I wish people would get crop circles out of their heads, and it doesn't help if National Geographic commits verbal shenanigans like this. I can remember back when Erich von Daniken (can't be bothered to check spelling) was new and all the rage.
] On Behalf Of Bob Muckle
Sent: Sunday, June 28, 2009 12:55 PM
Subject: [SACC-L] more on crop circles
Earlier this month, National Geographic new service reported that crop circles led to the recent discovery of previously unkown archaeological sites near Stonehenge.
The National Geographic headline writers played around with "CROP CIRCLES" a bit, to get peoples attention I suppose. What the archaeologists were looking at in aerial photos in southern England were actually 'crop marks', in which buried structures were covered with earthen mounds in antiquity.
Most archaeologists could tell you one of the easiest ways of discovering buried sites is to look at the vegetation on the surface. I've found many prehistoric sites myself this way. It doesn't explain all those fancy designs of flattened crops, or the Nasca lines, but the simpler designs and apparently abnormalities seen in lanscapes from the air often can be explained by past human activity.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]