in these links (see
The 2018 crop
picture at Sarraltroff was based graphically on two other crop pictures
from France in 2007 or 2008, and it seems to show the dynamic motion of a
Right away, any person
skilled at the study of crop pictures would be able to see, that this 2018
crop picture near Sarraltroff was based graphically on two other crop
pictures which appeared in France near Hesse in 2007 or near Sarraltroff in
2008. The various sceptics and debunkers seem to have not a clue as
to its obvious graphical origins:
Even more interestingly,
this Sarraltroff 2018 crop picture seems to show the dynamic motion of a
“counter-rotating gearbox”, as illustrated in this excellent YouTube
One “large gear” on the left (represented by two large, curved “teardrop”
shapes) rotates anti-clockwise in the outer parts of this crop picture. The
rotary motion of that “large gear” on the left causes another “large gear”
on the right (represented by one large, curved “teardrop” shape) to rotate
clockwise. Finally the rotary motion of that “large gear” on the right next
causes a “small gear” on the left, near the centre, to rotate clockwise
(represented by two small, curved “teardrop” shapes).
for a real mechanical example of a counter-rotating gearbox. In this link
we can see three real gears which turn anti-clockwise, clockwise or
clockwise respectively, just as in the Sarraltroff crop picture. Many
different types of “gears” were drawn in crops in England during the summer
of 2018. I could not find an exact match to the Sarraltroff crop picture in
any existing gif movie, but this somewhat-similar example will give the
reader a good idea:
Finally, part of this
crop picture resembles a capital letter “Q”, which might stand for the
well-known crop artist “Quetzalcoatl” (see
Sarraltroff articlesl ).
number 1: The French debunkers seem to have no idea of any of these
intellectual concepts. They have not told us, for example, where the new
graphical image drawn at Sarraltroff in 2018 comes from? They seem not to
new debunking video was released by a YouTube channel of low quality called
debunking video was released last week as the joint effort of several
debunking YouTube channels from France, one of which is called “DEFAKATOR”
(meaning “a person who defecates”). It purports to show that a large team
of unseen men “made” the beautiful and complex Sarraltroff crop picture of
June 11, 2018 using “rope and boards”. Certainly some crop pictures of the
past have been made using rope and boards. Yet what is the evidence in the
present case? The general quality of other videos from their YouTube
channel seems rather low (see
number 2: The less-than-respectable source of this video should be a
real warning sign, to anyone who is worried about getting fooled by “fake
claim to have made the entire Sarraltroff crop picture in just “90
minutes”, whereas all other man-made crop pictures of a similar kind have
taken 8 to 12 hours
claim made by these debunkers, which would astound anyone with even a
cursory knowledge of “crop circles”, is that they claim to have made the
entire Sarraltroff crop picture in no more than 90 minutes in the
We know that proven man-made crop pictures, made by the best teams in the
UK on contract to media companies, have required 12 hours of hard
work in daylight (see
Thus by any rational standard, this astounding and unevidenced claim can
only be considered as untrue.
number 3: Even the most-skilled human crop-artists would take 8 to 12
hours to make a crop picture of similar size and complexity to the new crop
picture near Sarraltroff. It could not have been done in “90 minutes” as
the French debunkers claim.
back to take an aerial drone video, late at night under bright floodlights
debunkers further claim to have entered the Sarraltroff crop picture again
on some night after June 10-11, when the crop picture appeared, to do
aerial drone photography in the dark under bright floodlights. Why did they
not send up an aerial drone camera early on the morning of June 11, so that
the metadata from such photographs would prove they had made it? And before
visitors from the public might walk through, and possibly damage the
artwork which they had just supposedly made?
number 4: No human crop-artists have ever waited until the next night to
photograph their artwork from the air, using aerial drone photography, late
at night under floodlights. If these debunkers entered that crop picture on
another night to get their photographs, it had to be for some other reason.
“red flags” often lead to five, six, seven, eight or nine
four “red flags” in mind, each of which would count as highly suspicious, I
studied their new video more closely, and saved screenshots from any parts
which show a broad image of this crop picture from above. There are two
major parts of this kind: one brief part around time 26:50, and another
long part around time 37:30. Other images which were shown there, for
example of men pressing down planks in some unknown field, or spreading red
powder on the ground, have no factual relevance whatsoever.
these aerial images from the new video at times 37.24 or 26:51 are shown in
a slide below. The first image at upper left shows what is said to be
aerial-drone photography under bright floodlights, on some night
after the Sarraltroff crop picture appeared. There in one of its
large flattened circles (easily identified by the unique spacings of crop
tramlines), we can see several men sitting down in a small ring on the
ground, while another man stands nearby. Various kinds of equipment may be
seen lying on the ground near them, for example a small backpack just below
and to the right:
image from the lower-right part of this slide shows what seems (at first)
to be the Sarraltroff crop picture in a partial stage of construction. It
would have been taken supposedly during those “90 minutes” of
frenetic activity, when they were “making it in the dark”. Once again, we
can see in the same large, flattened circle (identifiable by crop
tramlines), several men sitting down in a small ring. Perhaps having a cup
of hot tea? We do not see anyone planking or working hard. Various kinds of
equipment may be seen again, lying on the ground near those men, for
example a small backpack to their lower right:
number 5: This second image looks uncannily similar to the first image
shown in the upper part of this slide, which was made on some night after
the crop picture appeared.
