The first formations to be studied on their geometrical characteristics were those of the early 90s. People like John Martineau and Wolfgang Schindler studied these formations intensively. And not without result. Both John and Wolfgang looked mainly at the outer shapes and found many peculiarities. This section briefly shows the outcome of especially Wolfgang's work.

Whereas most people only look at the outer shapes of the crop circles, I took a look inside. By trying to reconstruct different formations, I found that these formations were all based on an intriguing geometry. This geometry was not visible at the outside but it was definitely there. This internal geometry has some amazing implications. In the next sections those implications will be explained. This section shows how this internal geometry functions. See the main-section Crop Circle Reconstructions to get a complete overview of all the steps needed to reconstruct the different crop formations.

There is no coincidence in geometrical constructions. Every element is in size and placing determent by the previous steps. That is the nature of geometrical construction. This means also that if it's possible to reconstruct crop circles using geometrical construction techniques, the different elements within the construction (crop circle) will by nature have special ratios to each other and their placing do follow strict rules. Neither the size of the elements nor their placing is coincidental. This section shows two examples of how this goes for crop circles. It shows that different elements within a formation are indeed not random in size and placing and do have by nature special ratios to eachother.

Geometrical constructions can be made with the aid of a straight edge and a pair of compasses. The compass is obviously being used for making circles. In order to do this you must put the needle of the compass in the paper. While reconstructing crop circles, you have to do this many, many times. The places where you put the needle in the paper you could call ‘construction points’. These construction points were in the formations I studied always on special places. This section shows what it is that makes those places special and which conclusions can be drawn from it.

If you take a closer look at the lay of the crop in a crop circle you will sometimes find pathways of crop under the general lay. These pathways are on average a foot wide and it often looks as if these pathways represent the general outlay of the formation. They look like 'construction lines' and these construction lines have for obvious reasons a very bad reputation. A lot of people think that these lines are the ultimate proof of human activity. But it is not that simple. I will show in this section that construction lines found in formations can turn out to be of unexpected value.

In the mid 90s some of the found crop circles were based on fractals. For instance the so-called 'Juliaset' at Stonehenge in 1996 and the 'Triple Juliaset' at Windmill Hill the same year. In later years this resembling disappeared and was replaced by other features. In 1999 a lot of the crop circles looked three-dimensionally. But did the fractals really disappear? In this section I will show how the 1999, three-dimensionally looking, crop circle at West-Overton (England) also contained an element of a fractal. A three-dimensional fractal.

Especially after the 1999 season, were a lot of crop circles looked three-dimensional, many people got suddenly interested in the three-dimensional aspects a crop circle can have. Already before this 1999 season I looked at the possibilities to reconstruct (two-dimensional) crop circles into three-dimensional shapes. This can be done in various ways, depending on the conventions you make before you start. In this section I will show two different ways of making the two-dimensional patterns three-dimensional.