Crop+Circles+-+Session+4

Session 1 Session 2 Session 3 Session 5 Briefcase Files
 * [[image:earth grid width="253" height="246"]] || [[image:magnetic field width="317" height="244"]] || [[image:crop circle magnetism width="386" height="254"]] || [[image:crop circle magnetism 2 width="338" height="254"]] ||

Toni wondered whether crop circles have recurred on the same sites, and I will look for evidence on this for next week's session.

 * [[image:thrive width="536" height="140"]] ||

The article argued that, because some crop circles are hoaxes it is therefore a rebuttable presumption that ALL crop circles are hoaxes.
====We discussed this reasoning, and compared it with the sort of logical reasoning approaches the students have been looking at in class, and also with the presumption of innocence and burden of proof in law.====

There was an interesting discussion about how to define 'crop formations' and the students felt that the term currently includes those that have been shown to be the work of hoaxers,
====and those whose origins are unknown. We discussed the difficulty of labelling any as 'genuine' as there doesn't appear to be a certain way to determine this, or even a clear basis for this 'genuine' status.====

====We felt that, even though the Debunked article was arguing that all crop formations are hoaxes, it didn't do full justice to the potential motivations of hoaxers, which might include the desire to showcase their abilities, and a creative drive.====

====Referring back to an earlier session, we discussed our reaction to this author. The overall sense was that the students did not like the author, and did not feel that Thrive's arguments were being accurately represented.==== ====Some students felt that the article's argument was all over the place, but this may have been the result of misunderstanding the difference between the article's own argument, and its restating of Thrive's argument.====