|Comments on Tuesday 8 October 2002:|
|And on a more entertaining note, a rather good endorsement of hollow earth theory in terms of seismology, albeit flawed in a couple of ways. It's still fun.
|Information from a friend of a friend and a bit of routine internet investigating led me to your web log.|
I am pleased you have chosen to reference my theory as a click worthy link.
However, I must ask what you see as flawed. Perhaps there is something I can explain in a more simplistic manner to you. I have tried to essentially 'demystify' the theory, removing all but traces of its original isoteric language, but still many seem to be confused.
Please humor me and detail what it is you find so flawed in regards to my conclusions.
|The Earth is flat.|
|The seismology content seems reasonable (to a layman, anyway - for all I know, the supplied details might be completely made up, but they look convincing enough), but there are two things that seem a bit fudged:|
1. The measured gravity difference (a vague mention of static electricity, which wouldn't act at distance).
2. The suggestion that 'classic' seismology has it wrong depending on the Thorne Lay diagram (which does seem quite poor) without giving even a nod to the diagram "from a text book on seismology" which actually seems quite similar to your own, in that it doesn't involve waves passing through the center.
However, I do approve that it's all proposed as a feasibility thing, rather than "this is how it *really* is", which gives you a bit of leeway on the bothering-to-explain-everything front.
|Your use of Occam's Razor is a mistake here. Occam's Razor is primarily a philosophic, not a scientific tool. It's best used in situations such as a refutation of Descartes' Evil Demon - the idea that our sensory experience of an external world could be the product of an Evil Demon who causes us in some way to have these experiences. However, the refutation of Occam's Razor is essentially "So what if it's more complicated you evil smelling bugger. It's still true." This is the only time at which it is acceptable to pour beer down your philosophy tutors neck. It's simpler to suggest that all matter is composed of a single homogeneous (it's possible that you don't understand exactly what homogeneous means in this discussion) substance, get rid of the atoms and molecules and electrons and strange dancing particles, just go with a basic goo. Most physicists wouldn't agree with this idea, but Occam's Razor does allow it. This is why Occam is best used for philosophy rather than science, as the two disciplines are understood today. Philosophy (the word), breaks down to a love of knowledge. Science (again the word) breaks down to knowing the truth. I'm being liberal with my translations, but the essence is there. Philosophy is about asking questions (however flawed). Science is about providing answers (however flawed). Occam's Razor is much better suited to determining the right question to ask rather than to deciding on the answer. In using Occam's Razor here, I think you're actually guilty of begging the question. Broken down we have something like: A. My hollow world theory. B. Solid world theory. C. My hollow world theory is simpler. D. Occam says that simple theories are correct. Therefore E. My theory is correct. Wherein you assume the truth of C and D without subjecting them to any real study to decide whether they are in fact true or not. This is essentially my problem with your paper - it's just not logically valid, no matter what the truth of the premises are.|
|My life is now circumscribed to a 2048 character limit. I blame myself.|
|Why blame yourself? It's much more simple to blame others. I blame Saddam!|
|or blame slimey robot thingys. I blame jesus and artichoke hearts.|
I know the earth is hollow because i have contacted balezuthius, one of the many guardian beings residing within.
He showed me the way to god. I know see the world as glimmering network of connected webs.
If you want to find him all you need to do is sit outside with your head on the earth and breath through a filter drenched with Byzantine.
It may sound pretensious but it's true.
J Lampretch is almost entirely correct. the only flaw is that she doesnt account for the force vectors created by the giants that hold up the earth.
|Jesus helps me trick people.|