"Nancy Talbott recently posted a statement appearing on Facebook which suggested that public questions about BLT's protocol were "insignificant" because lay people don't have the scientific knowledge to understand.
She further claimed that challenges must contain replicated experiments to be valid.
Her approach I considered was patronizing and arrogant, so I felt justified in revealing some firm facts which cast doubt on BLT and Levengood's work - information that I have sensitively kept out of the public domain for many years. Talbott fails to include in her provisions for significant challenges the importance of using double blind protocols in evaluating the scientific merit of experimental results, something Levengood refused to participate in.
I therefore set out my views on another section of the same Report a Crop Circle Facebook page and it was picked up and circulated round the net by retired journalist Dave Haith from the UK.
Below I run his report on the affair and then at the bottom of his report I reproduce the two statements - Nancy's and mine - which have caused all the fuss.
I am awaiting Nancy's defense of this - if she has one - but apparently she has declined to publicly comment further on the issue to Dave.
She asks that people address their questions to her directly through the "Report a Crop Circle" form on the BLT web-site.
This seems a very strange way of dealing with a black and white issue now in the public domain, but I will do as she suggests and challenge her via her website form.
If I and others do not get a satisfactory response, then folk must draw their own conclusions.
But it truly is time for the full truth to be told".
Continued with Dave Haith:
Two Crop Circle Experts Lock Horns
By David Haith
August 26, 2010
The croppie world awaits with bated breath the next move in a controversy which has arisen between two top researchers of the phenomena, Nancy Talbott of the BLT group and Colin Andrews.
Colin says some of the conclusions of BLT's researcher William Levengood are plain wrong and the group should admit the mistake.
He claims to have filmed proof that circle plants Levengood said showed good evidence of the genuine "crop circle making energy" were in fact from a fake circle made by Nancy's own plant samplers.
Nancy sparked the dispute in a piece she wrote for the Report a Crop Circle Facebook page responding to questions about published papers by her BLT group.
She suggested "No reputable professional scientist would challenge already published work without having carried out research replicating the research they are challenging"
She adds: "And if some of the lay-people involved in the crop circle situation are themselves raising questions about the scientific work, such questions are basically insignificant...precisely because these lay-people do not have the academic or scientific training needed to correctly understand what the published material actual says."
But weighing in with his own statement headed: "BLT got it wrong and should admit it and move on", Colin argues: "It does not always necessitate replication of a finding to prove the scientist is heading down the wrong road".
He claims he filmed Nancy's crop circle samplers making a crop circle, sending samples to her from it and then finally viewing Levengood's findings back to them.
Writes Colin: "Mr. Levengood concluded that the plants from this circle were……….....Read full story with the evidence by selecting the heading above.