There May Be an Ancient Earth Inside Earth, Say Harvard Scientists

originally posted by: TheToastmanCometh
I'm taking this one with a half grain of salt. I don't really subscribe to the hollow earth theory because astonishingly we do have pictures of north and south poles.

I also find Byrd's accounts suspect as there has been no evidence of a hardcopy ever existing, and if there was, why wouldnt they be photocopied for future reference?

Did you even read the posts above yours? This isn't about hollow earth. It's a scientific finding.

They may ring, but not for two or more hours. The Moon and Earth are hollow. Actually, the shape is a toroidal sphere. Beings from our galaxy and beyond lodge beneath our feet.reply to: MagicWand67

originally posted by: rickymouse
Actually, the dinosaurs didn't really have to have lived here, the dead dinosaurs could have been strewn all over the planet from this collision, much later than we think. Lots of things could upend what we think of as reality.

I don't agree with that one simply because they wouldn't have survived the impact. We have fossilized dino footprints, dung and other things.. unless they did some how survive a massive planetary collision and then walked around for some food afterwords

a reply to: Oannes

There's zero evidence to support a hollow earth ( or moon for that matter ) ... There are theories but nothing more, and most of the points in those theories are more hollow than the theory itself

a reply to: rickymouse

I hope you are trolling...
You might want to check those time scales on the facts on earth. Impacts are a thing of 0-5 billion (9 zeros) years ago, at the formation of earth. Dinosaurs are perfectly easy to carbon date to between 65 million and 250 million years ago (6 zeros).
No-one in his right mind with any kind of scientific degree will close the gap of a factor of 100 in age on that one.

(why am I doing this...)

a reply to: miniatus

That's true, the footprints disprove this. If the other planet rolled around this one leaving a trail then flew off, the footprints would be upside down and buried.

originally posted by: berheal

originally posted by: eriktheawful
Everyone, please click on the OP's link and read the article. Please.

They are not saying the Earth is hollow and that there is another "world" down there in the traditional sense.

They are saying that they think the entire Earth's crust was not turned molten when the giant impact happened, and mixed up with the mantle, but instead that a good chunk of the original Earth's crust survived.

Over time, much of that original crust subducted, and they are finding traces of it when they drill.

The article is not about a hollow Earth, or anything like that.

Oh... Well you never know, after all science isn't always an exact science

The Farallon Plate is one example:

en.wikipedia.org...

The interesting bit to note about the NASA simulation is that the remnants of this tectonic plate aren't where the
super-volcano is located, maybe they were melted or blown out.

a reply to: nighthawk1954

I’m hesitant to believe that there is indeed another earth with in earth but anything’s possible. I mean personally I never subscribed to the theory that the moon was made in some material by earth especially given the chemicals found on the services of the moon. Know however I will say that based on what I have seen from ancient earth I do believe there was a time before the moon existed I’m just not sure how to explain it yet there are many theories as far as that goes. But this is very in treating especially since its coming out of a Harvard professor’s mouth.

The most obvious evidence for there not being a Moon is that the rotation axis of the Earth would have moved all over the globe. Once we have the Moon in orbit, the two rotate together with the Moon acting as a counter-weight and the tidal locking effect keeps the Earth's axis stable.

a reply to: miniatus
Forget there being zero evidence to support it. There's droves of evidence that refute it. IT'S NOT EVEN A POSSIBILITY. We use seismic data from earthquakes/volcanic eruptions/celestial impacts to model the Earth's interior for geological and geophysical purposes. S-waves die out in liquids as a shear force is physically impossible in this phase of matter. This is how we know the outer core is liquid, the inner core is solid, and the asthenosphere portion of the mantle behaves plastically. Now if the Earth were hollow somewhere both P-waves and S-waves would terminate in these areas as neither one can propagate through a gaseous medium and guess what... Nowhere in the Earth does that happen. In addition to this, I invite you to think about what effect gravity might have on a planet with massive empty sections in the middle. For reference I would suggest looking up sinkholes but keep in mind, instead of having a few thousand newtons of force acting on them, they would have quadrillions, of billions, of millions, of thousands of newtons acting on them (not to mention acting on the "people" inside of the Earth, who hopefully have similar densities to solar cores (or they'd be crushed into a thin sheet of atoms), and prefer to keep room temperature a little closer to 6000 degrees Celsius, than the normal 21 degrees celsius

