Tag Archives: Robbert van den Broeke

Coming Back Soon

This blog has been inactive for some time, during which the 7,000 plus people on its mailing list have been receiving material and there has been constant activity on the Facebook pages for Suzanne Taylor, for What On Earth?, and for Ex TEDx West Hollywood.

This post is a placeholder to assure you that Suzanne Taylor and Mighty Companions are just as feisty as ever and will be returning to doing regular posts soon.

For a crop circle update, it would seem that the phenomenon has shifted out of England, where the hoaxers have become so contentious that no self-respecting other intelligence would want any more traffic there. However, what is going on in the Netherlands is something else, where the crop circle makers from unknown realms are at play. And perhaps in the rest of the world, as well, where there has been much more activity. But, without any sources to authenticate what’s outside of the Netherlands, although it is likely that we have a burgeoning of the real phenomenon worldwide there’s no way to validate those occruences as to genuine mystery.

For now, look at a clip which speaks to the overall circle situation, that I urge viewers to pass on. Cynicism and skepticism have had far too much sway, where the populace has been steered off paying attention to what is still a fascinating mystery that could be the key to opening humanity’s mind to a bigger picture, beyond the scientific materialism that has us wallowing in greed instead of overflowing with compassion.

A case study in debunking — a gotcha WAR against crop circles and me

Make Love Not War

I am under attack for my last post, Colin Andrews, Crop Circle Culprit, Strikes Again, about Nancy Talbott, who is responsible for the science that’s been done on crop circles, and Robbert van den Broeke, the Dutch medium around whom crop circles form and who photographs images of deceased people with still and video cameras. Look at the sort of things that are hurled at me:

This is war and since Nancy doesn’t want to fight, then the war needs to be fought out on your blog, so please let the combatants through on both sides for a proper go-round.

I must be important to have extensive website pages dedicated to me.

And this, too: Muertos has just devoted an entire new article to you, Nancy and Robbert on his THRIVE-Debunked blog.

Crop Circle Wars! Fake Video Shakes Credibility of One of Thrive’s Main Sources

A bizarre little drama is going on right now in the world of crop circles. A fake video designed to bolster belief in the supposed paranormal origin of crop circles has been making the rounds on the Internet, igniting both indignant recriminations and spirited defenses. This matter may seem extraneous to issues involved in Thrive—until you realize that the fake video controversy directly concerns a website called BLTResearch.com, which is one of the Thrive movie’s go-to sources for the crop circle nonsense that appears so prominently in the first part of the film.

Nancy has come to a basic policy decision not to respond to such things. I can attest that when you get into back and forths with crop circle debunkers it’s like a tar baby that never gives up its hold on its position. Nancy meticulously documents her work on her site, http://bltresearch.com, which the attackers ignore. It reminds me of The Skeptics Society, where nothing outside of ordinary reality is possible so no investigations are necessary in order to debunk things. I’m not going to approve all the gleeful “gotcha” comments that came in on that last post, but am dealing with them in the aggregate here.

Would that you all had heard Saturday’s webinar for DOORWAYS TO ANOTHER REALITY, with Stephan Schwartz. We are part of an infinite realm that Stephan deals with, which would relate to what’s happening with Robbert. I highly recommend you play this 48-minute video of Stephan talking about what’s outside of space and time: http://blip.tv/play/AYHelggC. I guarantee it will fascinate you. (The archive of Stephan’s DOORWAYS webinar will be available if you sign up for the course: http://evolverintensives.com/upcoming/st-doorways-another-world.html. There are three live webinars to go.)

The central premise of the assaults is that Robbert gets his images by trickery, somehow loading the cameras with what produces the results. The attackers document photos that can be found online that Robbert then gets, as if that’s proof of trickery. But, not so. Some images are online, but they don’t end up in Robbert’s photos through any manipulations of his or anyone else’s.

Here’s the first response I got from Nancy when I passed along critiques to my Colin post and asked if she would deal with them:

When you stand up publicly for what you believe is the truth–as you did in this case (and which you chose to do on your own based on what I see as solid reasons for your trust)–this is the kind of baloney you ALWAYS get if the facts themselves are (a) beyond some of your readers’ capabilities to grasp, or (b) the truth scares them, (c) they’re mentally impaired, or finally (d) they’re debunkers. [Egotism and arrogance may involve all of these problems.]

