AMAZING: Scientists again find evidence of a world within our Earth, but twist and ignore the evidence...

In what seems to me to be a followup from a post in 2019 (Inner Earth? Scientists find mountains and plains 660 kilometers beneath Earth's surface), I found the following article fascinating and depressing:

Jan Lamprecht also called out this article:

Also notice this article from last year:

Meet 'The Blobs': Two Continent-Size Mountains in Earth's Deep Mantle That Nobody Understands

https://www.livescience.com/64943-nobody-understands-the-giant-mantle-blobs.html

Personally I can't decide whether to laugh or cry at the depravity of the author and researchers who are collecting this data.

They're clearly talking about structures inside of our planet that are massive: mountains and valleys that are much more enormous than anything we have on the surface... Yet they spout complete BS GARBAGE about it being magma. They have 0 (ZERO) evidence of this being the case, and yet they continue down this insane road of miseducation. At the very least they could simply say, "This is amazing and we don't know at all what these are or what they're composed of."

I feel it an utter shame and disingenuous to do what they're doing because it removes the mystique and allure of children and those that would be future researchers and scientists that might say "WOW! I want to figure this out and explore these unknown frontiers here within our own world!"

This outright attack on our children and future generations of scientists and the progress that we could see from such inspiration is a true crime against humanity.

For posterity's sake, I'll copy the article contents here:

#1:

The monstrous 'blobs' near Earth's core may be even bigger than we thought

By Brandon Specktor - Senior Writer 10 days ago

The mysterious 'blobs' near Earth's core just got a little bigger.


Earthquakes (stars) send seismic waves rippling through the planet. Seismometers (blue triangles) detect them on the other side. Thirty years of seismic data revealed where those seismic waves slowed down (purple and orange splotches), pointing to mysterious inner-Earth structures called ultralow-velocity zones. (Image: © Doyeon Kim/University of Maryland)

Deep within Earth, where the solid mantle meets the molten outer core, strange continent-size blobs of hot rock jut out for hundreds of miles in every direction. These underground mountains go by many names: "thermo-chemical piles," "large low-shear velocity provinces" (LLSVPs), or sometimes just "the blobs."

Geologists don't know much about where these blobs came from or what they are, but they do know that they're gargantuan. The two biggest blobs, which sit deep below the Pacific Ocean and Africa, account for nearly 10% of the entire mantle's mass, one 2016 study found — and, if they sat on Earth's surface, the duo would each extend about 100 times higher than Mount Everest. However, new research suggests, even those lofty analogies may be underestimating just how big the blobs really are.

In a study published June 12 in the journal Science, researchers analyzed the seismic waves generated by earthquakes over nearly 30 years. They found several massive, never before-detected features along the edges of the Pacific blob.

"The structures we located are … thousands of kilometers across in scale," lead study author Doyeon Kim, a postdoctoral fellow at the University of Maryland, told Live Science in an email. According to Kim, that's an order of magnitude larger than typical features found along the blob's edge.

Because the blobs live deep, deep in Earth's interior, geologists can only begin to understand their shape and size by looking at the seismic waves (sound waves generated by earthquakes) that travel through them. These hot, dense regions can slow incoming waves by up to 30% relative to the surrounding mantle; the hottest, slowest regions are known as ultralow-velocity zones (ULVZs), and they typically occur near the edges of the blobs, Kim said.

In their study, Kim and his colleagues created a new map of ULVZs below the Pacific Ocean using an algorithm called "the Sequencer," which was originally developed to find patterns in stellar radiation. With this algorithm, the team analyzed 7,000 seismograms, or measures of seismic waves, collected between 1990 and 2018, created by hundreds of earthquakes of magnitude 6.5 or greater. The earthquakes occurred in Asia and Oceania, the researchers wrote; but as their seismic waves shuddered across the globe, they passed clearly through the Pacific Ocean mantle blob before reaching seismometers in the United States.

The algorithm revealed enormous sections of ULVZs never detected before, including a blobby region below the Marquesas Islands in the South Pacific Ocean, which measured more than 620 miles (1,000 kilometers) across. The Sequencer also showed that a segment of the blob deep below the Hawaiian Islands is considerably larger than previously thought.

"By looking at thousands of core-mantle boundary [seismograms] at once, instead of focusing on a few at a time, we have gotten a totally new perspective," Kim said in a statement.

