Hollow Earth? March 2013 Mormon Chronicle Semi Regular Event Presentation by Abraham Day

Hollow EarthThis podcast, Mormon Chronicle Semi-Regular Event March 2013: The Podcast Part 1, is brought to you by mormonchronicle.com

Download Podcast  here

Listen to podcast episode:

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

Part 1: Abraham Day presents: “Hollow Earth”

Eight years ago, while researching some old maps to see at how they have changed over time, Abe surprisingly discovered four islands that are missing on our current maps. Learning this lead him down the worlds biggest rabbit hole and pointed him to an amazing mystery of the Earth that was once commonly hypothesized then forgotten and now, rediscovered. He will present his research and discoveries of a living Hollow Earth that encapsulates a lost people; The Lost Tribes of Israel and some surprising conclusions you won’t hear anywhere else. Come and enjoy a Journey to the long lost Earth, her North Countries forgotten by history and hidden with ice.

Abe Day received a Science degree from Snow College and a Bachelors of Fine Arts from Brigham Young University. He has worked in the Video Game Software industry for the past 15 years as a Lead Character Designer, Art Director, Software/Game Designer and Creative Director. He is currently President of Attraction Studios and is working on a 3D platform for higher education learning. Abe lives in Highland, Utah with his wife and 4 great kids. He has served his community for the past (5) years as a Planning Commissioner for Highland City. He spends his spare time studying Economics, History, Government, Alternative Medicine, Science and Religious studies.


This entry was posted in Articles, Podcast. Bookmark the permalink.

40 Responses to Hollow Earth? March 2013 Mormon Chronicle Semi Regular Event Presentation by Abraham Day

  1. Tom says:

    Would have been nice to have the diagrams, maps, etc… or web links associated to these these posted with this. This presentation relies so much on what he is displaying that it loses a lot of value without them.

  2. Jim Johnson says:

    I do not believe the earth is hollow, but neither do I reject the idea as crack pottery. I simply do not have enough reliable information to choose a side in the discussion. I have long wondered what is under the Greenland ice pack, if anything. My problem with Antarctic theories is that the scriptures tell us that when the Ten Lost Tribes return, they are going to come from the north.

    A hollow earth is certainly no more preposterous from a scientific point of view than the Book of Mormon and stories contained in it. What could be less scientific than the resurrection of Jesus Christ, the Great Flood, or the First Vision?

    • Richard says:

      I agree with your thoughts. Many things in the Mormon Standard Works and teachings are not supported by science. But Mormonism accepts that all sources of truth will eventually agree. This should be considered in that light.

      I studied the Hollow Earth theory in high school and was fascinated by it. But it is neither clearly scriptural nor scientific, so I forgot about it for years.

      However, recently, for some unknown reason to me, I keep hearing about the Hollow Earth theory. Is something about to happen?

      I young guy that works for me recently read a book about it. He says the most convincing things to him is the D&C 133 statements that seem to support it, and the Benjamin F Johnson statement. I will quote BJF in a reply post.

      • Richard says:

        I can now see, as President George A. Smith afterwards said, that I was then really “the bosom friend and companion of the Prophet Joseph.” … Sometimes when at my house I asked him questions relating to past, present and future; some of his answers were taken by Brother William Clayton, who was then present with him, and are now recorded in the Doctrine and Covenants; … Other questions were asked when Brother Clayton was not present, one of which I will relate: I asked where the nine and a half tribes of Israel were.

        • Richard says:

          “Well,” said he [Joseph Smith], “you remember the old caldron or potash kettle you used to boil maple sap in for sugar, don’t you?” I said yes. “Well,” said he, “they are in the north pole in a concave just the shape of that kettle. And John the Revelator is with them, preparing them for their return.”

          –Benjamin F. Johnson, My Life’s Review page 109

  3. Marion Smith says:

    I want to see this in video. You cut off the end. I wanted to see how he envisioned the living earth. How can I learn more?

  4. Char says:

    I wish this article was fully printed in the written word. I do not do Mp3, podcasts, etc.
    I love reading about this subject! I read Admiral Richard E Byrd’s book on the Hollow Earth back in l962….. Never forgotten it!

  5. Eric Jorgensen says:

    C’mon guys, this kind of stuff really cheapens the value of the Mormon Chronicle. This article barely has anything to do with Mormonism and is based on wild that are neither scientific or spiritual.
    Before the benefit of the readers here, there are a many huge scientific arguments against a hollow earth. Here are a few of them: 1) a hollow sphere has no net gravitational force to hold inhabitants to the surface, nor are there any forces to explain why a light source would stay at the center. 2) The gravitational force on the outer surface cannot be explained by any plausible models based on a hollow earth, but is well explained by models based on a solid earth and backed up by countless confirming measurements.

