| DONATION BUTTON |
I find myself embroiled in what has to be one of the most intriguing and revealing paranormal
disputes ever. This began with an event reported on this website on May 15, 2012 ( Link )
regarding medium Robbert van de Broeke who claimed to have received images and
messages from deceased crop circle researcher Pat Delgado, a very good friend and co-
author with me of the first book written on crop circles, Circular Evidence.
As stated in my original report, the content and tone of the message bore no relation to Pat
Delgado and was upsetting to me and the Delgado family. My criticism of Robert’s methods
and ethics, along with conveyance of the Delgado family’s concern and belief of “trickery”
resulted in a maelstrom. Events have escalated with yet another paranormal event reported
by Robert van de Broeke in the form of messages from and images of two more deceased crop
circle researchers and friends of mine, Paul Vigay and David Kingston.
Robbert’s original posting of this event on July 13, 2012 provoked much reaction and Robert
quickly modified it. Here is a translation of his report with the changes shown below. The Dutch
version can be seen on Robberts own website.
A third and much more extensive one was later issued by Nancy Talbott on the BLT website,
along with her own additional coloring of events, I will deal with that later in this aricle.
This is Robbert's Posting (with the changes between version one and two are seen below it):
translated by Tom Mellett
July 13, 2012
Colin Andrews is a circle researcher who has been attacking Robbert. He started a war against
Robbert because he (Colin) wants to 'unmask' him (Robbert) as an (alleged) crook. In the
past, Colin believed in crop circles but not any more, and now he is siding with the skeptics.
Robbert has a message for him --- see the report below.
On the night of July 12 (officially July 13) around 3:15 AM, Robbert suddenly heard a ringing in
his ears and became dizzy. Robbert clearly felt the spirits of two deceased individuals, and
then he suddenly heard very clearly the names of Paul Vigay and David Kingston.
Robbert then heard: “Hello Robbert,” and telepathically received a very powerful
communication from both of them that this is a message that he (Robbert) must publish.
They indicated to Robbert that the crop circle phenomenon is very precious to them and they
do not condone the attacks of Colin Andrews (on Robbert). They told Robbert that they both
stand very steadfastly behind him and behind the research that Nancy (Talbott) does and that
Colin Andrews must work on himself.
[They said] that Collin formerly lived in light and love, but now he is being more influenced by
negative forces, and has gone over to the dark side. They told Robbert that they (Paul and
David) keep a watchful eye on Colin and that they send him much love and light, whereby he
may learn to love himself more, and love others as well. Both Paul Vigay and David Kingston
call upon the public to send massive amounts of love to Colin Andrews, so that he may come
out of the darkness. Colin Andrews also has to watch out for his heart, and one of his lungs.
Then Robbert asked telepathically whether he could make photo images, where they would be
allowed to manifest and then he got a very clear YES!
Robbert discovered that the batteries (in his camera) were almost dead, so he immediately
decided to take pictures while Paul and David were still present. Faces appeared, which
proved to be the two personalities. Next, when the mask of a joker materialized, Robbert
asked what the image of this mask signified. Robbert received the answer. It meant that Colin
Andrews wears a mask (in daily life), and does certain things that are not good. Here is the
reason why it is a joker mask: whenever people hear Colin speak or write anything negative
about Robbert, Colin makes a fool out of himself and people laugh at him.
They find it important that Robbert and Nancy continue their work together.
Greetings of love and wishing lots of light for everyone from Paul and David!
disputes ever. This began with an event reported on this website on May 15, 2012 ( Link )
regarding medium Robbert van de Broeke who claimed to have received images and
messages from deceased crop circle researcher Pat Delgado, a very good friend and co-
author with me of the first book written on crop circles, Circular Evidence.
As stated in my original report, the content and tone of the message bore no relation to Pat
Delgado and was upsetting to me and the Delgado family. My criticism of Robert’s methods
and ethics, along with conveyance of the Delgado family’s concern and belief of “trickery”
resulted in a maelstrom. Events have escalated with yet another paranormal event reported
by Robert van de Broeke in the form of messages from and images of two more deceased crop
circle researchers and friends of mine, Paul Vigay and David Kingston.
Robbert’s original posting of this event on July 13, 2012 provoked much reaction and Robert
quickly modified it. Here is a translation of his report with the changes shown below. The Dutch
version can be seen on Robberts own website.
A third and much more extensive one was later issued by Nancy Talbott on the BLT website,
along with her own additional coloring of events, I will deal with that later in this aricle.
