Mistakes In the 'Arecibo'
Crop Circle At Chilbolton?
From Bill Hamilton

The arguments and opinions have been raging back and forth on the crop glyph at Chilbolton. I have been favoring the conclusion that this glyph is a hoax or, at the least, not an answer to the Arecibo radio message of 1974.
Many researchers have undertaken an analysis of the message glyph to determine the new form of the message.
Now, Dr. Bruce Cornet has done an analysis of all the analyzers and has found a mistakes in the code referencing DNA.
Dr. Cornet has several degrees. B.A. in biology (1970) and M.S. in paleobotany (1973) at the University of Connecticut, and Ph.D. in geology and palynology (1977) at the Pennsylvania State University. Post-doctorate research in geology and paleobotany at the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, Columbia University (1989-1990). The author or coauthor of 21 refereed scientific papers and two books, all on paleontological and/or geological subjects. 14 years experience in the oil industry, and President of Geminoil, Inc., which successfully explored for and found oil on the East Coast in Triassic age rocks thought to be barren of hydrocarbons (just before the collapse of the oil industry in the early 1980's).
He says:
"Whether or not ETI could figure this out depends on their level of knowledge and understanding of biochemistry. Because of some mistakes in the code for Deoxyribose, Adenine, and Guanine, ETI might not be able to figure out all the nucleotides correctly. Deoxyribose has five Carbon atoms, but the "symbol" for it shows seven Carbon atoms. Guanine has five Carbon atoms, but the "symbol" for it shows four Carbon atoms. Likewise, Adenine has five Carbon atoms, but the symbol for it shows only four Carbon atoms. Within the DNA molecule (as opposed to separate from it), Adenine has only four Hydrogen atoms (two attached to a Nitrogen and one each attached to a Carbon), but the "symbol" shows it having five Hydrogens. These may seem like small errors, but when ETI attempts to figure out our DNA chemistry, those errors are compounded enormously. If the Chilbolton signal crop formation truly came from ETI, then it should have these errors corrected if ETI possess the same DNA and biochemistry as humans. The truth will be revealed in the errors. Drake may have intentionally included these errors so that hoaxers might be caught red handed. And so they seem to have been."
Full analysis with graphics and tables by Dr. Cornet may be viewed at: http://bcorn
Has anyone attempted to contact Frank Drake about this?
Frank Drake:
Professor, Astronomy and Astrophysics (1984 - present) and Dean, Natural
Sciences (1984 - 88), UC Santa Cruz
Member, National Academy of Sciences
Chairman, Board of Physics and Astronomy, National Research Council (1989
- 92)
President, Astronomical Society of the Pacific (1988 - 90)
Director, National Astronomy and Ionosphere Center (1970 - 81)
Professor of Astronomy, Cornell University (1964 - 84)
Bill Hamilton
Executive Director
Skywatch International, Inc.

This Site Served by TheHostPros