Hohle Erde - der unanfechtbare Beweis

der autor des buches ist "nur" journalist, oder?

FrankD schrieb:Andererseits gibts in der Grenzwissenschaft (GreWi) Hunderte von Betrügern und Scharlatanen, und keiner von den Kollegen denkt auch nur im Traum daran, da was aufzudecken, denn eine Krähe hackt der Anderen kein Auge aus

Weil eben jeder 'SCharlatan' weiß, ie dünn die eigenen als auch die
"Argumente" oder "Beweise" sind und von seriösen Wissenschaftlern
oft doch zu einfach aushebelbar sind. Schadet der Eine dem Anderen,
so hat es der Andere ebenso leicht, sich beim Einen wieder zu 'rächen'.
Daher macht man sich in diesen Kreisen das Geschäft nicht gegenseitig kaputt.

@Argor

Argor schrieb:der autor des buches ist "nur" journalist, oder?

Ja, und zwar ein ziemlich spinnerter dazu, glaubt man dem Focus, der "die märchenhaftesten Hypothesen der UFOlogen und Spökenkieker" um Ercivan nur nachsichtig belächeln kann:
http://www.focus.de/wissen/wissenschaft/grenzwissenschaften-kongress-der-ketzer_aid_171166.html

Mit Wissenschaft haben seine Enthüllungsbücher wohl weniger zu tun, eher mit der Pauschalverurteilung jedes anderen Forschers als "Fälscher", wenn deren Ergebnisse Ercivans Vorstellungen und Wünschen widersprechen. Dabei macht er auch vor großen Namen wie Heinrich Schliemann oder Charles Darwin nicht Halt:
Wikipedia: Erdoğan Ercivan
[Der Vergleich mit Glühwurm und Leuchtturm ist gerade der Selbstzensur zum Opfer gefallen]

Hohle Erde = hohler Schädel - der unanfechtbare Beweis.

@geeky
Erdogan ist übrigens NICHT Mitgleid des Ägypten-Forums, wie im WIKI-Beitrag steht - da ist er nämlich schon vor Jahren achtkantig rausgeflogen :)
Ich kenn zufälligerweise fast den kompletten Vorstand, und die haben mir die "Affäre Erdogan" damals erzählt :)

Hab denen mal den WIKI-Link geschickt, die werden sich freuen...

Vielleicht nehmen sie das gleich zum Anlaß, sich auf Wikipedia mit einem eigenen Artikel vorzustellen. Es haben schon unbedeutendere Interessengruppen die Relevanzhürde gemeistert.

..leider ist nicht nur unsere erde hohl....

Es steht in diesem Buch! Also stimmt es! :D

http://www.amazon.de/Im-Abgrund-Roman-Jeff-Long/dp/3442356199/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1266661233&sr=8-1

@cs89
*lol*

Ich sage da nur noch:
Papier ist geduldig - das Internet auch !

Hallo zusammen =) ich sehe das Thema besteht schon lange :D ähm aber um mal auf was zu kommen was am anfang aufkam @unerwünscht der Grund warum sich die Erde durch die Anziehungkraft der Sonne nicht schneller dreht ist das Gravitationfeld des Mondes für die Geschwinkeit der Erdrotion verantworlich ist. Da der Mond wesentlich näher an der Erde ist. Wäre Rund 80000 Kilometer weiter weg würde sich dieser klein Ball hier namens Erde so schnell drehen das hier Winde von über 320km herrschen würden und du könntes dir über solche fragen ob die erde hohl ist garkeine gedanken machen =) lg

@volvagia
Es gibt umfangreichte Dichtemessungen und Röngtenbilder die Beweisen dass sie nicht hohl ist!

Hallo zusammen,bin neu hier und dachte mir ich begebe mich gleich in den (vermeintlich)hohlsten Thread überhaupt und setz mich in die Nesseln...^^
Ich habe natürlich nicht alles gelesen aber ca. die ersten 10 Seiten.


Zuerst mal möcht ich sagen,das ich nicht an den Neuschwabenland/Nazi/Hanebu/Reptoiden Unfug glaube.(Grosse) Löcher an den Polen gibts auch nicht(Jan Lamrecht,der Autor von"Hollow Planets" hatte durch einen Bekannten Zugang zu Polfotos der Nasa(!).Er sichtete sie wochenlang akribisch und erkannte dann nur eins:Wolkenformationen,die aussehen wie ein"Strudel")


Doch nachdem ich"Hollow Planets"gelesen habe halte ich es nicht mehr für unmöglich das die Erde und andere Planeten einen Hohlraum haben könnten.Ich weis,die komplette Physik spricht dagegen,aber hier einige Argumente bzw.Indizien Pro-HE.