This is Robbert's Posting (with the changes between version one and two are seen below it):
translated by Tom Mellett
July 13, 2012
Colin Andrews is a circle researcher who has been attacking Robbert. He started a war against
Robbert because he (Colin) wants to 'unmask' him (Robbert) as an (alleged) crook. In the
past, Colin believed in crop circles but not any more, and now he is siding with the skeptics.
Robbert has a message for him --- see the report below.
On the night of July 12 (officially July 13) around 3:15 AM, Robbert suddenly heard a ringing in
his ears and became dizzy. Robbert clearly felt the spirits of two deceased individuals, and
then he suddenly heard very clearly the names of Paul Vigay and David Kingston.
Robbert then heard: “Hello Robbert,” and telepathically received a very powerful
communication from both of them that this is a message that he (Robbert) must publish.
They indicated to Robbert that the crop circle phenomenon is very precious to them and they
do not condone the attacks of Colin Andrews (on Robbert). They told Robbert that they both
stand very steadfastly behind him and behind the research that Nancy (Talbott) does and that
Colin Andrews must work on himself.
[They said] that Collin formerly lived in light and love, but now he is being more influenced by
negative forces, and has gone over to the dark side. They told Robbert that they (Paul and
David) keep a watchful eye on Colin and that they send him much love and light, whereby he
may learn to love himself more, and love others as well. Both Paul Vigay and David Kingston
call upon the public to send massive amounts of love to Colin Andrews, so that he may come
out of the darkness. Colin Andrews also has to watch out for his heart, and one of his lungs.
Then Robbert asked telepathically whether he could make photo images, where they would be
allowed to manifest and then he got a very clear YES!
Robbert discovered that the batteries (in his camera) were almost dead, so he immediately
decided to take pictures while Paul and David were still present. Faces appeared, which
proved to be the two personalities. Next, when the mask of a joker materialized, Robbert
asked what the image of this mask signified. Robbert received the answer. It meant that Colin
Andrews wears a mask (in daily life), and does certain things that are not good. Here is the
reason why it is a joker mask: whenever people hear Colin speak or write anything negative
about Robbert, Colin makes a fool out of himself and people laugh at him.
They find it important that Robbert and Nancy continue their work together.
Greetings of love and wishing lots of light for everyone from Paul and David!
| Paul Vigay David Kingston Pat Delgado |
| Colin Andrews |
| Dutch Medium Robbert van den Broeke |
A statement was posted on July 13, 2012 by medium Robbert van den
Broeke on his website concerning myself and messages from two more of
my deceased friends, former crop circle researchers....................
Broeke on his website concerning myself and messages from two more of
my deceased friends, former crop circle researchers....................
| I Have Received Messages From Two More Deceased Friends and a Warning - According to Medium Robbert van den Broeke. By Colin Andrews Posted July 14, 2012 |
| The primary tenet in every spiritual tradition is to love each other. It makes the path very clear: remove from within every resistance to love. |
A special in depth investigation into photographs of the kind taken of Pat Delgado and Dave Chorley by Robbert is still underway and I will publish those findings as soon as the specialist has finished his work. This will be posted as a technical paper only. |
| " Surely information of this kind is personal and according to Robbert was a message for Colin, then why not E-mail me, call me or the families concerned, rather than launch it all onto the Internet? That is certainly not Pat, Paul or David talking nor is it ethical or professional - to be honest I think its likely that its Robberts own subconscious working here" - Colin Andrews |
| Translation thanks to Tom Mellett |
| Yet a third more colorful version, supposedly the most accurate was posted by BLT spokesperson, Nancy Talbott. This third version can be read on her website , my response to it follows. This will be my last on this particular matter, out of respect for the deceased concerned and their distressed families. Colin. July 15th, 2012 |
Let’s take a step back and look at the bigger picture. In May Robbert posted images of Pat
Delgado and Dave Chorley with messages that were substantially different from their own voice. I
admit to having an emotional reaction to seeing my mate used in such a manner which compelled
me to join the Delgado family in repudiating the claim. I am sure I could have been less emotional,
and yet, extraordinary claims require, if not extraordinary proof, at least some proof of their
veracity. Surely it is up to Robbert to prove his claim, not me to prove it isn’t true. I have attempted
on several occasions to talk directly with Robbert, as Nancy well knows, and have been rebuffed.
It appears one must agree with Nancy Talbott or be labeled as negative.
I admit to a very sick feeling in my stomach when I think of my friend’s families having their loved
ones used in such a dispute. Even after death these people are not exempt from the crop circle
bickering; only now their voice can be used in any way possible with no shred of evidence to verify
it. Yes, it hurts and makes me want the truth and if that is egotistical and negative, so be it.