I have written in laborious detail all of the info anyone with either the basic intelligence and/or the degree of courage needed to understand the situation should require. And the only suggestion I can make to any of these people is that they READ the details. If they refuse to do this, or if they choose to dismiss me as stupid or a liar, there’s really nothing more I can do. 

People with sincere interest will read the reports–ALL of the info presented, not just look at the pictures. Intelligent people will grasp the complexity of the situation and would, I should think, either be fascinated with what the these facts suggest or, at the very least, have the courtesy to address me with any real questions they still may have. Since no one has asked me a single question I see no reason at all to respond to superficial or disrespectful commentary.

I would suggest that you not bother to respond. And if you feel you must (which I think is ill-advised), simply point out again that people must READ the reports. And tell them that if they then have genuine questions, to pose them to me directly. I will always answer a sincere question. I will not waste time answering superficial or insincere (or rude) questions. (My pay-grade doesn’t cover these.)

Well and good, but there is voluminous material on Nancy’s site, and I didn’t see this being an effective response when indeed there is a very effective rebuttal to all the daggers. I finally got Nancy to relent and to give some bullets of information, all of which can be found on her site, that counter the assaults.

Apparition Photos report: http://www.bltresearch.com/robbert/apparition1.php

Primary Facts Not Addressed by Debunkers:

1.         Robbert began getting photos of people (Apparitions) back in early 2004–HE HAD NO COMPUTER.

2.         Some of these early Apparition photos were of his OWN DECEASED RELATIVES, people he therefore KNEW were dead. 

3.         Many of the images of people who appeared in 2004 and 2005 and early 2006 were famous people and many others were of people Robbert DID NOT RECOGNIZE….and still doesn’t.  

4.         During 2004, 2005, 2006, he took HUNDREDS of photos of people (Apparitions) USING HIS CLIENTS’ CAMERAS (people he did not know prior to their visits and most of whom came to him wanting info about their deceased relatives). These clients were WATCHING ROBBERT AS HE TOOK THE PHOTOS USING THEIR CAMERAS.

5.         When the Apparition photos were taken with his clients’ cameras IT WAS THE CLIENTS WHO IDENTIFIED THE IMAGES AS THEIR DECEASED RELATIVES (often the relatives they had come to see Robbert about).

6.         The first time I personally witnessed Robbert taking photos showing people’s images was in 2006. Robbert was using MY camera and I was standing literally right next to him (my head touching his so I could see the LED screen as he took the shots) and saw multiple images of a man appear whom neither of us recognized.     

7.         In 2007, out in a crop circle field in broad daylight, Robbert took 60+ photos of MY OWN BROTHER who had died just two months earlier, USING MY CAMERA for the very first time that summer, and WITH ME STANDING RIGHT WITH HIM THE WHOLE TIME AND WATCHING EVERYTHING HE DID.

8.         Also in 2007, using Andreas Muller’s camera while Andreas, Robbert and I were out in a crop circle field, again in daylight (with no computers present), Robbert photographed an unknown man–with Andreas and me watching the whole time. None of us recognized the man.

9.         In 2008, using the highly-respected American parapsycholgist DR. WILLIAM ROLL’s BRAND NEW CAMERA, Robbert obtained multiple images of three different men–with Dr. Roll and me standing right there watching. None of us know who any of these men were.

10.       Robbert got his first computer in July of 2006. He did not begin to learn how to use it until the winter of 2006 and still does not know how to do very many things with it. It DOES NOT HAVE PHOTOSHOP OR ANY SIMILAR PROGRAM ON IT AND NEVER HAS HAD.  



And if you look 1/3 of the way down Part I of the Apparition Photos report, you will see this text, outlined in a box:

Basic facts regarding Robbert’s apparition photos:

(01)  Robbert usually feels a distinct “energy presence” as images begin; 

(02)  He aims any camera toward this “presence” and takes the photo;

(03)  The cameras are always set in the Auto mode;

(04)  The images do not appear on the LED screens until Robbert actually
depresses the Record button;

(05)  The apparition images, if they are occurring, then appear instantly;

(06)  Multiple cameras used within a specific time-period may all produces
images of the same apparition;

(07)  Multiple images of totally different figures may appear in one session;

(08)  Some individual images have appeared up to 60 times;

(09)  These images occur as readily in daytime as they do at night;

(10)  They are occurring with much greater frequency recently;

(11)  No one who has watched Robbert while he is taking these photos
ever has observed him to hold anything in front of the lens;

(12)  Regardless of the available ambient light, the flash never fires. 

