Debunking Flat Earth and the Hollow Earth

a reply to: ErosA433

then throwing in unsupported and unsubstantiated statements about structures on the moon and NASA coverups.

?? Enki didn't say he was in any structures. And, as far as I know, Enki, wasn't a member of NASA. Though, I could be wrong lol

You are also talking about ancient text as though they are fact. Which is quite dangerous given that the language is largely dead and our interpretation of such is derivative

Being a dead language should have no bearing on its truthfulness. Besides, someone thinks enough of it to be digging holes all over the ancient city of Sippar. Check it out on Google Earth

Also as soon as i see anything quoted/written by Zecharia Sitchin I instantly have to take it with a pinch of salt his translations and interpretations are well known to be quite deeply flawed and he can be accused at seeing what he wants to see rather than being objective.

Yea, I know what you mean. I have to admit the Zach story does tend to be misleading in the description of Nibiru, and its 3600 year cycle. And, I suspect the unit of time, the "Shar", is actually 29 earth years. Why he misdirected, our out and out lied, well, I don't know if it was because he was a Mason, or the Bloodline of Enki himself. Now that is something to research right there...

What you are doing is basically saying is 6000-7000 year old tablets are worth more than modern technology...

Actually, I believe then to be around 4000 years old, and is the basis for our present day technologically literate society. We sure have gone a long way in 200 years, don't you think?????

Again, my question, what would happen?

originally posted by: All Seeing Eye

Speaking of centrifugal force, what would happen to all the ocean waters if the planet was stopped from rotating in a short period of time. What would that look like, my dear knowledgeable friends???

Sorry, I cant debunk hollow earth theories.........

It will be like rock a baby for some time

originally posted by: Hyperboles

originally posted by: All Seeing Eye

Speaking of centrifugal force, what would happen to all the ocean waters if the planet was stopped from rotating in a short period of time. What would that look like, my dear knowledgeable friends???

Sorry, I cant debunk hollow earth theories.........

It will be like rock a baby for some time

Thank you, you are correct in my humble opinion.

As I see it, the oceans would leave their beds continuing in the same directions. The tidal waves would breech any mountain range, and wipe anything on the surface, off, or at least destroy anything not designed to withstand a tidal serge of that magnitude. Whole cities would be wiped off the map and any residue covered in silt and mud to unknown depth. Grand Canyon size washouts would occur where the water, seeking its own level, would attempt to return to its original beds. Grand Canyon, by the way, was created by what?

a reply to: All Seeing Eye

It's not just the oceans. If it abruptly stopped spinning then people, building, trees -- anything not firmly anchored to the ground -- would all be thrown eastward relative to the surface at about 1000 mph, more slowly in the higher latitudes.

It's just like if you were in a car that went from 60 mph to 0 mph in an instant, your body would continue moving forward (maybe out through the windscreen) at 60 mph.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
The Earth is a big cylinder. Hollow on the inside and flat on top.

I imagined a big deep dish pizza, except hollow.

originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People
a reply to: All Seeing Eye

It's not just the oceans. If it abruptly stopped spinning then people, building, trees -- anything not firmly anchored to the ground -- would all be thrown eastward relative to the surface at about 1000 mph, more slowly in the higher latitudes.

It's just like if you were in a car that went from 60 mph to 0 mph in an instant, your body would continue moving forward (maybe out through the windscreen) at 60 mph.

Well, thank the god's nothing like that ever happened here. I mean, if something like that ever were to happen, wouldn't it leave some rather huge marks, don't ya think??

Lucky for us Science hasn't found anything that could remotely resemble something like that. Though, I must say, sometimes it seems science has a blind eye, sometimes......







Nothing to see here, move along, move along..........

originally posted by: All Seeing Eye

Nothing to see here, move along, move along..........

That's on the side of the Moon that faces Earth -- the side that anyone can see.

Have you ever seen a feature like that line on the Moon when you look at it, even through binoculars or a small telescope?

originally posted by: Hyperboles
Hollow Earth

It is harder to debunk. There is no proof whatsoever except some legends. It is were true can you imagine a 4200 miles of atmosphere above you at the centre. the atmospheric pressure there will be close to 300lbs/sqin. Now what kind of flesh and blood can survive there, certainly not the surface dwellers who are used to 15lbs/sqin of atmospheric pressure.
So if there are inhabitants in the hollow earth, they cannot survive on the outer surface. The trees in the hollow earth will be certainly huge

That's the lamest debunking of hollow earth I've ever seen. What about the mass and density of the earth?