The enormous size of these structures suggests that blobs along the core-mantle boundary — and particularly the hottest, densest ULVZs — are probably more widespread than previous research indicates. What's more, Kim added, the fact that these large zones lurk near known volcanic hotspots could also reveal some clues about their impact on Earth's geology.

It's possible, for example, that ULVZs deep down in the mantle could feed into the large "plumes" of hot rock in the upper mantle that create volcanic hot spots on the surface, Kim said. Those mantle plumes might "suck on" the melty material collected in ULVZs and pull it upward, which could explain why the largest ULVZs are located deep under volcanic island chains like the Hawaiian and Marquesas islands.

That's just one theory, Kim said; even with algorithms designed to pierce the void of space, the mysteries near the center of the Earth remain just as murky as ever.

"In short, everything is unsure at the moment," Kim said, "but this is what makes our field of study so exciting."

#2:

Meet 'The Blobs': Two Continent-Size Mountains in Earth's Deep Mantle That Nobody Understands

By Brandon Specktor March 07, 2019

About halfway between your feet and the center of Earth, two continent-size mountains of hot, compressed rock pierce the gut of the planet — and scientists know almost nothing about them.

Technically, these mysterious hunks of rock are called "large low-shear-velocity provinces" (LLSVPs), because seismic waves shuddering through Earth always slow down when passing through these structures.

A mesmerizing image, featured in an article on Eos (the official news site of the American Geophysical Union, or AGU), gives us one of the most detailed views yet of these rocky anomalies — which most scientists simply call "the blobs." [Earth's 8 Biggest Mysteries]

Geophysicists have known about the blobs since the 1970s but aren't much closer to understanding them today.

"They're among the largest things inside the Earth," University of Maryland geologist Ved Lekic told Eos reporter Jenessa Duncombe, "and yet we literally don't know what they are, where they came from, how long they've been around, or what they do."

This much is evident: The blobs begin thousands of miles below Earth's surface, where the planet's rocky lower mantle meets the molten outer core. One blob lurks deep below the Pacific Ocean, the other beneath Africa and parts of the Atlantic. Both are massive, stabbing up about halfway through the mantle and measuring as long as continents. According to Duncombe, each blob stretches about 100 times higher than Mount Everest; if they sat on the planet's surface, the International Space Station would have to navigate around them.

To get a better sense of their shape and scale, take a look at the stunning 3D map of the blobs that Lekic and University of Cambridge seismologist Sanne Cottaar created in 2016 (shown above). The blobs' vast, cascading plains have been likened to mountains of sand or interconnected pits of gravel, Duncombe wrote, but whether they're lower- or higher-density than the surrounding mantle remains a point of contention among scientists.

Equally mysterious is how, if at all, the blobs affect geological functions such as plate tectonics and volcanism. A more recent map of the structures, presented by University of Oxford doctoral student Maria Tsekhmistrenko at the 2018 annual meeting of the AGU, suggests that the tips of the blobs might branch into plumes of hot material that brush up against volcanic hotspots just below Earth's surface. What does this mean? Nobody knows. It may take many more decades to better understand the enigma near the heart of our planet. Luckily, the blobs don't seem to be going anywhere.

You can read Duncombe's article here.

1 Like

@soretna , thanks for bring this up again...I think in the absence of any other clue from science , let's look at what ancient mythology tells us :-

  1. As per Hindu and Buddhist scriptures , Meru is a mountain of epic proportions that exists inside the Earth and is by far the largest mountain of this planet

  2. As per Norse mythology , we have Yggdrassil or the "World Tree" , passing right through the Earth , which matches the enormous scale of these structures .

Regards

1 Like

@Soretna @sidharthabahadur

This topic interests me a lot...I was studying earth images recently online and a few really caught my attention. So I reprocessed them and created an anaglyph. Now this is straight from the source and I did not add anything myself to the original image.

3d goggles please! What are we looking at? Tell me what you guys see!

North
South
Original

This is starting to make sense. I am sure they are called blobs because they do not want to attach any meaning to the structures, especially if the are not mountains but the heart of Gaia ie Yggdrassil. What we can do is gain truth from their half truths.

