Hollow Earth? how about a cold earth

Am I the only person that's skeptical of sciences' explanation of what's inside the Earth?
You know, the mantle, core, etc.

What we "know" about the Earth's structure comes from seismographs. This is not a reliable technology.

For example - in one drilling experiment, scientists were unable to find a layer of rock the seismographs predicted, and found another layer far from where it should have been.

This shows that we are really just making wild guesses. What if the inside of the Earth is actually cold, and lava is just a result of friction?

Well, what science says about the make-up of the inside of earth makes sense to me.

It being cold doesn't make much sense but, hey, I'm not a scientist

Because, think of tectonic plate movement.
It's basically floating on top of the liquid mantle.

If it was cold, there wouldn't be a "Liquid" mantle, therefore there wouldn't be tectonic plate movement.

Unless I got the whole process wrong, if so, correct me.

reply to post by Donnie Darko

Seismographs provide an excellent picture about the earths compostion

Earthquakes, and other sources, produce different types of seismic waves which travel through rock, and provide an effective way to image both sources and structures deep within the Earth

Alexander the Great is correct to, without the plates sitting on top of a layer of magma, we wouldnt have any plate movement, meaning no earthquakes, and no volcanoes.

So far Ive never heard of a cold volcano either

[edit on 25/4/2009 by OzWeatherman]

I suppose in stead of molten lava, the plates could be floating on a cushion of, crude oil? Oh, yea, thats just not possible, now is it. Everyone knows crude oil is produced by decaying plant matter, right? Well if oil is lighter than water someone please explain to me how water constantly stayed on top of the oil that has been forming for millions of years, and how did the oil get so deep in the crust while water is constantly pushing it up.

Additionally to that, I think that the ground would not be fertile, due to no possible vegetation. If that worked, there would be more plantsin antartica for example

I personally reject a molten core theory because sooner or later the heat"Approximately 5000 degrees" would migrate to the surface. The planet has had billions of years for this heat to migrate, and it has not. Also, where the plates come together, there would be oozing lava all the time as in Rings of fire. But do you see this? Frozen Polar regions could never form because of the internal heat.

In the fictional book "Etidorphia" it offers another explanation to the origination of volcanoes and magma or lava.

" How can a thin stratum of water give rise to a volcanic eruption?" I next queried. " There seems to be no melted rock, no evidence of intense heat,either beneath or about us." FIG. 27.

" I informed you some time ago that I would partially explain these facts. Know then, that the theories of man concerning volcanic eruptions, in connection with a molten interior of the earth, are such as are evolved in ignorance of even the subsurface of the globe. The earth's interior is to mankind a sealed chamber, and the wise men who elucidate the curious theories concerning natural phenomena occurring therein are forced to draw entirely upon their imagination. Few persons realize the paucity of data at the command of workers in science. Theories concerning the earth are formulated from so little real knowledge of that body, that our science may be said to be all theory, with scarcely a trace of actual evidence to support it. If a globe ten inches in diameter be covered with a sheet of paper, such as I hold in my hand, the thickness of that sheet will be greater in proportion to that of such a globe than the depth men have explored within the earth is compared with the thickness of the crust of the earth. The outer surface of a pencil line represents the surface of the earth; the inner surface of the line represents the depth of man's explorations; the highest mountain would be represented by a comma resting on the line. The geologist studies the substances that are thrust from the crater of an active volcano, and from this makes conjectures regarding the strata beneath, and the force that casts the excretions out. The results must with men, therefore, furnish evidence from which to explain the cause. It is as though an anatomist would form his idea of the anatomy of the liver by the secretion thrown out of that organ, or of the lung texture by the breath and sputum. In fact, volcanoes are of several descriptions, and usually are extremely superficial. This lake, the surface of which is but one hundred and fifty miles underground, is the mother of an exceptionally deep one. When the water pours over this ledge it strikes an element below us, the metallic base of salt, which lies in great masses in some portions of the earth's crust. * Then an immediate chemical reaction ensues, the water is dissociated, intense heat results, part of the water combines with the metal, part is vaporized as steam, while part escapes as an inflammable gas. The sudden liberation of these gases causes an irregular pressure of vapor on the surface of the lake, the result being a throbbing and rebounding of the attenuated atmosphere above, which, in gigantic waves, like swelling tides, dashes great volumes of water over the ledge beside us, and into the depth below. This water in turn reacts on fresh portions of the metallic base, and the reflex action increases the vapor discharges, and as a consequence the chamber we are in becomes a gasholder, containing vapors of unequal gas pressures, and the resultant agitation of the lake from the turmoil continues, and the pulsations are repeated until the surface of the lake is lowered to such a degree as at last to prevent the water from overflowing the barrier. Finally the lake quiets itself, the gases slowly disappear by earth absorption, and by escape from the volcanic exit, and for an unrecorded period of time thereafter the surface of the lake continues to rise slowly as it is doing now."

