It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Hollow Moon, Hollow Earth?

page: 1
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 13 2004 @ 04:04 PM
link   
This author has a habit of copying content from the Unexplained Mysteries site without giving credit, and is accumulating warnings as a result.

His post came from here:
www.unexplained-mysteries.com...



[Edited on 14-5-2004 by SkepticOverlord]

Yes am very sorry about that but i am not fully used to posting in forums and using the posting utilities

[Edited on 14-5-2004 by darkAngel]




posted on May, 13 2004 @ 04:12 PM
link   
Maybe that is why we havent been back, and the rest of hte misssions were :Faked"?

A bell rings because it has an opening at, at least one end. Then if the moon rang like a bell, then does it too, have an opening somewhere?



posted on May, 13 2004 @ 04:55 PM
link   
I've read in other threads that it's in a crater or something, or there's a dome in a crater?

Not sure, what are your thoughts?



posted on May, 13 2004 @ 05:15 PM
link   
Problems with hollow earth/moon theory.

1) Asteroid impacts would shatter the spheres. THere have been many impacts.

2) The sphere would have to be made of lead and heavier elements to account for the mass of each. The known upper layers are not heavy enough.

3) Natural "bubbles" have to have a tensile stregth strong enough to overcome thier weight. Nothing has the tensile strength to withstand the weight of the earth.

Not only is there no evidence that the moon or earth are hollow, but laws of nature known to man for the last 500 year would have to be wholely wrong for them to be.

At best there are small numbers of caverns in the upper layers of each body, but at certain depths the pressure doesn't even allow for caverns.



posted on May, 13 2004 @ 07:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by All Seeing Eye
Maybe that is why we havent been back, and the rest of hte misssions were :Faked"?

A bell rings because it has an opening at, at least one end. Then if the moon rang like a bell, then does it too, have an opening somewhere?


I don't think actual "ringing" was meant to be implied. Its sounds as if they meant there was a reverberation (like that of a ringing bell) which would happen even with a completely enclosed structure.

Makes sense about why we haven't been back. Too many missions would make information like that public. What would that do to the "approved" thought patterns? If the moon really were hollow, then that would imply that other bodies could be hollow as well.



posted on May, 13 2004 @ 07:05 PM
link   
There are creaters on the moon everywhere wich menas there were a LOT of meteors hitting it. If it is hollow it would have broken in halves by now.



posted on May, 13 2004 @ 07:16 PM
link   
The mass of the moon has a direct effect on the oceanic tidal movements on earth. If the moon was hollow scientists would have found out by the gravitational pull. I dont feel like searching out this info, maybe somebody else could find relevant information on the net.



posted on May, 13 2004 @ 07:24 PM
link   
All of you are wrong. The moon is really made of cheese; everything else is disinformation!



posted on May, 13 2004 @ 07:56 PM
link   
I seem to recall a similer thread to this.

anyway, The big splat theory

more on the hollow Earth theories.



posted on May, 13 2004 @ 08:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mr No One

Originally posted by All Seeing Eye
Maybe that is why we havent been back, and the rest of hte misssions were :Faked"?

A bell rings because it has an opening at, at least one end. Then if the moon rang like a bell, then does it too, have an opening somewhere?


I don't think actual "ringing" was meant to be implied. Its sounds as if they meant there was a reverberation (like that of a ringing bell) which would happen even with a completely enclosed structure.

Makes sense about why we haven't been back. Too many missions would make information like that public. What would that do to the "approved" thought patterns? If the moon really were hollow, then that would imply that other bodies could be hollow as well.


It was just a thought about an opening.

Creaters everywhere, I dont know. I havnt seen anything hit the moon. I mean, if something did hit the moon we couldnt really know what it was unless we were there to whitness it. For all we know those creaters could have been made by ancient beam technology, or metiors. So, unless we were there to see it, anything is possible....................



posted on May, 13 2004 @ 08:18 PM
link   
I think most of the craters were formed in the accretion phase of the solar system 4 billion years ago.



posted on May, 13 2004 @ 08:41 PM
link   
Our knowledge of astrophysics and planetary dynamics is very limited and most of it hypothetical. Just because the theories that we currently have do not allow for hollow celestial bodies does not mean they cannot exist. For quite sometime, our theories did not allow "dark matter" and now we have had to adapt to accomodate this new discovery.

Just because the moon is cratered doesn't mean that it was hit with enough force to damage whatever composes its alleged hollow shell.

Remember, objects that are solid can be split apart by massive impacts as well. The Earth is still here, does that mean it isn't solid? No. (I'm not saying it means its hollow either, but we can't PROVE one or the other).



posted on May, 13 2004 @ 08:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mr No One
(I'm not saying it means its hollow either, but we can't PROVE one or the other).


I kind of think that we can. Certainly there is ample evidence that the Earth is not hollow.

The hollow moon theory has never been seriously accepted by anyone. There have been numerous theories on the origin of the moon, but the latest (the big splat) manages to tie in all of the loose ends, the lunar motion, the orbit, the lunar mass, and most importantly, the composition of the lunar rocks retieved by the Apollo missions.



posted on May, 13 2004 @ 09:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by HowardRoark

Originally posted by Mr No One
(I'm not saying it means its hollow either, but we can't PROVE one or the other).


