Conversation with Cater

ALLPLANETS-HOLLOW Yahoo Group (Old Posts)
, , , ,
1

List Members,

I mentioned earlier that I had received a letter from Mr. Cater. Well, he
included his phone number, because I had asked, so I called him and had a
phone conversation. Open, friendly type of guy. He was happy to hear from
someone about the Hollow Earth Theory.

We spoke about several things, among them the Northern opening. He was quite
insistent that the magnetic pole, at Thule Greenland, is already on the lip
of the opening. I always think that one has to go way out there to find the
rim of the opening, in the middle of the Polar basin, but think about it-
when he was on the tip of Greenland, Greely was already reporting
foreshortening. That means that the tip of Greenland is already in the
downward sloping portion of the doughnut-like opening, end of story! Part of
the world we know is in the opening, or at least the beginning of it. After
all, the opening has a gradual sharpening of curvature, it isn't a sharp
drop.

This idea isn't contradictory with the experiences of Nansen- Nansen's ship
Fram just hit the opening from the other side.

And Amudsen's dirgible journey is compatible, too. Given the heavy curvature
which exists right there on the lip, I doubt that we can trust Amudsen's
affirmation that his starting point was the pole itself, from which he
traveled along 170* East. He could have traveled very much along the
curvature of the funnel without really knowing it. Rod has made that point,
that since Amudsen ended up off to the East of the Bering Strait, then he
must have dipped in along the way and lost his bearings because of the
inward-sloping curvature.

By the North of Greenland and Ellesmere Island, the inward sloping has
already started. The opening can extend a bit further towards Canada- we
don't have to cut it at 170* East exactly. And Nansen's location at 138*
East and 80* North puts us on the edge of the opening on the other side.
IMHO

Dean

2

DD,

Dean, please excuse me if this point has already been made.

These large masses of land that have been reported, sometimes considered as
mirages, could actually be the opposite side of the rim, no? If one was
heading down over the lip and further down towards the rim, looked upwards
and across the opening, might not the other side of the opening appear as a
large mass of land? This is my hypothesis, this just popped into my head
after reading the Greenland story, because before I thought that you couldn't
get in the northern opening via land.

MM

3

Dharmapada,

So what is the calculation of the size of the opening from the rim?

Jayaradhe

dean wrote:

List Members,

I mentioned earlier that I had received a letter from Mr. Cater. Well, he
included his phone number, because I had asked, so I called him and had a
phone conversation. Open, friendly type of guy. He was happy to hear from
someone about the Hollow Earth Theory.

We spoke about several things, among them the Northern opening. He was quite
insistent that the magnetic pole, at Thule Greenland, is already on the lip
of the opening. I always think that one has to go way out there to find the
rim of the opening, in the middle of the Polar basin, but think about it-
when he was on the tip of Greenland, Greely was already reporting
foreshortening. That means that the tip of Greenland is already in the
downward sloping portion of the doughnut-like opening, end of story! Part of
the world we know is in the opening, or at least the beginning of it. After
all, the opening has a gradual sharpening of curvature, it isn't a sharp
drop.

This idea isn't contradictory with the experiences of Nansen- Nansen's ship
Fram just hit the opening from the other side.

And Amudsen's dirgible journey is compatible, too. Given the heavy curvature
which exists right there on the lip, I doubt that we can trust Amudsen's
affirmation that his starting point was the pole itself, from which he
traveled along 170* East. He could have traveled very much along the
curvature of the funnel without really knowing it. Rod has made that point,
that since Amudsen ended up off to the East of the Bering Strait, then he
must have dipped in along the way and lost his bearings because of the
inward-sloping curvature.

