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.
Originally posted by Lucifer84
Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by w3nd1g0
You'll probably find my comments in one or more of the threads.
The "physics" used to validate the notion of a hollow Earth are absurd; beginning from the problem of the formation of a hollow planet and extending through gravitational effects and seismic data.
I would love it if it was true
Do you mean where they say the gravitational pull comes from the middle of the crust?
Have you seen the thread about the Nazis mapping it: Nazi Germany mapped the Hollow Earth
I'll be honest these "calcuations" they make mean nothing to me but according to the videos on the above thread they work out, everytime
Would you mind giving your take on them?edit on 9/8/11 by Lucifer84 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by TheOven
reply to post by w3nd1g0
Not sure where you got 2 mile figure from, took me about 15 sec of searching to find the current deepest hole dug on dry land is 7.6 miles deep.
I wonder how much more interesting the discussion would be if you had taken at least that much time to research. After a few min you could probably find lots of info explaining how ludicrous the entire concept is.
There is even a picture of it.
It is named Kola Superdeep Borehole.
There are 2 others as deep but they are off shore.
Not sure why that matters, the earth is only hollow under land?
Maybe they use the ones under the ocean for their showers.
earthquake.usgs.gov...
We present a new contourmap ofthethickness oftheEarth's crust. We use a 10 km contour interval plus the45km contour.This contourmap was created directlyfrom the 5 deg. by 5 deg. gridded crustal model CRUST 5.1 (Mooney et al., 1998) plus complementary information.An initialcontourmap was created using thecommand "grdcontour" in GMT, and theresultantmap was adjustedin AdobeIllustratorto honor individualpoint measurements and newly available information from Russia. The final contour map honors allavailableseismic refraction measurements for features with a dimension greater than2 degrees. To a first approximation, the continents and their margins are outlinedby the 30 km contour. Thatportion ofthe continental interior enclosed by the40km contour,and regions with crustalthickness of 45 to 50 km are found on all well surveyed continents (i.e., North and South America, Australia, and Eurasia). Continental crust with a thickness in excess of50km is exceedingly rare and accounts for less than10% ofthecontinentalcrust.These observations, now available on a global basis, provide important constraints on the evolution of the crust and sub-crustallithosphere.
Originally posted by w3nd1g0
reply to post by TheOven
Considering that we have never drilled deeper than your quoted figure... these figures are based on an "agreed" model of the earth and not a "proven" model.
The fact is that this is all still just hypothosis. Until we can drill down further... we will never know what the inner core of our earth is truly made from.
The best thing about science is that you dont have to agree with everyone else.. thats what breaks moulds, encourages new technologies and fields of interest.
The common theory here is that the crust from inside to outside is from 600 miles to 800 miles in thickess. It has also been proposed that within this crust lies pockets of magma. Considering that modern science REALY has no idea as to what lies further down there underground and its all just theory... how can you be so sure of your own (or accepted other peoples work) that you are correct?
As you appear to be so proficient with your googling.... hows about adding some more to this? Do you have any further information which is valid in debunking this theory?
If you read my OP rather than just jumping on the nyah nyah band wagon.. then you would have read that I was interested in learing more and requested as much info as people wanted.
Nothing wrong with being nice, informative and prepared to discuss... but there is everything wrong with
acting like a know-it-all and rudely adding to threads.
I hope you get better soon
Originally posted by w3nd1g0
reply to post by TheOven
LOL OMG and now your the grammar police too!!!! hahahahaha
When I said "common theory" it was meant as in "the common theory among hollow earthists".. but hey.. who cares.. you just want to obviously jump about and be a troll.
But thats ok... this is ATS after all where trolls live hahahaha
How did I (me) make up the theory of it being 6-800 miles thick? I didnt... its a long standing theory.. maybe if you'd have searched google for 15 seconds you would have seen that the whole theory was started by a hypothosis made by Edmond Halley.. you know.. of Halley's comet fame.. and then added to by several other mathmatitians over the following years.
I am merely following up on earlier workings by several very prominent figures in science history.
Your map shows various depths based on a 5.1 model of the earth... 5.1? as this number is ever increasing it obviously shows that they dont really know as they are constantly adjusting their model.
Again.. why not add something to the thread instead of whining about spelling and gammar, baiting me to bite you and generally acting supreme when you yourself have not really contributed anything else other than that so far?
Great work! keep it up!
P.s.. prolly lots of grammar errors in there but hey.... who gives a ****