If true, the trunk is around Africas sw coastline and its roots flow down South Africa. That is where one of the blobs is... Now where did they say the other blob is...Pacific Ocean. Ok i wonder what Anomolies are reported there. Time to investigate lol...oh yes... North Pacific massive underground civilisation!...could that be the source of high temperature anomoly they are reference to another "blob". Lol.. I love researching...

M

@Echo_on , if a myth like Yggdrasil , often derided as "far out stuff" by mainstream academia , gets proven to be true , it will turn the world of science UPSIDE DOWN , no less :))

I mean , if Yggdrasil really exists , then God knows what else from ancient mythology is TRUE . My hunch is - most of the "incredible stories" from ancient mythology occurred in Hollow Earth , so were actually true , but now seem impossible to those living on the Earth's surface !

Regards

1 Like

@sidharthabahadur Yes i agree, but you have to ask yourself the reason why the ancient texts cannot be verified. And why Science or Physics Acedemia give us their version of truth.

Do i believe Science does not know what these blobs are? Even though they seem know everything about everything....I am sure they can study the lithosphere ridges and see where they lead etc.

The only thing i am sure of as David Icke says is that nothing is coincidence.

M

Sidhartha,

In relation to Mount Meru ... Remember that the Krishna Avatar and his brother Avatar Balaram went northwards in order to draw Jarasanda after them. They scaled an 88 mile high mountain and then jumped off of it and sailed back down to ground level.

Now, "northwards" is also where the orifice is to the hollow earth. If you compare the outside of an amethyst to the inside and then pass that comparison over to the planet Earth, you can imagine mountains 88 miles high and 669 and as tall as Meru or whatever! The rumpled surface of an amethyst is nothing when compared to the jagged interior.

And if that giant tree stump in Wyoming is a leftover from Satya Yuga, then natural wonders may exist within of such a scale, even now ...

Dean

Echo_on
June 29

@Soretna @sidharthabahadur

This topic interests me a lot...I was studying earth images recently online and a few really caught my attention. So I reprocessed them and created an anaglyph. Now this is straight from the source and I did not add anything myself to the original image.

What are we looking at? Tell me what you guys see!

Gaia_20200524_234032620A

Gaia_20200524_233953821-B

IceAgeEarth_MINDR
Original

M

@deandddd , I agree . Suddenly , this Tibetan illustration of Mount Meru (mentioned often in the Vedas) , inside Hollow Earth , doesn't seem that "mythical" anymore :-

The Meru Cosmos in Buddhist Art and Culture

Tibetan/Himalayan May 26, 2015 - 1 comment

Review of Portrait of a Landscape: Depictions of the Meru Cosmos in Buddhist Art and Culture , by Eric Huntington.

In the traditional Buddhist model of the cosmos, Mt. Meru is the almost inconceivably immense mountain at the center of our world, so large that what we perceive as the blue of the sky is actually the blue stone ( vaidūrya , lapis-lazuli or blue beryl, p. 51, n. 44) that makes up the side of the mountain facing us. The idea of something so big that it is overlooked is a fine metaphor for the subject of cosmology in Buddhist studies, where the Meru cosmos, or cakravāla model, seems to be of marginal interest despite its ubiquity. In this dissertation, an ambitious study in both scope and interdisciplinary approach, Eric Huntington demonstrates the centrality of the cakravāla model as a “a unifying theme” in Buddhist thought, practice and material culture, and describes how the model has been adapted to differing contexts, functions, and mediums of expression. His methodology includes not only translation and interpretation of Buddhist texts, but also analysis of ritual and material culture and interviews with Buddhist ritual specialists and artists.

Chapter 1 acts as an introduction, and Huntington begins by noting the role that cosmology has played in many world traditions, addressing eternal, fundamental questions (What is the universe? Why are we here?). However, in scholarship on Buddhism the subject has been either deemphasized or glossed over, often by pointing to descriptions of the cosmos detailed in the fourth-/fifth-century text, the Abhidharmakośa . Huntington attributes this neglect to the privileging by Western scholars of philosophical and scholastic aspects of Buddhism in an effort to “secularize” the religion, removing those elements that were antithetical to a contemporary scientific worldview (cosmological examples to which I would point include the flat earth and geocentric universe, long rendered historical curiosities). However, this dissertation questions that view, and argues that the “style, iconography, and descriptions of various depictions of the Buddhist cosmos change in different contexts and traditions in ways that allow cosmological imagery (and textual description) to be contentful and expressive, rather than bound to a particular theorization” (p. 11). In other words, he says, different versions of the cakravāla model were applied in differing contexts in the same way that different kinds of maps (topographical, weather radar, etc.) have value in particular circumstances. Huntington identifies two such circumstances in which the Meru cosmos plays an integral part, but not necessarily as a description of the physical universe: deity maṇḍala and ritual offerings of the cosmos, both important elements of Esoteric Buddhist ritual practice. These two contexts also allow the study to expand beyond the canonical texts and into other kinds of primary sources, such as architecture, ritual and ritual implements, and murals. Examples of these from Nepal and different Tibetan Buddhist regions make up the subjects of Chapters 3, 4 and 5, and the introduction goes on to outline these topics.