Hollow Earth

Based upon the size of the Earth and the force of gravity on its surface, the average density of the planet Earth is 5.515 g/cm3, and typical densities of surface rocks are only half that (about 2.75 g/cm3). If any significant portion of the Earth were hollow, the average density would be much lower than that of surface rocks. The only way for Earth to have the force of gravity that it does is for much more dense material to make up a large part of the interior. Nickel-iron alloy under the conditions expected in a non-hollow Earth would have densities ranging from about 10 to 13 g/cm3, which brings the average density of Earth to its observed value.

I think your educational system seriously failed you if you can't put forth this simple and obvious argument to debunk hollow earth.

I am also dismayed to see the trend of flat earth believers and related videos on youtube, which is more evidence of serious failure of the educational systems.

originally posted by: All Seeing Eye
Lucky for us Science hasn't found anything that could remotely resemble something like that. Though, I must say, sometimes it seems science has a blind eye, sometimes......

That's just evidence of plate tectonics.

The Earth's rotation may be the result of large objects such as proto-planets smashing into it to make it spin, and to make it stop spinning would take something of an equally large and catastrophic magnitude, like a planet the size of Mars striking the Earth at such an angle to stop the spinning. Such a large impact might actually turn the entire surface of the planet molten which is a popular hypothesis for what happened when the moon was formed by such an impact. Because the molten surface tends to re-form back to a relatively spherical shape, any "scars" from the impact are literally melted away and analysis of the isotope ratios and composition provide some of the best clues of the occurrence.

Earth Is Actually Two Planets

That is the kind of thing it takes to start or stop the kind of rotation the Earth has. Those piddly little scars you posted are way too tiny to be associated with such drastic changes in angular momentum but in order to evaluate such you would need to propose a mechanism to stop the rotation....if not a giant impact as above, then what? That mechanism would determine what evidence if any would remain.

originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People

originally posted by: All Seeing Eye

Nothing to see here, move along, move along..........

That's on the side of the Moon that faces Earth -- the side that anyone can see.

Have you ever seen a feature like that line on the Moon when you look at it, even through binoculars or a small telescope?

I have tried to upload a photo of the moon minus the "film Slice" to just show the moon, to no avail. At any rate it is not about the "Lines", its about the Dark circular areas.

Science says they are produced by volcanic lava flowing out of the moon creating these dark circular areas. I disagree as no evidence is in existence to support this theory. No volcanoes on the moon.

What we do see is large circular areas that are darker than the surrounding surface. Science has established that water is present on the moon. How it got there is anyone's guess, so here is mine.

The Moon (Celestial Chariot) has been used to "adjust" the earths position, and even used to create the biblical flooding of Earth. It is so far outside of our "Reality" that something like this is impossible, but yet there it is, in our faces every single night. It is as if it is put into our faces as a reminder that what has happened in the past, can happen, again.

In my opinion, the moon was brought into contact with the earth to adjust its angle to the Sun, causing "Seasons". Looking at the amount of dark circles it was done more than once, or more than one attempt was made. And if this technology can do this, it can also "Stop" the Earths spinning, and even restart the spinning, in another direction.

The rise of the Sun from the West is mentioned in the ahadith and this is the major sign of the Day of Judgment, (For more about Judgement day, please click here)most if not all, the minor signs have occurred.Islam is the only religion that prophesies that the sun will rise from the West, instead of rising from the East, in the End Times, before Day of Judgement. Both the Quran and the Hadith affirm that this phenomenon will take place. The occurrence of this phenomenon is considered in Islam as one of the major signs that indicate the Day of Judgement is close.

When the Sun Shall Rise From the West

Enki's description of the "Deluge" to me, describes the Moon being brought into contact with the Earth. He went out of his way to describe the moon being as though being eaten by a monster at night, translated means, it was so close to the earth that the Earth was blocking the suns rays from reflecting on the moons surface. And during the day it was dark, because the moon was so close, it shielded the Suns light from shining on the Earth. The Earth itself was reacting with violent earth quakes.

The Dark circles coincide nicely with the Scars I have pointed out from the Ocean floors. So, once the Moon contacted the water it transferred some of the water to the moon. Once the moon stopped the rotation by contacting the ocean beds, it slowly returned the rotation to what we see today. As it withdrew from the surface of the ocean the Earth started to draw the water back off of the moon and "appeared" to rain for 40 days.

As the Earth transferred water to the moon, the moon would have transferred moon dust and rocks to the earth. For proof of this look for "Titanium", among other things, in the "Scars". For those who might think this is not possible with a Hollow sphere because such contact might collapse it, is true. Great care must be taken during the contact phase, too quick and the sphere would collapse. This may actually have happened with the planet Tiamat, which is now the Crushed necklace, or Asteroid belt.