– and there is NO computer involved –

This is all I am going to say…if people are sincerely interested they must READ THE REPORTS.  



Colin Andrews, Crop Circle Culprit, Strikes Again

There is something quite awesome going on in Nancy Talbott’s world. Nancy, who for my money is the most valuable player in the crop circle constellation, was a presenter in the Evolver Webinar series I hosted about the circles. Thanks to Nancy and http://BLTResearch.com, we have scientific experiments which are the key validation that crop circles are a real mystery.

DOORWAYS TO ANOTHER REALITY, the Evolver series I’m hosting that starts this Saturday, June 16, has one presentation about the circles, with the other three being subjects that would be more like a situation Nancy is involved with now — each one will take you out of ordinary reality. Please have a look and consider enrolling.

What Nancy is dealing with now involves Robbert van den Broeke, a Dutch medium around whom crop circles form. For seventeen years, Robbert has been getting “premonitions,” not only that a new event is about to happen — a lot of them appear close to where he is — but often exactly where a circle will form and what it will look like. (Nancy was eye witness to one of them! Knowing how straight-arrow Nancy is, if nothing else lets me know that hoaxers don’t account for all crop circles, this report does.)

I was really excited about her new report on something else about Robbert when I saw this story that crop circle pioneer, Colin Andrews, is telling to disparage it.

Over the years, Colin has made erroneous statements about various aspects of the BLT work. That includes an absurd claim that the results of a 1999 BLT study, conducted on an Edmonton, Canada, crop formation — which provided impressive confirmation of unaccountable changes in the clay minerals in the crop circle soil — “supported” his proclamation that 80% of UK crop circles, during a couple of years when he studied them, were man made. This was in spite of the fact that the BLT study had nothing to do with any UK crop circles. That report was widely circulated, whereby Nancy circulated a correction to it. When Nancy — and I — asked Colin to remove the inaccurate statement from his website, he refused.

I have had my own dealings with Colin, about my work, that echo Nancy’s situation. Here’s a write-up of my latest run-in with him: http://theconversation.org/correspondence-with-colin-andrews-over-his-erroneous-and-misleading-postings-about-me.

Colin claims not only that Nancy’s report (http://bltresearch.com/robbert/delgadochorley.php) about the appearance of the late Pat Delgado, an early circle researcher, on Robbert’s digital and video cameras, is “trickery,” but that she and Robbert have offended Pat’s relatives. Colin provides no substantiation for the trickery claim, and I am skeptical about Pat’s relatives contacting Colin and not Nancy. Also, In the videotape posted in the report (link above), you will see how touched Robbert is at recognizing Pat’s face and how much regard he feels for him, and if any Delgado family member saw the BLT report it’s hard to believe they would have felt that Pat had been mistreated.

An enormous array of other highly anomalous events occur around Robbert, including the clear images of deceased people he gets on digital cameras and on videotape. All this is meticulously documented (see multiple individual reports listed at the bottom of BLT’s page devoted to Robbert’s case, link above), and I trust Nancy’s reporting implicitly.

Also, I saw an un-cut video of Robbert taking pictures, and I know enough about the videographer and someone meaningful to the videographer whose image appeared on Robbert’s camera, to be blown away. We all look forward to a DVD with a compendium of videos that will show some of the incredible things that occur around Robbert, and I think everyone who sees what I have seen will think seriously about the larger grid of intelligence, the “cosmic consciousness,” in which we are embedded.

Bear in mind that Robbert didn’t “ask” for Pat, any more than he has asked for any of the deceased people whose images have appeared (including 60 photos of Nancy’s deceased brother). Robbert is a “medium,” whom the dead apparently can use to communicate with the living, but it is not Robbert’s choice as to who “comes through.”

Robbert’s experiences and Nancy’s careful reporting about the astonishing events that occur around him are intriguing and informative, and Colin has done a disservice to us all in summarily dismissing them.