HAARP & The South Polar Telescope

[axiomgate]

Hi Skeptics,

I have something I could do with your help with...
(My Video:- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ixzk3oT1Dlk (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ixzk3oT1Dlk))

Two things really...

1st HAARP:- http://www.haarp.alaska.edu/

Now this research Lab is looking at the Electro Magnetically charged area of our atmostphere by blasting it with 3.6 million Watts... Isn't that like testing how pure water is by pissing in it ?

The 2nd is the South Polar Telescope:- http://pole.uchicago.edu/

Now this Scope has been placed from FEB 2007... So running now for over 1 year... And not one photo of Space or a star...?

Why do you think they choose such a remote hard to get to location, and what do you feel they are using this to see ?

Tax payers money is being spent and the public facing page has nothing to show upon it !!... (The site has gone under some changes, they used to have a gallary link button that linked to nothing)...

-------------------------------------

Now I am kind of a Conspiracy theorist of sorts (Axiomist Seeker of Alternative Truth)...

My Video:- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ixzk3oT1Dlk

Here's my ideas:-

HAARP
I think HAARP is keeping the Magnetic field charged to help prevent a Pole shift... Or it's being used to project Hollograms or reprogram Nano technology within Chem trails.

South Polar TeleScope
I think is tracking a large Earth bound rouge planet or commet.

Hence why NASA is planning to land on a approaching comment:- http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/1933859/NASA-plans-to-land-on-asteroid.html?source=rss
--------------------------------------

Like I said... I could do with some minds like your own to give a different view... Cheers in advance !!

[Mulder]

... I think is tracking a large Earth bound rouge planet or commet...

What's the significance of the planet being red?

[axiomgate]

Rogue... Sorry... But you know what I ment.

[Mulder]

Now this research Lab is looking at the Electro Magnetically charged area of our atmostphere by blasting it with 3.6 million Watts...
Isn't that like testing how pure water is by pissing in it ?

Try telling a homeopath that - only kidding ...

Why do you think they choose such a remote hard to get to location, and what do you feel they are using this to see ?

Instead of answering these questions, I'm going to suggest you try it for yourself. The whole world wide web is at your disposal. First of all, how much physics do you know? If it isn't much them I'm afraid it will be a hard but not impossible task.

Here's a hint - pretend that these are not sinister technological developments but genuine scientific endeavours. Then ask the questions again. You may find out information you would never have looked for before.

[axiomgate]

I think I will wait until someone on here can give some sort of an answer.

[Mulder]

You're missing the point completely! Let me try again ...

If you look for conspiracies, that's what you'll find. You'll end up visiting all the same old websites peddling the same stuff. Your attitude affects the sort of words you put in search engines.

For instance, do you think your web search would ever come up with this link?

http://space.newscientist.com/article/dn13281-telescope-to-test-antarcticas-claim-to-best-sky.html?feedId=online-news_rss20

[axiomgate]

See now that was a pretty good link... But the Telescope you have just given is in Antarctica...

The South Pole Telescope is the one of interest to us.

Eros / Nibiru / Planet X will be seen in 2009 by the eye in most southern areas of the Globe... We feel if we could see the images from the South pole we could see if Eros is just a Metorite/Astoroide as reported or if it is a larger body that conspiracy theorists are stating is coming our way.

These are the images we have found of Eros from Shoemaker:- http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/planetary/mission/near/near_eros.html

There are a fair few telescopes in space all pointing the same direction...

See this video:- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4VR3TkRrrhc

You may be correct, we could be looking at this the wrong way and our searches could be slanted... We need people like you on our forum to keep our ideas grounded and to have a healthy debate...

I mean you may find talking to me slightly annoying, but the debate is better than debating with someone like minded... Don't you think ?

[Mulder]

If you really want the 'hard stuff', here it is http://pole.uchicago.edu/spt/depot/pdf/2004-11-04.pdf Happy reading!

This is a paper describing what telescope is for and why it is sited in Antarctica(!!!!!).

I'm ignoring 'Planet X' because we've discussed it before and decided there was no evidence for its existence. Of course, if you have some real evidence then feel free to post it. We're very open-minded ...

[axiomgate]

ARRRRrrrggghhh My head... Now I will start researching some of what is mentioned within that Article...

Sunyaev-Zel'dovich effect ?

Equation of state of the dark energy ?

redshift ?

I will research the above... Make sense of them... And then I will be back for more !!

During that time... Any idea on HAARP would be good... I mean I know what HAARP is supposed to be doing... it's the Method I am questioning ?

I mean they are looking at the natural changes to an area they are effecting directly unaturally ?...

[bobdezon]

Now do people see the harm the X-Files did? ;)

[Mulder]

I mean they are looking at the natural changes to an area they are effecting directly unaturally ?...

