If You Go Looking

Cryptoterrestrials

EN/5/S

Mac Tonnies' hypothesis

An indigenous technological species that stayed hidden.

The proposal that the occupants evolved here alongside us and became extremely good at not being found. Its explanatory power is real: it accounts for why so many reported occupants are bipedal, two-eyed and roughly our size, which is a strange coincidence if they evolved under another sun.

If you go looking

An argument about origins, not an invitation. No practice has ever been attached to it.

Who should be careful

Reading the code

EN/5/S

Earth-native, biological · embodiment 5 of 5, an ordinary biological body · source: speculative hypothesis · key

Dates

Published: 2010

Related

Takes the Grey body and reassigns its origin. Shares the hidden-neighbour structure with djinn and the fae, minus the metaphysics.

Terms used on this page

EN: Earth-native, biological

Origin code

Ordinary bodies and ordinary evolutionary history. Not us, but never anywhere else either.

Degree of embodiment: 5, an ordinary biological body

Scale, 1 to 5

5 is an ordinary biological body. 4 is physical but manifests oddly. 3 comes and goes. 2 is energetic or subtle. 1 is consciousness with no persistent form. Note that this tends to fall as a tradition ages.

S: speculative hypothesis

Source code

Offered explicitly as a proposal rather than a report. Rare in this field, and worth noticing when it happens.

Mac Tonnies

Published 2010

Proposed that the humanoid quality of reported occupants is a clue about where they evolved, rather than a puzzle about convergent evolution light-years away. He died in 2009; the book appeared posthumously.

No practice attached

Tradition-side

There is nothing to do here: no inherited method of engagement, whether the tradition is a text, an argument or a set of reports. Anyone offering you one has invented it.

Deliberate contact work

Read this first

The hazard in this subject attaches to the method, not to which name you aim it at. Ouija work, invocation, sustained channelling, induced hypnagogia, deliberate sleep deprivation and hypnotic regression are the practices associated with difficulty, and a session aimed at a benevolent civilisation is not safer than one aimed at something considered lower. What raises risk is doing it alone, doing it repeatedly, doing it while sleep-deprived, and doing it with an existing vulnerability to psychosis, mania or dissociation. People who get into trouble here overwhelmingly got there through practice, not through reading.

Who should be careful

Practice-side

Anyone with a personal or family history of psychosis, bipolar disorder or dissociative conditions, anyone in acute crisis, and anyone isolated from people who would notice a change in them. Intensive contact practice is destabilising by design (that is what it is for), and destabilisation lands hardest on people already close to an edge.

← Back to all 59 entries