Proving the Hollow Earth Theory Wrong...and Why Google Earth Should Not be Taken as a Satellite Imag

Can infra Red Photo's be accessed in the area?

(Heat)

Are mag or grav maps aval?

Why look with eye's - The science wont lie.


Watcher

Well heck, you just ruined my plans for digging an ice hole to Atlantis

Originally posted by n120by60w
Can infra Red Photo's be accessed in the area?

(Heat)

Are mag or grav maps aval?

Why look with eye's - The science wont lie.


Watcher

Yep, but they wont be much good for showing anything on the surface. Infra red images are mainly used to determine cloud type and height.

I believe these images come from the polar orbiting satellites NOAA-17 and NOAA-18

Here's some IR images

www.bom.gov.au...

There are also Vis images available at that link too

[edit on 31/3/2009 by OzWeatherman]

Originally posted by Unit541
Y'know, you claim in your OP that you have proven nothing has been hidden in Antarctica. You didn't. For a scholar, you're idea of what constitutes "proof" is pretty skewed. You've done nothing but provide an explanation of why you don't think there is anything hidden. Yet, you openly mock others who bring an open mind to the topic.

This is a very delicate argument: the story of the hollow earth comes from far away in the time, but it IS sci-fi. To those to whom happened to read (and, most important, to UNDERSTAND) Newton, this argument could result even laughable, while what OZ did was to share his knowledge in the same "almost-aggressive" way that blind believers are doing right now: check some of the UFOs threads and let me know if i'm lying. Sadly sometimes you need to use a language that is not supergentle, but i don't see any offence in the OP, while i DO see technical and scientific data: so, OZ, please apologize for trying to share some knowledge here, ok?

Unit541, may i ask you to explain to us how a planet like Earth could keep being in a stable configuration in presence of some large interior void (entire worlds, BTW) not to mention the total (supposed) lack of energy source to set against forces like for example (to be VERY easy) atmospheric pressure? I just ask you to avoid philosophy: this is a SCIENTIFIC subject matter so please provide me with a (even simple) explanation about HOW this planet could NOT implode And don't forget to explain our orbits, unless you believe that even our orbits are a LIE and that all that we see is some hologram. Please, reply to me, im not that rude as that bad guy, (OZ): im internos, i'm good: many people offend me and i don't react. OZ shared what he knows: THIS is what ATS was made for.

[edit on 31/3/2009 by internos]

reply to post by internos


Internos, like I said, I don't think there's anything but fantasy behind the hollow earth theory. However, I'm certainly not willing to say it's impossible without digging a hole to the center of the earth to see for myself.

Oz's assertions are naive at best, ignorant at worst. It might be a bit of a cliche at this point, but the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Oz is essentially saying "If you can't see it, it's not there".

I take issue with two things here. First, when someone claims "proof" when there is no proof. Why could Oz not simply state to the believers "Hey, I don't think you're right, and this is why...".

Second, the tone of Oz's posts are condescending at best, and not just to those who disagree. I happen to agree with Oz on this topic, but I'm also a little offended by the sarcasm directed towards those who have much more stringent standards as to what constitutes "proof".

Disproving Hollow earth is like disproving religion. Those that believe don't require proof, and no amount of evidence will convince those that don't believe.

If you think terrain camouflaging is impossible check these photos out. The images shown below as well as many other interesting images can be found here.


HAARP non-camouflaged


HAARP with a camouflaged Array


Total camouflage of HAARP


This means that a picture of anything can be taken and unless the resolution is super high and your eyes are trained to spot anomalies you would have no clue something was wrong.

Originally posted by OzWeatherman
So presenting a high resolution mosaic with no hollow earth entrance doesnt do the same (opposite) thing?

If I provide a high resolution mosaic of Carlsbad New Mexico with no caverns, does that mean there's no such thing as Carlsbad Caverns?

If I provide photos of houses on a street with no power lines, does that mean those homes have no power?

You're essentially saying there's nothing hidden because you can't see it. If you could see it, it wouldn't be hidden very well now would it.

I know you're just trying to share your point of view, but you presented your point of view as fact. Here's your exact words:

Now to prove that there is nothing being hidden in Antarctica...

Showing a picture, no matter how high resolution, of a continent does not prove nothing is hidden there. When others disputed your "proof", you attacked them with sarcasm. Maybe you didn't mean anything by it, but it was in extremely poor taste.

Originally posted by OzWeatherman
Well Im hopin that someone will come on here and provide some evidence of it, and try to prove my point of view incorrect, that the whole point of starting threads, for healthy discussion

Yet you started this thread with this:

Originally posted by OzWeatherman
Ok, Im starting to get sick of repeating myself on other threads, so Im doing one myself.

Do you get more points for repeating yourself in your own thread?

Edit for bbcode.

[edit on 3/31/2009 by Unit541]

reply to post by Unit541


Thank you for your reply.
I will tell you what it would be the best thing to do in my opininion, but it's just my opinion, i could be wrong and what brought me here is just the disappointment in seeing an OP misinterpreted: how comes, i have to read threads titled like (examples):
Alien caught in my window
Alien called me names
Aliens abused me. More than once
Skeptiks are idiots
An alien inside my WC
Etc...