The dark round areas on the moon, may actually be the points at which the moon dipped down into the ocean waters, leaving a large round flat area, dark with residual moisture, compared to the dry surrounding areas, that did not.

But since our scientific views have been controlled away from the obvious, no serious research will be undertaken. At least, until, we are completely free from covert control. I imagine......

You realize what you say and believe you have absolutely zero evidence for... you don't actually need mountainous volcanoes for volcanic flow of material... you realize this? or are you being purposely ignorant to keep up your narrative?

Every planet in the solar system has some axial tilt... even if close to zero.
Mercury 0.03degrees (pretty much zero)
Venus 177.4
Earth 23.4 (Moon is 1.5)
Mars 25.1
Jupiter 3.13
Saturn 26.7
Uranus 97.7
Neptune 28.3

So following your logic, each one of these objects has to have had a moon smack into it in order to have tilted it, as though magically, when a solar system forms it has to form on a perfect plane (oh yeah that doesn't happen either)

Venus... no moon, and yet it spins retrograde!
Mars... same tilt, oh has seasons no sizable moons
Saturn... masive planet, lots of moons, no way any of them is large enough to cause an object of such mass to do anything to its orbit.

the list goes on.

The point is, your arguments/statements/beliefs are treating ancient text, as i said, as though they are true. While there might be a purpose to some of the stories in terms of places, etc, but the kinds of things you talk about in terms of technology etc, it just makes little to no logical sense at all. Your understanding of basic science is quite flawed, and your understanding thus of geology is even worse.

There is a lot of evidence for the moon's lava flows being lava flows. it is far more simple and a reasonable explanation than... some intergalactic aliens thought... hey that planet looks good, lets make a big massive ball of rock/take one from somewhere else, and play billiards in the ope to tilt its axis to give it this thing called seasons... which, you know, really are probably not required for any life form at all, but hey we kinda like it that way.

And we are so advanced, but lets do it 3 times because, you know, can never be too careful.


Alternative theory... early in planetary formation a rogue planet crossed orbits with the Primordial Earth that resulted in a glancing blow, the ejecta was not energetic enough to escape earth gravity and such formed a moon.

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm I wonder?


Oh yes, also the fact that, if you wanted to tilt Earths orbit, you would rather have to hit it in a 'upward' direction rather than on axis in the plain... to do this, and put the moon back in its current orbit, you'd need a crazy amount of energy. Oh yeah and, the best part, is to leave the Earth with no trace other than some clay impressions... Brilliant.

a reply to: Hyperboles


theres supposedly an inner sun.

possibly the area around the inner sun is not dense atmosphere and there's only a layer of normal atmosphere around the earth and land

a reply to: ErosA433

The point is, your arguments/statements/beliefs are treating ancient text, as i said, as though they are true. While there might be a purpose to some of the stories in terms of places, etc, but the kinds of things you talk about in terms of technology etc, it just makes little to no logical sense at all. Your understanding of basic science is quite flawed, and your understanding thus of geology is even worse.

As you may have gathered, I do not support, and am not a member of the Religion of the "Almighty Peer Review paper". Your attempt at emotional manipulation via insults and brow beating is duly noted, but ineffective against me. "Everyone knows" statements like lave on the moon, or tectonic plate movements are theories without basis, as in observable evidence. "Your" version of science, I reject, and I reject it because it does not reflect what is seen. I am not ignorant of your version of science, I reject it. It rely s too heavily on theory that has no foundation in observations. For instance, Evolution. No one has seen one species evolve into another, but yet a whole scientific view is created to support it, same with subduction. Evolution itself has been shown to be a false religion, as their is no explanation where RH - blood comes from. But yet in the ancient writings it tells exactly where it came from, 30,000 years ago.

The point is, your arguments/statements/beliefs are treating ancient text, as i said, as though they are true

I find more truth in them, than I do your religious/ non "scientific" beliefs.

There is a lot of evidence for the moon's lava flows being lava flows

Produce this evidence, please. And explain why these "Lava Flows" are only seen on one side of the moon, as the dark circles are absent on the "Dark Side". And if you could, please explain why the moon does not rotate. That would be great!

So following your logic, each one of these objects has to have had a moon smack into it in order to have tilted it

I make no assumption of such. But as far as I'm concerned possible. Each one is its own uniqueness. If there was reason to do so. Maybe some were just practice, maybe untouched. In either case, I have not gone there with my observations.

seasons... which, you know, really are probably not required for any life form at all, but hey we kinda like it that way.

