-
NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!
Mac Tonnies Book
- Thread starter kevKong
- Start date
Free episodes:
ArchieBedford
Partly experienced
Not read it. I hope it's better than the lame and derivative "The Cryptoterrestrials", the worst book I've read in years (and I read about 30 books each year).
What's "After the Martian Apocalypse" about? The title doesn't sound promising.
What's "After the Martian Apocalypse" about? The title doesn't sound promising.
paraschtick
Paragilmorian guy
I really liked Mac. He was a really nice and interesting guy with some fascinating ideas, but I've not got on with this one at all... yet. There are no pictures in my copy, and I have no idea whether there are in any other editions of it ... but I felt that it really really needed pictures of what he was talking about. No matter how good someone is at describing a geological structure (or purported artificial structure) on another planet or whatever, you really need to see the pictures. I know they are probably on his website somewhere but there is really something to say for having those pictures in front of you with the text.
So ... so far, I've come to a grinding halt with "After the Martian Apocalypse". And I can't even give a precis of what its about
(sorry Archie) ... and I'm usually pretty good at that kind of thing ...[ps anyone know if there is a particular place on Mac's website where I can see the pics he talks about in the book??? Cue chirping crickets ...]
Gareth
Nothin' to see here
paraschtick: http://mactonnies.com/imperative.html
Youre welcome.
Scroll down each page and at the bottom there is a 'next' link to the next page. There is some interesting stuff there.
edit, BTW I spoke to Mac via email about a lot of that stuff as I was going through it. Mac always seemed more than happy to answer questions and offer additional information. He told me that all the material you see there (at the link I posted) basically served as the research for his book that youre reading. It was because of that research that he was offered the book deal, and the book is based on that research.
Youre welcome.
Scroll down each page and at the bottom there is a 'next' link to the next page. There is some interesting stuff there.
edit, BTW I spoke to Mac via email about a lot of that stuff as I was going through it. Mac always seemed more than happy to answer questions and offer additional information. He told me that all the material you see there (at the link I posted) basically served as the research for his book that youre reading. It was because of that research that he was offered the book deal, and the book is based on that research.
I loved The Cryptoterrestrials, I think mainly for the fact that it's the first alternative to the ETH I've really looked into. To be honest I did struggle a little with some of the terminology and had to look up the odd word here and there.
With regard to 'After the Martian Apocalypse'
I'm only in the early chapters but so far I'm loving it, For what it's worth I'll add my thoughts when I've finished it.
paraschtick - my copy has images but not many and I'm reading it on the kindle app for i phone so the images are very small, can't seem to enlarge them, so it does make it difficult. I think it helps as I've looked into the subject a little and watched countless youtube videos and the like of Martian anomalies, however a lot of them are crap hence my original post for recommendations of sources/writings on Martian Civilisation theories.
With regard to 'After the Martian Apocalypse'
I'm only in the early chapters but so far I'm loving it, For what it's worth I'll add my thoughts when I've finished it.
paraschtick - my copy has images but not many and I'm reading it on the kindle app for i phone so the images are very small, can't seem to enlarge them, so it does make it difficult. I think it helps as I've looked into the subject a little and watched countless youtube videos and the like of Martian anomalies, however a lot of them are crap hence my original post for recommendations of sources/writings on Martian Civilisation theories.
paraschtick
Paragilmorian guy
Thanks guys. It looks like I'll have to re-read it and when he talks about something I'll just have to look at it ... maybe on my little pda thing. Who needs a kindle or and I-pad when you've got a really small pda device and the worst eyes in the universe ...
Thanks anyway. It will help make things a bit clearer (ironically). Martian anomalies are kinda cool to think about but if they are architectural rather than geological, I'm so on the fence at the moment that I might be stuck to it for years to come. But Mac's book might change it for me ... we shall see
Many thanks, anyway,
paraschtick
...Thanks anyway. It will help make things a bit clearer (ironically). Martian anomalies are kinda cool to think about but if they are architectural rather than geological, I'm so on the fence at the moment that I might be stuck to it for years to come. But Mac's book might change it for me ... we shall see
Many thanks, anyway,
paraschtick
rhcball
Skilled Investigator
From what I understand, Tonnies didn't even put the 'hypothethesis' out there as a legitimate explanation, just more of a thought experiment.
Obviously I'm in the minority in finding little value in the book, as it met with gloooowwwwwing reviews (a touch of nepotism, maybe). But then again, most 'paranormal' books I've read lately have similarly been of little value. The subject as a whole is gaining in irrelevancy as the country I live in swirls down the toilet.
