Well, unfortunately, I'm rather like Mark Wahlberg's character from the new POTA, but not as nice looking and closed minded. (If that had been me on that planet, I would have got some hot monkey lovin... um, I mean ape lovin. Oooo, Ari, grab me with those four hands and have at it baby! lol)  

As for why I'm mostly like him, it's cause I'm just about as boring as his character is, I do what I damn-well feel like doin against better judgment and/or orders, and I'm almost as much of a dick..... ALMOST ;o)

 mlccougar@... wrote:

> -----Original Message-----
> From: patrickmichaeltilton [patrickmichaeltilton@...]
> Sent: Sunday, 22 September 2002 1:41
> To: pota@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Planet of the Apes] POTA "chaloupes"...
>
>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: patrickmichaeltilton [patrickmichaeltilton@...]
> Sent: Sunday, 22 September 2002 1:41
> To: pota@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Planet of the Apes] POTA "chaloupes"...

> But beware... just DARING to re-interpret the mistaken details of Dehn's

> -----Original Message-----
> From: veetus@... [veetus@...]
> Sent: Sunday, 22 September 2002 8:31
> To: pota@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [Planet of the Apes] PLANET satire vs. TV series and

----- Original Message -----

From: Haristas@...

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Sunday, September 22, 2002 4:09 PM

Subject: Re: [Planet of the Apes] Natalie Jacobs

In a message dated 9/22/02 2:03:14 AM Eastern Daylight Time, ktaylor@... writes:

Sorry, I was channel surfing and stopped when I saw Natalie. It was on free TV and we don't have a FreeTV guide, only a cable guide which doesn't list fee TV. Michael, maybe you can have a look? It was on Channel 2 at about 10pm.

Best,
KEN

Yeah, Michael, was it on channel 2 at 10 pm?  Also, when's the next repeat of "Are You Being Served?"   I just love that Mrs. Slocombe and her pussy!

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the .

----- Original Message -----

From: Haristas@...

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Sunday, September 22, 2002 5:09 PM

Subject: [Planet of the Apes] Burton is strange.

I've never thought about it before, but doesn't this photo from the new POTA kind of remind you of a vagina?   



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the .

----- Original Message -----

From: Haristas@...

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Saturday, September 21, 2002 7:54 PM

Subject: Re: [Planet of the Apes] POTA "chaloupes"...

In a message dated 9/21/02 12:36:47 PM Eastern Daylight Time, patrickmichaeltilton@... writes:

*** I took the concept Boulle originated in his novel--a mothership
from which 3 smaller ships detach and land on the planet ("une
chaloupe", or "launch", which is the same thing as a shuttlecraft)--
and used it to explain the discordant "flubs" that were introduced
into the series starting with BENEATH. Had they never made any
sequels, I would never have dreamed of deducing that there was any
orbiting mothership involved... but the mistakes Dehn introduced
required an "unflubbing" in order to make ALL the details make sense
(at least to ME).

However... if there ISN'T any bigger ship up in orbit during PLANET,
one must wonder how 4 astronauts could survive for 6 months (prior to
going into their "deep sleep") in the cramped quarters seen in the
opening scenes. Just how big is the ship we see in PLANET? The ship in
BENEATH shows what it probably looks like (i.e. the part that's
underwater in the "sinking ship" scene)--and there's not enough room,
dammit! Where's the bathroom? the kitchen? Where's all that "cargo"
Taylor mentions to Nova (remember when he refers to Stewart as "the
most precious cargo we brought along"? Well... his ship brought cargo
along on the voyage: WHERE THE F*CK COULD IT BE?!
I think it's up in his orbiting mothership. And when Brent sees Ursus
ranting about how "all humans are evil" (etc.), he looks up and says,
"I gotta get back... UP THERE... I don't know how or what with, but
I'm not staying here." What IS there "up there" that he wants to get
back to? Empty space? What good would THAT do? I think that Brent
knows there's something "up there" awaiting him... if he can only find
a working ship capable of rocketing his ass skyward.

My explanation of the "U.S.S. EARTH" bit, in brief, goes like this:
1.) Taylor tells Landon to "get out a last signal" [Landon: "What
signal?"] "To EARTH, that we've landed!" Taylor knows that the planet
Earth has aged HUNDREDS OF YEARS during the time they've been gone,
and sending out a radio signal 320 lightyears (from wherever in Orion
he thinks they are to where he thinks planet Earth is) would require
that message to travel for 320 years before anybody back home even
hears his "last signal". So what's the point? Their ship is "in the
soup"--it's sinking!--so why should he bother sending out a little
message that essentially tells Earthlings 320 years later that a
mission sent out THOUSANDS of years earlier finally arrived at its
destination?
2.) Skipper asks Brent if he contacted "Earth", and Brent says, "I
tried to, sir--not a crackle." In other words, his RADIO couldn't make
contact with "Earth". But does it make sense that the "Earth" in
question is the planet Earth? Brent goes on to tell Skipper that he
doesn't know "what planet we're on", and Skipper doesn't know "which
sun" it is shining down on his blind face; in other words, BOTH of
them believe that they're on an alien planet that is NOT our planet
Earth... in which case radio contact with planet Earth would be flatly
impossible (unless you have some sort of Star Trekkian "subspace
radio", which I don't think they have).
3.) So, I've re-interpreted these two lines of dialogue (Taylor's in
PLANET, and Brent & Skipper's in BENEATH) to suggest that their
orbiting mothership is named after their home planet: the U.S.S. EARTH
(a "spaceship Earth"). In both cases, the astronauts who landed on the
surface of the Planet of the Apes--believing it to be an alien planet
in "another solar system"--tried to contact "Earth" via their radios,
when ANY radio signals from a habitable planet lightyears away could
NEVER be in radio contact with their home planet. In both cases, for
the sake of my novel's scenario, I'm re-interpreting the word "Earth"
in these two scenes as the name of the bigger ship to which both of
these smaller shuttlecraft were attached prior to the mysterious
events which result in Taylor's shuttle detaching from it.

Feel free to disagree with my scenario, Rich. I don't insist that
anybody take it as gospel, and I've never implied that it's what the
screenwriters intended to be thought when they wrote their scripts. As
entertaining as they are, though, they are flawed in the details and
the logic, and my scenario is intended to make sense of the details
and make it more logical.

One final thing--a curious coincidence I've mentioned in prior
postings, and which I take particular pleasure in. In the pilot
episode of the TV series, Virdon's ship experiences a "time warp"
which propels it from EARTH-TIME 1980 to 3085 (in the opening credit
sequence). At some point, Virdon tells Jones to activate the
"Automatic Homing Device", which somehow sends them back to Earth. The
day they land, Farrow carries them away before the Apes arrive and
bash in all the machinery in the cockpit... and the next day, when
they see the EARTH-TIME chronometer, it reads 3-21-3085, which is 115
EARTH-TIME days prior to the last date given in the credit sequence
(EARTH-TIME 7-14-3085). In other words, whatever caused their ship to
experience a "time warp" out near Alpha Centauri (which they were
approaching) not only sent them 1,105 years of Earth-Time into the
Future, but ALSO (just afterward) somehow 115 days into the Past,
during the moments it takes for their ship to zip the 4.34 lightyears
from Alpha Centauri to the Sol System (and good ol' planet Earth).