In science, experiments often use unnatural situations to deduce how things work. With a complex system like the ionosphere there are many variables so it's difficult to see which one is causing what effect. Introducing a known variable is like adding a distinctive signature that flows through the system.

You know science is actually fun. Maybe you should try it instead of those indescribably dull conspiracy theories.

[Mulder]

Now do people see the harm the X-Files did? ;)

Hey, don't diss the X-Files or I'll set Scully on you ... :smiley:

[axiomgate]

Cheers guys... we have found this of interest...


Sunyaev-Zel'dovich effect ?
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunyaev-Zel'dovich_effect (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunyaev-Zel'dovich_effect)) - OK... Well admittedly that didn't make much sense...

Equation of state of the dark energy ?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_energy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_energy) - Now this is brilliant stuff... You have to read this... !!! (If you haven't all ready heard of it).
If the South Polar Telescope is made for looking into this then it could be the break through in providing energy to power crafts in space.

One bit we found of great interest is this:-

Measurements of cosmic microwave background (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_microwave_background) (CMB) anisotropies, most recently by the WMAP (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilkinson_Microwave_Anisotropy_Probe) satellite, indicate that the universe is very close to flat. For the shape of the universe (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shape_of_the_universe) to be flat (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flatness_problem), the mass/energy density of the universe must be equal to a certain critical density (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_density). The total amount of matter in the universe (including baryons (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baryons) and dark matter (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_matter)), as measured by the CMB, accounts for only about 30% of the critical density. This implies the existence of an additional form of energy to account for the remaining 70%

The Universe is close to being Flat...?

It just goes to show how little we actually know.

redshift ?
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redshift (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redshift)) - Loads of info to explain that there is less interference in the South Pole.

--------------------------

HAARP however kind of goes againt Global Warming prevention... don't you think ?

[Mulder]

There you are, I told you it was interesting ...

[DrS]

... But the Telescope you have just given is in Antarctica...

The South Pole Telescope is the one of interest to us.
:confused:

[bobdezon]

lol? ???

[Bunny]

I just wonder where all these conspiracy theories originate. I believe that all the conspiracy theorists meet once a year in secret to decide what new conspiracy theories to start up. This can be the only explanation, surely?

[Mongrel]

I just wonder where all these conspiracy theories originate. I believe that all the conspiracy theorists meet once a year in secret to decide what new conspiracy theories to start up. This can be the only explanation, surely?

Nah, it's the Illuminati. Once a year they get together and intoxicated (with baby BBQs and Kitten Huffing (http://uncyclopedia.org/wiki/Kitten_Huffing)), then they ask "How can we make a bigger laughing stock of conspiracy theorists this time around?". At which point someone pulls out the Mad Lib chart and they're away

[Bunny]

Nah, it's the Illuminati. Once a year they get together and intoxicated (with baby BBQs and Kitten Huffing (http://uncyclopedia.org/wiki/Kitten_Huffing)), then they ask "How can we make a bigger laughing stock of conspiracy theorists this time around?". At which point someone pulls out the Mad Lib chart and they're away

Nice theory but mine has more irony.

axiomgate - I don't want to be rude but I have to say it's difficult to have a rational debate with such ramblings.

[ZERO]

See now that was a pretty good link... But the Telescope you have just given is in Antarctica...

The South Pole Telescope is the one of interest to us.


:confused:

lol? ???

Antarctica is subject to extremely fast continental drift. Antactica is now in the Bahamas.

AntarticaFastTectonicsWiki

Antarctica in the Bahamas Youtube

O0

[axiomgate]

The South polar Scope is said to be on the Magnetic axis of the pole.

Antartica is fairly large...

[axiomgate]

Bunny (http://www.ukskeptics.com/forum/member.php?u=1062)

I just wonder where all these conspiracy theories originate. I believe that all the conspiracy theorists meet once a year in secret to decide what new conspiracy theories to start up. This can be the only explanation, surely?


Nope... Unlike Skeptics who are shovelled half baked truths in school and life in general from passed down bollox Axiomists seek out alternative truths within that Bollox and also come out with Bollox... Your Bollox is the same Bollox just rebranded !!

[bindeweede]

Bunny (http://www.ukskeptics.com/forum/member.php?u=1062)


Nope... Unlike Skeptics who are shovelled half baked truths in school and life in general from passed down bollox Axiomists seek out alternative truths within that Bollox and also come out with Bollox... Your Bollox is the same Bollox just rebranded !!

Gorgeous! Now in English please.

[Bunny]

Gorgeous! Now in English please.

English is inadequate. axiomgate's last reply to my accusation of rambling ... ipso facto

[brodski]

Nah, it's the Illuminati. Once a year they get together and intoxicated (with baby BBQs and Kitten Huffing (http://uncyclopedia.org/wiki/Kitten_Huffing)), then they ask "How can we make a bigger laughing stock of conspiracy theorists this time around?". At which point someone pulls out the Mad Lib chart and they're away

Nope, It's all the fault of Snopes... http://xkcd.com/250/

[Croydon Bob]

Eros / Nibiru / Planet X will be seen in 2009 by the eye in most southern areas of the Globe...

