Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

What is the deal with this Micah Hanks character?

page: 2
1
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 7 2014 @ 02:03 PM
link   
reply to post by JadeStar
 



Context is everything. Not all books have the same target audience.


This is it isn't it? Whoever has an interest in the paranormal field is attracted by different elements and tends towards types of thought that either reflect their own thinking or are expressed in terms that appeal to them.

There are members who have a bookcase of Timothy Good and others who might go for the Whitley Strieber/Moulton-Howe perspective. Some of the authors I've seen you recommending are authors I used to read too. It's all about which flavour of paranormal excites our senses...

Whilst Micah's outlook is usually at odds with my own, he has an audience and I respect the guy for his efforts. It takes a certain level of commitment to pin your hopes of success on a subject that gives very little back.

Although there are blatant parasites and con-merchants in the field, I don't think Micah Hanks is one of them.

FWIW - Nick Redfern's a good guy and has done a great deal of research for ~20 years. He's someone I've had a few exchanges with and one or two disagreements too. As a career writer, a lot of his output is to pay the bills and some of it is more interesting and controversial. A nice fella and the same goes for the rest of Nick's 'crew.' To my mind, they've each contributed to the sum of knowledge regarding (and surrounding) these elusive people and subjects. Paul, Greg and Nick have been friendly and helpful with me and that's good enough.




posted on Mar, 7 2014 @ 02:18 PM
link   
reply to post by JadeStar
 


Oh please, Jade. Nick Redferns target audience is anybody he can talk into buying his books. he's a hack and huckster.



posted on Mar, 7 2014 @ 02:33 PM
link   

FlyingTeacup
reply to post by JadeStar
 


Oh please, Jade. Nick Redferns target audience is anybody he can talk into buying his books. he's a hack and huckster.



Simply repeating the same thing over and over doesn't make it true.

As I said, Redfern's books are more or less chronicles of different para-subjects. They aren't INTENDED to break any new ground research wise but rather put them in a nice, neat, tidy package for the average person who may never have picked up a paranormal book.

I can't fault him on that anymore than someone like Michio Kaku's books on theoretical physics for the layperson.

Recognize that YOU are not Redfern's intended audience.



posted on Mar, 7 2014 @ 03:08 PM
link   
reply to post by FlyingTeacup
 


Oh, and apparently Micah Hanks is the sole representative of Ufology, him and his little radio network KGRA. Because Micah Hanks now claims that I have come out and attacked Ufology. What a joke. Friends, listen, this is what hucksters like Micah Hanks do, they twist criticisms of their cult around into an attack on the community as a whole. No, that is not what I am doing.

TIC TOCK, TIC TOCK, TIC TOCK

Come on Micah, you still haven't shown up to debate me, I guess you can't handle being outside your comfort zone surrounded by your Yes men. LOL



posted on Mar, 7 2014 @ 03:20 PM
link   

JadeStar

FlyingTeacup
reply to post by JadeStar
 


Oh please, Jade. Nick Redferns target audience is anybody he can talk into buying his books. he's a hack and huckster.



Simply repeating the same thing over and over doesn't make it true.

As I said, Redfern's books are more or less chronicles of different para-subjects. They aren't INTENDED to break any new ground research wise but rather put them in a nice, neat, tidy package for the average person who may never have picked up a paranormal book.

I can't fault him on that anymore than someone like Michio Kaku's books on theoretical physics for the layperson.

Recognize that YOU are not Redfern's intended audience.


Customer Reviews The Pyramids and the Pentagon: The Government's Top Secret Pursuit of Mystical Relics, Ancient Astronauts, and Lost Civilizations


No meat on this bone, December 13, 2012
By James

Mildly interesting but lacking in any substantive info that you can sink your teeth into. Vague references and poor research. A great book for conspiracy buffs who do not rely on solid sources and take hearsay as factual information. I downloaded the Kindle version and paid too much. Two dollars would have been a reasonable price based on the so-so entertainment value of the book. Is this book in print? The publisher will lose their a-- on this one. Save your hard earned money my friend.



Nick Redfern's endless rehash, November 24, 2012
By Michael G. Simonetto "Terminally curious"

Once again, Nick Redfern offers a disjointed, all-over-the map rehash of various fringe discussions. No real insight, sensationalist questions that cannot be answered, and a long list of references which really don't tell you anything. Do not buy this book.



Worthless, Insultingly Bad Waste of Shelf Space, April 19, 2013
By Douglas Ralph Zork

This book is so carelessly written that I ended up throwing it in the trash after forcing myself to read through three chapters, attempting to find some value so I wouldn't have to feel like a complete idiot for having purchased it.

The topic is interesting and important, and Redfern may know something about it, but this book reads like a transcript of someone rambling on in a bar, after a few too many drinks. He emphasizes random unimportant details, omits key facts, jumps around randomly, and doesn't provide useful references.





new topics

top topics
 
1
<< 1   >>

log in

join