If indeed these messages are true, there is only one sensitive and professional route to take and
that is to involve the families of the deceased people. Why is Robbert posting images and
messages first, without even a warning to them?
One has to wonder how dangerous a place our world would be if we were to carry out the
‘instructions’ given to us from mysterious sources. Should the president of the United States go to
war with another nation if JFK returns and instructs him to do so? The direction Nancy and
Robbert have taken forms a very thin and dangerous line that absolves people of personal
responsibility for what they do. It also shifts the attention from the very real question of whether
spirits can communicate from the other side and reduces it to personal squabbles.
I have gotten my answer in regards to the accuracy of Robbert’s work in this particular case. I wish
him no harm and strongly suggest that this highly dangerous war of words end. We are all entitled
to our views and to learn more about what surround us. We do not need to agree, we only need to
maintain respect. I apologize for my emotional reactivity, but I do not back down from my opinions.
Posted after version three of Robbert’s experience was posted on BLT website by Nancy Talbott.
Colin Andrews
PS: 10.30 am US eastern-15th July, 2012
I have just received contact with Pat Delgado’s family who are greatly distressed by what is taking
place. To reiterate, out of respect for the deceased and their families, this will be my final word on
this particular matter.
(The findings of an investigation into photographs of the kind taken by Robbert and referred to in
my website, will be dealt with as a technical paper only).
---------------------------------------
Delgado and Dave Chorley with messages that were substantially different from their own voice. I
admit to having an emotional reaction to seeing my mate used in such a manner which compelled
me to join the Delgado family in repudiating the claim. I am sure I could have been less emotional,
and yet, extraordinary claims require, if not extraordinary proof, at least some proof of their
veracity. Surely it is up to Robbert to prove his claim, not me to prove it isn’t true. I have attempted
on several occasions to talk directly with Robbert, as Nancy well knows, and have been rebuffed.
It appears one must agree with Nancy Talbott or be labeled as negative.
I admit to a very sick feeling in my stomach when I think of my friend’s families having their loved
ones used in such a dispute. Even after death these people are not exempt from the crop circle
bickering; only now their voice can be used in any way possible with no shred of evidence to verify
it. Yes, it hurts and makes me want the truth and if that is egotistical and negative, so be it.
If indeed these messages are true, there is only one sensitive and professional route to take and
that is to involve the families of the deceased people. Why is Robbert posting images and
messages first, without even a warning to them?
One has to wonder how dangerous a place our world would be if we were to carry out the
‘instructions’ given to us from mysterious sources. Should the president of the United States go to
war with another nation if JFK returns and instructs him to do so? The direction Nancy and
Robbert have taken forms a very thin and dangerous line that absolves people of personal
responsibility for what they do. It also shifts the attention from the very real question of whether
spirits can communicate from the other side and reduces it to personal squabbles.
I have gotten my answer in regards to the accuracy of Robbert’s work in this particular case. I wish
him no harm and strongly suggest that this highly dangerous war of words end. We are all entitled
to our views and to learn more about what surround us. We do not need to agree, we only need to
maintain respect. I apologize for my emotional reactivity, but I do not back down from my opinions.
Posted after version three of Robbert’s experience was posted on BLT website by Nancy Talbott.
Colin Andrews
PS: 10.30 am US eastern-15th July, 2012
I have just received contact with Pat Delgado’s family who are greatly distressed by what is taking
place. To reiterate, out of respect for the deceased and their families, this will be my final word on
this particular matter.
(The findings of an investigation into photographs of the kind taken by Robbert and referred to in
my website, will be dealt with as a technical paper only).