" But what has this phenomenon to do with the volcano?"

" It produces the eruption; the water that rushes down into the chasm, partly as steam, partly as gas, is forced onward and upward through a crevice that leads to the old crater of the presumed extinct but periodically active Mount Epomeo. These gases are intensely heated, and they move with fearful velocity. They tear off great masses of stone, which the resultant energy disturbances, pressure, gas, and friction, redden with heat. The mixture of gases from the decomposed water is in large amount, is burning and exploding, and in this fiery furnace amid such convulsions as have been described, the adjacent earth substance is fused, and even clay is melted, and carried on with the fiery blast. Finally the current reaches the earth's surface through the funnel passage, the apex of which is a volcano- the blast described a volcanic eruption."

www.lycaeum.org...

The truth is far stranger than fiction!!So, I would say yes to Colder Earth interior.

[edit on 25-4-2009 by All Seeing Eye]

This is interesting put up against the expanding earth theory:

ATS Earth is Expanding

I the earth is expanding then, then the volume of the interior of the earth is increasing. Less matter must thereby make voids, which could be cold?

reply to post by mithrawept
That was a great video!!! The only problem with it, is where did the extra material come from to make the earth grow in size? I don't think it is realistic to think it came in the form of millions of years of space dust and asteroid hits.

It would be possible that the outer crust has expanded and stretched threw centrifugal force like with a balloon, but, you are still left with a void in the middle that must be filled with "Something". I would guess a mixture of, water, and air.

Originally posted by All Seeing Eye
I personally reject a molten core theory because sooner or later the heat"Approximately 5000 degrees" would migrate to the surface. The planet has had billions of years for this heat to migrate, and it has not. Also, where the plates come together, there would be oozing lava all the time as in Rings of fire. But do you see this? Frozen Polar regions could never form because of the internal heat.

The Earth's core is actually solid, no argument on that. Why the heat is taking too long to dissipate is due to decaying nuclear isotopes deep under the surface and the very thick insulating crust.

Not all plates divisions have lava oozing, unless there's an active ridge pushing the plates together which is common in the Ring of Fire. You won't see lava oozing from the plates though, they ooze rather from the active volcanoes lining up the plate boundaries.

Frozen Polar regions is possible like I said earlier due to our very thick(for miles) insulating crust. While heat can migrate up, cold from the surface can migrate down too and they meet in the middle. But there is actually migration of heat to the surface, aside from tectonic or volcanic activities, don't get me wrong on that. It's just so small that compared to all the heat under the crust, it's negligible.

Simple phenomenon with typical fiberglass insulator, of a heated room. Why does the wall of such room not warm when touched outside or why not cold when touched inside? It will actually go on indefinitely until the source of warmth is shut down. The Earth's crust is rather a near perfect insulator simply for its thickness. That's an insulator's job - to trap the heat or cold, in our case, trapping heat inside earth and the cold outside.

[edit on 28-4-2009 by ahnggk]

reply to post by Donnie Darko


So uh all those volcanoes about are caused by friction huh?

What about geothermal springs? Do you have an explanation for them?

They seem pretty common too, HERE is a list of these springs all over the world.

Oh and have you heard of geothermal power?
You should look into it!

Originally posted by Chadwickus
reply to post by Donnie Darko

 

So uh all those volcanoes about are caused by friction huh?