1.Die Gravitation ist bis heute nicht verstanden worden.Wenn sie durch Elektrizität beinflusst wird könnte die Grav.Konstante nicht stimmen und somit auch nicht das Gewicht der Erde.Im Erdinnern gibt es starke Spannungen...-->Gravitation nicht überall gleich.
2.Dr.Cook und Dr.Peary,zwei Arktispioniere sahen bei ihren Expeditionen Land nördlich von Alaska,das es angeblich nicht gibt weil es eine Luftspiegelung sein soll.Sie sahen das Land unabhängig voneinander bei verschiedenen Expeditionen bei bestem Wetter und guter Sicht.Sie nannten dieses Land Crocker Land bzw.Bradley Land und es wurde in die damaligen Karten eingezeichnet.Dann wurde ein Schiff losgeschickt um das Land zu finden.Der Kapitän sah auch etwas aber offiziell wurde nichts gefunden...
Die Russen haben fast die gleiche Story,dort nannte man das "Phantomland" Sannikov Land.
Genau dort könnten Löcher sein.;):D
3.Die"Innere Sonne"könnte ein natürlicher Reaktor sein,solche Reaktoren wurden schon gefunden und sie sind Millionen Jahre alt.
4.Die Erdexpansionstheorie ist zwar nicht anerkannt,aber auch nicht widerlegbar(ich denke beide Theorien haben eine Daseinsberechtigung).

5.Viele kleine Indizien z.B. der Fallout nach Chernobyl wurde wetterbedingt nur auf der Nordhalbkugel gefunden/gemessen nicht aber südlich des Äquators.Ausser am Südpol und zwar zeitverzögert,als ob er einen"Umweg durch die Hohle Erde"unternommen hätte...!

Das sog."Delayed Radio Wave Phenomena" und die Aurora Borealis könnte mann damit auch richtig erklären.Ebenso einige Wetterphenomäne besonders in Nordamerika.


Die meisten Seiten über die HE-Thematik sind nichts als Quatsch,ebenso wie die meisten Bücher.Das Buch von Lamprecht ist da eine löbliche Ausname,obwohl es bei"Esowatch"als pseudowissenschaftlich verunglimpft wird.Aber bei dieser Seite macht man es sich zu einfach.Für mich ist es gut gemacht incl.guter Quellen.
Wie gesagt:Ich halte es für möglich.Nicht mehr und nicht weniger!

*Jan Lamprecht
*Phänomene

http://www.hollowplanets.com/
http://nuclearplanet.com/

@FiatLuxFan

FiatLuxFan schrieb:Sie sahen das Land unabhängig voneinander bei verschiedenen Expeditionen bei bestem Wetter und guter Sicht.Sie nannten dieses Land Crocker Land bzw.Bradley Land

Wiki schreibt dazu:

Da dieser Kontinent nie existiert hat, was durch Satellitenaufnahmen bewiesen werden konnte, ist er selbstverständlich auch nicht gefunden worden. Heute geht man davon aus, dass Peary von einer Luftspiegelung getäuscht wurde.

Wikipedia: Crocker Land

Mehr information dazu siehe hier:
Wikipedia: Phantominsel

Ja,ich kenne den Wiki-Eintrag bzgl.Crocker Land,Phantominseln etc. @schwa
Aber die Sachlage ist in dem Fall etwas komplizierter und darum stell ich jetzt das ganze Kapitel von "Hollow Planets" rein...(hoffe es funzt,bin derzeit noch heillos überfordert mit dem Board,aber alles wird gut;)^^

__________________________________________________________________________

CHAPTER 16 – THE MISSING CONTINENT

Despair


I was very frustrated and terribly depressed at the thought that even though I had come this far, I still had nothing concrete to offer with regard to the physical location of a Polar Hole. I had been conducting this study for some years, writing this book, and examining the evidence without knowing what my final conclusion would be regarding Polar Holes. Everything had gone so well, except for the Arctic. I had scrutinized everything – photos, science, the whole lot. I took out atlases, bought the finest maps, and there was just nothing to be seen. Not the faintest clue. I only had two areas to look into before winding up my Arctic research. Then I would have to admit that I could find no physical evidence of Polar Holes. Hollow Earthers had often claimed that islands and even mountain ranges had been struck off Arctic maps. They tried to demonstrate that all polar navigation was unreliable – but this of course was not true. I studied this aspect closely and could find no evidence to suggest that polar navigation was highly flawed. On the contrary, it was amazingly accurate.