similar patterns of illumination from a bright floodlight in both images
Also on the
right-hand slide of both images, as shown in the slide above, we can see a
bright, low beam of illumination from a nearby floodlight, which the
debunkers say that they brought in to help with aerial-drone photography,
on some night after the crop picture was made. When we compare these two
images, we can see right away that the two patterns of illumination look
almost identical. This means that the bright floodlight had to be placed in
nearly the same place for both images. Yet the French debunkers said they
made it in the “dark”. This would seem to be another claim which is
number 6: All of their aerial drone images seem to have been filmed
under bright floodlights on the same night, presumably after the crop
circle had appeared.
strange “white line” with no RGB colour profile
the upper-right part of the second image from 26:51, we can see a long
“white line” which looks like it does not belong there. If it were part of
a “measuring tape”, why can’t we see anyone on the left, holding a spool
for this “measuring tape”? Why does it follow a perfectly-straight path
over many meters of standing crop, then stop suddenly on the other side?
this anomalous “white line” at high resolution, and found that it has
no RGB colour profile like for the rest of the field image. It
is purely “white or black”. Someone evidently pasted a “white
line” on top of the overall field image using computer graphics, rather
than using the detailed image of a real measuring tape.
number 7: A few images from this video suggest that post-hoc
manipulations may have been made using computer graphics.
wait over two months to release this video?
delay of more than two months, between when the Sarraltroff crop picture
appeared, and when this strange debunking video was released, seems totally
inexplicable and highly suspicious. Yet it is typical of past cases where a
film production company needed lots of time to edit or otherwise manipulate
the images which they intended to show (please see for example
number 8: Why were none of these images released right away in June,
before any film company would have time to edit or possibly manipulate
are there no aerial photographs for the early morning of June 11 as proven
French debunking team made this crop picture in 90 minutes in the dark,
during the night of June 10 or pre-dawn hours of June 11, then they should
have many different photographs from first daylight on the morning of June
11 with metadata to prove date, location and time. More than two months
have passed now. Where are they?
number 9: Why are there no aerial images with metadata, to prove when
and where the photos were taken?
reliable evidence for local human construction seems to have been reported
anywhere in this new video
I am still
in the process of studying this fascinating video, but do we really need
any more information, to consider that some or all its claims may not be
true? No reliable evidence for human construction seems to have been
reported anywhere within.
the real crop artists told us in 2002 near Crabwood Farmhouse. I oppose
deception also in 2018. One hopes that the French media will study this new
video more closely, then decide whether they are spreading “fake news” to
their readers? What will so much “fake news” do for your sales and
advertising revenues, my friends?
a “socio-psychological experiment” without ethics approval
of the many claims of these debunkers is that they were doing a
“socio-psychological experiment” on the local people of France (see
seemingly without ethics approval from any local university. They obtained
no permission slips for people interviewed in this so-called “experiment”.
Their purpose was obviously to hold certain identifiable people up to
truly appalling in a moral sense, especially in light of unethical behavior
by scientists at Stanford recently, in a similar case of investigation of
the paranormal (see
They and the newspapers there have no excuses. Instead of entering into a
calm, rational scientific debate concerning the possible origins of “crop
circles”, they seem compelled to resort to “public ridicule and shaming”.
This shows how weak their case really is.
not reflect well on the general character of French society today, its news
channels, or its scientific establishments. It seems more like something
which would have been done in the Third Reich, when German leaders held
Jews, gypsies or any other deplorables up for public ridicule. The German
doctors even did unethical medical “experiments” on these lesser-quality
humans, and were not troubled by ethical concerns. Nor are some of the
people and newspapers in France today. It is very sad.
P.S. As a final salient point, if
those French debunkers had really made the Sarraltroff crop picture with
“rope and boards”, then they would certainly know how long it takes to make
one as 8 to 12 hours, not 90 minutes.
A team of men cannot enter some field at 8
PM in the evening, make a big crop picture, then leave the field and not
know whether the time is 9:30 PM in the evening, or 8 AM on the next
est-il, Monseiur, 21h30 ou 8h?”
Indeed they still do not seem to know, more
than two months later! It is like someone claiming to be a “champion at
golf” yet not knowing that a golf course has 18 holes. Thus we can be sure
that they did not make anything, except on a computer.
These two screenshots from the new French debunking video show a team of
men walking around inside of an already-existing crop picture near
Sarraltroff, France under bright floodlights: what else can we see there?
We can see long shadows
which were created by bright floodlights, mounted close to the ground. We
can see a ring of men sitting around and relaxing in one flattened circle
at lower left. Yet we cannot see anyone actually flattening crop. We cannot
see any large regions of this crop picture that were not already flattened
on the morning of June 11, 2018. And we cannot see anyone rushing around to
make the entire crop picture in a world-record time of “90 minutes”.
This was how National
Geographic pretended to have “made” an already-existing crop picture near
West Kennett Long Barrow in 2005 (see
natgeo_cropcircleshow). Same floodlights, same method. Please see for
Collie or Dr.
Horace R. Drew (professional research scientist, Caltech 1976-81, MRC LMB
Cambridge 1982-86, CSIRO Australia 1987-2010)