By the North of Greenland and Ellesmere Island, the inward sloping has
already started. The opening can extend a bit further towards Canada- we
don't have to cut it at 170* East exactly. And Nansen's location at 138*
East and 80* North puts us on the edge of the opening on the other side.
IMHO

Dean

4

Jaya Radhe,

Interesting question. First of all, let me mention that if the opening is so
close to Greenland, rather than being out there in the middle of the polar
basin, then this might just support the idea of Byrd's entry into the
opening; it depends on where the base was which he took off from.
Provocative, huh?

As far as the size is concerned, well, let's think about it. Nansen
experienced definite curvature anomalies from around 138* East, 79* North,
over above the New Siberian Islands. And by 80* on the Ellesmere Island side
you already have similar anomalies, so the opening could actually be very
wide. A few degrees in towards the center from 80* on either side, and it
could still be a couple of hundred of miles wide at the neck.

The question then becomes the shape of the opening. You know, there are no
satellite pictures to help because the Arctic is usually under constant
cloud cover. There is a person, Will Rhea, on another list, whose uncle
worked for the meteorological service when satellites first started taking
pictures. Even back then, the pictures were censured by the military before
being handed over. The weathermen would sometimes receive pics with Arctic
sections blotted out due to NATO type considerations. Of course, there are
crystal clear nights in the Arctic- Nansen described some of them. But
satellite photos showing the area in question free of cloud cover are non
existent. Is the opening an oval? Is it a slit? Questions such as these
would determine the area of the opening, regardless of any two given points
of extension. I bring this up because the interferometer of the Pioneer
Venus Orbiter # 9 perceived a wide slit, from which emanated heat and light,
stretching across the Venusian North pole, coming down as far as 70* of
latitude on either side- that's about 4,000 kilometers long! Of course,
being so close to the Sun, someone said that Venus would need more
ventilation. I doubt that the Earth has such a long opening. Although an
elongated opening, at the neck, along 140* East and 80* North, stretching
over to just above Ellesmere, would fit a lot of deductive evidence.

The idea is that, because of all the warming anomalies and curvature
anomalies experienced by Nansen and the ship Fram, the opening had already
started- I'm referring to the downward angle. And the neck couldn't have
been too far off because his water temperatures were too warm, land birds
were sighted, clouds of volcanic ash descended all over the area around him,
etc. And all that started around 138* East, 79* North. He went no further
East, they began their drift towards Greenland.

And then North, Northwest of Ellesmere, MacMillan, Peary and Cook all had
sightings of a continent, with land mountains against a blue sky. It could
have been a mirage from the other side of the pole, but we don't know how
close MacMillan got; he says he went over 100 miles across the ice but
didn't reach it.

I doubt things are like he says, though, because there were only two white
men and two Eskimos that went, and one Eskimo was led off by Commander Green
and shot under the pretext of a squabble. How did that happen? The Eskimo
had been working with MacMillan since the times of Peary 10 years before,
and they trusted him. Why would a Naval officer sit around and argue on the
Arctic ice with his Eskimo guide and then shoot him? What if the other
Eskimo didn't like that? What if the white men lost the other guide, too? It
just doesn't make sense, although I hate to start arguing conspiracy theory
at such an early date. So we could be talking about a very elongated
opening.

And keep in mind that where the downward curvature starts, and the width of
the neck, are two different things. Even so, we are so accustomed to this
catch-all phrase " the opening."

I have all but discarded that theory running around about a mini hole offset
from the pole. Such an idea just does not tie in with the wide ranging
curvature anomalies and other sightings. ( Back over towards Siberia, Nansen
saw a sun above the horizon while the Arctic night was still on. )

That's all for now, sports fans-

Dean/Dharmapada

5

By the way, the lip is no longer at Thule- it is near 100* West longitude.

Dean

6

Madhava/Mike,

You've got it. A land reflection could be coming straight across from the
other side. There seems to be a land mass which fingers its way up to the
rim, on SOME side.

The Arctic is very shallow except for a path going through the middle,
emptying between Greenland and Iceland. Once you go past Greenland and over
the side, who knows how soon the land picks up again.

Dean/Dharmapada

MM