ArchieBedford
Partly experienced
There was nothing remotely original in "The Cryptoterrestrials". The idea of a second civilization of highly developed but secretive beings sharing the Earth with humans and being in various ways responsible for the UFO phenomenon was postulated by Jacques Vallee and separately by John Keel as early as 1970; in turn they were recycling Richard Shaver's ideas from 1946 (but at least acknowledged they were doing that); and if you go back far enough Jules Verne, Edmund Halley (astronomer who gave his name to the comet in the 1600s) and countless others were pushing the "cryptoterrestrials" idea centuries ago. No evidence has ever emerged to support these theories and the more recent (single witness, unvalidated) reports Mac tried to shoehorn into this old theory in his book are equally or better explained by other hypotheses - the ETH, for instance, which fits the evidence much more credibly.
It might have been more honest had Tonnies openly acknowledged that he was recycling very old - and largely discredited - ideas, but the text published by Anomalist Books earlier this year tried to pretend these ideas were new. In Mac's defence we understand the manuscript was nowhere near complete, and the lean mish-mash put out into the world as "The Cryptoterrestrials" was all there was. Had Mac lived a couple more years, he might (or might not) have produced something more worthwhile or developed a thesis displaying some original thought. Unfortunately, we'll never know.
No evidence has ever emerged to support the ETH theory either. Absolutely none whatsoever...
OK mass sightings over 'single witness, unvalidated' sightings are obviously more credible to document but that still does not point to the origin of the phenomena.
ArchieBedford
Partly experienced
o
Sure, no argument from me on that general point, though others would credibly and reasonably point out that it's a probabilities game (and might point to anomalies on The Moon and Mars, released FOIA docs & all that stuff). My point about Tonnies' book is that it was promoted as offering new and original thinking, when in fact it was just tired old stuff recycled.
Kandinsky
Curious Cat
You could be right, who's to say? My own take on the support Tonnies received wasn't for any 'original thinking.' Rather, it seemed he kind of refreshed old ideas and brought them into a modern context. It was this that brought the attention and generated discussions amongst people new to the subject.
Nick Redfern's recent book has had the same effect. The notion of UFOs being demonic entities has been around since the late 50s, but Nick's reinvigorated the discussion. Even guys like Vallee haven't brought wholly original ideas to the subject. Before he was writing articles for Flying Saucer Review, people had written letters to FSR and mentioned similar ideas of a phenomena directing human consciousness.
I guess it could be argued that there hasn't been an 'original' idea in ufology or the paranormal for decades.
In my opinion, what guys like Redfern, Tonnies and Vallee do is keep some ideas alive in various generations. The new generation aren't aware of the history and are just learning about it all. It's similar to how every generation discovers The Doors, Beatles and Jimi Hendrix. It's all fresh to them and encourages comparisons with other music.
So when Tonnies refreshed ideas of crytoterrestrials, he caused people to wonder if they exist or not. If the phenomena isn't terrestrial...what is it? What isn't it? Likewise, if UFOs aren't 'demons,' we start to ask *what* they could be?
I agree with that, I've read many books on the ETH but never read anything in depth that dealt with a different theory such as this. I only bought the books after hearing Mac on various podcasts.
I was never happy with the ETH, and since the majority of sightings throughout the modern era seem to be post Nuclear, it gives rise to the idea that something sharing our planet is taking a greater interest. I say 'modern era' and I know there are countless accounts in ancient texts of sightings and visitations but the documented evidence is wrapped up in the naive and god fearing mindset of the time.
On a final note, I know I'm late with this but I've just seen the new Face On Mars image from a few weeks ago taken with Nasa’s high-definition HiRISE camera (Daily Mail UK link below). What does this mean? I'm gutted! Someone please tell me it's another NASA cover up!
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...-famous-Face-Mars-proves-just-rocky-hill.html
Kandinsky
Curious Cat
I used to buy the UFO magazines in the 90s. There was one that had a back page dedicated to Cydonia. The guy was Mark Carlotti or Carlito...something like that. He presented a case for pyramids and buildings backed up with topography and all sorts of angles and whatnot. I lapped it up and was blinded by his science...I was young and gullible. When the images were released and showed an eroded mesa, it gave the 'believer' in me a good kicking. Within weeks, I'd binned all my paranormal/ufo magazines and got rid of the books too.
ArchieBedford
Partly experienced
Ooooohh...What's Richard Hoagland gonna do now?
Yep this could put a few out of business, anyway I thought Hoagland was dead! He is/was a crank but I'd give him credit for his early work. I found his moon anomalies ideas interesting. I watched that long drawn out lecture on YouTube from the 90's, some of it was crap but some aspects were very thought provoking.