---------------------------------------
| This cartoon is Intended in good spirit and agreed to before hand by the characters involved. True friends can jest with one another. |
| COLIN'S CONTRACT |
| Former British Jounalist Dave Haith makes a serious challenge to Robbert van den Broeke. Below |
| Dave Haith is a former British Journalist |
| A CHALLENGE TO ROBBERT VAN DEN BROEKE BY DAVE HAITH July 15, 2012 The problem with mediumistic communication with the dead is that as every parapsychologist knows, it's not enough to say 'I have Aunt Mabel here and she sends her love' That is NOT evidence. Now, maybe being able to somehow produce a photo of the deceased, may count as evidence of survival to Robbert and Nancy Talbott. But in truth it's simply a photo which, aside from using trickery, may have been accessed from the so-called Akashic Records - that 'cosmic library' which some believe to exist. Or as I gather Nancy believes, 'spirit' take the photos off the web and feed them to Robbert's mind and camera. Colin was close friends with Pat Delgado, Paul Vigay and David Kingston. If Robbert really wants to prove that these three are likely communicating, he should come up with some personal facts known only to Colin. That shouldn't be too difficult because there must be a hundred moments these friends shared - but not known to the rest of us, I gather Robbert works as a professional medium and gives readings to people wishing to contact deceased loved ones. I know Colin has unsuccessfully tried to contact Robbert, with no reasons given for refusal. Colin, a trusted friend of mine, is an honest man. I feel sure if he was given real evidence for the survival of his friends, he would publish it as part of his ongoing investigation into this matter. I have known Nancy for many years and also count her as a friend. She is an intelligent woman and given her accounts of the astounding happenings with Robbert, I personally don't believe that she could have been fooled for so long by trickery. I have also listened to interviews with Robbert and Stan and my gut feeling is that they are honest. But feelings and belief are not evidence. None of the rest of us know what really happens there in Holland because we weren't there. So I challenge Robbert and Nancy to set up a special 'reading' for Colin - it could be arranged in moments and carried out on Skype. The two parties could agree for the conversation to be recorded and the rest of us could later question Colin and Robbert on whether the results represent real evidence. There will never be actual proof - because the same Akashic Records argument I used for the photos, could equally be used for any 'secrets' known only to Colin which might be revealed. It could also be claimed Robbert was telepathically tapping Colin's mind. But at least it would be greater checkable evidence that something paranormal is going on - which might do something to settle this 'trickery or genuine' web debate. Of course this kind of small experiment should do nothing to prevent a real scientific investigation of the process involved into how these photos and information are obtained. It is reported that parapsychologist William Roll investigated and was satisfied he witnessed paranormal photography - but he has since died and none of his writings or recordings about this, seem to have surfaced. Nancy also mentions two scientists who investigated and were impressed - but says they refused to be named. Despite the unfortunate vitriolelevelled at Colin Andrews over this, he is simply an investigator who refuses to accept these remarkable claims without evidence. I challenge Robbert to produce it. Dave Haith |
| Updated August 19, 2012 Deceased Crop Circle Artist David Chorley's family issue a statement, the second family to do so: HERE |
Lets Take a Step Back and Look At The
Bigger Picture - Colin Responds To BLT
Bigger Picture - Colin Responds To BLT
I find this most interesting. For the past twelve years I have been researching on a daily basis
the connection between crop circles and consciousness as those visiting my website or hearing
my lectures will attest. In my research I have followed the Robbert van de Broeke case with an
open mind waiting to be convinced of his claims. I have had little to say about his work until he
received alleged messages from Pat Delgado and Dave Chorley, and now Paul Vigay and
David Kingston. The personal nature of these messages gives me direct evidence of their
inaccuracy; I can say that I now have my answer regarding part of Robbert’s work. Other
people will need to find their own answers. I keep an open mind to Robbert’s abilities; however, I
can say with assuredness that he has got things wrong in this one.
First of all, while I did not work directly with David Kingston, both Paul Vigay and Pat Delgado
knew of my daily research into crop circles and consciousness as we spoke regularly and our
findings were in agreement. We shared good intentions and positive desires. While anyone can
report the dead as saying anything they want, in life, Paul, Pat and I agreed with each other’s
assessments and worked together. We had projects on the table at the time they died and their
deaths were devastating blows to me. I have not gone to “the dark side” since Paul’s passing
over and I can’t see why he would be wrong about who I am and what my work is after his
death. For me, there is clear distortion of facts and relationships which should concern the
normal rational mind.
Secondly, what many dislike about me is that I tell the truth as I see it whether it is palatable or
not. I follow the evidence where it leads. This has earned enmity by some and admiration by
others. I answer to my own conscience and take care to nourish my spirit so that I leave this
world better for having been here. My mission is to bring hope, not to trick people as the
message claims. Since I know this to be true, I fear no judgment from the other side as I expect
the other side to see clearly. For me to be obscured to Paul and David Kingston resulting in
their dire message about my motives means that either they did not die or the message was not
from them.
The answers to these discrepancies may unfortunately lie more in personality than fact. My
background as attributed by Robert in his preamble to his version of events on July 13, is
clearly an attempt to write me out of present day research. However, my website reveals the
degree of my involvement and can be seen by all. My work is transparent. The words of the so-
called messages from Paul and David are an attempt to diminish my voice. The fact that my
findings are not always palatable may be more at heart here than any censure of me by my
deceased friends.
As for the concerns for my health and spiritual well-being, I find this most intriguing of all. While I
am sure Paul would want to warn me of health problems, the health problems appear as linked
to my “trickster” nature, implying that if I want to stay healthy, I need to change my opinions of
Robbert and Nancy Talbott, specifically named. Again, Paul knows the truth as do I and so this
message cannot be his.