I began wondering if these ‘missing lands’ might be related to the elusive anomalous curvature I was look for. I wondered if these islands and mountains really existed inside Polar Holes. The other issue had to do with the discovery of the North Pole. Could the Cook/Peary controversy perhaps be related to the Hollow Earth? The only connection I could see were the issues regarding sledding speeds and navigation. Since these resulted in dead-ends, I could not see how there could be any further connection between these two diverse subjects. Bit by bit, as I followed up the ‘missing lands’ problem, radical new thoughts began falling into place. Let us now set off on the final leg of our journey in search of the Earth’s elusive Polar Holes.



The Polar Continent


Take a look at any map in any atlas. It shows the Arctic Ocean to be nothing but an ice-covered sea. The Arctic Ocean is quite shallow, but even so there are no islands in it beyond a certain latitude. There most definitely is no Polar continent in the Arctic. Yet, many explorers and geographers once believed there was something there. The Americans Marshall Gardner and William Reed collected a great deal of evidence to show that animals, birds, fish and whales originated from inside a Polar Hole. Many explorers wondered why some birds would fly north as winter was setting in, instead of going south. Hence Gardner and Reed wondered if these animals came from a warmer land further north, inside a Polar Hole. They were not alone in their thinking, however, There were geographers and explorers who thought these things could be explained in terms of a Polar continent. To some, the idea of the Open Polar sea tied in with the existence of this continent, and a few thought there might be a relatively warm continent up near the North Pole.

Peary had once thought that volcanic activity of some kind was taking place further north in the Arctic. During his North-Greenland Expedition of 1891-1892 he mentioned the following incident:

“(An Eskimo) Megipsu told me of a heavy fall of black dust or soot during an east wind at Cape York about a year ago which frightened the natives seriously. In this neighborhood the fall was lighter. I could get no further particulars, but as to the general truth of the story I have little doubt. It seems strongly to indicate the possibility of volcanic dust having reached that region, perhaps from some northern area still unexplored.”

There are no volcanoes to be found further north in the Arctic. Nor can continents be found in the Arctic Ocean on any modern map of the Arctic.



Sannikov Land


The Sankt-Petersburg’s Academy of Science (Russia) organized a research expedition in 1808-1810. They set off for the Novosibirsky Islands which are situated between the Laptev Sea and the East Siberian Sea. In 1811 Jakov Sannikov, a member of the expedition, claimed that he had seen a vast land to the north or north-west of Kotelny Island which is a part of Novosibirsky Islands. This vast land which he reported was named Sannikov Land in honor of him. In the years that followed the Sankt-Petersburg’s Academy of Science arranged for other expeditions to this area. E. Moll took part in these expeditions and he claimed to have seen Sannikov Land twice, once in 1888 and again in 1893. Sannikov Land was marked on maps.



No one had visited it yet, although it had been seen on the horizon on the three occasions mentioned above. Nansen, the polar explorer firmly believed Sannikov Island existed. He hoped to find it when he drifted across the Arctic in his ship, the “Fram”. Nansen’s is unquestionably one of the most brilliant, daring, and successful Arctic expeditions ever undertaken. Even so, Nansen never did find Sannikov Land. The Russians were absolutely convinced Sannikov Land was real and they later mounted new expeditions to find it. “The Big Soviet Encyclopedia” states:

“In spite of an intensified search in the first half of the 20th century, the so-called Sannikov Land hasn’t been found. In the opinion of some explorers, this land has been destroyed by the ocean as has happened to many other islands made mainly of fossil ice.”

So what had Sannikov and Moll then seen? Had they really only seen an ice-island? It had been seen on three occasions in a period of 82 years.

Sannikov Land therefore remains something of a mystery because it was seen on at least three occasions and was marked on maps. Sannikov Land might, or might not be, related to a larger mystery. There is, however, one possibility which I would venture to propose. What if the Russian expeditions earlier this century did indeed find something but kept it under wraps? Although this is mere speculation, it is a possibility which cannot be excluded. My thoughts regarding Sannikov Land therefore remain inconclusive.



Crocker Land


The most famous ‘disappearing land’ of all is Crocker Land, originally seen by Peary in 1906. He saw it twice through binoculars and then proceeded to mark it on his maps. In 1914 Captain (later Admiral) MacMillan, Peary’s great friend and admirer, set out to find Crocker Land. History records the fact that MacMillan’s expedition never did find Crocker Land. In fact, MacMillan concluded that Crocker Land was a mirage. Scientists and polar experts these days agree with MacMillan’s assessment and Crocker Land has long been struck from our maps. If everyone is in agreement, then what is the mystery?