                           "OK, we're here to stay."

Unless I can get a hold of the mothership and tell them to get down here and collect our asses!"

You'll recall that Taylor tells Landon that (he thinks) they are "320
lightyears from Earth on a planet in orbit around a star in the
constellation of Orion". And somehow the EARTH-TIME chronometer on his
ship read 11-25-3978 right before it sank. However, when Brent &
Skipper are just about to do their re-entry burn, Brent takes an
"Earth-Time reading" of "Three-Niner-Five-Five": 3955 A.D., which--of
course--is some 23 years EARLIER than the Earth-Time that Taylor saw
on his clock. A mistake, right? Ahhh, but if you compare the amount of
"retrotemporal" Time which Virdon's ship experiences (115 days) with
the distance in lightyears it goes in order to get back to planet
Earth (4.34) after the activation of their "Automatic Homing Device",
then apply that to the distance Taylor's ship would had to have
travelled in order to get back to planet Earth from their destination
in Orion (320 ly), you'll find that 320 ÷ 4.34 = 73.7327 = 8479.26 ÷
115. In other words, if Taylor's (mother)ship had its "Automatic
Homing Device" activated (obviously by somebody other than Taylor,
Landon, Dodge or Stewart), and if it were in a similar situation as
Virdon's ship, then it too would go backwards through Time a
proportional amount, related to the distance in lightyears. Virdon
goes 4.34 lightyears and 115 "retro-days"; Taylor goes 320 lightyears
and 8479 "retro-days"... and 8479 days is equivalent to 23.215 years.
Subtract 23.215 years from 11-25-3978 and what year do you get? Why,
3955! An amazing coincidence! Somehow, the EARTH-TIME clock on
Taylor's shuttle didn't register this "back-through-Time" jump, and
continued to read 3978 as the year, but the OTHER ships accompanying
it (the two ships seen in BENEATH and ESCAPE, as well as the
"mothership") all do register the "jump" back in Time, reading the
true date of Earth's destruction: 3955.
The President mentions that Taylor's ship was "one of two" that have
been "missing"--but if he means the ships in PLANET and BENEATH, then
what about the DIFFERENT ship from ESCAPE? Its gull-wing port
hatchdoor differentiates it from the other two crashed ships. Since
Virdon & Burke don't know about Zira & Cornelius, they must have left
planet Earth BEFORE the Ape-onauts landed in 1973... which would make
the Virdon mission to Alpha Centauri ONE of the two "missing" ships,
and the Taylor mission to Somewhere in Orion the OTHER of the two,
which is why the shuttlecraft in ESCAPE can be referred to as
"commanded by Col. Taylor".

This is all a re-hashing of stuff I've posted before, but since you're
new (and you DID ask!), here it is. I recommend you read up on my past
postings, where I go into more detail fleshing out this scenario. And,
hey, feel free to disregard it if it doesn't rub you right. If you
have a more sensible scenario to turn Dehn's mistakes into "non-
mistakes", then I for one would be tickled to hear it! But beware...
just DARING to re-interpret the mistaken details of Dehn's sequels
(etc.) will get you bearing the wrath of Rory, Whitty, James90210, and
who knows who else!

Patrick Michael Tilton
EARTH-TIME 9-21-2002

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

"My baby sleeps so peacefully after I read him one of Patrick's posts."

----- Original Message -----

From: Haristas@...

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Saturday, September 21, 2002 7:54 PM

Subject: Re: [Planet of the Apes] POTA "chaloupes"...

In a message dated 9/21/02 12:36:47 PM Eastern Daylight Time, patrickmichaeltilton@... writes:

*** I took the concept Boulle originated in his novel--a mothership
from which 3 smaller ships detach and land on the planet ("une
chaloupe", or "launch", which is the same thing as a shuttlecraft)--
and used it to explain the discordant "flubs" that were introduced
into the series starting with BENEATH. Had they never made any
sequels, I would never have dreamed of deducing that there was any
orbiting mothership involved... but the mistakes Dehn introduced
required an "unflubbing" in order to make ALL the details make sense
(at least to ME).

However... if there ISN'T any bigger ship up in orbit during PLANET,
one must wonder how 4 astronauts could survive for 6 months (prior to
going into their "deep sleep") in the cramped quarters seen in the
opening scenes. Just how big is the ship we see in PLANET? The ship in
BENEATH shows what it probably looks like (i.e. the part that's
underwater in the "sinking ship" scene)--and there's not enough room,
dammit! Where's the bathroom? the kitchen? Where's all that "cargo"
Taylor mentions to Nova (remember when he refers to Stewart as "the
most precious cargo we brought along"? Well... his ship brought cargo
along on the voyage: WHERE THE F*CK COULD IT BE?!
I think it's up in his orbiting mothership. And when Brent sees Ursus
ranting about how "all humans are evil" (etc.), he looks up and says,
"I gotta get back... UP THERE... I don't know how or what with, but
I'm not staying here." What IS there "up there" that he wants to get
back to? Empty space? What good would THAT do? I think that Brent
knows there's something "up there" awaiting him... if he can only find
a working ship capable of rocketing his ass skyward.

My explanation of the "U.S.S. EARTH" bit, in brief, goes like this:
1.) Taylor tells Landon to "get out a last signal" [Landon: "What
signal?"] "To EARTH, that we've landed!" Taylor knows that the planet
Earth has aged HUNDREDS OF YEARS during the time they've been gone,
and sending out a radio signal 320 lightyears (from wherever in Orion
he thinks they are to where he thinks planet Earth is) would require
that message to travel for 320 years before anybody back home even
hears his "last signal". So what's the point? Their ship is "in the
soup"--it's sinking!--so why should he bother sending out a little
message that essentially tells Earthlings 320 years later that a
mission sent out THOUSANDS of years earlier finally arrived at its
destination?
2.) Skipper asks Brent if he contacted "Earth", and Brent says, "I
tried to, sir--not a crackle." In other words, his RADIO couldn't make
contact with "Earth". But does it make sense that the "Earth" in
question is the planet Earth? Brent goes on to tell Skipper that he
doesn't know "what planet we're on", and Skipper doesn't know "which
sun" it is shining down on his blind face; in other words, BOTH of
them believe that they're on an alien planet that is NOT our planet
Earth... in which case radio contact with planet Earth would be flatly
impossible (unless you have some sort of Star Trekkian "subspace
radio", which I don't think they have).
3.) So, I've re-interpreted these two lines of dialogue (Taylor's in
PLANET, and Brent & Skipper's in BENEATH) to suggest that their
orbiting mothership is named after their home planet: the U.S.S. EARTH
(a "spaceship Earth"). In both cases, the astronauts who landed on the
surface of the Planet of the Apes--believing it to be an alien planet
in "another solar system"--tried to contact "Earth" via their radios,
when ANY radio signals from a habitable planet lightyears away could
NEVER be in radio contact with their home planet. In both cases, for
the sake of my novel's scenario, I'm re-interpreting the word "Earth"
in these two scenes as the name of the bigger ship to which both of
these smaller shuttlecraft were attached prior to the mysterious
events which result in Taylor's shuttle detaching from it.

Feel free to disagree with my scenario, Rich. I don't insist that
anybody take it as gospel, and I've never implied that it's what the
screenwriters intended to be thought when they wrote their scripts. As
entertaining as they are, though, they are flawed in the details and
the logic, and my scenario is intended to make sense of the details
and make it more logical.