While people reading this can view my website to know my views, they have no way to know
what is the truth about my relationship with these three men or my true nature. These are my
answers. Everyone will have to come to their own.
.
Both versions are identical up to this point where Robbert describes getting the images in his camera.
Version 1 — originally negative about Colin
Faces appeared, which proved to be the two personalities. Next, when the mask of a joker materialized,
Robbert asked what the image of this mask signified. Robbert received the answer. It meant that Colin
Andrews wears a mask (in daily life), and does certain things that are not good. Here is the reason why it
is a joker mask: whenever people hear Colin speak or write anything negative about Robbert, people
should laugh at him.
Version 2 — now positive about Colin (and much longer)
Faces appeared, which proved to be the two personalities. Next, when the mask of a joker materialized,
Robbert asked what the image of this mask signified. Robbert received the answer. It meant that Colin
Andrews wears a mask (in daily life) and does certain things that are based not purely and solely on ego.
Here is the reason why it is a joker mask: whenever people hear Colin speak or write anything negative
about Robbert, then it is better if they can laugh about it. This is not the real Colin (not what he really is
deep inside), but only his mask, and it is better to laugh at yourself than to get angry or frustrated with
yourself.
It is not Robbert’s intention to ridicule Colin — the real message that came through above all else, is that
we can better get along with each other lovingly by laughing at this kind of negativity in the crop circle
world, because “laughter is the best medicine.” Thus we get along better with each other without
engaging in mutual ego conflicts. We come closer to the essence of authentic human relationship.
----------------------------
Colin continues with his response:
Version 1 — originally negative about Colin
Faces appeared, which proved to be the two personalities. Next, when the mask of a joker materialized,
Robbert asked what the image of this mask signified. Robbert received the answer. It meant that Colin
Andrews wears a mask (in daily life), and does certain things that are not good. Here is the reason why it
is a joker mask: whenever people hear Colin speak or write anything negative about Robbert, people
should laugh at him.
Version 2 — now positive about Colin (and much longer)
Faces appeared, which proved to be the two personalities. Next, when the mask of a joker materialized,
Robbert asked what the image of this mask signified. Robbert received the answer. It meant that Colin
Andrews wears a mask (in daily life) and does certain things that are based not purely and solely on ego.
Here is the reason why it is a joker mask: whenever people hear Colin speak or write anything negative
about Robbert, then it is better if they can laugh about it. This is not the real Colin (not what he really is
deep inside), but only his mask, and it is better to laugh at yourself than to get angry or frustrated with
yourself.
It is not Robbert’s intention to ridicule Colin — the real message that came through above all else, is that
we can better get along with each other lovingly by laughing at this kind of negativity in the crop circle
world, because “laughter is the best medicine.” Thus we get along better with each other without
engaging in mutual ego conflicts. We come closer to the essence of authentic human relationship.
----------------------------
Colin continues with his response:
| A Special Thank You July 17, 2012 Thank you so much to the many messages of support for the families and myself, deeply effected by the recent BLT and Robbert van den Broeke events - made so much worse by the unprofessional conduct of researcher Nancy Talbott in particular. Lets have an end to this. - The work goes on to produce hope for our kids and best we do that by example. Colin Andrews |
| Updated: July 25, 2012 Spiritual Integrity Is What Is In Question |
Spiritual Integrity Is What Is In Question
Colin Andrews
Posted July 25, 2012
In the ongoing debate over the messages received by Robbert van de Broeke from deceased crop
circle researchers, it has been suggested that I remove any criticism of Robbert and Nancy Talbott
from my website. It has also been suggested that the words used by those whose views are presented
on my site and whose websites I have linked to, must necessarily be mine.
My website is an open forum: I frequently post my research or pose a question then present the
variety of opinions that result. This discussion is no different. My initial posting (link) after the alleged
message from Pat Delgado and Dave Chorley incorporates the research and opinions of other
investigators and their conclusions and words including:
• A report from Dr. Roger Wibberley at the University of London who discovered that the images
in Robbert’s photographs of Pat and Dave could both be found in a 1991 BBC interview. His
reasoning and comments, such as that Robbert’s images were ‘fakes’ are his own.
• A statement from the Delgado family about their feelings which included the term ‘trickery.’ This
was their word; however, I stand by the statement and believe the emotional impact of seeing this
claim on the internet could have been mitigated to some degree if the family had been directly contact
by Robbert beforehand. The public internet should not be a family mail box.
• An article researching the Pat and Dave images from the website ‘Thrive Debunked’ (link) which
concluded that the images are ‘fake’. Again, their word.