You seem to be a bit out of date. It already hit Earth in May 2004. Don't you remember the pole shift and 90% of us dying? :cheesy:

[axiomgate]

2004 was the start of the Pole shift, we are entering a slight shift now...

Hence the storms, Earthquakes etc...

And the Lava flow from Volcanos shows the Magnetic North is getting weaker...

Soon we will start to see a massive speed up in the shift...

http://www.psc.edu/science/glatzmaier.html

According to some a Pole Shift is long overdue and the only reason the Earth has not had a Pole shift is HAARP is keeping the Magnetic Field changed by pulsing it with Electricity.

[Mongrel]

According to some a Pole Shift is long overdue and the only reason the Earth has not had a Pole shift is HAARP is keeping the Magnetic Field changed by pulsing it with Electricity.

That's like saying a hamster could stop a lion eating it by sneezing, Nothing we've got can produce enough energy to be more than a piddling annoyance compared to what nature itself does (in a non-anthropomorphic way).

BTW, how do you reconcile the Earths magnetic field with your Hollow Earth view?

[axiomgate]

Someone on the inside of a hollow Earth would not experience an outward pull and could not stand on the inner surface; rather, the theory of gravity implies that a person on the inside would be nearly weightless. This was first shown by Newton, whose shell theorem mathematically predicts a gravitational force of zero everywhere inside a spherically symmetric hollow shell of matter, regardless of the shell's thickness. A tiny gravitational force would arise from the fact that the Earth does not have a perfectly symmetrical spherical shape, and also from forces due to masses such as the Moon which do not form part of the spherical shell. The centrifugal force from the Earth's rotation would pull a person (on the inner surface) outwards, but even at the equator this is only 1/300 of ordinary Earth gravity.

Above from Wiki

[axiomgate]

My theory differs from the above... I would say the Centre of Gravity is within the Outer shell of the Earth between the land masses of here and the inner Earth... Meaning the people within the Earth would have the Gravity as we do on the outer Earth:- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HQMPMWrtotc

[Mongrel]

Wow.....

That's not even wrong (although you did miss the important bit from the Wiki page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollow_earth))
The hypothesis of a Hollow Earth has long been contradicted by overwhelming evidence as well as by the modern understanding of planet formation, and the scientific community now dismisses the notion as pseudoscience.

Try reading my post again and look for the important keywords ;)

[axiomgate]

Apart from that's not my theory.

[ZERO]

Could you please answer the question both Mongrel and I have asked which is, what causes the earths magnetic field if there is no iron core?

Another question I have is, if the earth is hollow and consists of a relatively thin crust, there would be much less mass. Wouldn't this material have cooled a long time ago? How do you account for continuing volcanic activity?

One last point.
If the earth had much less mass the way the moon orbits and the earth wobbles would be different.
The moon would orbit a lot slower and the earth would wobble a lot more due to the moons gravity moving around it.

[Bunny]

Some things are worth debating but this is just plain daft. The Earth is hollow and occupied by aliens - give me a break, it's just not worth the effort arguing.
axiomgate - you could rationalise that he world is a flat disk supported by turtles (all the way down) better that this piece of insanity.

[axiomgate]

The Gravity of the Iron core doesn't factor as there is no inner core but an inner sun and the land we stand upon is nothing more that thousands of parts trapped in the Gravitational pull of the inner sun, like the rings of Saturn, our land orbits the inner sun.

Some more reasons:-

1. The Earth and the Moon both ring like a bell long after meteor impacts and earthquakes.

2. Recent research has shown that the Aurora Borealis is caused not by the sun but by enormous outgassings from the poles.

3. NO scientist or drilling company has ever reached the mantle. Despite the deepest hole of 40,000 ft.

4. The current theory amounting to the existence of solid mantle is the equivalent to telling what type of furniture is in a house by using a stethascope. See waveguide phenomena such as "whistlers" and apply that to the fact that seismic waves will be distorted by bouncing through the crust.

5. Nearly every ancient culture claims to have emerged from underground caves. And most ancient temples (pyramids, etc.) have deep underground tunnels beneath them.

6. Vortex theory- The center of a hurricane is hollow. The center of a wirlpool is hollow. The center of a tornado is hollow. All exhibit EMF generation. When a planet forms, the lighter hot elements will condense into a core of GAS as they cool. The heavier elements get thrown out by centrifugal force forming a crust. What's left is an inner sun and an outer crust, with no mantle.

7. Recent videos from SOHO show definitively that the surface of the sun is solid! Don't expect NASA to inform you look for yourself. I watched the videos a hundred times over. There is a triangular crytaline structure to the sun.

