From the very beginning, the Hollow Earth theory has had strong ties to the Arctic. This is where everybody expected to find a gigantic hole which leads through to the centre of the Earth. People like Marshall Gardner, William Reed and many others have focused almost exclusively on this aspect. Everybody says the Arctic is well-traveled. There may be veritable ‘highways’ into and out of the Arctic, but that hardly means anything. Logistics alone dictates that access to the Arctic must be determined by the location of air fields, ports, availability of fuel, the range of aircraft and weather.


Caves have been hidden for centuries in well-populated areas. Just look at the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls. If there is anything unusual in the Arctic and the Antarctic, then it must lie some distance from the well-traveled paths. The Arctic (and Antarctica too) is one and a half times the size of the USA.


Do you realize how big an area that is? Then there is the bad weather which exists there – the clouds, the fog, the white-outs. It would take you years to criss-cross it in detail with an aircraft. Only Armies, Navies and Air Forces can muster the necessary time, money, personnel and equipment for such a task. The US, Canadian and Russian military must indeed know every nook and cranny of the Arctic because of the Cold War. In their extensive preparations for fighting World War III across the Arctic only they know what’s really up there.


The silence may mean there’s nothing up there. But it could also mean they just do not want to tell us – on government orders – since they are controlled by politicians. If there is something there which they do not want us to know about, and if that thing is small enough, we could easily miss it. If it is not on a map, then no one is going to bother looking for it. Look at a map of Arctic and you will see an enormous expanse of islandless ocean. I think the skeptical case is not as solid as many might think.

The Open Polar Sea

(The history of Arctic exploration is given and reasons discussed why the far north was thought by many for a long time to be warmer than expected.)


From latitude 70 degrees northwards, there is a very large discrepancy between theoretical and observed temperatures. Meteorologists explain this by saying that warm air from the equator blows to the polar regions where the relatively warm air descends. This is very probably the answer. Among the early ‘explanations given as to why the North Pole might harbor an iceless sea was based on the idea that the polar regions actually receive more sunlight than lower latitudes. We now know that it’s not just a case of how much sunlight the polar regions receive, but also the angle at which it strikes. The ice and snow is highly reflective and much of the heat is radiated back into space. The extra hours of sunlight do not therefore account for the higher temperatures in the Arctic. The suggestion that equatorial air is the cause of the greater Arctic warmth is much more sensible.

In pondering the issue I am not sure if one could expect warm winds from an inner Earth even if it did have some sort of tropical climate. One just wouldn’t know what to expect regarding heat inside a Hollow Earth. So it is a bit much to just assume it has such a climate. But even if it did, wouldn’t the air cool down as it traveled along a long tunnel to the surface of the Earth? Wouldn’t such a tunnel lie in total darkness, and would that not cool down the air so much more?

The Arctic Ocean is not always frozen solid. Even explorers like Peary, who traveled when the ice was at its hardest, happened upon very large areas of open water. He believed it stretched from the northernmost point of Greenland, Cape Jessup westwards to Crocker Land. This is a considerable distance. I have found nothing which causes me to think that any of this open water is linked to a Hollow Earth.

There is another line of thinking which might help to explain the idea of the Open Polar sea. It has been suggested by a number of scientists and thinkers that perhaps the Arctic was warmer in past centuries. There seems to be some very convincing evidence that indeed the climate was much milder near Cape Farewell in Greenland where the original settlement took place. The soil in this region is now frozen solid all year round. But in those days it was not frozen. The coffins were penetrated by a thick mass of plant roots which indicates that the soil temperature was above freezing. O. Pettersson concluded that ice did not come down as far south in those days as it does now. If the climate really was milder in those times, it would help to explain Christopher Columbus’s original observations and thoughts. It might help to explain why the Open Polar sea had support for so long.