    • Jim Johnson says:

      A lot of truth is not scientific in the sense that science doesn’t even know about it or even consider it when it does. Scientists are fallible human beings. And science itself is fallible.

    • Richard says:

      Please watch this:


      Tell me if Jan Lamprecht is credible in his claim that seismic data actually is more in support of a hollow earth than the present theory. And that the present theory of gravity is based on just one scientific experiment that honestly is not conclusive.

      It is well known that many in science have an agenda to push god-less evolution and discredit anything that does not support their agenda. Right?

  6. Eric Jorgensen says:

    3) The formation of a hollow planet has no credible theory behind it. 4) For a hollow planet to hold itself up against its own weight would require matter with entirely unknown, unobserved, and fantastical properties. 5) Geologist routinely perform measurements such as measuring vibrations from explosion and earthquakes that are well explained by solid earth models, and unexplainable with hollow earth models. 6) Simple thermodynamics tells us that an internal light source bright enough to grow plants would rapidly heat the internal surface of a hollow world to thousands of degrees. The reason this does not happen on the outer surface of the earth is that heat is radiated away to space. I could go on.

    • Jim Johnson says:

      No credible theory? Who decides what is and is not credible? Besides most scientists would not even consider such a theory to determine its credibility. And if they just proclaim it to be nonsense, that is not scientific. A good scientist remembers that scientists proclaimed that heavier than air flight was impossible clear up until the Wright brother flew. Dozens of other examples could be made of apologists for science making unscientific claim that cannot or have not been proven. Many scientists and scientifically inclined layman do not have a religion, so the make a religion out of science. The emphasize the successes of science and sweep the errors under the rug.

    • Jim Johnson says:

      Another thing. I do not believe the earth is hollow, but I don’t know it isn’t. Could you provide references for these studies that prove the hollow earth a bad theory? How great the distance from the outside of the sphere to the inner surface would vary according to how large the hollow part is, wouldn’t it? I suspect the idea is idiotic, but I don’t KNOW that it is idiotic because I don’t KNOW anything but my religion. Even scientists would have to admit that there is occasionally relevant information that they do not have. Making a pronouncment one way or the other without all the information is call “jumping the gun” or “going off half cocked.”

      • Chuck Testa says:

        Your position of ‘I don’t know but it could be’ is paradoxical. If it comes down to proof to show this theory isn’t valid(which there is plenty of, seismic testing and such and dozens of other tests disprove this in a heartbeat) then you havig a faith for religion stands in the hazard. Where is the proof for it? What tests and findings support it? Just because you feel something doesn’t mean it is there. In fact religion is easily disproved unless I is accepted upon by faith. I’m curious to know how you rationalize your belief. If it is just off faith then no one can touch you, that’s the easy way out. But if you critic the idea of rejecting something off faith then you are in paradox, juxtaposition, hypocritical state.

        • Jim Johnson says:

          Religion doesn’t need to be proven. The minute you prove it, it isn’t religion any more. I am surprised you don’t know that already.

          • Chuck Testa says:

            What kind of a statement is that? In no way did you answer the questions proposed. I shouldn’t be surprised as this is a typical cope out for most.
            Do you care to answer anything? I’d love to have a discussion :)

          • Jim Johnson says:

            You may know a lot about science, but you do not seem to know the first thing about religion, and nothing that is correct. All religion is about faith. In the Mormon faith we understand as official doctrine that faith is the substance of things that are not seen that are true. See Alma 32 and similar material in the writings of Paul in the New Testament. If you can see it as in the case of evidence or proof, or if it is not true, then it does not fit the definition of faith. If it is not faith, it is not religion. Religion is beliving in something that cannot be proven. Duh. We all believe whatever we want to, we use our agency to choose what we will believe. And God judges us by the desires of our heart. We are commanded to believe. If we don’t, we sin.

        • Jim Johnson says:

          I didn’t answer your questions because they are irrelevant. You asked for proof, tests, findings, etc. That is science, not religion. Asking such questions of religion betrays a fundamental ignorance of what religion is.

          Most folks have little faith. That is why we live in an increasingly secular world, and the power of Satan grows daily as our whole culture sinks into the pit.

        • D says:

          …as you ironically but predictably offer no proof, only assertions.

  7. Eric Jorgensen says:

    If these guys are going to claim that “science” is on their side, then they need to use *all* of science. A competent scientist knows that unless you can provide rational, non-falsified explanations for sound arguments against your theory, then your theory is probably wrong.

    Please focus on articles that have more spiritual substance and less superstition.

    • Jim Johnson says:

      What you say is true to a degree. But a lot of incompetent scientists make similar pronouncements without rational, non-falsified explanations. They just read something in a science book and the spread it around as if it were indisputable. It is common for them to do this even when there is a substantial minority of scientists that advocate a contradicting theory or model. Of course they make no mention of them. They proclaim their position to be the orthodox position and label every other position crackpot. A good example could be the so-called cholesterol myth, or the idea that salt is bad for you even if many studies have shown it is only bad for those predisposed to high blood pressure in males in a certain age group. Science needs a grain of salt too.