8. Current theory suggests that the earth's core rages a mighty 5,000 degrees celsius. This means that the only form a substance may take at the core is that of plasma.

9. Given the hollow earth theory one can explain the cause of every myth, legend, and war in all of history. The NAZIs held a strong beleif that the earth was hollow. See "The Black Sun" I don't know the author but I saw it at my library.

10. Search the net for a month as I did looking for satellite PHOTOGRAPHS of the artic sea. They barely exist. There are supposed to be enormous holes in the crust that provide entrance into the earth. 99% of the satelite images out there are composite images not photographs. Of 1,000+ images of the arctic I have found 3 photographs. 2 of which show a largw cicular depression. 1 is covered with ice. These pictures have since vanished from their original sources. Why?

11. Recent PHOTOGRAPHS of Mars, and Saturn, both show the same phenomena.

12. Both Mars and Saturn both have Auroras.

13. North and south pole Auroras occur simultaneously.

14. The Van Allen belts exhibit the same hollow torus shape.

15. Of all the explorers to the Arctic sea, most if not all are certain that there's a lost land up there. Admiral Byrd himself said that he flew there. Who's he? Only the first man ever to fly over the North Pole. On another trip to Antartica he and all of the crew on board the fleet of battleships that went there, reported being attacked by UFO's. This is out of the mouth of a rear admiral of the armed forces not some cooky farmer boy.

16. There is an expedition planned to go to the inner earth in the summer of 2006. For $20,000 you can reserve a seat. I don't even have patience for people who think I'm making this up.

[Mongrel]

That's not even an evasion...
LOL time especially for this quote 16. There is an expedition planned to go to the inner earth in the summer of 2006. For $20,000 you can reserve a seat. I don't even have patience for people who think I'm making this up.


http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b24/Mongrel01/slaps/intarwebsmart.jpg

[bobdezon]

He is taking the piss right? :undecided:

[ZERO]

He is taking the piss right? :undecided:

He's taking something....probably with a needle.

I think Bunny is right, waste of time.

[SimonC]

3. NO scientist or drilling company has ever reached the mantle. Despite the deepest hole of 40,000 ft.





Pfft! Everybody knows about the Russian miners who drilled a hole 14 kilometers deep. Suddenly, at that great depth, their drill started spinning freely, as if they'd found a huge underground cavern. Of course, they lowered a microphone to listen for plate movement. And what did they hear..?

They heard human voices screaming in pain because they'd drilled right into HELLLLL!!! :shocked::shocked::shocked:


Robert Rankin told me that, so it must be true!! ;D

He is taking the piss right?

Sadly, I have my doubts.

http://axiomgate.proboards61.com/index.cgi

[MischiefMonkey]

I'm confused now - are you all saying the earth isn't hollow???

But I saw this documentary with Doug McClure..........there were exploding flying dino-people and everything........:-[

[bobdezon]

sweet jeebus, I used to love troy doug mclure and his z-list movies. The camembert of movies ftw O0

[bindeweede]

sweet jeebus, I used to love troy doug mclure and his z-list movies. The camembert of movies ftw O0







Are you saying you don't like camembert, or Doug McClure? I am quite fond of one of them.

[ZERO]

I can't help myself...:-[



6. Vortex theory- The center of a hurricane is hollow. The center of a wirlpool is hollow. The center of a tornado is hollow. All exhibit EMF generation. When a planet forms, the lighter hot elements will condense into a core of GAS as they cool. The heavier elements get thrown out by centrifugal force forming a crust. What's left is an inner sun and an outer crust, with no mantle.





You have not explained volcanic activity.

If there is no mantle, what do the tectonic plates move on?

How do you explain the formation of the Hawaiian chain of islands?
The accepted explanation is the Pacific plate moving over a hot spot in the mantle.

[Mulder]

The Gravity of the Iron core doesn't factor as there is no inner core but an inner sun and the land we stand upon is nothing more that thousands of parts trapped in the Gravitational pull of the inner sun, like the rings of Saturn, our land orbits the inner sun.

Some more reasons:-

2. Recent research has shown that the Aurora Borealis is caused not by the sun but by enormous outgassings from the poles.

Have you a reference for this? Also, why do aurorae correspond with solar wind flux if they are not related?

3. NO scientist or drilling company has ever reached the mantle. Despite the deepest hole of 40,000 ft.

Which isn't deep enough - need to do 20km! Any special reason why conspiracy theorists can't go metric?

4. The current theory amounting to the existence of solid mantle is the equivalent to telling what type of furniture is in a house by using a stethascope. See waveguide phenomena such as "whistlers" and apply that to the fact that seismic waves will be distorted by bouncing through the crust.

Please expand on this as I don't understand the connection between atmospheric whistlers (electromagnetic wave) and geological seismic waves (pressure wave) that you're implying.