When all the factors are taken into consideration, I favor the idea that the heat in the polar regions is largely equatorial in origin. Even if an Inner Earth were warm, I cannot see how it could have a great effect on Arctic temperatures. It seems to me that at best hot air from inside a Hollow Earth would only be a minor contributing factor to Arctic heat. Hollow Earthers stated that because the temperatures in the Arctic were higher than predicted, therefore the Inner Earth must be quite warm. However, even under the most favorable assumptions, Arctic heat can be accounted for adequately by warm air from the equator, hence the original assumption is no longer valid. At this stage, I think it would be wise to conclude that there is no overwhelming evidence pointing to whether the Inner Earth is hot or cold. The Open Polar sea is of no further use to us in our quest, and we must now seek clues elsewhere.

The Ozone Holes

Whenever I mention the idea of Polar Holes to anyone, they immediately wonder if the Ozone holes are related to a Hollow Earth. The subject of the Ozone holes is however extremely complex. It is deeply interwoven with the subject of atmospheric physics. My real interest in the Ozone holes was to see if they could be useful in determining the location of any Polar Holes which may or may not exist. The problem is that the Ozone holes cover an enormous area and are therefore of no use in pin-pointing something so small. They also move around considerably.

Along with the Ozone holes, I was also interested in the electric currents which flow high in the polar atmosphere. These electric currents move around and have been measured. I wondered if they too had a link with Polar Holes. I found the Ozone holes, the electric currents, and the Auroral Oval to be a large scale phenomena. They are very mobile, and it is extremely difficult to see how they could be used to pinpoint something much smaller like Polar Holes. So I did not take these researches further.

The Mini Offset-Hole Proposal

From the earliest days of this study I had been wondering how easily a small hole could be hidden up in the Arctic, especially if its location had no special significance. Firstly, a small hole is much easier to ‘hide’ and much harder to find. If it is small enough, its effects on the weather would be minimal. A small hole might exhibit no special characteristics which would make it stand out on satellite images.

What would happen to a polar explorer who is sledding across the ice in the vicinity of such a feature? If an explorer were to wander into it, would he necessarily end up going right into it? He might wander partly into this depression. If the feature is small, he will not even detect it. He may sledge into and out of it during the course of a day or two. He would only notice the change in slope if he were still heading downward into the hole at the time that he took a sextant reading. If he takes a sextant reading while deep inside the depression, he will immediately think he has wandered off course.


He will think he is further north (or south) than he really is. He may try to correct for it by setting a more southerly (or northerly) course away from the tunnel itself. Such events as these might result in a certain amount of ‘camouflage’ which will keep many explorers and travelers out of the hole because they will think they’ve made some navigational error.

If, as Hollow Earthers maintained, there is warm(er) air and water emanating from inside a Hollow Earth, and if this air does indeed cause some (but not all) polyanas and the melting of sea ice, then we are left with an interesting possibility. We might be left with a ‘hole-in-the-sea’ just like that old Eskimo legend states. Such an ice-free hole could be sailed upon. Our Eskimo could indeed paddle into it in his kayak, and he could go fishing in it. But such a hole would be impassable to the polar explorers who used sledges.


Either the entire hole would consist of open water, or the ice would be thinner and more dangerous than is normally the case. In either case, the warmer weather emanating from the hole itself would make it impassable. If such were the case, then no normal land-based expedition could wander into it. Its anomalous curvature would never be discovered for the simple reason that nobody could enter it accidentally. Its true nature would only be discovered by those who brought canoes along with them, or more likely, by those who traveled through the air.


Hollow Earthers have long been suspicious of events in the Arctic and the Antarctic. In spite of their scrutiny however, they found virtually nothing of substance to indicate that gigantic Polar Holes exist. It seemed quite possible to me that a Polar Hole could lie anywhere in the Arctic and it could be quite small. Finding it might be very difficult indeed. The ‘Mini-Offset-Polar-Hole’ idea seemed quite promising – at least in theory. It also changes the Polar Hole equation. It makes things much more difficult. Yet it alone may be the solution to a myriad of scientific anomalies which I have raised.