True, seasons are not required for life to form. But is a way to limit growth of vegetation and trees. Why if the trees were allowed uncontrolled seasonal growth the earths oxygen content might hit, 30 35 %. Oh wait, it already was...

Oh look, another crack pot who refuses to stay in the box of the holy Religion of "PRP". I don't agree with everything he says but he is out of the box........

The moon information starts at 51 min.
Who Built The Moon? - David Icke - The Lion Sleeps No More

a reply to: Arbitrageur

So you know more about my education eh?

a reply to: All Seeing Eye


The Moon does rotate and is tidally locked, as are the vast majority of all of the moons in the Solar system.

a reply to: All Seeing Eye

Alright, noted, then in the same language... I reject your 'science' as much as you reject mine, what you say and state you have absolutely zero evidence for and your rejection of the advice and studies performed by the mainstream is to embrace ignorance. If this is your path, then thats fine.

You will continue to receive refutations on anything you post in the S&T forums as a manner of moderating the amount of information that is trying to steer users down the path of embracing ignorance and pulling facts out of thin air and quoting ramblings of quite possibly mentally incapable men as though they are great prophets and bringers of truth.

Have fun with your reptilian/mason/illuminati controlling all of science everywhere ever for the last 6000 years rambling. Have fun using your computer... which is by your own definition, a device that is based on science that clearly doesnt work either.

originally posted by: All Seeing Eye
"Your" version of science, I reject, and I reject it because it does not reflect what is seen. I am not ignorant of your version of science, I reject it. ...

Produce this evidence, please. And explain why these "Lava Flows" are only seen on one side of the moon, as the dark circles are absent on the "Dark Side". And if you could, please explain why the moon does not rotate. That would be great!

Debating with you is like debating with a post. You're not ignorant of science, you reject it. But then you ask for evidence. What kind of evidence? Scientific evidence, the kind you reject? Wouldn't that be completely pointless since you're not ignorant of the science and you've already rejected it? So why even ask for evidence?

originally posted by: Hyperboles
a reply to: Arbitrageur

So you know more about my education eh?

I don't know what you mean by more. I know that anybody who can't do a better job of debunking the hollow earth than you did was failed by their educational system. The same goes for anybody who can't debunk flat earth.

a reply to: ErosA433

SCIENCE

the intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment.

There are two main subjects I reject the "Science" in, GEOLOGY and ASTROPHYSICS. Mainly, as I said, there are no "Observations". Stephan Hawking, the "Pope" of the "PRP" religion, is a puppet and a fraud, as far as I'm concerned!! But your own puppet master has warned you:

Hawking, a noted physicist and author, supports the search for aliens, but regularly cautions against attempting contact. Hawking argued in “Stephen Hawking’s Favorite Places,” a video on the platform CuriosityStream, that aliens could be “vastly more powerful and may not see us as any more valuable than we see bacteria.”

Stephen Hawking Has Flawed Ideas About Alien Life, According to Former SETI Scientist

It is your own Scientific Pope who tells you, to remain ignorant! How interesting it is that it was a "Alien"(Lost Book of Enki) who told us that the "Heaven(Astrophysics) and Earth(Geology)" will not be taught to mankind. And again, the one area of earth that would be restricted, any guess where that area is(HE)???!! Enki the self professed alien tells us some truths of the way things really are, and to even bring it up, is a sin? Is ignorant?? Its just mythology???

Edmund Hally in 1692 proclaimed the earth to be hollow. Edmund, obviously didn't know that was a restricted area. He used real "Science" as through "Observations"!!!!! It was at that point real science was taken over, by the good old boy networks!! SCIENCE STARTS WITH OBSERVATIONS, NOT, THEORY!!! And if it does, its not science!! I accept observation based science!!

I observe dark rings on the moon and and scars on the ocean bed that coo-inside with each other. I experiment by measuring the diameter of the black circles, and the diameter of the scars, and I find that they match in diameter, then I theories that the moon came into contact with the earth, in those locations. The self proclaimed Alien "Enki" states oddities about the moon during the deluge. I compare what he said to what would have been seen in the skys if, the moon was moved from its location. I show circumstantial evidence to support the position that their was no moon in the sky's before the flood. Science starts with the observation, not the theory!! Again, the "Evidence" is in your face every night!!!

I reject Subduction because it is based on theory, not, observation, and I don't care how many times you say "Everyone Knows"!!! Its not science!! Show me observable evidence for Lava on the moon, not theory!!