5. Nearly every ancient culture claims to have emerged from underground caves. And most ancient temples (pyramids, etc.) have deep underground tunnels beneath them.

Seriously, who cares about creation legends?

6. Vortex theory- The center of a hurricane is hollow. The center of a wirlpool is hollow. The center of a tornado is hollow. All exhibit EMF generation. When a planet forms, the lighter hot elements will condense into a core of GAS as they cool. The heavier elements get thrown out by centrifugal force forming a crust. What's left is an inner sun and an outer crust, with no mantle.

Who says planet formation is a vortex? It is but one of several theories, the most popular being accretion. The centre of a hurricane is low pressure air, not nothing. Even if a planet is formed by a vortex, gravity will come to predominate at a certain point stopping any vortex.

7. Recent videos from SOHO show definitively that the surface of the sun is solid! Don't expect NASA to inform you look for yourself. I watched the videos a hundred times over. There is a triangular crytaline structure to the sun.

So what? Obviously, if you compress gas under gravity enough you will get solids? What is your point?

8. Current theory suggests that the earth's core rages a mighty 5,000 degrees celsius. This means that the only form a substance may take at the core is that of plasma.

Pressurize a plasma and what do you get?

9. Given the hollow earth theory one can explain the cause of every myth, legend, and war in all of history. The NAZIs held a strong beleif that the earth was hollow. See "The Black Sun" I don't know the author but I saw it at my library.

The Nazis had some pretty weird and repellent theories. Do you really want to use such people as a source?

10. Search the net for a month as I did looking for satellite PHOTOGRAPHS of the artic sea. They barely exist. There are supposed to be enormous holes in the crust that provide entrance into the earth. 99% of the satelite images out there are composite images not photographs. Of 1,000+ images of the arctic I have found 3 photographs. 2 of which show a largw cicular depression. 1 is covered with ice. These pictures have since vanished from their original sources. Why?

Funnily enough therte was a news story from the BBC the other day showing ar reporter on a huge chunk of arctic ice. Of course, it could have been made up ... :smiley:

11. Recent PHOTOGRAPHS of Mars, and Saturn, both show the same phenomena.

Which phenomena?

12. Both Mars and Saturn both have Auroras.

And your point is?

13. North and south pole Auroras occur simultaneously.

As you'd expect if they were produced by the solar wind.

14. The Van Allen belts exhibit the same hollow torus shape.

And your point is? I expect some maths in your answer ... :smiley:

15. Of all the explorers to the Arctic sea, most if not all are certain that there's a lost land up there. Admiral Byrd himself said that he flew there. Who's he? Only the first man ever to fly over the North Pole. On another trip to Antartica he and all of the crew on board the fleet of battleships that went there, reported being attacked by UFO's. This is out of the mouth of a rear admiral of the armed forces not some cooky farmer boy.

I guess all the subsequent scientific expeditions were just mistaken. Where did the Russians plant that underwater flag exactly?

16. There is an expedition planned to go to the inner earth in the summer of 2006. For $20,000 you can reserve a seat. I don't even have patience for people who think I'm making this up.

I don't think you're making it up! However, I'd appreciate some scientific evidence please.

[Cuddles]

the land we stand upon is nothing more that thousands of parts trapped in the Gravitational pull of the inner sun, like the rings of Saturn

So, wait, the Earth is actually a big disc of dust and ice? Could have fooled me.

1. The Earth and the Moon both ring like a bell long after meteor impacts and earthquakes.

Yes. Solid things will do that.

2. Recent research has shown that the Aurora Borealis is caused not by the sun but by enormous outgassings from the poles.

No it hasn't.

3. NO scientist or drilling company has ever reached the mantle. Despite the deepest hole of 40,000 ft.

And no scientist or drilling company had ever reached a big hollow space in the centre of the Earth with a sun in it. Despite the deepest hole of 40,000 ft.

4. The current theory amounting to the existence of solid mantle is the equivalent to telling what type of furniture is in a house by using a stethascope. See waveguide phenomena such as "whistlers" and apply that to the fact that seismic waves will be distorted by bouncing through the crust.

Well, that and the fact that we can see the mantle coming up out of volcanoes.

5. Nearly every ancient culture claims to have emerged from underground caves.

No they don't.

And most ancient temples (pyramids, etc.) have deep underground tunnels beneath them.[/quote]

No they don't. Also, the pyramids aren't temples.

6. Vortex theory- The center of a hurricane is hollow. The center of a wirlpool is hollow. The center of a tornado is hollow. All exhibit EMF generation.

Nope. The centre of vortexes tends to be stationary, but there's just as much material there as elsewhere.

When a planet forms, the lighter hot elements will condense into a core of GAS as they cool. The heavier elements get thrown out by centrifugal force forming a crust. What's left is an inner sun and an outer crust, with no mantle.

