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 Earth theory is just stupid, and illogic.

page: 1
5

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 25 2010 @ 10:11 AM
link   
Im not going to make a huge rambling post, but a quick few points to show that Earth isnt a multi-spherical object hurtling through space.

Plate tectonics - the cause for geological features such as volcanoes, mountains, rifts, contential shifting....

If the earth was a multi-spherical object, none of this would occur. There would be no shifting whatsoever of the earths crust, everything would remain as is. There wouldnt be vents at the bottom of the ocean spewing out boiling hot gas from the mantle, there would be no mantle. If earth were made up of different spheres, explain to me where the magma comes from, explain how diamonds are formed, explain Mt. Everest, explain the Himalayas, explain Yellowstone, explain Mt. St. Helens, Mt. Vesuvius, Krakatoa.

If earth were hollow, then there would never be any geology, nothing, eath would be smooth as a baby's bottom, save for a few craters.

"Oh but 8fl0z, check out these cool holes we found in the ground near the south/north poles" - Wow, you found a cave using G. Earth. Wanna cookie? Holes in the ground arent that special. Ever seen a cave, a lava tube, or a mine? Pretty common stuff these days...

Im not trying to bash anyones beliefs, but before stomping around the internet claiming the Earth is hollow, think about it a bit more.

Im not gonna lie, it would be freakin awesome if the Earth was hollow, and multiple worlds resided inside of it, id be all in if someone could provide some real, tangible evidence, not some book written by an obscure author who lives near Roswell, or a picture from G. Earth. Just use your head before saying to someone "Hey, did you know the Earth might be hollow?"




posted on Dec, 25 2010 @ 10:38 AM
link   
party pooper >:-(

2nd line



posted on Dec, 25 2010 @ 10:39 AM
link   



posted on Dec, 25 2010 @ 11:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by 8fl0z
Im not going to make a huge rambling post, but a quick few points to show that Earth isnt a multi-spherical object hurtling through space.

I respect your opinion, but there is also some work have been done through the time about the "Hollow-Earth" Theory. You might want to look at these. I am also skeptical, but i also keep a possibility open to the "Hollow-Earth" Theory.

Taken from this Source

The Ultimate "Did You Know That ... Never Mind"

Here is a list of the wide range of evidence which we will now present to the un- believing outer earth visitors who want to know why they have never heard about the Hollow Earth before, and feel that they have been somewhat left out.

Concepts

* All planets are spheres, not only the Earth: the Moon, Saturn, Jupiter, the Sun itself

* Standard planetary formation theories: how were they formed, what made them spin, and still does: completely woowoo

* A massive planetary body with an incandescent and progressively cooling core would crack into pieces while cooling and shrinking

* Gaseous planetary bodies like the sun and the large planets of our solar system can not generate a magnetic field; but they all have one

* All the solar system's outer planets emit more energy than they receive from the sun

* A spinning planetary body in formation has zero gravity in its center, so mass does accumulate where gravitational and centrifugal forces are balanced within the area of the spinning matter, and that form would be a sphere with openings at the top and bottom, like a hurricane of matter in space - not as a solid body with a solid center (the center has zero gravity)

* If planets were formed from cosmic dust which started to condense into a body like Earth, then the angular momentum would still continue to increase, which it doesn't - the earth's spin is steady, not slowing down or speeding up

* Larger planets with more mass should spin more slowly than smaller planets with less mass - but they don't: the largest, Jupiter, spins a lot faster (once every 10 hours) than Mercury, which is just a tiny fraction the size of Jupiter and needs 58 Earth days for one spin around its axis

General Observations

* Both Earth and Moon ring hollow for hours after struck with meteorites, as measured by seismic stations on Earth and on the Moon

* Earthquakes do not occur deeper than 450 miles, but down there, the supposedly molten magma would not create and release friction via earthquakes - a viscous or molten mass equalizes tension, it does not accumulate tension because it is flexible