What exactly did Peary see? When? And where? I June 1906 Peary was surveying the northern coastline of Canada. On 24 June he decided to climb a 2,000 ft mountain which was situated inland, behind Cape Colgate. In his book “Nearest the Pole” he described what he saw as he looked out over the Arctic Ocean:

“North stretched the well-known ragged surface of the polar pack, and north-west it was a thrill that my glasses revealed the faint white summits of a distant land which my Eskimos claimed to have seen as we came along from the last camp.”

A few days later, on 28 June, Peary was at Cape Thomas Hubbard at the northern tip of Axel Heiberg Island. Peary was unable to sleep that evening, so he hitched his dogs to a sledge and drove it 1,600 ft up a hill.

“The clear day greatly favored my work in taking a round of angles, and with the glasses I could make out apparently a little more distinctly, the snow-clad summits of the distant land in the north-west, above the ice horizon.”

Let us carefully examine the information contained in Peary’s original statements:

1. He saw Crocker Land through his field glasses
2. He stood on high ground at the time of the sightings
3. Crocker Land stood out above ice horizon
4. He personally saw Crocker Land twice
5. The first time he describes seeing ‘white summits’
6. The second time he describes seeing ‘snow-clad summits’
7. The sightings were four days apart
8. Crocker Land was slightly clearer on the second sighting
9. He saw Crocker Land in the same direction from two different vantage points
10. Peary also informs us that his Eskimos claimed to have seen the white summits of Crocker Land some time on or before the 24th as they came from their last camp

Since Peary’s sighting of Crocker Land has generally been dismissed as a mirage, I did not think much of Crocker Land until Dr. Gohnert and I stumbled upon a “Times of London” newspaper article printed on 20 July 1908. It concerned Peary’s upcoming attempt at reaching the North Pole and his thoughts on the matter. Peary made a remark which shows that he definitely believed Crocker Land to be a real land mass.



It was this article which first brought Crocker Land to my attention and made me realize that Peary thought it was absolutely real. Peary had reckoned distances from Crocker Land, and he even intended sending a party of his own men there on his return journey from the North Pole. Crocker Land was marked on many maps during this time because everyone, including Peary, seemed to be utterly convinced of its existence.

Let us now take a look at Captain MacMillan’s 1914 expedition to find Crocker Land. MacMillan describes this expedition in his book “Four Years in the White North”. MacMillan desperately wanted to go back to the Arctic. There was only one place left to go, the Unexplored region which Peary referred to in his 1908 press release. MacMillan tells us he did not go searching for Crocker Land based on Peary’s testimony alone:

“My decision to return into the frozen North was not actuated by this single report. Richardson, McClure, Marcus Baker, Capt. John Keenan, and Dr. R. A. Harris have all given reasons for the existence of such a land. This belief has persisted for nearly ninety years. The accumulated evidence of years substantiated Peary’s belief.”

It is often stated that MacMillan never found anything as he ventured out on to the Arctic Ocean. However, that is not the full story. As they struggled across the pressure ridges, they kept a constant watch for Crocker Land. Nothing. Still they continued forth in their north-westerly quest. They had now journeyed seventy-eight miles out onto the Polar sea while bypassing many leads. Then, when they were approximately 100 miles from the shore, something very extraordinary happened, the likes of which has never been recorded in the history of exploration:

“April 21st was a beautiful day; all mist was gone and the clear blue of the sky extended down to the very horizon. Green was no sooner out of the igloo than he came running back, calling in through the door, ‘We have it!’ Following Green, we ran to the top of the highest mound. There could be no doubt about it. Great heavens! What a land! Hills, valleys, snow-capped peaks extending through at least one hundred and twenty degrees of the horizon.



I turned to Pee-a-wah-to anxiously and asked him toward which point we had better lay our course. After critically examining the supposed landfall for a few minutes, he astounded me by replying that he thought it was poo-jok (mist). E-took-a-shoo offered no encouragement, saying, ‘Perhaps it is.’ Green was still convinced that it must be land. At any rate, it was worth watching. As we proceeded, the landscape gradually changed its appearance and varied in extent with the swinging around of the Sun; finally at night it disappeared altogether. As we drank our hot tea and gnawed the pemmican, we did a good deal of thinking.



Could Peary with all his experience have been mistaken? Was this mirage which had deceived us the very thing which had deceived him eight years before? If he did see Crocker Land, then it was considerably more than 120 miles away, for we were now at least 100 miles from shore, with nothing in sight...



To increase our latitude we set a more northerly course on the 23d and 24th, with a variation of 178 degrees westerly. Observations on these two days put us ahead of our dead-reckoning in latitude 82 degrees 30 minutes, longitude 108 degrees 22 minutes, 150 miles due north-west from Cape Thomas Hubbard. We had not only reached the brown spot on the map, but we were thirty miles in-land! You can imagine how earnestly we scanned every foot of that horizon – not a thing in sight, not even our almost constant traveling companion, the mirage. We were convinced that we were in pursuit of a will-o’-the-wisp, ever receding, ever changing, ever beckoning.”