So you're saying that the heavier elements, which are pulled on more strongly by gravity, are the ones that end up on the outside? OK...

7. Recent videos from SOHO show definitively that the surface of the sun is solid! Don't expect NASA to inform you look for yourself. I watched the videos a hundred times over. There is a triangular crytaline structure to the sun.

No they don't, and no there isn't.

8. Current theory suggests that the earth's core rages a mighty 5,000 degrees celsius. This means that the only form a substance may take at the core is that of plasma.

No it doesn't.

9. Given the hollow earth theory one can explain the cause of every myth, legend, and war in all of history. The NAZIs held a strong beleif that the earth was hollow. See "The Black Sun" I don't know the author but I saw it at my library.

A hollow Earth explains someone living inside a whale's stomach and Argentina invading the Falklands? Are you sure?

10. Search the net for a month as I did looking for satellite PHOTOGRAPHS of the artic sea. They barely exist. There are supposed to be enormous holes in the crust that provide entrance into the earth. 99% of the satelite images out there are composite images not photographs. Of 1,000+ images of the arctic I have found 3 photographs. 2 of which show a largw cicular depression. 1 is covered with ice. These pictures have since vanished from their original sources. Why?

Composite images are photographs. They are just composites of more than one photograph since a single photo won't cover as much area.

11. Recent PHOTOGRAPHS of Mars, and Saturn, both show the same phenomena.

No they don't.

12. Both Mars and Saturn both have Auroras.

Yes. So? Of course, the Mars aurorae completely contradict you, since they are not the same as any other aurorae on any other planet, since Mars doesn't have a global magnetic field.

13. North and south pole Auroras occur simultaneously.

Yes. As expected.

14. The Van Allen belts exhibit the same hollow torus shape.

Same hollow torus as what?

15. Of all the explorers to the Arctic sea, most if not all are certain that there's a lost land up there.

No they aren't.

Admiral Byrd himself said that he flew there. Who's he? Only the first man ever to fly over the North Pole.

Actually, he's been proven to have lied about that. He never reached the North Pole, although he probably made it about 80% of the way there, rather than just making the whole thing up as was previously suspected.

On another trip to Antartica he and all of the crew on board the fleet of battleships that went there, reported being attacked by UFO's. This is out of the mouth of a rear admiral of the armed forces not some cooky farmer boy.

No they didn't. I can find several claims, although only on seriously nutty UFO sites, that he wrote about UFOs during his Arctic flight, but I can't find anything suggesting he saw UFOs in the Antarctic.

16. There is an expedition planned to go to the inner earth in the summer of 2006. For $20,000 you can reserve a seat. I don't even have patience for people who think I'm making this up.

Wow. For only $20,000 I can reserve a seat on an expedition that didn't happen 2 years ago. Tempting, but let's be honest, you're either uttely insane or terminally stupid.

[Mulder]

A couple more points:

1. The Earth and the Moon both ring like a bell long after meteor impacts and earthquakes.

(I missed this one) When scientists use phrases like 'ring like a bell' it is a metaphor to help non-scientists understand (I suspect Axiomgate falls in this latter category) what the waveform looks like. If you took the metaphor too literally, it would imply that the Earth is bell shaped!

8. Current theory suggests that the earth's core rages a mighty 5,000 degrees celsius. This means that the only form a substance may take at the core is that of plasma.

The temperature, which is a guess, is indeed what scientists think the Earth's core may be at. However, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phase_diagram to understand why that doesn't mean it has to be a plasma. It all depends on what it is made of.

I don't even have patience for people who think I'm making this up.


Weird ideas float around and it is often difficult to say exactly who first thought of them. No one is accusing you of making up these particular ideas. However, if you're going to quote them, you should be prepared to defend them with solid (:smiley:) evidence.

[Bunny]

What really interests me is the effort some of my fellow skeptics are willing to put into this thread. Don't get me wrong, I admire your patients, you have more of this virtue than I have. The simple fact is however, that someone (that's you axiomgate) with such bizarrely delusional views is never going to accept any sort of rational argument. The astronomy, physics, mathematics (and science generally I have no doubt) is so utterly wrong, so completely disjointed, so off the planet (...sorry buried in the planet) that there is no hope of redemption. This is the last time I am posting on this thread, there are others that are far more interesting and productive.

[Mongrel]

I decided to give up on the loon yesterday but still hang around for the entertainment value ;)
I think it was Mojo who said that "Ridicule is an appropriate response to the ridiculous"

[Croydon Bob]

15. Of all the explorers to the Arctic sea, most if not all are certain that there's a lost land up there. Admiral Byrd himself said that he flew there. Who's he? Only the first man ever to fly over the North Pole. On another trip to Antartica he and all of the crew on board the fleet of battleships that went there, reported being attacked by UFO's. This is out of the mouth of a rear admiral of the armed forces not some cooky farmer boy.