You will continue to receive refutations on anything you post in the S&T forums as a manner of moderating the amount of information that is trying to steer users down the path of embracing ignorance and pulling facts out of thin air and quoting ramblings of quite possibly mentally incapable men as though they are great prophets and bringers of truth.

Have fun with your reptilian/mason/illuminati controlling all of science everywhere ever for the last 6000 years rambling. Have fun using your computer... which is by your own definition, a device that is based on science that clearly doesn't work either.

Again, your attempts at ridicule and insulting manners are noted, along with ignoring the evidence, which is in your face! And again, it is obvious your attacking the messenger rather than the message tells all.

Enki did not reveal he was a "Reptilian", only that he manipulated present life forms. The Masons? Great people in a horrible system. Its not hard to see, what they hide, or who they work for Illuminati? Another made up cast of characters to take the blame. All sciences? No, just two fields. Computer sciences? Divine! 6000 years?? It might have been as little as 4000, but debatable!

Oh, and by the way, reading ancient scripts is a form of "Contact". I suggest you ignore your popes decree....

quoting ramblings of quite possibly mentally incapable men as though they are great prophets and bringers of truth.

Your words not mine. But in doing this, you have insulted all the "Scientists" who practice Observation based science. Shame on you.

"Many claim that the moon is an artificial satellite rather than a natural object.

"It is hollow, which should be impossible were it a natural planetary object.

"As noted astronomer Dr Carl Sagan wrote in 1966, 'A natural satellite cannot be a hollow object'.

"So, if the Moon is a hollow artificial construct as the facts lead us to understand, who built the Moon, how did they get it into its present orbit and why did they put it there? "How is it that our moon remains stationary in Earth’s orbit, never revealing the dark side to us?

"Such questions will certainly not be answered overnight but the initial realisation that our Moon is not a natural object behaving naturally would raise a few eyebrows were it common public knowledge."

Hollow Moon that rings like a bell put into orbit by ancient ALIENS', shock theory claims

Observation based science!!! Not theory based!! Ring like a bell?? Debate the evidence!!! Debate the Evidence!!!!

a reply to: Arbitrageur

Debating with you is like debating with a post. You're not ignorant of science, you reject it. But then you ask for evidence. What kind of evidence? Scientific evidence, the kind you reject? Wouldn't that be completely pointless since you're not ignorant of the science and you've already rejected it? So why even ask for evidence?

Again, Observation evidence, not theory based. Show me Lava brought from the moon. Show me there is nothing in the dark circles but lava. Don't show me theory. Show me the observable evidence of lava on the moon. Fair enough??

originally posted by: All Seeing Eye
Again, Observation evidence, not theory based. Show me Lava brought from the moon. Show me there is nothing in the dark circles but lava. Don't show me theory. Show me the observable evidence of lava on the moon. Fair enough??

Show you as in bring the samples from the moon over to your house? I can't do that but I can post a picture:

Apollo 11 Lunar Sample Overview

Apollo 11 basalt 10049. This sample has a mass of 193 grams and is up to 10 centimeters across. (NASA/Johnson Space Center photograph S76-25456.)

You can read about the samples online and maybe talk to some scientists who tested say the Apollo 11 Basalt samples and found them somewhat similar to basalts found from solidified lava on earth in places like Hawaii. If you've seen basalt from Hawaii it even looks somewhat similar to that basalt sample from Apollo 11.

Two main types of rocks, basalts and breccias, were found at the Apollo 11 landing site.

Basalts are rocks solidified from molten lava. On Earth, basalts are a common type of volcanic rock and are found in places such as Hawai'i. Basalts are generally dark gray in color; when one looks at the Moon in the night sky, the dark areas are basalt. The basalts found at the Apollo 11 landing site are generally similar to basalts on Earth and are composed primarily of the minerals pyroxene and plagioclase.

originally posted by: All Seeing Eye
I reject Subduction because it is based on theory, not, observation, and I don't care how many times you say "Everyone Knows"!!! Its not science!!

New evidence of subduction found and is discussed on a separate ATS thread:

For The First Time Ever, We've Found a Deep-Earth Mineral Inside a Diamond

For the first time, scientists have found calcium silicate perovskite (CaSiO3) on the surface of Earth...

"Diamonds are really unique ways of seeing what's in the Earth," Pearson said.

"And the specific composition of the perovskite inclusion in this particular diamond very clearly indicates the recycling of oceanic crust into Earth's lower mantle. It provides fundamental proof of what happens to the fate of oceanic plates as they descend into the depths of the Earth."

a reply to: Arbitrageur

So you know about my education more than me, is it?
Isnt it obvious that I am not a wiki jockey?