a reply to: berheal
I think I can help ya out with this one. If I hit you in the head with a sledge hammer today, tomorrow you wouldn't be "you" anymore. The reason being that "you" are your brain. If you ever become brain damaged or not in connection to your brain you are no longer you. Therefore, even if you went to "heaven" or "hell" it wouldn't be as "you".

a reply to: DMan1001

That's a pretty good summary (before you went into rant mode).

We see a number of moon rocks that can be dated to older than "typical" rocks found on Earth but the fact that we only measure rocks from the Earths crust which is subject to plate tectonics skews the data
Plate tectonics means the earth crust is millions of years rather than billions of years whereas the moons lack of tectonic activity means the process of melt/solidify didn't happen.

People are taught a form of static stellar evolution so the thought of solids becoming molten and then soldifying again seems alien at the planetary scale.

Perhaps if people were taught that our current Sun (and therefore Solar system) is a third generation star made up of the remnants of 2 previous "Suns" it might give us a wider perspective on how things in space change over VAST periods of time.

a reply to: MagicWand67

Wow, I'm really depressed if you were serious about those questions. Both are well knows, and I believed commonly known facts. Both can very easily be researched on the internet, or in textbooks, or if ya have a brain with a little common sense. I assume you have none of those 3 so I`ll give ya a rudimentary basic grade 10 science lesson and I won`t even charge ya for it.)

1) Lava comes from heating rocks beyond their solidus (were you #ing serious?). Magma's can also be generated by processes known as hydration melting and decompression melting (both of which I assume are at least 6 years, and 75 IQ points beyond your comprehension).

2) The Earth's magnetic field is generated by the geo-dynamo created by the convecting mafic rich mantle which surrounds the Earth's nickel-Iron Core.

Done.
1 point intelligence.
-1 point ignorance­.
Go to school

a reply to: DMan1001

You've actually just proved your own ignorance and lack of reading comprehension.

Have you ever heard of a rhetorical question?

If you look at the post, by the person I was responding to, maybe it will put things in context for you.

The whole point of me asking those questions was not because I didn't know the answer.

It was because the answers to those questions help to explain why we know the Earth isn't hollow.

We know that the Earth's core is mostly composed of iron because of the magnetic field it gives off.

We know that the mantle is made of magma because of lava flows and volcanoes.

Next time you try to insult someones intelligence make sure it's not your own ignorance being exposed.

a reply to: Kangaruex4Ewe

I think the theory is really based on an ecosystem within caves. Like the infinite caves in Vietnam where it rained in the caves and had its own underground forest. The Mayans built pyramids in tribute to mountains and referred to the underground passages as the underworld. Caves are very underrated.

Nice find! It's not a Hollow/Concave Earth theory, but it definitely caught my interest. I love science.

a reply to: smurfy

My apologies.
I misread your comment.
For some reason I thought you were saying you agreed with a much much younger moon.
In the sense that life existed when the event that formed the moon happened.
Not sure how I got that now, to be completely honest.

a reply to: ericblair4891

That's a bit of a stretch imho.
Do you realise how much more energetic an eruption would have to be for the ejected material to achieve escape velocity to even low Earth orbit?
Earth would've had to have been tearing it's self apart for some reason then just stopped.

a reply to: DMan1001

There's droves of evidence that refute it. IT'S NOT EVEN A POSSIBILITY. We use seismic data from earthquakes/volcanic eruptions/celestial impacts to model the Earth's interior for geological and geophysical purposes.

All Evidence about our current Earth According to Government Approved Science.

a reply to: DMan1001

How does this theory of the moons creation account for the tribes and other civilisations who have stated the earth never had a moon and then it appeared?

the Arcadians and tribes in Bogota who claim that the moon wasnt always here