[Tapupah]

jasper et al,
i have found our answer from the esa. http://www.esa.int/esacp/sem7zf8lure_index_0.html

read the last paragraph. they say twice that the black hole is the north pole. in zoomed-in photos, the hole is larger.

doesn't fully disprove your hypothesis, but at least there is a reason for the black hole other than simply covering something up.

peace in the love and the light,
e.j.

[wiweimeli]

thanks for that, but again another 'blob'. why don't they use something like a cross? if you examine the bbc video clip between 50 secs and 1 minute it shows a big blob quickly reducing. if this is their attempt to indicate the north pole, then it's a rather rough way to do it. if the north pole was rated to cover such an area then maybe scott would have gotten there first!!!

[wiweimeli]

i've just watched a bbc presentation on arctic ice melt. about half way through a satellite view of the arctic is used. a large grey fuzzy blob appears to reduce and stabilize. i've asked the nsidc for comment. is this a poor attempt to blank out a hole to hollow earth ?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7418041.stm

[Lorionasodi]

it is also all fuzzy on google earth.....

[wiweimeli]

that's a 'sharp' observation!! did you check out the south pole? i have, and am now very convinced that there is something strange here. the hollow earth theory is most entertaining, and i've now got a very open mind about it. i think i'm going to collate all the stuff i've read and go over it again. i think it was the george green interview (or maybe the later john lear one) on project camelot that he stated that all but one of the planets in our solar system are inhabited, and that the earth was the only one where life could exist on the surface. goldilocks zone and all that.

i saved a frame of the south pole 'anomoly' if anyone wants a copy.

oh, and i haven't received a reply from the nsidc people yet !!

[poRmawayncmop]

i in no way consider it the end-all of "secret knowledge", but what does the law of one say in regard to more than one planet being inhabited in our solar system? i remember reading (in the law of one) that this isn't so. project camelot seems to run a whole lot of information through their site, and accordingly, the collection of that information is not consistent at all. i'm curious as to whether or not this bit of information is plausible.