Early in Chapter 1 Huntington notes the influence of scholars who assert the centrality of cosmology to Buddhist studies (Stanley Jeyaraja Tambiah, Buddhism and the Spirit Cults in North-East Thailand . Cambridge Studies in Social Anthropology No. 2. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1970; Rupert Gethin, “Meditation and Cosmology: From the Aggañña Sutta to the Mahāyāna,” History of Religions 36, 1997; John Strong, The Legend of King Aśoka: A Study and Translation of the Aśokāvadāna . Princeton Library of Asian Translations. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1983; Stephen F. Teiser, Reinventing the Wheel: Paintings of Rebirth in Medieval Buddhist Temples . Seattle: University of Washington Press, 2006). He concludes the chapter with acknowledgement of other scholars whose work on Buddhist cosmology had some impact on his study (Randy Kloetzli, Buddhist Cosmology: From Single World System to Pure Land . Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1983; Adrian Snodgrass, Architecture, Time and Eternity: Studies in the Stellar and Temporal Symbolism of Traditional Buildings , ed. Lokesh Chandra, 2 vols. Śata-Piṭaka Series: Indo-Asian Literatures, New Delhi: Aditya Prakashan, 1990; Akira Sadakata and Hajime Nakamura, Buddhist Cosmology: Philosophy and Origins , trans. Gaynor Sekimori. Tokyo: Kosei Publishing Company, 2004; Martin Brauen, Mandala: Sacred Circle in Tibetan Buddhism . Stuttgart: Arnoldsche Art Publishers, 2009; Angela Falco Howard, The Imagery of the Cosmological Buddha . Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1986; Ferdinand Diederich Lessing, Yung-Ho-Kung: An Iconography of the Lamaist Cathedral in Peking, with Notes on Lamaist Mythology and Cult , vol. 1, Reports from the Scientific Expedition to the North-Western Provinces of China under the Leadership of Dr. Sven Hedin, the Sino-Swedish Expedition. Stockholm: Elanders Boktryckeri Aktiebolag, 1942).

Chapter 2 carefully balances a developmental overview of traditional Indian cosmological thought with select, detailed descriptions of the specific models, greatly aided by the very clear and well-produced plans and diagrams created by the author that appear throughout the dissertation. Before expanding into other areas in later chapters, Chapter 2 reviews the canonical and textual sources in order both to lay out in some detail the basic structural elements of the Meru cosmos and their evolution, and, by comparing and contrasting the models in different texts and traditions, to begin to suggest that the Meru model is less standardized than often assumed. Although the Buddhist model is his focus, Huntington begins with the cosmos as described in Hindu Sources, the Vedas and Purāṇas , which share a basic sense of the world as discs or bowls of earth and sky linked by a central axial mountain, surrounded by either concentric rings of land or continents at the cardinal points. However, ambiguities in the specifics exist among and even within these early texts, a problem addressed by the Vāyu Purāṇa with forthright humility: “Only Brahmā knows it in full” (p. 32). Jain sources provide interesting differences in their models, such as multiple Merus and greater geographic detail, but also share many features with the concurrently developing Buddhist models. Although Southern and Northern traditions of Buddhism later diverge in significant ways, early Pali Buddhist texts from the south such as the Visuddhimagga and the Lokapaññatti shared similar cosmological models with their northern contemporaries. The Pali texts, however, imply that the study of cosmology lacks the “practical” value of the study of ethics or meditation. After a brief overview of the models in these texts, Huntington turns to the north and devotes the rest of the chapter to a detailed accounting of the influential and much more detailed Meru models found in the Abhidharmakośa and later Kālacakra literature. What emerges from Huntington’s detailed descriptions, diagrams and comparisons is the emergence of two complementary models from these sources whose ambiguities “open up a wide range of possibilities for Meru symbolism in a variety of cultural and ritual contexts” (p. 45); and an evolution from the Abhidharmakośa model towards a regular, systematic model in the Kālacakra , “whose very orderliness allowed for multiple, overlapping levels of symbolism” (p. 85). Some of the ramifications of this interpretive spectrum are presented in the next three chapters.