I kind of think that we can. Certainly there is ample evidence that the Earth is not hollow.

The hollow moon theory has never been seriously accepted by anyone. There have been numerous theories on the origin of the moon, but the latest (the big splat) manages to tie in all of the loose ends, the lunar motion, the orbit, the lunar mass, and most importantly, the composition of the lunar rocks retieved by the Apollo missions.


How do you propose to prove the earth is solid? Have you been to the center? And when you were there, did you take pictures of a moltin core?

Think about it. If the earth's core was truly moltin do you think you could walk on the surface? What temp do they say the core is? Dont you think that, that heat would of "Leached" out to the outter core by now? Or maybe the earth has some sort of "Air Conditioner" somewhere down there, cooling things off before it heated the surface. Do you have pictures of that? Do you really believe the north and south pole could have ice on it if it were true?

This is for you to prove to us. I dont know about the others here at ATS, but for me I need hard core proof, not some mumbo jumbo from some ancient secret society member, selling me more snake oil.



posted on May, 13 2004 @ 09:28 PM
link   
The Earth has a solid Iron core; we know this by detecting earthquake vibrations and their travel through the earth.





For 60 years geophysicists have suspected that the Earth's inner core was solid - now they have proved it.

By detecting special seismic tremors in the aftermath of a massive Indonesian earthquake, the seismologists from Northwestern University and the French Atomic Energy Commission have shown without doubt that at the heart of the Earth is a solid iron-nickel ball, 2400km in diameter.

The key to the breakthrough is the behaviour of the two types of seismic waves. Pulse waves can travel through both liquids and solids as they move by compressing and then relaxing the material in the direction of travel.

Shear waves, in contrast, can only pass through solids. They vibrate at right angles to the direction of travel and as liquids have no material strength the signal rapidly dissipates in the fluid.

So they then had to exploit the different speeds at which the waves travel. Imagine a seismic wave rumbling down through the Earth. When it reaches the outer core, all shear waves are lost and only pulse waves continue. When the pulse waves reach the inner core the waves are partly refracted and reflected.

This allows part of the energy to convert into shear waves that then travel through the inner core. Shear waves travel more slowly than pulse waves so they reach the opposite side of the inner core later. Here they are partly converted back to pulse waves.

It was these delayed pulse waves that the scientists detected.



news.bbc.co.uk...



posted on May, 13 2004 @ 10:14 PM
link   
Metaphor, they didn't literally mean 'ringing like a bell'. The seismic monitoring equipment picked up small tremors for up to an hour afterwards. The conclusion from this was not OMG ITS HOLLOW. Where did you get that from?

The conclusion was that the Moon is almost completely solid. Or at least a lot more solid than Earth. Another theory is that the crystalline rock found on the surface penetrates a long way underground. Hollow really is not an option for an object of that size.



posted on May, 13 2004 @ 10:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by kinglizard
The Earth has a solid Iron core; we know this by detecting earthquake vibrations and their travel through the earth.



This is all just theory. The findings you quoted are assumptions made based on existing theories.

I am not saying that with the information available to us it doesn't make sense for the Earth to be solid, it does. Logical reasoning based on the theories we currently possess says that the Earth is solid. I am saying that there is a distinct possibility that our theories are wrong (other theories have been proven wrong in the past) and everything we "know" could be wrong. The fact is no one has been to the center of the Earth. We can't even get past the "crust". As such we don't "KNOW" that the Earth is solid. Maybe one day we'll find out we live on a giant Geode (with my luck it'll be because some giant alien comes along and cuts the world in half!).



posted on May, 13 2004 @ 10:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mr No One
This is all just theory. The findings you quoted are assumptions made based on existing theories.


I have provided enough proof for a reasonable person to see that the earth and moon are not hollow. It isn't theory it's scientific proof. You may continue to believe whatever you wish.



posted on May, 13 2004 @ 10:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by kinglizard

Originally posted by Mr No One
This is all just theory. The findings you quoted are assumptions made based on existing theories.


I have provided enough proof for a reasonable person to see that the earth and moon are not hollow. It isn't theory it's scientific proof. You may continue to believe whatever you wish.


That statement alone in unreasonable. Any good scientist will tell you that its important to keep an open mind and never assume facts not in evidence.

I will not deny that you have provided some credible arguements (ones I agree with I might add) but you have NOT provided proof - scientific or otherwise. I'm not trying to get you to believe the Earth is hollow. I'm not even saying that I believe the Earth is hollow. I am just suggesting that people keep an open mind and learn to question the "facts" that they are fed by the mainstream. Feel free to keep your mind closed if you like.



posted on May, 13 2004 @ 10:51 PM
link   
Well to find out that the Earth is hollow would mean that a large range of modern science is utterly false. Sciences that have been studied and built upon for centuries. Without a single shred of evidence that goes against the modern theories.

"Any Good Scientist" would also know that there is a point where the 'anything is possible' argument becomes stupidity. Thinking that 'ooh the Earth could still be hollow' is not keeping an open mind. It is wasting time and generally foolish. "Any Good Scientist" would tell you about a chap named Occam, and just how useless this kind of reasoning is.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join