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 in Google Earth? North Pole anomaly

page: 2
5
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 20 2011 @ 12:56 AM
link   
reply to post by Skate
 


I don't normally do this (and although I'm not at all, will accept the fact that this makes me look arrogant), but as a new member, you need to either not argue, or provide evidence to support one's claim, whether it's your own or someone's you're defending.

That being said, I will only add this following statement so that it adds relevance to the thread.

OP, I feel as though by now you understand it's a satellite imaging issue, and not a government coverup. I am curious to know, what evidence you have to support your own idea that the earth is hollow. Geology and physics say it isn't possible... so do the laws of thermodynamics. So, what evidence do you have to combat these and support your theory that the earth is hollow?

reply to post by theabsolutetruth

Although I don't wish to change the topic, I believe you need to read up on the Nazca lines. There's obviously much you don't know about them other than what you've heard from that racist Erich Von Daniken. Why do people trust an author with archaeology? You wouldn't trust Tom Petty with a lesson in paleontology... why trust someone else with no credentials? Anyway, to add to what you are seeing in your pictures... which I saw nothing, you see what you want. Faces are the easiest thing the human eye and brain can put together, so seeing faces everywhere makes sense.




posted on Feb, 20 2011 @ 10:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Skate
How hard is that to believe? There isn't any proof AGAINST it so stop rippin on him and give him a break. You should at least be praising him for taking his own time to research into this and take his time to arrange the thread so stop being a troll and at least say "Thanks for sharing!"


Actually, there are many proofs against your hypothesis. We know the composition of the Earth's core by use of seismic waves. Perhaps you should do a little research on the subject before being so defensive? We have used the same techniques to study the core of Mercury and the Moon as well.

If your idea has any validity at all, how do you explain volcanic activity? What about earthquakes and plate tectonics? How would continental drift be possible at all if there earth were hollow? What about our magnetic field? You realize our magnetic field is produced from the liquid metal core via convection, right? That's why the other terrestrial planets in our solar system have very weak, if any magnetic field at all since they have smaller liquid (or solid iron cores like the moon) cores.



posted on Feb, 20 2011 @ 12:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Schmidt1989
 


I have read several books on the Nazca lines and Von Daniken, in fact the first was more than 20 years ago as a young teenager. I know my stuff.

I never gave an opinion on either the Nazca lines, Von Daniken or the validity of anything theorised in OP.

Nor did I suggest these images are anything other than visual anomalies that are apparent everywhere, in nature and beyond.

I only alluded to Nazca lines as a reference to images being visible from above that could have served as markers.

Presuming the opinions of others based on nothing is not an intelligent way to post. Please refrain from adding your opinion of something you think I might be saying, reading between the lines and throwing accusations of lacking knowledge. Instead, save your posts that sound like arrogance based on ignorance for your own time and only read that which is written.


edit on 20-2-2011 by theabsolutetruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 20 2011 @ 06:24 PM
link   
reply to post by theabsolutetruth
 


It's hard to imagine why someone would mention the Nazca lines in this context without referring to them in an odd manor. You mention markers, twice I believe. Markers for what? The religious ceremonies that occurred there? Maybe, but that wouldn't make them markers on purpose. So they shouldn't be called markers. You wouldn't refer to a birthday party as a marker for a Jeremy, would you?

I'm studying peruvian archaeology right now in college. I too, know my stuff. Reading anything by Von Daniken means nothing. Just hearing his name mentioned makes me less intelligent.
edit on 2/20/2011 by Schmidt1989 because: typo



posted on Feb, 20 2011 @ 06:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Schmidt1989
reply to post by theabsolutetruth
 


It's hard to imagine why someone would mention the Nazca lines in this context without referring to them in an odd manor. You mention markers, twice I believe. Markers for what? The religious ceremonies that occurred there? Maybe, but that wouldn't make them markers on purpose. So they shouldn't be called markers. You wouldn't refer to a birthday party as a marker for a Jeremy, would you?

I'm studying peruvian archaeology right now in college. I too, know my stuff. Reading anything by Von Daniken means nothing. Just hearing his name mentioned makes me less intelligent.
edit on 2/20/2011 by Schmidt1989 because: typo


because Nazca lines are large images on the Earth's surface, placed there for a purpose, whichever purpose, I made no reference to any purpose other than the similarity in that they are both essentially they are visual representations or markers of things / places / events/ people /ancestors etc.

You mentioned Von Daniken, not me.

Furthermore if you want to get picky because I used the word Nazca when referring to large images visible from above then you might want to check your own posts for incorrect use of words, for example, ''manor'' is a large dwelling, often for those of aristocracy and is entirely out of context when referring to use of other words in ''an odd manor'' or are you also presuming my house is a manor house and furthermore referring to it as ''odd'' is equally offensive.

Learning not to presume and nit pick details which you imagined would be a better learning practice for you when replying to posts.

I too have studied archaeology and one of the first rules of such studies is to not be presumptious.



posted on Feb, 21 2011 @ 12:44 AM
link   
reply to post by theabsolutetruth
 


It wouldn't hurt for you to pay attention to modern English. I expect the same argument out of you for the word, "ain't".

It just shows how far we're separated in age and intelligence.



posted on Feb, 21 2011 @ 06:06 AM
link   
reply to post by Schmidt1989
 


I think you should stop replying to me now Schmidt89.

Clearly your replies are based on assumptions.

Stop wasting my time making random assumptions about me and my opinions and posting offensive comments about me.



posted on Feb, 21 2011 @ 02:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by taters2468
yes it does, im sorry hahaha my mistake guys ill delete the thread hahahaha


I love it when someone on here admits they made an error its so rare and so good to see



posted on Feb, 21 2011 @ 02:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Somehumanbeing
Yes, you will find world-changing information that can turn all known science inside-out, on google earth. Yes. Yes. I see now.


Maybe not world changing information but some new discoveries maybe


Lost Tombs found on Google Earth



posted on Feb, 28 2011 @ 03:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Skate
There isn't any proof AGAINST it so...


I am your fairy godmother. You have no proof against it so... go ahead! Make a wish.



posted on May, 27 2011 @ 01:19 PM
link   
reply to post by SnakeShot
 


looks like your going to be one very confused person when things start to happen and come out because you decided to be like most of the general public and be skeptical about something that has no proof either way....they thought the earth was flat and it #in isnt!!!!! you are ridiculous and everyone like you are also i dont get why you need such proof to believe something that isnt that #ing unfathomable



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1   >>

log in

join