Lt. Col. Molett’s explanation for Crocker Land was that clouds and snow are easy to confuse. He alluded to a horizon which was whitish. In this close-up encounter with Crocker Land, MacMillan tells us that the sky was blue all the way down to the horizon. Crocker Land therefore stood out against his blue background. The mystery continued to deepen after MacMillan and his men turned back for they continued to see this mysterious, yet unattainable land. They struggled to find their trail through a blinding snow storm. April 26th was a fine day, but MacMillan makes no mention of Crocker Land on that day. They reached igloos 7, 6, and 5 on that day’s long march. Then, six days after the sighting quoted above, he wrote:

“On the 27th we marched from igloo No. 5 to No. 4 in the same perfect weather and perfect going, all leads being frozen. Throughout the day the mirage of sea ice, resembling in every particular an immense land, continued to mock us. It seemed so near and so easily attainable if we would only turn back.”

MacMillan believed Crocker Land to be a mirage of sea-ice. We will study the scientific aspects of his sightings in greater detail later. But first we need to understand the facts he presents. Crocker Land seems to have a peculiar aspect to it. It always seems to be close at hand, yet by now MacMillan knows better! They seem to see Crocker Land during extremely clear weather, when conditions are ‘perfect’. This makes Crocker Land difficult to explain as some kind of optical illusion. They see it on the clearest days – seemingly for hours at a stretch. Note his terse description of it as “resembling in every particular an immense land…”

MacMillan’s final sighting of Crocker Land took place from Cape Thomas Hubbard, and it is every bit as spectacular as the previous sightings:

“We now turned eagerly to an examination of the Polar Sea. Peary stood here in June, 1906, and from this very spot he saw what resembled land lying to the north-west, 120 miles distant. The day was exceptionally clear, not a cloud or trace of mist; if land could be seen, now was our time. Yes, there it was! It could even be seen without a glass, extending from south-west true (sic) to north-north-east. Our powerful glasses, however, brought out more clearly the dark background in contrast with the white, the whole resembling hills, valleys, and snow-capped peaks to such a degree that, had we not been out on the frozen sea for 150 miles, we would have staked our lives upon its reality. Our judgment then, as now, is that this was a mirage or loom of the sea ice.



That there is land west of Axel Heiberg Land ("click" right map) – not north-west, as some scientists would have us believe – I have no doubt. I would limit the eastern edge of this land to 120 degrees west longitude, and the northern to 82 degrees north latitude for the following reasons: Our eight days’ travel out from Cape Thomas Hubbard was over ice which had not been subjected to great pressure, evidence that it was protected by some great body of land to the west against the tremendous fields of ice driven on by the Arctic current, which has its inception north of Bering Strait and Wrangel Land, across the Pole, and down the eastern shore of Greenland.



At our farthest north, 82 degrees, all was suddenly changed. The long, level fields ended in a sharp line going east and west; beyond this line there was the roughest kind of ice, which had evidently been pushed around the northern point of this unknown land over shoal ground extending toward the north.”

In the above, MacMillan affirms, for the last time, that Crocker Land resembles real land in every ounce of detail. He speaks of the contrast between light and dark. He mentions, again, ‘show-capped peaks’ – with its implications for color and contrast. MacMillan’s sighting from Cape Thomas Hubbard is even more amazing than Peary’s. Peary only saw the land faintly above the horizon with his field glasses.



But MacMillan sees it with the naked eye. Most astounding of all is his description that on this occasion it covers an even wider field of view than happened during his sighting out on the Polar sea. This time it stretches from the south-west through north to north-north-east. It is as if all of MacMillan’s sightings of Crocker Land are much ‘closer’ and even more real looking than those of Peary in 1908. It is true they saw a mirage, but it was an incredible mirage the likes of which has never been reported before or since.

What we have here is excellent testimony that for long periods of time a mystery land becomes visible in the Arctic. But what could cause this? Mirages in the polar regions are distortions of something physical on the ground. This is an important fact. Mirages on a hot day result from light in the sky being refracted so that the ‘water’ we see on the ground in fact comes from clouds in the sky. Mirages in the polar regions are the opposite. Here we normally see mirages in the sky which are caused by objects which lie on the ground.



Polar mirages are therefore a reflection or distortion of something physical. Yes, Crocker Land is a mirage. But a mirage of what? We are not dealing with magic and witchcraft. We are dealing with science, and Crocker Land remains unexplained in scientific terms, especially when we take into account MacMillan’s multiple sightings.