Chapters 3 and 4 detail the application of Meru symbolism in two adjacent Buddhist cultures: among the Newars of the Kathmandu Valley in Nepal; and in various Tibetan Buddhist regions of India and Tibet. Despite their reliance on similar textual sources, cosmology plays out very differently in the material and ritual cultures of these two Buddhist traditions. In Nepal, explicit cosmological symbolism requires some effort to discover and elucidate, whereas in Tibetan Buddhist areas it is clearly and frequently depicted in various contexts.

Chapter 3 examines the interrelationship in Newar Buddhism between the Meru cosmos, the Buddhist ur-monument—the stūpa ( caitya in Nepal)—and the tantric maṇḍala . An example of such multilayered symbolism found in sites is presented in an exegesis of a modern caitya found at Bu Bahā in Patan, Nepal, which Huntington demonstrates can be understood on deeper and deeper levels, although by fewer and fewer people. He begins by noting the link, shared with all Nepalese caitya , to Kathmandu’s famed stūpa , Svayambhū Mahācaitya: “First, at the most mundane, the caitya i s a representation of Svayambhū, which arose as a luminous form atop a lotus in the mountain-ringed lake that was drained to become Kathmandu valley.” Beyond this initial interpretation of the Bu Bahā caitya , we read, “[s]econd, at the level of the Vajradhātu that is governed by the five jina buddhas that appear both outside and within the caitya , the maṇḍala of the caitya is occurring in a jeweled pavilion atop the peak of Sumeru [Mt. Meru]. Third, at the level of the Buddha Vairocana who generates the Vajradhātu maṇḍala atop Meru, the location is none other than the highest heaven of the Sumeru system, Akaniṣṭha” (p. 106). The next half of the chapter is devoted to the use of Meru symbolism in the most common offering ritual in Newar Buddhism, a guru offering known as the guru-maṇḍala-arcana . Parallel to the architectural/monumental context of the caitya , the role of Meru as cosmos in the ritual is demonstrated to be multivalent, but more implied than explicit.

Chapter 4 turns to Tibetan Buddhist regions, in which the Meru cosmos appears, as it does in Nepal, in art, architecture and ritual, but much more frequently, unambiguously and in more varied forms than in Nepal. Here Huntington provides a wealth of description emphasizing the Meru cosmos as a recurring structural/organizing principle, first in deity maṇḍala , then in architecture. However, the bulk of the chapter details Tibetan forms of the guru offering ritual, a central feature of which is the maṇḍala . In Tibetan Buddhist practice, he writes, “the maṇḍala offering…came to serve as a template for cosmic iconography used in everything from wall murals to sculptures to amulets…[it] becomes the symbol par excellence of guru devotion and tantric preliminary practices” (p. 160). After discussing the ritual in great detail, Huntington concludes the chapter by asserting that “the image of Meru and the cakravāla system becomes the icon of more than the basic abhidharma cosmology; it is the expansive symbol of the entire Buddhist world, including the fundamental principles of enlightenment. Furthermore, the role of the offering to the guru as one of the foundational and most often performed practices of Tibetan Buddhism provides the Meru imagery with a widespread platform from which to become popularized and influential” (pp. 203-204).