Sorry but I've got to pick up on the reference to Rear Admiral Richard Byrd. What you have said is complete rubbish. Total fiction. Not only is it now accepted that he faked his flight over the North Pole and actually just flew around in circles before returning, but his numerous exagerated accounts of his own exploits absolutely never included any reference to being attacked by UFOs or finding a lost land or a hollow earth.

Everything you have said, including the Byrd reference, can be found in the works of "Brinsley le Poer Trench" who was the 8th Earl of Clancarty. But you probably took it all from a website that stole it from Trench's fact/fiction rather than borrowing from primary sources.

To give an indication of the quality of BlPT's journalism; Secret of the Ages: UFOs From Inside The Earth says on the back cover: "Did Tolkien's Middle-Earth have a factual basis?". :cheesy:

[Mulder]

What really interests me is the effort some of my fellow skeptics are willing to put into this thread...

My interest is in where these odd ideas originate. I'm increasingly convinced that they mostly originate in fiction. When people read a novel or watch a movie they obviously know it's fiction. But years, or even months, later they may become hazy about where they first heard a plausible (but fictional) idea. They may well decide that it is derived from actual evidence. For instance, I've never been able to track down the origin of the idea that ghosts emit magnetic fields. There seems to be no evidence to support it but millions believe it.

The 'stone tape' theory of ghosts, by contrast, has a known origin, in Nigel Kneale's play of the same name. I'm sure many people who now quote theory aren't aware of its origins nor its manifest weaknesses. Once an idea gets 'out there', it develops a life of its own dependent purely on how many people believe it.

[Matt]

What really interests me is the effort some of my fellow skeptics are willing to put into this thread. Don't get me wrong, I admire your patients, you have more of this virtue than I have. The simple fact is however, that someone (that's you axiomgate) with such bizarrely delusional views is never going to accept any sort of rational argument. The astronomy, physics, mathematics (and science generally I have no doubt) is so utterly wrong, so completely disjointed, so off the planet (...sorry buried in the planet) that there is no hope of redemption. This is the last time I am posting on this thread, there are others that are far more interesting and productive.

For me axoimgate is performing a skeptical service. I see the value of doubt but sometimes it's easier said than done. I've never really doubted that the earth is structure pretty much how they say it is, but by exploring such doubts as held by this fellow. I've learned a great deal about how we know this, how this relates to my own personal experiences and what alternative interpretations might be plausible.

I don't need to convince axiomgate that he's wrong about any part of his ideas in order to win. The extra knowldge and understanding I've gained from arguing against him is the prize.

[bobdezon]

The 'stone tape' theory of ghosts, by contrast, has a known origin, in Nigel Kneale's play of the same name. I'm sure many people who now quote theory aren't aware of its origins nor its manifest weaknesses. Once an idea gets 'out there', it develops a life of its own dependent purely on how many people believe it.


Older than Kneales work, by about 11 years.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Charles_Lethbridge

[Mulder]

We do not know Kneale took the idea from Lethbridge. I seem to recall an interview where he denied it but that could be my faulty memory and I can't find a reference to it.

Whose to say Lethbridge himself didn't pick up the 'environmental recording ghost' idea from someone else! The origin of many weird ideas remains obscure.

[Bunny]

Wow Matt and Mulder, impressive answers. But I am still not going to post on this thread again - d'oh

[bobdezon]

We do not know Kneale took the idea from Lethbridge. I seem to recall an interview where he denied it but that could be my faulty memory and I can't find a reference to it.

Whose to say Lethbridge himself didn't pick up the 'environmental recording ghost' idea from someone else! The origin of many weird ideas remains obscure.

He may not have, like you said the idea could have been floating about for a long time.

[Mulder]

He may not have, like you said the idea could have been floating about for a long time.

Either way, it doesn't invalidate my point that the idea was popularised through a fictional representation.

[bobdezon]

Either way, it doesn't invalidate my point that the idea was popularised through a fictional representation.

No, my comment was not intended to invalidate your post. It was merely a point of interest for those interested in the origin of the stone tape "psuedotheory". O0

[Cuddles]

What really interests me is the effort some of my fellow skeptics are willing to put into this thread.

Well, there are two points really. Firstly, it's really not that much effort at all. I spent a couple of minutes looking up that Admiral blokey since I'd not heard of him before, but other than that it didn't take much more than looking at each point and writing "Nope" once I'd managed to stop laughing. Secondly, things like this are really quite amusing, and make a refreshing change from all the woo that has the potential to actually harm people. It's all very well discussing psychic scams, quackery and various other serious thing, but it's nice to every now and then find something that requires nothing more than simply pointing and laughing.

[Croydon Bob]

nothing more than simply pointing and laughing.