* Gravity experiments in mine shafts show that the balls pointing to the center of gravity point away from the center of the Earth, instead of towards it, as measured by the distance at the top and bottom of two lead balls hanging from very long wires into a mine shaft

* ... Odd ..." would inspector Clouseau say



Observations at the Earth's poles: welcome to Mr. Woo's pole anomalies

* The temperature, as one gets past a certain latitude, increases as one approaches the poles, which is not supposed to happen; arctic (and in less cases, antarctic) explorers have reported in their ship's logs to have taken off their climate gear (this was before Goretex)

* Floating flora and fauna near the northern polar region's ocean: seeds, flowers and trees are found at latitudes where none should be, and they are often very fresh, not decomposed from many months of floating in the ocean currents that might have brought them from far away

* Spiders, bees, mosquitos, moths and flies were found once past the cold and icy region below the north pole; northern Greenland is the mosquito capital of the world

* Many bird species in the northern hemisphere migrate north - before winter; birds in the southern hemisphere migrate south in their winter, too - if the poles are the coldest regions, it makes no sense, but flocks of millions of birds like the auk have been observed doing this, and they must have a very good reason

* Presence of seal, auk, goose, seagull, duck, rabbit, wolf, fox, bear and other large animals at extreme northern latitudes (the exploration of Antarctica is much more scarce compared to Arctic explorers)

* The origin of icebergs: around the north pole, they are made of frozen sweetwater - not frozen saltwater. There is little if any precipitation of rain or snow (sweetwater) in the polar regions. Saltwater freezes to sea ice at low enough temperatures. There is no supply of sweetwater to explain the existence of icebergs which are hundreds of feet high, up to hundreds of miles long and dozens of miles wide

* Icebergs around the north pole are colored by red pollen of an unknown plant, as well as dust - a lot of it; including earth material on top of them

* Massive wave-like or tidal movements in the arctic polar region have been witnessed by many explorers, waves which cracked and moved the ice floes around the explorer's ships in a very, very major way that had their hair stand on end

* Floating and deposited driftwood (including exotic species) is extremely abundant and sometimes stacked 15 feet/5m high along the coasts in the polar region of Spitzbergen and Greenland, up to 86 degrees latitude north

* Mammoth, elephant, woolly rhinoceros, hippopotamus, lion and hyena have been found in the ice from the north pole that is also deposited on the coasts of Siberia; entire forests of mammoth ivory have been found there

* The stomach content of (un)frozen mammoth has been found to contain tropical (undigested) plants that do not occur anywhere in the northen polar region; supposedly, the last time the mammoths were clomping around was during the last Ice Age (not the Pixar animation films 1, 2 or 3), but many were found with their (un)frozen meat good enough to give it to the sled dogs in Siberia for dinner (or late lunch) [Note from the editor: If these mammoths came out of Inner Earth via the huge freshwater rivers that flow outwards and freeze as they pass the northern polar opening, then the theory of a massive crustal shift of the Earth which supposedly transported mammoths who had been peacefully chomping on tropical plants way up north, in two days, causing them to insta-freeze as a result of a polar reversal, has one argument less; see Charles Hapgood, Maurice Cotterell, Patrick Geryl, Clif High and others]




If the earth was a multi-spherical object, none of this would occur. There would be no shifting whatsoever of the earths crust, everything would remain as is. There wouldnt be vents at the bottom of the ocean spewing out boiling hot gas from the mantle, there would be no mantle. If earth were made up of different spheres, explain to me where the magma comes from, explain how diamonds are formed, explain Mt. Everest, explain the Himalayas, explain Yellowstone, explain Mt. St. Helens, Mt. Vesuvius, Krakatoa.


Here is another source that you might want to look at. Inner Earth Mysteries


It is becoming increasingly evident that the earth model presented by the reigning theory of plate tectonics is seriously flawed [8].