One final thing--a curious coincidence I've mentioned in prior
postings, and which I take particular pleasure in. In the pilot
episode of the TV series, Virdon's ship experiences a "time warp"
which propels it from EARTH-TIME 1980 to 3085 (in the opening credit
sequence). At some point, Virdon tells Jones to activate the
"Automatic Homing Device", which somehow sends them back to Earth. The
day they land, Farrow carries them away before the Apes arrive and
bash in all the machinery in the cockpit... and the next day, when
they see the EARTH-TIME chronometer, it reads 3-21-3085, which is 115
EARTH-TIME days prior to the last date given in the credit sequence
(EARTH-TIME 7-14-3085). In other words, whatever caused their ship to
experience a "time warp" out near Alpha Centauri (which they were
approaching) not only sent them 1,105 years of Earth-Time into the
Future, but ALSO (just afterward) somehow 115 days into the Past,
during the moments it takes for their ship to zip the 4.34 lightyears
from Alpha Centauri to the Sol System (and good ol' planet Earth).

                           "OK, we're here to stay."

Unless I can get a hold of the mothership and tell them to get down here and collect our asses!"

You'll recall that Taylor tells Landon that (he thinks) they are "320
lightyears from Earth on a planet in orbit around a star in the
constellation of Orion". And somehow the EARTH-TIME chronometer on his
ship read 11-25-3978 right before it sank. However, when Brent &
Skipper are just about to do their re-entry burn, Brent takes an
"Earth-Time reading" of "Three-Niner-Five-Five": 3955 A.D., which--of
course--is some 23 years EARLIER than the Earth-Time that Taylor saw
on his clock. A mistake, right? Ahhh, but if you compare the amount of
"retrotemporal" Time which Virdon's ship experiences (115 days) with
the distance in lightyears it goes in order to get back to planet
Earth (4.34) after the activation of their "Automatic Homing Device",
then apply that to the distance Taylor's ship would had to have
travelled in order to get back to planet Earth from their destination
in Orion (320 ly), you'll find that 320 ÷ 4.34 = 73.7327 = 8479.26 ÷
115. In other words, if Taylor's (mother)ship had its "Automatic
Homing Device" activated (obviously by somebody other than Taylor,
Landon, Dodge or Stewart), and if it were in a similar situation as
Virdon's ship, then it too would go backwards through Time a
proportional amount, related to the distance in lightyears. Virdon
goes 4.34 lightyears and 115 "retro-days"; Taylor goes 320 lightyears
and 8479 "retro-days"... and 8479 days is equivalent to 23.215 years.
Subtract 23.215 years from 11-25-3978 and what year do you get? Why,
3955! An amazing coincidence! Somehow, the EARTH-TIME clock on
Taylor's shuttle didn't register this "back-through-Time" jump, and
continued to read 3978 as the year, but the OTHER ships accompanying
it (the two ships seen in BENEATH and ESCAPE, as well as the
"mothership") all do register the "jump" back in Time, reading the
true date of Earth's destruction: 3955.
The President mentions that Taylor's ship was "one of two" that have
been "missing"--but if he means the ships in PLANET and BENEATH, then
what about the DIFFERENT ship from ESCAPE? Its gull-wing port
hatchdoor differentiates it from the other two crashed ships. Since
Virdon & Burke don't know about Zira & Cornelius, they must have left
planet Earth BEFORE the Ape-onauts landed in 1973... which would make
the Virdon mission to Alpha Centauri ONE of the two "missing" ships,
and the Taylor mission to Somewhere in Orion the OTHER of the two,
which is why the shuttlecraft in ESCAPE can be referred to as
"commanded by Col. Taylor".

This is all a re-hashing of stuff I've posted before, but since you're
new (and you DID ask!), here it is. I recommend you read up on my past
postings, where I go into more detail fleshing out this scenario. And,
hey, feel free to disregard it if it doesn't rub you right. If you
have a more sensible scenario to turn Dehn's mistakes into "non-
mistakes", then I for one would be tickled to hear it! But beware...
just DARING to re-interpret the mistaken details of Dehn's sequels
(etc.) will get you bearing the wrath of Rory, Whitty, James90210, and
who knows who else!

Patrick Michael Tilton
EARTH-TIME 9-21-2002

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

"My baby sleeps so peacefully after I read him one of Patrick's posts."

> Jacobs was planning to use those same Turkish dwellings that inspired Ape City as the home of the Fremen in his movie of "Dune". In his archives there's a magazine article about them and some correspondence in the "Dune" files. That would have been cool for them to appear in a Jacobs movie.
> Etc. - - - Jeff

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "patrickmichaeltilton" <patrickmichaeltilton@y...>
> To: <pota@y...>
> Sent: Saturday, September 21, 2002 10:12 AM
> Subject: [Planet of the Apes] Re: POTA, Cappodocia's Troglodyte cities, &
> Kaymak
>
>
> > --- In pota@y..., "patrickmichaeltilton" <patrickmichaeltilton@y...>
> > wrote:
> > > One of the books I've read in the past year is "FROM THE ASHES OF
> ANGELS: The Forbidden Legacy of a Fallen Race" by Andrew Collins. It's
> basically an overview of the mythic literatures of the Near East concerning
> the "Nephilim" or "giants" from Genesis, chapter 6. It's a great book
> (though, like all books on the subject, one to be taken with a pinch of
> NaCl), and--after delving into the evidence for the existence of a supposed
> culture older than Egypt & Sumeria, he writes:
> > >
> > > Why, then, cannot we simply accept that we are not the first advanced
> race to have inhabited this planet? The answer is clear. To do so, with our
> current understanding of life on earth, would frighten us to death.
> > > We fear that one day we, too, may fall. One of the best-remembered cult
> movies of the 1960s is PLANET OF THE APES. Everyone who has seen this film
> remembers it almost exclusively for one chilling scene at the end. The hero,
> a marooned astronaut played by Charlton Heston, rides along a beach and sees
> before him the reason why apes and not human beings rule on this hostile
> planet. Exposed above the sands is the sunken head and raised arm of the
> Statue of Liberty. He realizes he is on earth many hundreds of years beyond
> his own time, and that, before the apes took control of the world, human
> beings had raised a mighty civilization that had crumbled to dust long
> ago--its history and achievements having been almost entirely erased from
> the memory of the planet. The shock factor of this film lies in the
> realization that it gives an apocalyptic vision of our own possible future.
> [page 361-362]
> > >
> > > Guys like Andrew Collins (and other researchers, such as Graham
> Hancock--author of "FOOTPRINTS OF THE GODS"--and Rand Flem-Ath, author of
> "WHEN THE SKY FELL") remind me of Cornelius, that maverick scientist who has
> to buck the trend (and the accusations of "heresy") of his own culture when
> his professionalism in regards to Archaology points him in the direction of
> postulating the existence of a superior antecedent culture (ours) which
> "official history" says shouldn't exist at all. This particular book, "FROM
> THE ASHES...", is a good read, regardless of whether or not he's really onto
> something, so I recommend it. Also, he goes into a lot of detail concerning
> the troglodyte dwellings in Cappadocia which--you'll recall--Bill Creber
> said were the inspiration for the design of the Ape City in PLANET.
> > >
> > > Patrick
> >
> > *** I was just surfin' some sites about those Cappadocian troglodyte
> > dwellings in Turkey, and came across this webpage:
> > http://www.turkishodyssey.com/places/anatolia/ana2.htm#Kaymakli
> > Check out the pic of "Uchisar Fortress, Cappadocia"--it bears a
> > resemblance to the "Ape City" look. I wish I could find one big site
> > that just had tons and tons of pictures of these places, but every
> > site I click onto seems to just have one or two. Rats!
> >
> > Also, one of the many underground cities built there is called
> > "Kaymakli". For some reason this struck me as a strange coincidence,
> > since one of the villages in the POTA TV series--in "The Gladiator"--
> > is called "Kaymak", where Prefect Barlow instituted his "games". I
> > wonder if the writer of that episode got the name "Kaymak" from this
> > place in Cappadocia, with its similar architecture?
> >
> > While I'm on the topic, does anybody happen to know which book Bill
> > Creber saw which showed the pictures of the troglodyte cities that
> > inspired him to make Ape City look the way it does? The book is
> > mentioned in "BEHIND THE POTA", but I don't think the book's title was
> > ever given.
> >
> > Bye, till tomorrow's tide...
> >
> > Patrick
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >

> In a message dated 9/21/02 10:03:08 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
> patrickmichaeltilton@y... writes:
>
>
> > The POTA TV show is just as relevant today as it was 28 years ago when it first aired. Was it as good as PLANET (the film)? Well, NO... but hell, that's asking one hell of a lot! PLANET was absolutely magnificent, and it's amazing that its sequels were as good as they were. Most sequels are horrid. Despite their flaws, the films (BENEATH through BATTLE) and the TV episodes had something to say--and it's a message the world sure as hell needs to hear. Especially after 9/11/2001.
> > Patrick
>
> Again, I'll have to completely agree with you there, Patrick. APES LIVES! And of course the original film is truly absolutely magnificent. It's one of those magnificents movies they now put on DVD that Rory loves (or: How I watched a film 300 times in seven days and twenty-five minutes). Dare I say that it's also a modern classic? Would you agree with me there, Patrick?
>
> -- Rory

> In a message dated 9/21/02 10:48:27 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
> patrickmichaeltilton@y... writes:
>
>
> > Incidentally, in Boulle's "Bridge", there's a passage where one of the =

> >
> > Patrick

>
> I've noticed this before too, Patrick. I think it may also have somethin=

>
> -- Rory

> "how 4 astronauts could survive for 6 months (prior to going into their "deep sleep") in the cramped quarters seen in the opening scenes. " Haven't you seen pictures on the inside of Mir and Space Station Alpha? Cosmonauts have lived inside of Mir for over a year, which is just as cramped as Heston's ship.

> Don't forget, a clock doesn't "detect" what date/time it is (except for those ones which connect via radio with the atomic clock at the National Observatory).

> I wish they had better pictures of this item. Looks pretty interesting.=

>
>
> [Unable to display image]
> <A HREF="http://cgi.aol.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=714608010=

> PLANET OF THE APES ICARUS BLUEPRINT</A>

> Is there anyone here who's never seen this issue of Mad?
>
> [Unable to display image]

> --- In pota@y..., Haristas@a... wrote:
> > Is there anyone here who's never seen this issue of Mad?
> >
> > [Unable to display image]
>
> *** I'm waiting for MAD to put out one of their "colorized" reprints
> with their "Milking of the Planet that went Ape" bit. I've got a copy, and it's still a riot to read. Somehow I lost that issue of CRAZY which had a parody of BENEATH, drawn by Tim Severin I believe. Still, you can't beat Mort Drucker for his style of caricature art...
>
> Patrick

> In a message dated 9/22/02 9:46:59 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
> patrickmichaeltilton@y... writes:
>
>
> I consider these ANSA ships to be shuttlecraft. They are spaceplanes, able to descend from an orbiting ship (like the Galileo 7 from the U.S.S. ENTERPRISE), landing on their tripods, with enough fuel left for at least one more re-ascent into orbit. That should be obvious, because Milo finds one of these ships and is able to reach orbit--AFTER that ship had first landed FROM orbit.
> >
> Feel free to argue for what you consider to be a more plausible explanation, though.
> >
> > Patrick

> I believe you may be right there, but one problem with that is that it seems more logical that the crew would be awakened in orbit and then go down to the planet's surface, and of course in orbit they would easily be able to detect that they were back at earth.

I'm not weird, I'm twisted, there's a difference. :o)

 Haristas@... wrote:

In a message dated 9/22/02 2:57:59 AM Eastern Daylight Time, thypentacle@... writes:

Burton was leaning more towards a womb type of thing I think. Especially the scene when Leo comes out from under the water out of the pod. He wanted the effect to seem similar to being 'born' into the new world.

 CheeseGOTAS@... wrote:

----- Original Message -----
From: "patrickmichaeltilton" <patrickmichaeltilton@...>
To: <pota@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, September 23, 2002 12:16 AM
Subject: [Planet of the Apes] Re: Mad PotA


> --- In pota@y..., Haristas@a... wrote:
> > Is there anyone here who's never seen this issue of Mad?
> >
> > [Unable to display image]
>
> *** I'm waiting for MAD to put out one of their "colorized" reprints
> with their "Milking of the Planet that went Ape" bit. I've got a copy,
> and it's still a riot to read. Somehow I lost that issue of CRAZY
> which had a parody of BENEATH, drawn by Tim Severin I believe. Still,
> you can't beat Mort Drucker for his style of caricature art...
>
> Patrick
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

> My favorite comic book artist is Paul Gulacy. I think his talent

> be perfect for the job. Whether or not he'd ever do it, I guess it
> depends on whether or not the writer/adapter's script rubs him the
> right way (he tends to work with Doug Moench a lot--and Moench, we

> know, did the writing chores for Marvel's POTA magazine).

----- Original Message -----

From: patrickmichaeltilton

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Sunday, September 22, 2002 9:44 AM

Subject: Re: [Planet of the Apes] POTA "chaloupes"...

--- In pota@y..., "Richard Cisak Jr." <rcisak@o...> wrote:
> "how 4 astronauts could survive for 6 months (prior to going into their "deep sleep") in the cramped quarters seen in the opening scenes. " Haven't you seen pictures on the inside of Mir and Space Station Alpha?  Cosmonauts have lived inside of Mir for over a year, which is just as cramped as Heston's ship.

*** There's a lot more room on Mir (or, there WAS until it fried up in
the atmosphere) and the Space Station than is seen to be available on
the Taylor-&-Brent-type ships.