Why should the same land be seen continually in only this one direction? This consistency suggests that this mirage is indeed related to something physical. The sea-ice theory is flawed, but no one has been able to better it yet. One has to ask how sea-ice can produce an effect so real that it is :

(a) the right way up

(b) has the right color contrasts

(c) has the right shape

(d) has the right proportions and dimensions to fool Peary, MacMillan, Green and even some of their Eskimos

Crocker Land did not vary in direction. Crocker Land was right there eight years after Peary had seen it. And it lay in exactly the same direction and could be seen from the same spot again. On each occasion its reality was so great that no one doubted it was real – except when they realized they could not reach it.

There is one final aspect which makes the description of Crocker Land unlike anything ever seen before. Its sheer dimensions are staggering. MacMillan describes it as covering at least 120 degrees of horizon. In his final sighting the frontage seems to be even greater. I know of no mirage with a frontage that wide. It covered a full one-third of a circle, if not more. What could have created a mirage this spectacular?

MacMillan made it clear that the impetus for the expedition resulted from testimony other than Peary’s. In Appendix VII of his book he records:

“Statements concerning the possible existence of land in the Polar sea. Captain Richardson, in his work “The Polar Regions”, says ‘The Eskimos of Point Barrow have a tradition, reported by Mr. Simpson, surgeon of the Plover (in 1832) of some of their tribe having been carried to the north on ice broken up in a southerly gale, and arriving, after many nights at a hilly country inhabited by people like ourselves, speaking the Eskimo language, and by whom they were well received. After a long stay, one spring in which the ice remained without movement they returned without mishap to their own country and reported their adventures. An obscure indication of land to the north was actually perceived from the masthead of the Plover when off Point Barrow.”



“In 1850, Captain McClure, when off t he northern coast of Alaska, wrote in his journal that, judging from the character of the ice and a ‘light shady tint’ in the sky, there must be land to the north of him.”

“Marcus Taker, writing in the ‘National Geographic’ magazine 1894, under the title of An Undiscovered Island off the Northern Coast of Alaska, says: ‘It is often told that natives wintering between Harrison and Camden Bays have seen land to the north in the bright, clear days of spring. In the winter of 1886-87 Uxharen, an enterprising Eskimo of Ootkearie was very anxious for me to get some captain to take him the following summer with his family, canoe, and outfit to the north-east as far as the ship went, and then he would try to find this mysterious land of which he had heard so much; but no one cared to bother with this venturesome Eskimo explorer.”

“The only report of land having been seen in this vicinity by civilized men was made by Capt John Keenan of Troy, New York, in the seventies (1870s) at that time in command of the whaling-bark Stamboul of New Bedford. Captain Keenan said that after taking several whales, the weather became thick, and he stood to the north under easy sail and was busily engaged in trying out and stowing down the oil taken. When the fog cleared off, land was distinctly seen to the north by him all the men of his crew, but as he was not on a voyage of discover, and there were no whales in sight, he was obliged to give the order to keep away to the south in search of them.”

“In June, 1904, Dr. R. A. Harris of the United States Coast and Geodetic Survey, published in the ‘National Geographic’ magazine his reasons for believing that there must be a large body of undiscovered land or shallow water in the polar regions. He based his theory upon the report that Siberian driftwood had been picked up in South Greenland, upon the observation of drifting polar ice, upon the drift of the ship Jeannette, and upon numerous tidal observations made along the northern coast of Alaska and eastward.”



Polar Images


The polar regions are well known for their mirages. A mirage is an optical illusion caused by the refraction of light passing through layers of atmosphere of varying density. Mirages are often seen in warm climates. The inferior image is the most common type seen under these conditions. The air above a hot surface lies in layers of varying density. An inferior mirage causes the distant, nearly level desert surface to assume the appearance of a sheet of water, especially if one observes from a slight elevation or simply from a point above the heated layer.



The same effect occurs over a hot road. The ‘water’ is really an image of the sky. One can sometimes observe objects below eye level on this ‘water’ surface. These objects are usually inverted. Superior mirages are found in cold regions and in conditions where there are strong temperature inversions. They are less common and more spectacular than inferior images. Distant objects (often over a sea horizon) are seen upside-down in the sky. There may also be an upright image of the same object above the inverted one.



When such a mirage is seen on land, all the trees and other landscape features are inverted, and in all cases of superior mirage, the images are more clearly defined than in an inferior mirage. Superior mirages are not, as is commonly supposed, caused by reflection from a surface above the spectator. The explanation is complicated and involves the action of the wave fronts of light as they progress through strata of varying density.