The rigid lithosphere, comprising the crust and uppermost mantle, is said to be fractured into several 'plates' of varying sizes, which move over a relatively plastic layer of partly molten rock known as the asthenosphere (or low-velocity zone). The lithosphere is said to average about 70 km thick beneath oceans and to be 100 to 250 km thick beneath continents.

A powerful challenge to this model is posed by seismic tomography, which shows that the oldest parts of the continents have deep roots extending to depths of 400 to 600 km, and that the asthenosphere is essentially absent beneath them. Seismic research shows that even under the oceans there is no continuous asthenosphere, only disconnected asthenospheric lenses.

The more we learn about the crust and uppermost mantle, the more the models presented in geological textbooks are exposed as simplistic and unrealistic. The outermost layers of the earth have a highly complex, irregular, inhomogeneous structure; they are divided by faults into a mosaic of separate, jostling blocks of different shapes and sizes, generally a few hundred kilometres across, and of varying internal structure and strength. This fact, in conjunction with the existence of deep continental roots and the absence of a global asthenosphere, means that the notion of huge rigid plates moving thousands of kilometres across the earth is simply untenable. Continents are about as mobile as a brick in a wall!

The plate-tectonic hypothesis that the present oceans have formed by seafloor spreading since the early Mesozoic (within the last 200 million years) is also becoming increasingly implausible. Numerous far older continental rocks have been discovered in the oceans, along with 'anomalous' crustal types intermediate between standard 'continental' and 'oceanic' crust (e.g. plateaus, ridges, and rises), and the evidence for large (now submerged) continental landmasses in the present oceans continues to mount.



Plate tectonics - the cause for geological features such as volcanoes, mountains, rifts, contential shifting....


Here is another source about Plate Tectonics.

Plate Tectonics: A Paradigm under Threat


Plate tectonics – the reigning paradigm in the earth sciences – faces some very severe and apparently fatal problems. Far from being a simple, elegant, all-embracing global theory, it is confronted with a multitude of observational anomalies, and has had to be patched up with a complex variety of ad-hoc modifications and auxiliary hypotheses. The existence of deep continental roots and the absence of a continuous, global asthenosphere to "lubricate" plate motions, have rendered the classical model of plate movements untenable. There is no consensus on the thickness of the "plates" and no certainty as to the forces responsible for their supposed movement. The hypotheses of large-scale continental movements, seafloor spreading and subduction, and the relative youth of the oceanic crust are contradicted by a substantial volume of data. Evidence for significant amounts of submerged continental crust in the present-day oceans provides another major challenge to plate tectonics. The fundamental principles of plate tectonics therefore require critical reexamination, revision, or rejection.


Peace



posted on Dec, 25 2010 @ 11:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by 8fl0z
Im not going to make a huge rambling post, but a quick few points to show that Earth isnt a multi-spherical object hurtling through space.

Plate tectonics - the cause for geological features such as volcanoes, mountains, rifts, contential shifting....

If the earth was a multi-spherical object, none of this would occur. There would be no shifting whatsoever of the earths crust, everything would remain as is. There wouldnt be vents at the bottom of the ocean spewing out boiling hot gas from the mantle, there would be no mantle. If earth were made up of different spheres, explain to me where the magma comes from, explain how diamonds are formed, explain Mt. Everest, explain the Himalayas, explain Yellowstone, explain Mt. St. Helens, Mt. Vesuvius, Krakatoa.

If earth were hollow, then there would never be any geology, nothing, eath would be smooth as a baby's bottom, save for a few craters.

"Oh but 8fl0z, check out these cool holes we found in the ground near the south/north poles" - Wow, you found a cave using G. Earth. Wanna cookie? Holes in the ground arent that special. Ever seen a cave, a lava tube, or a mine? Pretty common stuff these days...

Im not trying to bash anyones beliefs, but before stomping around the internet claiming the Earth is hollow, think about it a bit more.