• An opinion page from respected British Researcher Andrew Russell making a case for
‘objectivity’ and his coverage of this situation with personal comments
• A skeptical opinion page on the website ‘Leaves that Whither’ which takes the view that ‘fakery’
is involved.
• I also link to the BLT website and Robbert’s website, and we know I don’t agree with the
statements they provide.
This site will continue to post relevant research results. At this time no one has submitted any
research to substantiate Robbert’s claims; however, I will gladly post any that are sent. This is not to
say that people haven’t sent emails supporting Robbert’s honesty and talent; they have. I have also
received emails in support of my position. At this time I see no reason to post anything other than
investigative research or links to other postings.
I fully believe in spiritual reality and in the spiritual presence of the deceased. Electronic Voice
Phenomenon (EVP), Instrumental Transcommunication (ITC) and other forms of after-death
communication provide provocative direction. Having been informed of the Scole experiments some
years ago by scientists involved, I have seen firsthand how essential well-designed scientific protocols
can be in researching this realm. I am fully prepared to believe Robbert is a talented medium.
However, I know that even excellent mediums can get things wrong. They can be influenced by others,
their messages can be reflective of their own subconscious, or they can be intercepted by
mischievous spirits. One will remember that the scientific studies which were involved with the Scole
experiments had to be abandoned because negative forces hijacked the mediums. Consequently, I
gage the accuracy of information with four key questions:
Is the message true to the spiritual voice of the deceased being represented?
Does it provide useful information as opposed to carrying on personality disputes?
Does the message inspire people as opposed to manipulating?
Does the message uplift the receiver or does it aggrandize, promote or elevate the messenger?
I leave people to answer these questions as they relate to this case for themselves, or even decide if
the questions are relevant. For me, related to this transmission, the answers are clear.
Colin Andrews
Posted July 25, 2012
In the ongoing debate over the messages received by Robbert van de Broeke from deceased crop
circle researchers, it has been suggested that I remove any criticism of Robbert and Nancy Talbott
from my website. It has also been suggested that the words used by those whose views are presented
on my site and whose websites I have linked to, must necessarily be mine.
My website is an open forum: I frequently post my research or pose a question then present the
variety of opinions that result. This discussion is no different. My initial posting (link) after the alleged
message from Pat Delgado and Dave Chorley incorporates the research and opinions of other
investigators and their conclusions and words including:
• A report from Dr. Roger Wibberley at the University of London who discovered that the images
in Robbert’s photographs of Pat and Dave could both be found in a 1991 BBC interview. His
reasoning and comments, such as that Robbert’s images were ‘fakes’ are his own.
• A statement from the Delgado family about their feelings which included the term ‘trickery.’ This
was their word; however, I stand by the statement and believe the emotional impact of seeing this
claim on the internet could have been mitigated to some degree if the family had been directly contact
by Robbert beforehand. The public internet should not be a family mail box.
• An article researching the Pat and Dave images from the website ‘Thrive Debunked’ (link) which
concluded that the images are ‘fake’. Again, their word.
• An opinion page from respected British Researcher Andrew Russell making a case for
‘objectivity’ and his coverage of this situation with personal comments
• A skeptical opinion page on the website ‘Leaves that Whither’ which takes the view that ‘fakery’
is involved.
• I also link to the BLT website and Robbert’s website, and we know I don’t agree with the
statements they provide.
This site will continue to post relevant research results. At this time no one has submitted any
research to substantiate Robbert’s claims; however, I will gladly post any that are sent. This is not to
say that people haven’t sent emails supporting Robbert’s honesty and talent; they have. I have also
received emails in support of my position. At this time I see no reason to post anything other than
investigative research or links to other postings.
I fully believe in spiritual reality and in the spiritual presence of the deceased. Electronic Voice
Phenomenon (EVP), Instrumental Transcommunication (ITC) and other forms of after-death
communication provide provocative direction. Having been informed of the Scole experiments some
years ago by scientists involved, I have seen firsthand how essential well-designed scientific protocols
can be in researching this realm. I am fully prepared to believe Robbert is a talented medium.
However, I know that even excellent mediums can get things wrong. They can be influenced by others,
their messages can be reflective of their own subconscious, or they can be intercepted by
mischievous spirits. One will remember that the scientific studies which were involved with the Scole
experiments had to be abandoned because negative forces hijacked the mediums. Consequently, I
gage the accuracy of information with four key questions:
Is the message true to the spiritual voice of the deceased being represented?
Does it provide useful information as opposed to carrying on personality disputes?
Does the message inspire people as opposed to manipulating?
Does the message uplift the receiver or does it aggrandize, promote or elevate the messenger?
