"It's an interesting idea as far as ideas go, but that's all it seems to be."
"All modern science generally refutes this..."
I'm sorry, Mr Jingo,
But it greatly amazed me that you would so easily dismiss the theory of a hollow earth because modern science disallows its existence! This is a website dedicated to discourse on such matters as astral projection, phasing, and even ceremonial magick.
Joe.
Hi Joe,
One might discuss AP, phasing and ceremonial magick, but if you read the majority of posts here, they discuss it in a rational way. Science is simply rational thinking, and personally, I’d rather live my life through the lens of rationality – sorting the wheat from the chaff, than taking onboard everything what-so-ever in an irrational way with no method to differentiate between the useful and ‘true’ knowledge, and the downright crazy knowledge. The occult can, and has, unhinged people for failing to do just that.
If you wish to ignore basic things like:
*Earths tug on the moon is consistent with a body of earths mass. If Earth was hollow, it would tug on the moon less. These measurements are used for everything from satellite technology, to launching probes into space, to measuring earth’s course through space. There is no such inconsistency in gravity which there would be with a hollow earth.
*When an earthquake occurs at point a on the earth’s surface, the waves created by the quake propagate to point b and c. To do this they travel across the surface crust and through the deeper magma layers. Waves travel at different speeds through the brittle hard crust and the viscous deeper layers. Taking measurements at point b and c show the waves travelled through a solid and more viscous layer – rather than the outer layer of an hollow shell. You could built a model yourself to test this.
*The earth bulges at its rotational equator due to the viscous nature of the core being pushed out by centrifugal forces – if the earth was hollow this wouldn’t occur.
*The earth has a very strong magnetic field, if the earth was hollow, or indeed had a sun at the centre of it, where would the magnetic core reside? If in some miniature sun (which would be too small for fusion to occur), we would see cycles in the field’s strength like the 11 year cycles with our own sun.
*Tectonic plates (huge parts of the crust) are moving on the magma currents below them, creating earthquakes, volcanoes, mountains and various constructive and destructive phenomenons on their travels. Such migration would not be seen with a hollow earth.
*There are numerous experiments which are shooting various subatomic particles through the earth to detectors on the other side, all results from these experiments and consistent with a solid earth.
*We have countless satellites in orbit around our planet, which have (and continue to take) photographs of every square foot of earth. None have shown any form giant entrances at the poles – nor have any of the arctic/polar explorers seen huge holes on their crossings of these ‘land’ masses.
*One of the giant ‘hole’ entrances at the north pole would once have been pure ocean during ice free periods, and we didn’t lose our ocean to into the hollow earth during such periods.
*The arctic is actually a landmass under most of the ice, it migrated where to where it currently is from the supercontinent ‘Pangaea’. How did the hole form in the arctic landmass?
One could ignore all of this, but the evidence on the other side is little more than hearsay and belief. It’s one thing to hold belief; it’s another to hold a belief against a tide of insurmountable evidence.
I personally want to see through the words and ideas man has spun over such occult ideas (due to antiquated world views) to the raw ideas underneath. And to so this, one must be critical, else our knowledge would never progress – and if we really took a non-rational view in these areas, we would still have the beliefs of man circa 200,000 bc.
Dilber MC Theme by HarzeM