You know, i'm not a skeptic at all, and i SUFFER whenever someone believes the i debunk something because i like it. I feel BAD whenever i find that something turns out to be be fake. Same goes for each other member. Since i know OZ, i also know that his purpose is NOT to ridiculize who think different from him, but simply to share what he knows, and what he knows is part not only of his work, but also of his life. I see what you didn't appreciate in his post, it was the WAY it was posed, it has happened to me many times, after reading loads of non sense, knowing for sure that it IS non sense, you may react as he did, and as i did, more than once, in the past: i got even more than one OFF topic alert, and even a warning once . IN cases like this one, what we should do is to try to DISCUSS about the topic, not to try to annihilate the counterpart's argument: no one would get any benefit from a fight.
In my opinion, YOU and OZ are both intelligent people, maybe i shouldn't chime in, but i'm VERY confident that this thread could turn out to be a very constructive one. Without brains there is no growth, no matter what these brains think.


[edit on 31/3/2009 by internos]

No serious investigator ever claimed that google earth proves that the earth is hollow. If you want to be a Debunker, dont cherry-pick the most delusional theories but challenge stuff like this:

1. Camouflaging Landscapes is Real

2. Subterranean Activities are Real

3. Cover-Ups in the Antarctica are possibly Real

reply to post by internos


I dig your style.

And Oz, I'm sorry for upping the tension and frustration level of this thread.

I would like very much, to find a way to make this a productive discussion. I just don't think debating the validity of this particular theory can be any more productive than debating the existence of alternate universes.

However, perhaps this thread can evolve into a discussion regarding various methods of terrain camouflage, and spotting it in photographs.

Im not a strong believer in the "hollow earth" theory but i do believe there must be massive underground hollow points if you will sort of like caves or pot holes its abit ignorant to blatenly deny that there cannot be any holes in all that space

2 satelite photos dont prove much thats being pretty selective with your argument i will believe whatever you want me to believe soon as you or i go there and dig further enough into the ice get some pictures or video to back up whichever side of the argument your on,

you can use whatever software you want it an all be edited just the same you can see my house but you cant see whats inside my safe can you?

What is this strangle glow?

I don't know that this does anything to debunk the hollow earth theory as I understand it.

The idea is that the Earth's crust is 50 miles thick and in being so thick, and porous, that there is a LOT of room for people to live in it.
Not that the middle of the Earth is completely hollow.

I'm still on the skeptical side of that fence, but I'm just trying to call a spade a spade.

The Hollow Earth stories make for fantastic reading, btw.

reply to post by EarthCitizen07

What is this strangle glow?

Strangle glow? What's it strangling?

The Aurora Australis. It's like the Aurora Borealis but ausier.
earthobservatory.nasa.gov...
www.antarcticconnection.com...

[edit on 3/31/2009 by Phage]

[edit on 3/31/2009 by Phage]

Well, I don't know anything about a hollow earth. I have heard of the theory and i am not sure I care, but just a thought, no matter how many clear photos you have, it would be kind of hard for even a clear satellite to find a doorway, maybe built into an ice shelf covered from above. I mean a satellite is not going to pick up what is deep UNDER the earth right? You would have to find the actual door....a bit harder.
As for Google Earth being a satellite image that you can count on???? I agree with you 100%. Google Earth is a joke in every respect and can be edited almost like Wikipedia. It is a farce to think that anything you see there on GE could be really taken seriously. I agree with you on this one. Hollow Earth? I don't know. I do know there are a lot of big bases and possibly sizable cities strategically placed all over the earth.

reply to post by EarthCitizen07


EarthCitizen07 I like your photo. Where did you get the photo? It looks like a lot of the energy of the glow is actually coming out of a black hole where the glow is the brightest and then spreads out as a triangle and then to the larger surrounding perimeter glow.

reply to post by Unit541


Google Earth does show a hole. Not a physical hole but a hole in the algorithm which wraps a flat image onto a curved surface using a cylindrical projection. It just doesn't fit right.
www.geography.hunter.cuny.edu...

I need some elaboration on how you showing these images, 'debunks' the hollow earth theory? As if a mile wide hole is all the Hollow earth theory is about!

To be honest, I'm not sure if there is or isn't a big hole in the antarctic and until I can see for myself if there is, or isn't, I'll keep an open mind. I can accept that a quick photoshop job could clear that problem right up and I also don't fool myself into thinking none of these images are not 'screened' for public consumption.

That being said, the 'hole in the pole' is a small facet of the theory, in fact, as far as I know, it is only mentioned in a small minority of cases (very small).

Either way, the name 'Hollow Earth' is kind of a misnomer, but I doubt 'Honeycombed Earth' theory would be quite as catchy.

EMM

Oz Weatherman; you have not pulled no wool over my eyes, all you have guided people to is Mosaic veiws that are heavy on the image tampering, were are the sumer time views of the mountains and valleys,in color ?i am quite sure the antartica area was on the world mapping project were google and europa buys there images from NASA. you solved nothing sir i should know

reply to post by OzWeatherman


Nice thread. While I'll admit the odds of hollow Earth being correct is practically nil I have to say I've always found Antarctica to be a mysterious continent. I'd really like to know what's under that ice and I don't think sattelite images are going to disprove or prove whether there's a hole beneath the ice or not. I can't imagine what we might learn about life on this planet if we could get to the actual land beneath the ice and start looking for fossils and perhaps even evidence of human (or human ancestor) habitation.

Google Earth shouldn't be considered a satellite image or as a good tool for anything other than amateur research and finding cool little anomalies to pass the time... Even if the Earth was hollow and the entrance was in Antarctica what difference would it make? Are these people planning on a trip to Antarctica? Do they honestly think the hole is so massive it would show up on Google Earth or even show up on the surface of the ice at all? Seems like a lot of silliness to me...