What about geothermal springs? Do you have an explanation for them?

They seem pretty common too, HERE is a list of these springs all over the world.

Oh and have you heard of geothermal power?
You should look into it!

Hmmm, I'm sure there are hot spots. But I'm skeptical the entire interior of the Earth is hot as hell, actually.

Originally posted by Chadwickus
reply to post by Donnie Darko

 

So uh all those volcanoes about are caused by friction huh?

Actually the book "etidorphia" explains that it is a chemical reaction where high salt metals come into contact with water. Here is what happens when Sodium is mixed with water. Imagine if it were 50 to 100 pounds, or more, that get drenched in water, under great pressure deep in the crust.



media.abovetopsecret.com...

Photo 1: Freshly cut sodium has a metallic sheen. Within a few minutes, water in the air causes a layer of sodium hydroxide to develop on exposed surfaces, which is why elemental sodium is stored under hexane or a similar substance. The crystallized layer contains water that can be removed with a few drops of phenolphthalein solution (base indicator, see Chapter 12).
Photo 2: Sodium reacts with water, here as an acid, according to:

www2.uni-siegen.de...


[edit on 28-4-2009 by All Seeing Eye]

reply to post by All Seeing Eye


I reject the theory that my coffee is hot because the "over 150" degree heat would have migrated to the outside of the cup by now.

Insulation: Dozens to hundreds of miles of rock and dirt are pretty good at it. As long as the planet loses heat to space as fast the sun can heat it up, and the heat can be transferred through miles of solid rock, it will not warm up.

the outside of a thermos bottle isn't going to get very hot even if there's a very hot liquid inside.

Originally posted by mdiinican
reply to post by All Seeing Eye

 

I reject the theory that my coffee is hot because the "over 150" degree heat would have migrated to the outside of the cup by now.

Insulation: Dozens to hundreds of miles of rock and dirt are pretty good at it. As long as the planet loses heat to space as fast the sun can heat it up, and the heat can be transferred through miles of solid rock, it will not warm up.

the outside of a thermos bottle isn't going to get very hot even if there's a very hot liquid inside.

One question for you. What causes the theorized heat at the center of the planet, and what continues to fuel this theorized heat.? Please be as specific as possible.

reply to post by All Seeing Eye


Do you realize exactly how big the earth is? It's pretty big. if it isn't glowing red on the outside, it isn't really losing much heat. If it's decently insulated, heat will not be able to flow quickly from the inside to the outside. The inside stays hot, and if the outside has any cooling at all, it will be much cooler than the inside. It's probably a combination of heat left over from when the earth first formed, and some heat from the decay of all the heavier radioactive elements that likely accumulate towards the center.

Anyway, you may as well ask yourself why the sides of a dormant but not extinct volcano aren't GLOWING RED HOT. Some quite clearly have liquid magma inside them, not all that far from the outside, compared to most of the world.

We have the moon to thank for a hot interrior of the Earth. It's pull causes friction and that causes heat. Mars is about as old as Earth but has no real good sized moon, just two pepples that are meaningless. It's interrior cooled quickly, though it may still be warn deep at the core. The center of the Earth is hot... very hot indeed, and will stay that way as long as we have the moon.

Originally posted by Fromabove
We have the moon to thank for a hot interrior of the Earth. It's pull causes friction and that causes heat. Mars is about as old as Earth but has no real good sized moon, just two pepples that are meaningless. It's interrior cooled quickly, though it may still be warn deep at the core. The center of the Earth is hot... very hot indeed, and will stay that way as long as we have the moon.

In a odd way, I know what you mean, seeing how there was no moon, before the flood. But, thats another kind of heat

reply to post by All Seeing Eye


I'm pretty sure the bible explicitly states that the moon was created in the first seven days of creation, and not at some subsequent, post-flood time.

reply to post by mdiinican


What the bible says is quite interesting...although if you want to believe the bible then the earth is only about 6000 years old as well..and we have proof that man has been on the earth far longer than that.. Floods or not..the bible as we know it is as reliable as an Aesop fable..