In Chapter 5, Huntington continues in the Tibetan Buddhist sphere, but expands his analysis, finding connections to the Meru cosmos more broadly. He applies many of the themes and principles covered in the previous chapters to link various examples of Tibetan Buddhist material culture to the iconography of the Meru cosmos, most of which he notes can be associated to greater or lesser degrees with offering rituals. Although noting that possible examples are numerous, the first half of the chapter focuses on dough offerings ( gTor ma ); representations of “collections of adornments” ( rGyan tshogs ); protective amulets and “thread crosses” ( mDos ); “field of merit” paintings ( tshogs zhing ); and paintings portraying Meru as a vast altar. The second half of the chapter covers the familiar entrance murals found at most Tibetan Buddhist monasteries: “The Wheel of Existence” ( bhavacakra , Tib. srid pa’i ’khor lo ) and an image of the Meru cosmos. Huntington discusses the significance of the two and their iconography in some detail, then compares a number of important in situ examples. He concludes the chapter by noting the murals’ unusual status: despite their ubiquity, he argues, these murals are different from other Meru cosmos images in that they are not “cosmos as maṇḍala ” or “cosmos as offering,” but rather are “explicitly didactic” (p. 271), liminal images bridging secular and sacred space that can be understood in part as demonstrating the importance of systematic, progressive explanation as a bridge to deeper understanding of the Tibetan Buddhist worldview.

Chapter 6 is a brief conclusion. Beginning with a review of key points of the dissertation, Huntington demonstrates the centrality of Meru symbolism in many facets of a Buddhist practitioner’s experience. “From the moment of entering the monastery, to placing offerings on the altar, to showing devotion to the guru, to the conceptual location of buddhas within the cosmic hierarchy (as they appear in both meditations and the physical shrine rooms themselves), the cosmos and visions of the cosmos are among the most important visual metaphors and conceptual imagery that underlie the foundations of Buddhist practice. Such cosmic principles are so ubiquitous that visitors and practitioners may sometimes not even realize what they are seeing—the Meru world-view is such a basic cultural assumption that it can become invisible” (p. 280). He underpins his argument with the following: “Rather than see Buddhist cosmology as simply another layer of symbolism onto which Buddhist concepts can be mapped, we can learn to see it as the structuring principle, perhaps even the blueprint, from which the façade of Buddhism is constructed” (p. 284). He concludes the chapter by suggesting areas for future research in other Buddhist cultures, such as those of Japan or Thailand, and in other world systems within Buddhism, such as pure lands or Shambala.

In sum, Huntington’s study of the Meru cosmos succeeds admirably in its goals of bringing attention to the neglected field of traditional cosmology in Buddhist studies, and in being a model for the kind of interdisciplinary methodology that is appropriate to a topic of this dimension. It is an important and welcome addition to a variety of fields, tying together Buddhist studies, literature, art history, and studies of ritual practice and material culture. It succeeds both as a “big picture” analysis of the underlying significance of the Meru cosmos in Buddhism generally (and particularly in Esoteric Buddhism), and also provides excellent detailed studies of ritual, murals, and other expressions that incorporate Meru symbolism.

Kevin R. E. Greenwood
Allen Memorial Art Museum
Oberlin College
[email protected]

Regards

Sidhartha,

I've always thought of this Meru in the hollow earth as being something astral or ethereal.

You know, the River Ganges is supposed to flow from the celestial realms to the Earth, and then through the Earth to continue downwards. I don't exactly know of the details! But we don't see the Ganges, flowing onto the Earth from above, with our eyes; nor do we see Meru.

This situation reminds me of the Eleventh Chapter of The Bhagavad Gita wherein Krishna shows his Universal Form (A form of the Zodiac, if I am not mistaken) to Arjuna; but first he had to give Arjuna the eyes to see it. So Mount Meru might be something like that because Mount Meru is supposed to reach up to the Pole Star!

Dean

@deandddd , Mount Meru is quite an intriguing concept . On the one hand it is described in scriptures as being "inside" the Earth at it's very center , then again those same ancient Hindu & Buddhist texts also attribute astral/ethereal/cosmic qualities to Mount Meru .

Meru has even been called the Earth's Axis - this sounds somewhat similar to the Yggdrasil concept , which explains it's association with the North Pole .

Maybe...and this is just me speculating - Mount Meru is a physical mountain in Hollow Earth , which also has a stargate or portal to higher dimensions , or like a wormhole to other star systems etc.

Humans have been called a species with amnesia and it seems some critical part of the Meru puzzle has been forgotten by mankind .

Regards

Folks , mainstream scientists have now reached their wits' end in explaining this phenomena . There are only two ways to move forward on this topic :-

  1. Either they open up Earth's internal structure to a full and transparent "scientific" debate wherein alternative theories such as Hollow Earth are given a fair opportunity to be presented

OR

  1. Accept that some of those ancient mythological ideas (Mount Meru , Yggdrasil) have genuine merit and need to be thoroughly investigated

Regards