Was Crocker Land a mirage? Definitely. Firstly, MacMillan’s Eskimos declared it to be ‘mist’. Mirages are unstable. Nevertheless, in spite of its amazing stability, Crocker Land had to be a mirage. They watched it change during the day as the Sun moved. Furthermore, it did not lie 120 miles from shore as Peary had thought. As MacMillan approached it, he found it receding. Also, when in fact he knew it could not possibly be. Now if Crocker Land was not a mirage of something much further away? Could this be true for Keenan Land and for Sannikov Land too? Could these lands somehow be related? Could these be different views of one single gigantic missing Polar continent?

There is an aspect of the mirage theory which poses a problem. Superior images are normally upside-down! Nobody ever said these lands were upside-down. If these explorers had seen upside-down, they would have mentioned it. These mirages were so real-looking in every detail that no one suspected they were mirages until someone went closer. The most common incarnation of a superior mirage results in a distorted upside-down image. Less often however, superior mirages have another image above them which is the right way up.



Could it be that Crocker Land is an instance where, for some unknown reason, we are only seeing the top image? If so, then why don’t we see the lower inverted image? I have not come across any mention that only the top part of such a mirage can be visible. What could cause this? The only reasonable explanation for Crocker Land must be the one which at first seems impossible Crocker Land can only be caused by mountains and real land somewhere nearby in the Arctic Ocean. It must lie 200 or 300 miles from where Peary and MacMillan saw it. But it can’t be too far away or else the light would not be able to travel that distance through the atmosphere.

Can people see mirages of real objects over a considerable distance? Billy Baty, who helped with this book, told me the following story about a mirage of the city of Corpus Christi:

“… People in the Rio Grande valley not too far from where I live have seen a mirage of a city on many occasions. It was discovered the mirage city was Corpus Christi which is a hundred or so miles away. I actually knew a man who saw the mirage city on at least two occasions. Apparently the image would last for hours and when it would disappear, you could drive a small distance and see it again. Sometimes it would appear on the following day.”

There are a number of instances where objects have been seen which are below the horizon. There are also a number of instances where objects have been seen at a considerable distance as if they were magnified by some kind of ‘atmospheric lens’. (Examples given are omitted in this summary except for this final one.)



Captain Robert Bartlett was in command of the schooner Effie M. Morrissey. He had experience sailing in polar waters for forty years when he saw the clearest mirage of his life. At 16h00 on 17 July 1939 his ship was between Cape Farewell on the southern tip of Greenland and Iceland. The Sun was lying in the south-west when the Captain and crew saw:

“… the Snaefells Jokull (4,715 feet) and other landmarks (of Iceland)… were seen as though at a distance of twenty-five or thirty nautical miles (instead of the actual 335 to 350 statute miles). ‘If I hadn’t been sure of my position and had been bound for Rejkjavik (Captain Bartlett said), I would have expected to arrive within a few hours. The contours of the land and the snow-covered summit of the Snaefells Jokull showed up almost unbelievably near.”

We are therefore able to establish that under certain strange atmospheric conditions, a mirage can be magnified to make land appear to be 10 or more times closer than it really is.

Why isn’t Crocker Land on our maps by now? Even if MacMillan did not find it, surely the USAF or US Navy should have found it decades ago? What of the extensive Russian sea and air searches for Sannikov Land earlier this century? Did they also come up empty-handed? Or did they find something they would rather keep under wraps? The Russian and American military have scrutinized every square inch of the polar regions. Maps made of the Arctic Ocean seafloor by nuclear submarines of the US Navy were classified for 25 years. Could it be that Crocker Land does not technically belong to the outer surface of the world? Could it be that Crocker Land lies ‘below the surface’ of this Earth? Could it be that some strange geographic and atmospheric conditions exist there which exist nowhere else on Earth? Could it be that Crocker Land lies in a Polar Hole?

Now let’s think about that. Remember the debate I mentioned regarding warm or cold air exiting from an Inner Earth? Arctic mirages occur early in spring and summer in this region where MacMillan and Peary were. Peary saw Crocker Land in June, while MacMillan saw it at its finest in April and May. The geography of a Polar Hole must have some effect on temperature and weather in the vicinity.



For example, would that land not lie in eternal darkness throughout the winter? And what of the temperature of the air coming from inside the Earth? Could this create a natural, circular belt of air above, and around a Polar Hole? Could air from inside the Earth create a naturally occurring temperature inversion in such a hole? Would this mean that light from Crocker Land, Sannikov Land and Keenan Land always passes through certain layers which refract the light in a certain way? Are the temperatures there causing light to be refracted along the curvature of the Outer Earth? According to the various accounts I have presented, the Polar continent seems to be enormous in size. Does the circular rim of a hole also have a circular layer of air of a certain density which then causes a natural focusing effect on light passing out of it? Could it result in greater lateral magnification thereby making the land appear wider than it really is? Would this explain why Crocker Land covered such a large frontage?

