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 wmd_2008
reply to post by All Seeing Eye
It was NO compliment!
That comet didn't emerage it past by you hollow earth people begger belief
You also believe the earth is expanding, do you want to explain that as that would mean your crusty shell around the hollow earth would have to get thinner.
As for the other video an entrance to a cave, his lid is most likely ICE he said its 5 ft thick how did he measure that from above. If thats the best you have got WACKJOBS from youtube best of luck with your theories!!
Originally posted by WatchRider
reply to post by CaptainLJB
The HE theory's been around a loooong time and I think even in some translation's of the bible it has a tribe entering into the light of day, from the darkness of the ground.
Could very well be that in olden times the ancient ones had to leave their underground realms (for whatever reason) and may have others still down there that may emerge some day...
I am certain that is by design. If you had a "Environment" that had a 35% oxygen content that allowed you to live 10 life times long, no illness, no disease, no fear of meteorites or tornadoes, and a real heaven on earth, how far would you go to protect it?
My problem is that it's all very, very theoretical with few hard "proofs" to latch onto.
Let me start with this.
My problem is that it's all very, very theoretical with few hard "proofs" to latch onto.
en.wikipedia.org...
Circumstantial evidence is evidence in which an inference is required to connect it to a conclusion of fact, like a fingerprint at the scene of a crime. By contrast, direct evidence supports the truth of an assertion directly—i.e., without need for any additional evidence or the intervening inference.
On its own, it is the nature of circumstantial evidence for more than one explanation to still be possible. Inference from one piece of circumstantial evidence may not guarantee accuracy. Circumstantial evidence usually accumulates into a collection, so that the pieces then become corroborating evidence. Together, they may more strongly support one particular inference over another. An explanation involving circumstantial evidence becomes more valid as proof of a fact when the alternative explanations have been ruled out.
And don't forget being called Whack Jobs LOL LOL LOL
Then there's our mysterious North Pole and all the trouble it's caused explorers. People being discredited, called liars, imprisoned...
I have to agree with you on that point, not the only one though. Misdirection and disinformation seem to be the norm.
That is to say, aliens/saucers were Always said to be from Up There and Never Down Here--literally 180 degrees in the opposite direction. Perfect misdirection.
Hollow Earth Theory is Big. The mother of all conspiracy theories and the sort of mind-blowing thing which would turn our understanding of the universe literally upside down and inside out...if it's true.
You seem to find everything is funny, good for you.
Originally posted by wmd_2008
reply to post by CaptainLJB
I tuck them away as well in the BIN where they belong,expanding earth
Originally posted by wmd_2008
reply to post by CaptainLJB
I tuck them away as well in the BIN where they belong,expanding earth
I'm already there, with a truck load of salt
Originally posted by CaptainLJB
reply to post by All Seeing Eye
The book looks interesting, but I wouldn't put too much trust in it.
In January, 1956, Admiral Byrd led another expedition to the Antarctic and there penetrated for 2,300 miles *beyond* the South Pole. The radio announcement at this time (January 13, 1956) said: "On January 13, members of the United States expedition penetrated a land extent of 2,300 miles *beyond* the Pole. The flight was made by Rear Admiral George Dufek of the United States Navy Air Unit."
The word "beyond" is very significant and will be puzzling to those who believe in the old conception of a solid earth. It would then mean the region on the other side of the Antarctic continent and the ocean beyond, and would not be "a vast new territory" (not on any map), nor would his expedition that found this territory be "the most important expedition in the history of the world". The geography of Antarctica is fairly well known, and Admiral Byrd has not added anything significant to our knowledge of the Antarctic continent. If this is the case, then why should he make such apparently wild and unsupported statements - especially in view of his high standing as a rear admiral of the U.S. Navy and his reputation as a great explorer?
This enigma is solved when we understand the new geographical theory of a Hollow Earth, which is the only way we can see sense in Admiral Byrd's statements and not consider him as a visionary who saw mirages in the polar regions or at least imagined he did.
After returning from his Antarctic expedition on March 13, 1956, Byrd remarked: "The present expedition has opened up a vast new land." The word "land" is very significant. He could not have referred to any part of the Antarctic continent, since none of it consists of "land" and all of it of ice, and, besides, its geography is fairly well known and Byrd did not make any noteworthy contribution to Antarctic geography, as other explorers did, who left their names as memorials in the geography of this area. If Byrd discovered a vast new area in the Antarctic, he would claim it for the United States Government and it would be named after him, just as would be the case if his 1,700 mile flight beyond the North Pole was over the earth's surface between the Pole and Siberia.
But we find no such achievements to the credit of the great explorer, nor did he leave his name in Arctic and Antarctic geography to the extent that his statements about discovering a new vast land area would indicate. If his Antarctic expedition opened up a new immense region of ice on the frozen continent of Antarctica, it would not be appropriate to use the word "land," which means an iceless region similar to that over which Byrd flew for 1,700 miles beyond the North Pole, which had green vegetation, forests and animal life. We may therefore conclude that his 1956 expedition for 2,300 miles beyond the South Pole was over similar iceless territory not recorded on any map, and not over any part of the Antarctic continent.
Originally posted by Jordan River
wait a sec, if there is a sun in the cores earth wouldn't that create molten lava... amzingly, this theory is bs imHO