I'll ask it again: Where's the Bathroom? Where's the Kitchen? Is there
room in that ship for cargo to sustain 4 people for 6 months (and,
presumably, for at least the first month they spend at their
destination once they wake up from hibernation)? If you look at the
ship in BENEATH, which is probably a "sister-ship" to the one seen in
PLANET, then there ain't enough room for all those extra necessaries.
All that junk behind the part visible above the water seems to me to
consist of 1.) LANDING GEAR (the 3 tripodal legs), 2.) THE ROCKET
ENGINE'S EXHAUST BELL (clearly visible in the middle of that hexagonal
truss to which are connected those 3 landing legs), and 3.) THE FUEL
TANK ASSEMBLY (after all, the rocket had to have burned fuel to slow
its descent; too bad something went fubar and made it flop onto it's
belly, requiring Brent to put out an engine fuel fire with that fire
extinguisher).
Between the "back wall" of what can be seen in the cabin of the ship
in PLANET (with that pressure hatch in the middle), and the fuel tank
assembly (which can be seen aft of the side "wings" of the BENEATH
ship), there isn't much room there at all--most certainly not for a
BATHROOM and a KITCHEN (or should I call them the "Head" and the
"Mess" since it's a military mission?) and a CARGO HOLD. Since the
tripodal landing legs are where they are, it's obvious that the ship
Brent (crash)landed was supposed to land with the nosecone pointed
straight up in the air, like a Christmas tree on its stand. One
wonders, then, how Brent & Skipper were supposed to get out of their
ship--and I think the answer is that there is a small airlock behind
that "back wall" of the cabin, and a hatch leading from it to the
outside on the underside of the vessel, which could not be used for
egress, of course, with the ship flopped onto its belly. It was THIS
unfortunate circumstance which necessitated Brent leaving the ship
through the same forward escape hatch which Taylor's crew had to use
(since their aftward area was flooded, making his ship angle up in the
water, neither floating flat--like the capsule in ESCAPE--nor bobbing
like a buoy straight up).

I consider these ANSA ships to be shuttlecraft. They are spaceplanes,
able to descend from an orbiting ship (like the Galileo 7 from the
U.S.S. ENTERPRISE), landing on their tripods, with enough fuel left
for at least one more re-ascent into orbit. That should be obvious,
because Milo finds one of these ships and is able to reach orbit--
AFTER that ship had first landed FROM orbit.

Feel free to argue for what you consider to be a more plausible
explanation, though.

Patrick




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the .

----- Original Message -----

From: Haristas@...

To: pota@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Sunday, September 22, 2002 12:39 PM

Subject: [Planet of the Apes] Check out Table of Contents- Flight Manual

Yes, a very interesting site
Click here: Table of Contents- Flight Manual










Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the .

> --- In pota@y..., "Richard Cisak Jr." <rcisak@o...> wrote:
> > "how 4 astronauts could survive for 6 months (prior to going into

>
> *** There's a lot more room on Mir (or, there WAS until it fried up

> the atmosphere) and the Space Station than is seen to be available

> the Taylor-&-Brent-type ships.
>
> I'll ask it again: Where's the Bathroom? Where's the Kitchen? Is

> room in that ship for cargo to sustain 4 people for 6 months (and,
> presumably, for at least the first month they spend at their
> destination once they wake up from hibernation)? If you look at the
> ship in BENEATH, which is probably a "sister-ship" to the one seen

> PLANET, then there ain't enough room for all those extra

> All that junk behind the part visible above the water seems to me

> consist of 1.) LANDING GEAR (the 3 tripodal legs), 2.) THE ROCKET
> ENGINE'S EXHAUST BELL (clearly visible in the middle of that

> truss to which are connected those 3 landing legs), and 3.) THE

> TANK ASSEMBLY (after all, the rocket had to have burned fuel to

> its descent; too bad something went fubar and made it flop onto

> belly, requiring Brent to put out an engine fuel fire with that

> extinguisher).
> Between the "back wall" of what can be seen in the cabin of the

> in PLANET (with that pressure hatch in the middle), and the fuel

> assembly (which can be seen aft of the side "wings" of the BENEATH
> ship), there isn't much room there at all--most certainly not for a
> BATHROOM and a KITCHEN (or should I call them the "Head" and the
> "Mess" since it's a military mission?) and a CARGO HOLD. Since the
> tripodal landing legs are where they are, it's obvious that the

> Brent (crash)landed was supposed to land with the nosecone pointed
> straight up in the air, like a Christmas tree on its stand. One
> wonders, then, how Brent & Skipper were supposed to get out of

> ship--and I think the answer is that there is a small airlock

> that "back wall" of the cabin, and a hatch leading from it to the
> outside on the underside of the vessel, which could not be used for
> egress, of course, with the ship flopped onto its belly. It was

> unfortunate circumstance which necessitated Brent leaving the ship
> through the same forward escape hatch which Taylor's crew had to

> (since their aftward area was flooded, making his ship angle up in

> water, neither floating flat--like the capsule in ESCAPE--nor

> like a buoy straight up).
>
> I consider these ANSA ships to be shuttlecraft. They are

> able to descend from an orbiting ship (like the Galileo 7 from the
> U.S.S. ENTERPRISE), landing on their tripods, with enough fuel left
> for at least one more re-ascent into orbit. That should be obvious,
> because Milo finds one of these ships and is able to reach orbit--
> AFTER that ship had first landed FROM orbit.
>
> Feel free to argue for what you consider to be a more plausible
> explanation, though.
>
> Patrick
>
>
>
> ------------------------ ---------------------

> Plan to Sell a Home?
> http://us.click.yahoo.com/J2SnNA/y.lEAA/ySSFAA/9_IolB/TM
> --------------------------------------------------------------------

>
>
>
>

>
>
>

So in other words, our planet is being orbited by, um, well I'd rather not think about it... lol. Imagine it, one day, one of our billion dollar space stations is going to be damaged by high velocity orbiting turd torpedoes!

 "whitty@..." wrote:

They live on Space Sticks - who needs a kitchen?

And they have a high tech hole in the side of the ship out of which
they poo and wee.

And that only took me two lines to explain.

Michael

--- "patrickmichaeltilton" <patrickmichaeltilton@...> wrote:
> --- In pota@y..., "Richard Cisak Jr." <rcisak@o...> wrote:
> > "how 4 astronauts could survive for 6 months (prior to going into
their "deep sleep") in the cramped quarters seen in the opening
scenes. " Haven't you seen pictures on the inside of Mir and Space
Station Alpha?  Cosmonauts have lived inside of Mir for over a year,
which is just as cramped as Heston's ship.
>
> *** There's a lot more room on Mir (or, there WAS until it fried up
in
> the atmosphere) and the Space Station than is seen to be available
on
> the Taylor-&-Brent-type ships.
>
> I'll ask it again: Where's the Bathroom? Where's the Kitchen? Is
there
> room in that ship for cargo to sustain 4 people for 6 months (and,
> presumably, for at least the first month they spend at their
> destination once they wake up from hibernation)? If you look at the
> ship in BENEATH, which is probably a "sister-ship" to the one seen
in
> PLANET, then there ain't enough room for all those extra
necessaries.
> All that junk behind the part visible above the water seems to me
to
> consist of 1.) LANDING GEAR (the 3 tripodal legs), 2.) THE ROCKET
> ENGINE'S EXHAUST BELL (clearly visible in the middle of that
hexagonal
> truss to which are connected those 3 landing legs), and 3.) THE
FUEL
> TANK ASSEMBLY (after all, the rocket had to have burned fuel to
slow
> its descent; too bad something went fubar and made it flop onto
it's
> belly, requiring Brent to put out an engine fuel fire with that
fire
> extinguisher).
> Between the "back wall" of what can be seen in the cabin of the
ship
> in PLANET (with that pressure hatch in the middle), and the fuel
tank
> assembly (which can be seen aft of the side "wings" of the BENEATH
> ship), there isn't much room there at all--most certainly not for a
> BATHROOM and a KITCHEN (or should I call them the "Head" and the
> "Mess" since it's a military mission?) and a CARGO HOLD. Since the
> tripodal landing legs are where they are, it's obvious that the
ship
> Brent (crash)landed was supposed to land with the nosecone pointed
> straight up in the air, like a Christmas tree on its stand. One
> wonders, then, how Brent & Skipper were supposed to get out of
their
> ship--and I think the answer is that there is a small airlock
behind
> that "back wall" of the cabin, and a hatch leading from it to the
> outside on the underside of the vessel, which could not be used for
> egress, of course, with the ship flopped onto its belly. It was
THIS
> unfortunate circumstance which necessitated Brent leaving the ship
> through the same forward escape hatch which Taylor's crew had to
use
> (since their aftward area was flooded, making his ship angle up in
the
> water, neither floating flat--like the capsule in ESCAPE--nor
bobbing
> like a buoy straight up).
>
> I consider these ANSA ships to be shuttlecraft. They are
spaceplanes,
> able to descend from an orbiting ship (like the Galileo 7 from the
> U.S.S. ENTERPRISE), landing on their tripods, with enough fuel left
> for at least one more re-ascent into orbit. That should be obvious,
> because Milo finds one of these ships and is able to reach orbit--
> AFTER that ship had first landed FROM orbit.
>
> Feel free to argue for what you consider to be a more plausible
> explanation, though.
>
> Patrick
>
>
>
> ------------------------ ---------------------
~-->
> Plan to Sell a Home?
> http://us.click.yahoo.com/J2SnNA/y.lEAA/ySSFAA/9_IolB/TM
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
-~->
>
> 
>
>

