More from BLT Research, where they claim (in 2002) that they are soon to publish a paper showing 'remarkable results'.
Levengood has reported finding tiny holes in the plant stems that he says are caused by microwave energy heating the plants from the inside out, turning the water they contains into steam. Levengood and Burke have patented a way to replicate this phenomena, claiming it could lead to new types of plants that grow faster than their conventional equivalents. Conventional scientists typically quickly dismiss the BLT claims, but not everyone is as sceptical. New York philanthropist Laurance S. Rockefeller recently funded the research team to embark on its biggest crop examination yet. Soil samples were taken from crop circles in the Netherlands and the US, along with hundreds of plant and soil samples from a seven-circle barley formation in Canada, and were examined using a process similar to that adopted by Conrad. Preliminary results showed crystal growth similar to those achieved in a laboratory when temperatures of more than 600C are used. Seeking confirmation of the findings from the scientific community, Talbott sent the results to emeritus professor of geology and mineralogy at Dartmouth College, Dr Robert Reynolds, who is considered a world expert in X-ray diffraction analysis of clay minerals. In a letter to the BLT team, Reynolds wrote that the heat required to have made the observed changes in crystallinity would have incinerated the plants. "In short, I believe that our present knowledge provides no explanation," Reynolds said. The BLT Research Team's website says that an academic paper presenting the "remarkable results" of this study is in progress and will be submitted for publication soon. |
This paper has been promised on the website since at least February 2003, as the Wayback Machine's archives show. It has been linked from their web site ('Clay-Mineral XRD Study') since at least March 2004.
So in a minimum of 2 years they have failed to get it published. It seems a little disingenuous, or at best hugely optimistic, to still list it in the 'published materials' section of the site and to still describe it as 'in progress'.
But failure to be published in a peer-reviewed journal has not prevented a review of this 'paper' by the National Institute of Discovery Science, a "privately funded science institute engaged in research of UFOs, animal mutilations, and other related anomalous phenomena". Even with their credulous bent, they feel compelled to list these shortcomings of this latest BLT study:
The limitations or shortcomings of their study are given below, followed by explanations.
1. Only the aerial portion of the plants collected were studied. No roots were taken and examined for damage due to heating or other causes. Root tips are the fastest growing portions of plants, and the most sensitive to damage from heat. Soil samples were taken only as deep as 1/2 inch, which would have been above most roots and root tips. A second set of soil samples with roots should have been collected to show if the clay mineral effects are limited to the top of the soil, or penetrated down as far as the root tips. Damaged root tips would be a secondary method of verification that clay samples experienced extreme although temporary (flash) heating. 2. More sampling is needed, since 83 soil samples are not enough to assure skeptics that another 50-100 samples wouldn't have changed the statistical results. Even if money to process only 83 samples could be obtained, additional samples should have been collected and stored as backup for later study, especially by another laboratory. Because nine samples were lost in the mail, a backup set of samples would have provided replacements. 3. Because a significant number of crop formations have been hoaxed, it is important to show that the results obtained for the 1999 Edmonton crop formation can be reproduced in unhoaxed formations, and also show that similar results cannot be obtained from hoaxed formations. This report and study should be regarded as a pilot study that indicates scientifically valid and important information can be obtained in larger studies. With more comprehensive sampling, questions raised in this review could be answered. 4. Information from other relevant studies needs to be added, along with references, when this study is published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal. It is important to show that only through heating to high temperatures do clay minerals change crystallization characteristics. 5. Information from other relevant studies needs to be added, along with references, when this study is published in a peer-review scientific journal. It is important to show that statistics are needed to detect clay mineral changes in laboratory experiments, and that these changes correspond with what is found in nature. 6. To gain recognition, consideration through peer debate, and ultimate acceptance in the scientific community, this study must be published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal. |