Finally, why is the lower, inverted image of Crocker Land never seen? Remember that anomalous Earth curvature which I hunted for so fruitlessly? Well, maybe I’ve found it. What would happen if this mythical mountain existed inside a Polar Hole where the curvature is much more pronounced? Could it be that the anomalous curvature of a Polar Hole blocks the rays of light which would normally form the lower inverted distorted image in a superior image? Light rays carrying the superior image may be so refracted that they are never seen by the human observer because of the curvature of the Earth in the vicinity of a Polar Hole.



On the other hand rays carrying the upright image are so refracted that they take a higher path through the atmosphere and they are then seen by the observer. Could this be the scientific explanation for Crocker Land, Sannikov Land and Keenan Land? This explanation neatly dove-tails with my other thoughts which suggest that Crocker Land lies much further away than even MacMillan thought. Crocker Land could be 350 miles, and perhaps even more, away from where MacMillan saw it on 21 April. The behavior of the pack-ice also suggested that MacMillan was still far away from land.

Let us suppose someone were to set out towards Crocker Land and they did not turn back. At first they may see it from time to time, as the weather allows, as clearly as MacMillan and Peary did. As they approach it and begin entering the Polar Hole, they will see it gradually rising in the sky. Below it, gradually rising also, will be an inverted and distorted image of Crocker Land. By now they should be seeing the mirage much more often. But Crocker Land will still be far away. They will need to travel further still. And as they do so, they will see both images still rising, and below these images they will see the Crocker Land mountains – for real.

What will they find on Crocker Land when they finally set foot upon its shores? As they wander through its hills and valleys, will they meet Eskimos who technically are dwellers of the Inner Earth? Will these Eskimos be able to direct them to the City of Shamballa?

__________________________________________________________________________

Quelle:Jan Lamprecht/Hollow Planets/Chapter 16-The missing Continent


By the way:Cool,das du mich nicht gleich als "Hohlkopf" tituliert hast und auf meinen Post eingegangen bist...
Habe jetzt fast den ganzen Thread gelesen(sic)und naja...^^
Aber Ausnamen bestätigen ja bekanntlich die Regel;)

Ein Link hätte es auch getan:
http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/tierra_hueca/esp_tierra_hueca_8p.htm

@FiatLuxFan

FiatLuxFan schrieb:der Fallout nach Chernobyl wurde wetterbedingt nur auf der Nordhalbkugel gefunden/gemessen nicht aber südlich des Äquators.Ausser am Südpol und zwar zeitverzögert

Wer sagt das? Ich kenne nur diese Studie:

No traces of Chernobyl-derived fallout radionuclides (e.g. 134Cs) were detected in any of the collected samples at the Antarctic region

http://www.springerlink.com/content/2lg9xw631ap7yhxp/

Ist sie widerlegt? Wenn ja, von wem und wo sind die Messungen gemacht worden, wo ist die Studie, auf die du dich beziehst, veröffentlicht?

@FiatLuxFan

Naja,vielleicht nicht widerlegt aber...
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1200/is_n19_v137/ai_9027937/
@voidol

@FiatLuxFan

Danke für den Link, den kannte ich noch nicht.

Hier ist auch was zu den Bohrungen von Dibb:

http://books.google.com/books?id=J5GM3M8UOL4C&pg=PA56&lpg=PA56


Aber 20 Monate nach dem Unfall, das lässt sich durch ganz normale meteorologische Phänomene erklären.

Auch die Hotspots sind eigentlich typisch für die Tschernobyl-Katastrophe. Wenn es nicht abgeregnet/abgeschneit hat, gab es auch keine Hotspots. Es müssen nicht überall Stellen mit radioaktivem Fallout sein.

Eine hohle Erde sehe ich da nicht unbedingt belegt ;)

Hi,

@FiatLuxFan

FiatLuxFan schrieb:Die Gravitation ist bis heute nicht verstanden worden.Wenn sie durch Elektrizität beinflusst wird könnte die Grav.Konstante nicht stimmen und somit auch nicht das Gewicht der Erde

Wenn dem so wäre, würden jede Menge anderer astronomischer Dinge nicht mehr passen, was aber nicht der Fall ist. Dein "könnte" ist völlig sinnfrei, denn erst wenn es Beweise für deine Theorie gäbe, dann könntest du darauf aufbauen.
Im Moment strampelst du im luftleeren Raum.

Und Gravitation wird nicht durch Elektrizität beeinflußt.

-gg