I leave people to answer these questions as they relate to this case for themselves, or even decide if
the questions are relevant. For me, related to this transmission, the answers are clear.
My investigation with specialists into the photography and the technology part of Robbert’s claims is
still ongoing. In my final report I will consider not just the scientific and technical findings, but also the
testimonials from those who have reason to believe Robbert’s abilities are real. My finding will be as
fair as possible.
As mentioned above, I am in close contact with a number of highly credible people who totally believe
Robbert’s claims are real and that the sheer number of experiences and photographed he has taken
over twelve years speak to this. I have not yet come to my own conclusions on the totality of his work
or ability. I am very concerned that Robbert not be subject to personal attacks as the debate
continues. I know how vulnerable it can feel to be out in front of people with controversial findings.
This work is hard to verify and the debate requires respect.
Let me be clear that my intent is research and I would not be involving myself at all if the messages
were not coming from deceased friends and involving me. I wish Robbert no harm, which I would say
personally if I could reach him. I have asked people close to him to pass it on. I have tried to reach out
through direct contact with Nancy Talbott, who seems to be Robbert’s gatekeeper, and have also tried
to reach Nancy through mutual friends, but have been rejected on all counts. She has made it clear
that the only way she will ‘consider’ talking to me is if I comply with a list of demands. The demands
essentially require suppressing any research findings of mine that are in disagreement with hers. To
do so would not only be moral and spiritually reprehensible, investigation cannot proceed with half-
truths and the search for truth is my ultimate goal.
Consequently, my appeal is directly to Robbert. To be accepted, his claims require transparency and
scientific study. Spiritual integrity is what is at stake. Being the focus of such highly publicized high-
strangeness activity comes with a responsibility that I hope Robbert is prepared to accept. Otherwise
he should not publicize it. I would like to see Robbert provided with trustworthy expert support; a
professional team working with him over a period of time to specified protocols with complete
transparency. I am aware that several scientists have looked at his case, but little has been provided
in the way of protocols, evidence or conclusions.
The personality squabbles are unnecessary distractions from true investigation and only obscure real
findings. Until and unless we can have unbiased investigation, continuing this conversation serves no
purpose. Robbert, I am open to resolving this with you, otherwise I am moving on.
============================
still ongoing. In my final report I will consider not just the scientific and technical findings, but also the
testimonials from those who have reason to believe Robbert’s abilities are real. My finding will be as
fair as possible.
As mentioned above, I am in close contact with a number of highly credible people who totally believe
Robbert’s claims are real and that the sheer number of experiences and photographed he has taken
over twelve years speak to this. I have not yet come to my own conclusions on the totality of his work
or ability. I am very concerned that Robbert not be subject to personal attacks as the debate
continues. I know how vulnerable it can feel to be out in front of people with controversial findings.
This work is hard to verify and the debate requires respect.
Let me be clear that my intent is research and I would not be involving myself at all if the messages
were not coming from deceased friends and involving me. I wish Robbert no harm, which I would say
personally if I could reach him. I have asked people close to him to pass it on. I have tried to reach out
through direct contact with Nancy Talbott, who seems to be Robbert’s gatekeeper, and have also tried
to reach Nancy through mutual friends, but have been rejected on all counts. She has made it clear
that the only way she will ‘consider’ talking to me is if I comply with a list of demands. The demands
essentially require suppressing any research findings of mine that are in disagreement with hers. To
do so would not only be moral and spiritually reprehensible, investigation cannot proceed with half-
truths and the search for truth is my ultimate goal.
Consequently, my appeal is directly to Robbert. To be accepted, his claims require transparency and
scientific study. Spiritual integrity is what is at stake. Being the focus of such highly publicized high-
strangeness activity comes with a responsibility that I hope Robbert is prepared to accept. Otherwise
he should not publicize it. I would like to see Robbert provided with trustworthy expert support; a
professional team working with him over a period of time to specified protocols with complete
transparency. I am aware that several scientists have looked at his case, but little has been provided
in the way of protocols, evidence or conclusions.
The personality squabbles are unnecessary distractions from true investigation and only obscure real
findings. Until and unless we can have unbiased investigation, continuing this conversation serves no
purpose. Robbert, I am open to resolving this with you, otherwise I am moving on.