    • Jim Johnson says:

      I really like this blog. If the owner wants any readers he has to offer somethng for many different kinds of people. And he is the one who has to decide how much should be spiritual and how much should be flying saucers and little green Mormons from Mars.

    • marginalizedmormon says:

      I’m glad the operators of this blog are using their agency to write about what they find interesting.

      I’m glad they are not setting narrow parameters for what is or is not important or relevant.

      • The first time I heard about this, was about 1971. The Bishop that baptized me was a US air force pilot and while on our way to the LA Temple for a meeting. Told us a story about being stationed in this area. He was informed that this was never to be discussed even with others at the base.

        • Jim Johnson says:

          If I were a crackpot with a wild, overheated imagination, I would imagine that there is an entrance to the inside of the hollowearth under the Greenland icecap. And the ten lost tribes live there. And because they are planning to return with military might as suggested by the Doctrine and Covenants, they are sending forward scouts to observe preparatory to their return from the lands of the north. Of course, those scouts would have to have have air or space craft which could be shaped like flying saucers. But in my fantasical imagination, they are not green or gray. They look just like the rest of us except they are better looking. They are all Mormons who “evolved” separately from the LDS of our acquaintance.

          Just kidding.

          • D says:

            If I were a person who lacked an ability to have a discussion without using ad hominems as a cetnral pillar, I wouldn’t be taken seriously and my comments would be equivalent to noise.

    • D says:

      Scientists promote hypothesis all of the time. Your attempt to assign a validity to the discussion by unilaterally raising it to the level of theory is a rhetorical fallacy. A “competent scientist” certainly does not require “non falsified explanations” for hypothesis. It’s always pretty embarrassing when non-scientists attempt to inform the world what science and scientists require.

  8. Dara Smythe says:

    Is it possible to get transcripts of these podcasts? My pc does not work very well with podcasts and being able to read these as articles would be great–for me as well as others, I’m sure.

  9. Kam Fowler says:

    Anyone who wants to know a little more should refer to Admiral Richard E. Byrd and his discovery of the Hollow Earth.

  10. Marc says:

    One thing that 53 years here has taught me. That WE DON’T really know even a small portion of what is possible. Yet we assume it to be PROBABLE…merely because WE THINK…WE KNOW IT. George Q. Cannon said that Joesph Smith taught him…the Lord will never fault you for believing too much…it’s the unbelief that will get us in hot water. I continue to pray and meditate concerning things I hope to know. Since I have started giving the spirit an opportunity to TEACH ME…IT HAS! Boo and hiss to the arm of flesh! Praise God! As God our Father…keeps His promises. (Ether 4:12–16)

  11. Catherine Fredericksen says:

    When will the maps, diagrams, etc. be available as stated in a reply back in April? I found this site after being sent a link to the audio by LatterdayConservative.com. I would like to SEE what I am hearing about when I listen.

  12. Chuck says:

    I, too, was impressed with what was portrayed as “evidence” that the earth is hollow when I read about it in a book back in the 80’s. It seemed relevant to me because of scriptures; but also because of archeological findings, such as a mammoth frozen since antiquity in the far northern hemisphere with undigested tropical herbs in its mouth; photographs of light coming out of the poles of Mars and other planets; the northern lights; the two flights of Admiral Bird and his accidental discovery of tropics in the North, and his complete disorientation and confusion the first time it happened, etc. This book gave what appeared to me to be rational explanations regarding volcanos, inner atmosphere, and everything. Gravity is easily explained, as far as what is known.

  13. w. kennedy says:

    Google images NASA Worldwind Artic you should find an image that if you examine shows a circle starting about 1/2way up Greenland. This is a very gradual “funnel” I have looked for some time and this seems to actually show the real thing??? in color remember that humans are best not to know this we are inclined to shoot Bigfeet and put in zoos for example

  14. Blake says:

    If the scientific community just now discovered vast oceans under the crust, clearly they don’t have a clue what’s really down there. If God is sheltering people within the earth, be it the hollow earth or in underground cavities, that’s his call–and he could do it. Admiral Byrd may have been right.

  15. Taylor says:

    Any update on getting some visual on this podcast? I’m listening through it, trying to envision things, but so much of his presentation relies on his visual aids he used that the audio only version is almost useless.

  16. D says:

    Any hope for part 2?

  17. Clay Pendleton says:

    Where is it written that some of the House of Israel, I think when fleeing the Assyrians, went inside a mountain and it closed and others never saw them again?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

 characters available

Note: For further discussion of these articles and topics we invite you to join the LDS Freedom Forum.