Im not gonna lie, it would be freakin awesome if the Earth was hollow, and multiple worlds resided inside of it, id be all in if someone could provide some real, tangible evidence, not some book written by an obscure author who lives near Roswell, or a picture from G. Earth. Just use your head before saying to someone "Hey, did you know the Earth might be hollow?"


who said the earth was hollow?

its far from it and id be the first to prove it as would about 20,000 scientists



posted on Dec, 25 2010 @ 11:52 AM
link   
people dont get that the inner earth theory is just allegory.

Same with reptilians, and grays and atlantis etc.

Its not the first time that the masses have been guided to take the myth as truth.



posted on Dec, 25 2010 @ 02:13 PM
link   
You never been there huh...
Just wait until you see that inner sun shine... absolutely freaking amazing.

Aghartha is the most beautiful city ever build. But I suppose you will not go and check it for yourself.



posted on Dec, 25 2010 @ 02:16 PM
link   
According to the Ra entity from The Law of One, it says that the Earth is like a "honeycomb" inside - with no intelligent species in the holes - just some abandoned cities.

Honeycomb with a "molten core".

I have yet to see ANYONE debunk The Ra Material in the first place...



posted on Dec, 25 2010 @ 02:54 PM
link   
stupid and illogical, yet only debunkable by saying, ey, too complex. so maybe its not stupid and illogical, just too much to believe.. I like the idea.. the earth is huge. I would not be suprised to find hidden races of humans/humanoids underground.



posted on Dec, 25 2010 @ 03:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by 8fl0z
Just use your head before saying to someone "Hey, did you know the Earth might be hollow?"
The density of the Earth would be hard to explain with any hollow Earth theory:

www.xenophilia.com...


The density of rock is roughly 3000 kg per cubic meter, but the average overall density of the Earth from mass measurements is 5520 kg per cubic meter. ( This is also 5.52 g per cubic centimeter. ) Therefore, we can make a good guess that something inside the Earth is more dense than rock. This fits well with the accepted idea of a molten metal core. It does not fit the hollow earth idea.



posted on Dec, 26 2010 @ 03:39 PM
link   
have u looked at admiral byrds journal....hitlers expeditions.....there may be hope for you yet



posted on Dec, 26 2010 @ 03:53 PM
link   
I agree OP. I'd star your post, but you are just stating the obvious



posted on Dec, 26 2010 @ 03:56 PM
link   
reply to post by 8fl0z
 


I'm no subscriber to the hollow earth theory, but if you are going to insult people, you ought to come with a little more legit info than this.

Your post is based on your opinion alone. You call the theory stupid, but do nothing to back up that claim.

Just because you dont buy it or dont understand it, does not prove it false.



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 08:46 AM
link   
I always thought that the Hollow Earth theory was just a really cool story. A what if, if you will. I never could see any valid information that could make me believe otherwise. Since it was a kid facination, I spent some time reading about more stories and information that I had no idea was out there.

A myth? Maybe. Hitler looked for it. He was smart enough to lead his people into whole new ideas. Many of which actually worked. The Bomb! V1 & V2 rockets. We use these concepts to send up all the pretty metal in space around us today. If Hitler had won the war, which he wasn't far off from doing had the US not stepped in at the time, he could have assured total nuclear destruction around the world. Certainly Nazi germany was doomed to total world domination by through it's own and the worlds destruction. Still, he looked for it. I'm curious where the information came from that pulled him into searching for it.

Today, the information we do have can be found almost instantly on the internet. I understand that probably 99% of such things are bogus, but still, with all the useless information, one can still glean facts and usefull information.

I still dont know what to believe on this issue to be 100%, but I did see this site and it really opened up my mind on possibility. There is alot of information there. ALOT. Some of it is baseless, but most of it seems very sound. I noticed alot of similarities in images taken of our planet, the planets around us, the moon, and wildly enough, google earth/moon ect. I understand the distortion factors, but still, there seems to be a "Fractal" in the whole universe around us, so I would be foolish to say that it's not the same all the way down into subinfinity.


Lots of good info here. Definatly worth the read!



new topics

top topics



 
5

log in

join