============================
| "The views expressed by others are not necessarily shared by me personally but all views and perspectives are respected" |
| Verifying "Ghost Photos": Andrews - Robbert By Dirk Vander Ploeg Of UFO Digest Posted July 25, 2012 Link |
| Updated: July 30, 2012. More crop circles/ letter from another medium/ Dutch TV report that farmer accuses Robbert of making them. |
| Dizzy With Crop Circles Around The Home of Medium Robbert van den Broeke - are they for real? Dutch television interviews the farmer who says 'no' and says she thinks Robbert made them. Also another medium says that 'something is wrong in this equation'. Updates by Colin Andrews Posted July 30, 2012 |
| There has been a glut of activity in the area surrounding the home of Dutch medium Robbert van den Broeke - Latest see his website HERE This photo from the Crop Circle Connector Dutch TV interview th farmer who blames the medium of making them HERE English translation: Summary: Robbert swears again he never made a crop circle himself, but the farmer's wife, who is interviewed, says "it's very strange Robbert always know where they are, HENCE he made them himself". And that she is not pleased at all, because they work hard for their living, and now part of their work is destroyed by the crop circle. Robbert's crop circles are always like kids play and very amateurish. > Her response is the so called 'Brabantse nuchterheid' (Brabant sobriety) Another TV station report of farmer blaming Robbert HERE |
| One of the recent circles near Seppe Airport (2), Nr Bosschenhoofd. Photo: Crop Circle Connector.. |
| Letter from Medium Kate Lawler: "This was not Colin Andrews Friends" I have had experiences that would qualify me as a medium! It is Important for you & the Families to know, if a friend or relative dies, when they cross over, their personality does not change. A message may be given to a medium in a number of ways. Through a dream or telepathy however, pay attention. If the message does not sound like the loved one you remember, it most likely is not them. Trust your gut feeling; how would your Loved one talk to you if they were alive? I feel that Robbert van den Broeke is wrong. He is not talking to your dear deceased friends. There are Entities out there that would pretend to be someone else, so they can get into a persons body via channeling. The trick is to say delicately but firmly & with authority, I do not Believe Robbert van den Broeke is speaking with Pat Delgado, Paul Vigay, or David Kingston. Nancy Talbot's opinion & support for Robbert, is not based on Scientific Research. I am writing this to support Colin Andrews, a dear veteran of the Crop Circle phenomenon, since it's beginning. Colin has followed the Scientific Discipline & I trust his experience as well as his opinion. Please rest easy that the Gentlemen who have crossed over, are still watching us, they still love us, that never dies. Let's focus on a positive picture for the future, for our children & Grand children. Best, Kate M. Lawler |
| TV psychic accused of fraud Dutch TV program: Half 8 Live! on WNL |
"Stop it and go find a job!" Said Jose Vermue Standdaartbuiten from
Friday night's Half WNL 8 Live!
Van den Broeke, who gained national fame through appearances in
Life & Cooking, is aware of anything wrong. " I've never done,
because they're real."
See what a reporter in the above fragment Maaike Timmerman
experience as they themselves stand in the crop circle.
Source
Friday night's Half WNL 8 Live!
Van den Broeke, who gained national fame through appearances in
Life & Cooking, is aware of anything wrong. " I've never done,
because they're real."
See what a reporter in the above fragment Maaike Timmerman
experience as they themselves stand in the crop circle.
Source
| The reporter, Maaike Timmerman says she could feel nothing. |
| The book: Robbert van zorgenkind tot medium was written by Robbert and his father and published in the Netherlands in 2005. |
| Dutch TV reporter meets Robbert in one of the crop circles and says she does not feel the energies that Robbert is sensing - see below. |
| Updated August 19, 2012 Deceased Crop Circle Artist David Chorley's family issue a statement, the second family to do so: HERE |
| HOME NEW POSTINGS CONSCIOUSNESS UFOs PHOTOGRAPHY CROP CIRCLE RESEARCH PRESENTATIONS FARM MONITOR STORE MEDIA BIOGRAPHY 2012 DEBATE CLIMATE CHANGE QUOTATIONS LETTERS BLOG CONTACT OBSERVATORY WELLNESS |
| NOTICE: Research Goal My goal is to investigate with a team of experts working with me, some of the specific claims made by Robbert van den Broeke and Nancy Talbott on their respective websites. It is my aim to establish what has actually taken place and establish mechanisms and methods by which they have, or have not, been achieved. There is NO DESIRE TO HURT IN ANY WAY, ROBBERT VAN DEN BROEKE, NANCY TALBOTT OR OTHERS CLOSE TO THESE EVENTS. To eliminate human error or interference could be to learn more about the established subject of Mediumship and miracles that could be larger than any of us. I am not prepared to place my blind trust in recent claims surrounding my deceased friends and colleagues, Pat Delgado, David Chorley, Paul Vigay and David Kingston, based upon restricted data and denied access. Hence this work. Colin Andrews August 2012 |
| Updated August 26, 2012 Deceased Researcher Paul Vigay's family issue statement. HERE |