New DSL Internet Access from SBC & Yahoo!

>
> So in other words, our planet is being orbited by, um, well I'd

> "whitty@..." wrote:They live on Space Sticks - who

>
> And they have a high tech hole in the side of the ship out of which
> they poo and wee.
>
> And that only took me two lines to explain.
>
> Michael
>
> --- "patrickmichaeltilton" <patrickmichaeltilton@...> wrote:
> > --- In pota@y..., "Richard Cisak Jr." <rcisak@o...> wrote:
> > > "how 4 astronauts could survive for 6 months (prior to going

> their "deep sleep") in the cramped quarters seen in the opening
> scenes. " Haven't you seen pictures on the inside of Mir and Space
> Station Alpha? Cosmonauts have lived inside of Mir for over a

> which is just as cramped as Heston's ship.
> >
> > *** There's a lot more room on Mir (or, there WAS until it fried

> in
> > the atmosphere) and the Space Station than is seen to be

> on
> > the Taylor-&-Brent-type ships.
> >
> > I'll ask it again: Where's the Bathroom? Where's the Kitchen? Is
> there
> > room in that ship for cargo to sustain 4 people for 6 months

> > presumably, for at least the first month they spend at their
> > destination once they wake up from hibernation)? If you look at

> > ship in BENEATH, which is probably a "sister-ship" to the one

> in
> > PLANET, then there ain't enough room for all those extra
> necessaries.
> > All that junk behind the part visible above the water seems to me
> to
> > consist of 1.) LANDING GEAR (the 3 tripodal legs), 2.) THE ROCKET
> > ENGINE'S EXHAUST BELL (clearly visible in the middle of that
> hexagonal
> > truss to which are connected those 3 landing legs), and 3.) THE
> FUEL
> > TANK ASSEMBLY (after all, the rocket had to have burned fuel to
> slow
> > its descent; too bad something went fubar and made it flop onto
> it's
> > belly, requiring Brent to put out an engine fuel fire with that
> fire
> > extinguisher).
> > Between the "back wall" of what can be seen in the cabin of the
> ship
> > in PLANET (with that pressure hatch in the middle), and the fuel
> tank
> > assembly (which can be seen aft of the side "wings" of the

> > ship), there isn't much room there at all--most certainly not for

> > BATHROOM and a KITCHEN (or should I call them the "Head" and the
> > "Mess" since it's a military mission?) and a CARGO HOLD. Since

> > tripodal landing legs are where they are, it's obvious that the
> ship
> > Brent (crash)landed was supposed to land with the nosecone

> > straight up in the air, like a Christmas tree on its stand. One
> > wonders, then, how Brent & Skipper were supposed to get out of
> their
> > ship--and I think the answer is that there is a small airlock
> behind
> > that "back wall" of the cabin, and a hatch leading from it to the
> > outside on the underside of the vessel, which could not be used

> > egress, of course, with the ship flopped onto its belly. It was
> THIS
> > unfortunate circumstance which necessitated Brent leaving the

> > through the same forward escape hatch which Taylor's crew had to
> use
> > (since their aftward area was flooded, making his ship angle up

> the
> > water, neither floating flat--like the capsule in ESCAPE--nor
> bobbing
> > like a buoy straight up).
> >
> > I consider these ANSA ships to be shuttlecraft. They are
> spaceplanes,
> > able to descend from an orbiting ship (like the Galileo 7 from

> > U.S.S. ENTERPRISE), landing on their tripods, with enough fuel

> > for at least one more re-ascent into orbit. That should be

> > because Milo finds one of these ships and is able to reach orbit--
> > AFTER that ship had first landed FROM orbit.
> >
> > Feel free to argue for what you consider to be a more plausible
> > explanation, though.
> >
> > Patrick
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------ -------------------

> ~-->
> > Plan to Sell a Home?
> > http://us.click.yahoo.com/J2SnNA/y.lEAA/ySSFAA/9_IolB/TM
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------

> -~->
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of

>
>
>
> ---------------------------------

----- Original Message -----
From: <whitty@...>
To: <pota@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, September 22, 2002 4:32 PM
Subject: Re: [Planet of the Apes] POTA "chaloupes"...