I'd suggest that that is a very important point. Lots of people think that loony beliefs should be respected. Even amongst skeptics you get the opinion that they should be carefully argued with to try to show the loony where he/she is mistaken. I think that pointing and laughing is at least as valuable a method of addressing woo woo claims and I enjoy it more than trying to think down to their level and have a debate.

I've had 100 arguments with 100 creationists and I really can't be bothered anymore. Point and laugh ;D much more fun.

It's a shame that "axiomgate" seems to have left this thread, as I was having a really good laugh at him and I'd like to see him trying to defend the lies that he copied from somewhere about Byrd.

[Cuddles]

I'd suggest that that is a very important point. Lots of people think that loony beliefs should be respected. Even amongst skeptics you get the opinion that they should be carefully argued with to try to show the loony where he/she is mistaken. I think that pointing and laughing is at least as valuable a method of addressing woo woo claims and I enjoy it more than trying to think down to their level and have a debate.

While laughing at people can be fun, I think it is important not to simply assume all woos are loons. As I see it, there are really three general kinds of woo. Firstly, there are the woo peddlers. Whether they are outright frauds or just deluded, these people need to be argued with rationally. You're not going to convince them of anything, but it's not them you're trying to convince, it's the people who might fall for the woo they're pushing. Mockery will only serve to push their victims further away from skepticism and deeper into the woo. While it can be very hard to not include any mockery and sarcasm, the simple point and laugh approach just isn't appropriate here.

Secondly you have the believers, fence sitters and people who tend to the skeptical but aren't quite sure on some points. This is probably the largest group and, in general, these are the people who can actually be taught. People being people, some of them are impossible to reason with and many discussions degenerate into insults and mockery, but it's always worth trying to have a sensible discussion to start with. As I said above, simply mocking people will only ever serve to drive them away, so until you're absolutely sure that a person is not going to listen, you should assume that they actually will. Even then, it's worth thinking about what kind of impression bystanders will get.

Finally, you have the nuts. When people start dribbling about hollow Earths, shapeshifting lizards and what have you, it's just not worth making an effort. Even the more hardcore believers generally have trouble taking them seriously. There tends to be a bit of a grey area between this group and the more sane believers, so it's worth giving the benefit of the doubt to start with, but it usually becomes apparent fairly quickly that a person has very little connection with reality. Fortunately, this group seems to be disproportionately represented on the internet, so we get plenty of entertainment.

[bobdezon]

SEE HOW THIS POST STOPPED RANDIS MILLION DOLLAR CHALLENGE!!!!

You fool, the lizard shapeshifters come from inside the holow earth CHECK YOUR FACTS!!!!! Or are you just another "Skepto-shill"? Heed my warning and stock up on Tinfoil and catfood. :cheesy:

[EHocking]

The Gravity of the Iron core doesn't factor as there is no inner core but an inner sun and the land we stand upon is nothing more that thousands of parts trapped in the Gravitational pull of the inner sun, like the rings of Saturn, our land orbits the inner sun.
OK, so you're saying that the "inner sun" is what causes gravity on earth and keeps those of us walking on it's surface from flying off into space.

So how do you reconcile this "fact" with your claim in Post 29 (http://www.skeptics.org.uk/forum/showpost.php?p=38589&postcount=29)that people walk around on the inside of the hollow earth.

Why is it that the gravitational force (gF) of the "inner sun" is capable of holding us on the surface against centrifugal forces (cF) i.e. gF>cF, yet, even though those inside a hollow earth would be 1000s of km closer to that same gravitational source, they are not dragged into the core of the "inner sun" - i.e. gF<cF.

How is it that gF is less than cF closer to the gravitational source and greater the further it is away from the gravitational source?

[Croydon Bob]

OK, so you're saying that the "inner sun" is what causes gravity on earth and keeps those of us walking on it's surface from flying off into space.

So how do you reconcile this "fact" with your claim in Post 29 (http://www.skeptics.org.uk/forum/showpost.php?p=38589&postcount=29)that people walk around on the inside of the hollow earth.

Why is it that the gravitational force (gF) of the "inner sun" is capable of holding us on the surface against centrifugal forces (cF) i.e. gF>cF, yet, even though those inside a hollow earth would be 1000s of km closer to that same gravitational source, they are not dragged into the core of the "inner sun" - i.e. gF<cF.

How is it that gF is less than cF closer to the gravitational source and greater the further it is away from the gravitational source?

If I remember correctly from when I read up on this stuff many many years ago, at least some of the woo brigade thought that the molten iron was actually between us and the hollow centre. There's also the spin of the Earth pressing the inner inhabitants up against the inside (the same way it throws us off out into space?). It was obvious nonsense to me when I read it in my early teens!

When Edgar Rice Burrough's book At The Earth's Core was made into a film in the 1970s, the hollow planet bit was considered so silly that they changed it and just set the film in a giant cave at great depth. So a children's film with "stone age" people who speak English interacting with dinosaurs was too sensible to go with the idea...