It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: TheToastmanCometh
I'm taking this one with a half grain of salt. I don't really subscribe to the hollow earth theory because astonishingly we do have pictures of north and south poles.
I also find Byrd's accounts suspect as there has been no evidence of a hardcopy ever existing, and if there was, why wouldnt they be photocopied for future reference?
originally posted by: rickymouse
Actually, the dinosaurs didn't really have to have lived here, the dead dinosaurs could have been strewn all over the planet from this collision, much later than we think. Lots of things could upend what we think of as reality.
originally posted by: berheal
originally posted by: eriktheawful
Everyone, please click on the OP's link and read the article. Please.
They are not saying the Earth is hollow and that there is another "world" down there in the traditional sense.
They are saying that they think the entire Earth's crust was not turned molten when the giant impact happened, and mixed up with the mantle, but instead that a good chunk of the original Earth's crust survived.
Over time, much of that original crust subducted, and they are finding traces of it when they drill.
The article is not about a hollow Earth, or anything like that.
Oh... Well you never know, after all science isn't always an exact science
There's droves of evidence that refute it. IT'S NOT EVEN A POSSIBILITY. We use seismic data from earthquakes/volcanic eruptions/celestial impacts to model the Earth's interior for geological and geophysical purposes.