> They live on Space Sticks - who needs a kitchen?
>
> And they have a high tech hole in the side of the ship out of which
> they poo and wee.
>
> And that only took me two lines to explain.
>
> Michael
>
> --- "patrickmichaeltilton" <patrickmichaeltilton@...> wrote:
> > --- In pota@y..., "Richard Cisak Jr." <rcisak@o...> wrote:
> > > "how 4 astronauts could survive for 6 months (prior to going into
> their "deep sleep") in the cramped quarters seen in the opening
> scenes. " Haven't you seen pictures on the inside of Mir and Space
> Station Alpha? Cosmonauts have lived inside of Mir for over a year,
> which is just as cramped as Heston's ship.
> >
> > *** There's a lot more room on Mir (or, there WAS until it fried up
> in
> > the atmosphere) and the Space Station than is seen to be available
> on
> > the Taylor-&-Brent-type ships.
> >
> > I'll ask it again: Where's the Bathroom? Where's the Kitchen? Is
> there
> > room in that ship for cargo to sustain 4 people for 6 months (and,
> > presumably, for at least the first month they spend at their
> > destination once they wake up from hibernation)? If you look at the
> > ship in BENEATH, which is probably a "sister-ship" to the one seen
> in
> > PLANET, then there ain't enough room for all those extra
> necessaries.
> > All that junk behind the part visible above the water seems to me
> to
> > consist of 1.) LANDING GEAR (the 3 tripodal legs), 2.) THE ROCKET
> > ENGINE'S EXHAUST BELL (clearly visible in the middle of that
> hexagonal
> > truss to which are connected those 3 landing legs), and 3.) THE
> FUEL
> > TANK ASSEMBLY (after all, the rocket had to have burned fuel to
> slow
> > its descent; too bad something went fubar and made it flop onto
> it's
> > belly, requiring Brent to put out an engine fuel fire with that
> fire
> > extinguisher).
> > Between the "back wall" of what can be seen in the cabin of the
> ship
> > in PLANET (with that pressure hatch in the middle), and the fuel
> tank
> > assembly (which can be seen aft of the side "wings" of the BENEATH
> > ship), there isn't much room there at all--most certainly not for a
> > BATHROOM and a KITCHEN (or should I call them the "Head" and the
> > "Mess" since it's a military mission?) and a CARGO HOLD. Since the
> > tripodal landing legs are where they are, it's obvious that the
> ship
> > Brent (crash)landed was supposed to land with the nosecone pointed
> > straight up in the air, like a Christmas tree on its stand. One
> > wonders, then, how Brent & Skipper were supposed to get out of
> their
> > ship--and I think the answer is that there is a small airlock
> behind
> > that "back wall" of the cabin, and a hatch leading from it to the
> > outside on the underside of the vessel, which could not be used for
> > egress, of course, with the ship flopped onto its belly. It was
> THIS
> > unfortunate circumstance which necessitated Brent leaving the ship
> > through the same forward escape hatch which Taylor's crew had to
> use
> > (since their aftward area was flooded, making his ship angle up in
> the
> > water, neither floating flat--like the capsule in ESCAPE--nor
> bobbing
> > like a buoy straight up).
> >
> > I consider these ANSA ships to be shuttlecraft. They are
> spaceplanes,
> > able to descend from an orbiting ship (like the Galileo 7 from the
> > U.S.S. ENTERPRISE), landing on their tripods, with enough fuel left
> > for at least one more re-ascent into orbit. That should be obvious,
> > because Milo finds one of these ships and is able to reach orbit--
> > AFTER that ship had first landed FROM orbit.
> >
> > Feel free to argue for what you consider to be a more plausible
> > explanation, though.
> >
> > Patrick
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------ ---------------------
> ~-->
> > Plan to Sell a Home?
> > http://us.click.yahoo.com/J2SnNA/y.lEAA/ySSFAA/9_IolB/TM
> > --------------------------------------------------------------------
> -~->
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

> In a message dated 9/22/02 10:34:35 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
> whitty@... writes:
>
>
> > I only just read the article about the TV Series today.
> >
> >
>
> What article?
>

> Award-winner: Best e-mail of the year!
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <whitty@...>
> To: <pota@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Sunday, September 22, 2002 4:32 PM
> Subject: Re: [Planet of the Apes] POTA "chaloupes"...
>
>
> > They live on Space Sticks - who needs a kitchen?
> >
> > And they have a high tech hole in the side of the ship out of

> > they poo and wee.
> >
> > And that only took me two lines to explain.
> >
> > Michael
> >
> > --- "patrickmichaeltilton" <patrickmichaeltilton@...> wrote:
> > > --- In pota@y..., "Richard Cisak Jr." <rcisak@o...> wrote:
> > > > "how 4 astronauts could survive for 6 months (prior to going

> > their "deep sleep") in the cramped quarters seen in the opening
> > scenes. " Haven't you seen pictures on the inside of Mir and Space
> > Station Alpha? Cosmonauts have lived inside of Mir for over a

> > which is just as cramped as Heston's ship.
> > >
> > > *** There's a lot more room on Mir (or, there WAS until it

> > in
> > > the atmosphere) and the Space Station than is seen to be

> > on
> > > the Taylor-&-Brent-type ships.
> > >
> > > I'll ask it again: Where's the Bathroom? Where's the Kitchen? Is
> > there
> > > room in that ship for cargo to sustain 4 people for 6 months

> > > presumably, for at least the first month they spend at their
> > > destination once they wake up from hibernation)? If you look at

> > > ship in BENEATH, which is probably a "sister-ship" to the one

> > in
> > > PLANET, then there ain't enough room for all those extra
> > necessaries.
> > > All that junk behind the part visible above the water seems to

> > to
> > > consist of 1.) LANDING GEAR (the 3 tripodal legs), 2.) THE

> > > ENGINE'S EXHAUST BELL (clearly visible in the middle of that
> > hexagonal
> > > truss to which are connected those 3 landing legs), and 3.) THE
> > FUEL
> > > TANK ASSEMBLY (after all, the rocket had to have burned fuel to
> > slow
> > > its descent; too bad something went fubar and made it flop onto
> > it's
> > > belly, requiring Brent to put out an engine fuel fire with that
> > fire
> > > extinguisher).
> > > Between the "back wall" of what can be seen in the cabin of the
> > ship
> > > in PLANET (with that pressure hatch in the middle), and the fuel
> > tank
> > > assembly (which can be seen aft of the side "wings" of the

> > > ship), there isn't much room there at all--most certainly not

> > > BATHROOM and a KITCHEN (or should I call them the "Head" and the
> > > "Mess" since it's a military mission?) and a CARGO HOLD. Since

> > > tripodal landing legs are where they are, it's obvious that the
> > ship
> > > Brent (crash)landed was supposed to land with the nosecone

> > > straight up in the air, like a Christmas tree on its stand. One
> > > wonders, then, how Brent & Skipper were supposed to get out of
> > their
> > > ship--and I think the answer is that there is a small airlock
> > behind
> > > that "back wall" of the cabin, and a hatch leading from it to

> > > outside on the underside of the vessel, which could not be used

> > > egress, of course, with the ship flopped onto its belly. It was
> > THIS
> > > unfortunate circumstance which necessitated Brent leaving the

> > > through the same forward escape hatch which Taylor's crew had to
> > use
> > > (since their aftward area was flooded, making his ship angle up

> > the
> > > water, neither floating flat--like the capsule in ESCAPE--nor
> > bobbing
> > > like a buoy straight up).
> > >
> > > I consider these ANSA ships to be shuttlecraft. They are
> > spaceplanes,
> > > able to descend from an orbiting ship (like the Galileo 7 from

> > > U.S.S. ENTERPRISE), landing on their tripods, with enough fuel

> > > for at least one more re-ascent into orbit. That should be

> > > because Milo finds one of these ships and is able to reach

> > > AFTER that ship had first landed FROM orbit.
> > >
> > > Feel free to argue for what you consider to be a more plausible
> > > explanation, though.
> > >
> > > Patrick
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ------------------------ -----------------

> > ~-->
> > > Plan to Sell a Home?
> > > http://us.click.yahoo.com/J2SnNA/y.lEAA/ySSFAA/9_IolB/TM
> > > ----------------------------------------------------------------

> > -~->
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >

> >
> >
>
>
>
> ------------------------ ---------------------

> Sell a Home for Top $
> http://us.click.yahoo.com/RrPZMC/jTmEAA/ySSFAA/9_IolB/TM
> --------------------------------------------------------------------

>
>
>
>

>
>
>

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ken and Heather Taylor" <ktaylor@...>
To: <pota@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, September 22, 2002 1:39 PM
Subject: Re: [Planet of the Apes] Re: Mad PotA


> I've got three out of four of the original art pages of the Underneath the
> Planet of the Apes parody. I thought it was from Cracked, but I may have
> been from Crazy?
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "patrickmichaeltilton" <patrickmichaeltilton@...>
> To: <pota@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Monday, September 23, 2002 12:16 AM
> Subject: [Planet of the Apes] Re: Mad PotA
>
>
> > --- In pota@y..., Haristas@a... wrote:
> > > Is there anyone here who's never seen this issue of Mad?
> > >
> > > [Unable to display image]
> >
> > *** I'm waiting for MAD to put out one of their "colorized" reprints
> > with their "Milking of the Planet that went Ape" bit. I've got a copy,
> > and it's still a riot to read. Somehow I lost that issue of CRAZY
> > which had a parody of BENEATH, drawn by Tim Severin I believe. Still,
> > you can't beat Mort Drucker for his style of caricature art...
> >
> > Patrick
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >

> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

----- Original Message -----
From: "patrickmichaeltilton" <patrickmichaeltilton@...>
To: <pota@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, September 22, 2002 5:57 AM
Subject: [Planet of the Apes] Re: POTA, Cappodocia's Troglodyte cities, &
Kaymak


> --- In pota@y..., <veetus@e...> wrote:
> > Jacobs was planning to use those same Turkish dwellings that inspired
Ape City as the home of the Fremen in his movie of "Dune". In his archives
there's a magazine article about them and some correspondence in the "Dune"
files. That would have been cool for them to appear in a Jacobs movie.
> > Etc. - - - Jeff
>
> *** What's the magazine (title/year & month)? I'm sure MacDonald's
> brother coulda found it in the Archives he supervised... so, c'mon
> Jeff ol' Veetus ol' buddy ol' pal! Inquiring minds wanna know!
>
> Patrick
>
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "patrickmichaeltilton" <patrickmichaeltilton@y...>
> > To: <pota@y...>
> > Sent: Saturday, September 21, 2002 10:12 AM
> > Subject: [Planet of the Apes] Re: POTA, Cappodocia's Troglodyte cities,
&
> > Kaymak
> >
> >
> > > --- In pota@y..., "patrickmichaeltilton" <patrickmichaeltilton@y...>
> > > wrote:
> > > > One of the books I've read in the past year is "FROM THE ASHES OF
> > ANGELS: The Forbidden Legacy of a Fallen Race" by Andrew Collins. It's
> > basically an overview of the mythic literatures of the Near East
concerning
> > the "Nephilim" or "giants" from Genesis, chapter 6. It's a great book
> > (though, like all books on the subject, one to be taken with a pinch of
> > NaCl), and--after delving into the evidence for the existence of a
supposed
> > culture older than Egypt & Sumeria, he writes:
> > > >
> > > > Why, then, cannot we simply accept that we are not the first
advanced
> > race to have inhabited this planet? The answer is clear. To do so, with
our
> > current understanding of life on earth, would frighten us to death.
> > > > We fear that one day we, too, may fall. One of the best-remembered
cult
> > movies of the 1960s is PLANET OF THE APES. Everyone who has seen this
film
> > remembers it almost exclusively for one chilling scene at the end. The
hero,
> > a marooned astronaut played by Charlton Heston, rides along a beach and
sees
> > before him the reason why apes and not human beings rule on this hostile
> > planet. Exposed above the sands is the sunken head and raised arm of the
> > Statue of Liberty. He realizes he is on earth many hundreds of years
beyond
> > his own time, and that, before the apes took control of the world, human
> > beings had raised a mighty civilization that had crumbled to dust long
> > ago--its history and achievements having been almost entirely erased
from
> > the memory of the planet. The shock factor of this film lies in the
> > realization that it gives an apocalyptic vision of our own possible
future.
> > [page 361-362]
> > > >
> > > > Guys like Andrew Collins (and other researchers, such as Graham
> > Hancock--author of "FOOTPRINTS OF THE GODS"--and Rand Flem-Ath, author
of
> > "WHEN THE SKY FELL") remind me of Cornelius, that maverick scientist who
has
> > to buck the trend (and the accusations of "heresy") of his own culture
when
> > his professionalism in regards to Archaology points him in the direction
of
> > postulating the existence of a superior antecedent culture (ours) which
> > "official history" says shouldn't exist at all. This particular book,
"FROM
> > THE ASHES...", is a good read, regardless of whether or not he's really
onto
> > something, so I recommend it. Also, he goes into a lot of detail
concerning
> > the troglodyte dwellings in Cappadocia which--you'll recall--Bill Creber
> > said were the inspiration for the design of the Ape City in PLANET.
> > > >
> > > > Patrick
> > >
> > > *** I was just surfin' some sites about those Cappadocian troglodyte
> > > dwellings in Turkey, and came across this webpage:
> > > http://www.turkishodyssey.com/places/anatolia/ana2.htm#Kaymakli
> > > Check out the pic of "Uchisar Fortress, Cappadocia"--it bears a
> > > resemblance to the "Ape City" look. I wish I could find one big site
> > > that just had tons and tons of pictures of these places, but every
> > > site I click onto seems to just have one or two. Rats!
> > >
> > > Also, one of the many underground cities built there is called
> > > "Kaymakli". For some reason this struck me as a strange coincidence,
> > > since one of the villages in the POTA TV series--in "The Gladiator"--
> > > is called "Kaymak", where Prefect Barlow instituted his "games". I
> > > wonder if the writer of that episode got the name "Kaymak" from this
> > > place in Cappadocia, with its similar architecture?
> > >
> > > While I'm on the topic, does anybody happen to know which book Bill
> > > Creber saw which showed the pictures of the troglodyte cities that
> > > inspired him to make Ape City look the way it does? The book is
> > > mentioned in "BEHIND THE POTA", but I don't think the book's title was
> > > ever given.
> > >
> > > Bye, till tomorrow's tide...
> > >
> > > Patrick
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >

> > >
> > >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

On Monday, September 23, 2002, at 05:02 PM, apefan23@... wrote:

> I'm not sure.....have you tried opening it from the yahoo page?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

> In a message dated 9/23/02 6:35:04 PM Eastern Daylight Time,

> writes:
>
>
> > I was just going to post this too! Just found it again...it's

> > and he has spent alot of time on funkifying pics......
> >
> >
>
> OK, I've told somebody else this before, and now I'm going to tell

>
> Alot is two words! It's a lot!
>

>
> I've posted this before and there was no comment. Has anyone

> it?
>
> [Unable to display image][Unable to display image][Unable to

> [Unable to display image][Unable to display image][Unable to

> [Unable to display image][Unable to display image][Unable to

> <A

>

> When leaving for a few days of fun in the Forbidden Zone be sure to

> the Waffle House.
> [Unable to display image]
>

> In a message dated 9/23/02 5:30:25 PM Central Daylight Time,

> writes:
>
> << Has anyone bother to read
> it? >>
>
> Well, since you're correcting others...
>
> Wouldn't it be 'bothered'? u no not how 2 spel.
>
> -Joe
>
> ------------------------ ---------------------

> Buy stocks for $4
> No minimums or annual fee!
> http://us.click.yahoo.com/4ZN8wA/4lsEAA/ySSFAA/9_IolB/TM
> --------------------------------------------------------------------

>
>
>
>

>
>
>

>>