Is hell an imaginary, nightmarish place that was thought up by people to threaten and scare others? Is there any credible support besides the Bible that suggests hell is a real place? Or is hell an "ace in the hole" for fire and brimstone preachers who only care about getting into pocketbooks of gullible parisheners??
One day I ran into an amazing newspaper article that had been translated from the Finnish into English. There is even a sound-recording on this webpage that you may listen to. It is the very sounds coming from hell itself. The researchers who made this discovery were not Christian or any other religion; they were evolutionits and atheists; communists, even, by their own admission. You can view this article and listen to the proof(sound-recordings) here:
http://www.av1611.org/hell.html
Often times people have died and come back to tell us their account in either heaven or hell. Research is being done on this subject even now as I write. Many credible researchers DO believe in the supernatural or paranormal. What do you believe?
I would like to point out that this story has been repeatedly proven to be false. Now, I'll probably be labeled as being biased against Christianity or whatever. That's not my intention, but I don't really care if that's the end result either. It drives me insane when people post these types of things as fact without doing the research. It is doubly irritating when those hoaxes are sent out not in email form or on Myspace but on ProgressiveU and other sites where users discuss real and serious issues.
Kudos for having faith and believing in Hell, but a little research goes a long way. You would have done far better, dear, to leave the article out and talk about Hell from your own perspective instead of relying on a ridiculous hoax. Your arguments loose far too much credibility when based on reports that have been investigated numerous times and have been proven false.
http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_cul4.htm
http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/d/drilltohellfacts.htm
http://www.snopes.com/religion/wellhell.htm
"If knowledge can create problems, it is not through ignorance that we can solve them." Isaac Asimov
"Fight for your opinions, but do not believe that they contain the whole truth, or the only truth." Charles Dana
So HELL -- A REAL PLACE; NO JOKE!!! turns out to be based on information that is not real and is a joke.
Who would have thought it? ... I would have guessed just about everybody. But that's me.
Cheers,
Darwin's Beagle
===
Evolution says that we share a common ancestor with a jackass. It does not give us license to act like one.
You speak of research. I have one thing to say; you claim I did none and yet I have known about this news article for months and tried to prove it true or false. You claim you proved it is a hoax as soon as I got the blog uploaded here. Funny how your so-called research took such a minute amount of time!!!
Since you positioned your post as a response to my post, I'll assume you are actually replying to me. In that case:
(1) I didn't speak of research.
(2) I didn't claim you did none.
(3) I didn't claim that I proved it was a hoax as soon as you uploaded it here.
Go back and read what I wrote.
However, now that you bring it up, I did confirm Fallon's websites with a Google search of my own using the search terms "Siberia" "drilling" and "Hell". I found many other sites that add to the evidence that the whole story is a hoax. Included in those websites is this one from the Young-Earth Creationist group Answers in Genesis. If even a whacko Christian Fundamentalist group like AiG can spot it for a hoax then pretty much everybody should.
You, on the other hand, still don't seem to get it ... even after months of "research".
Cheers,
Darwin's Beagle
===
Evolution says that we share a common ancestor with a jackass. It does not give us license to act like one.
Your post made it to this site at 4:54pm. I posted my reply at 6:04pm or somewhere thereabouts. That's a lot longer than a minute where I come from.
"If knowledge can create problems, it is not through ignorance that we can solve them." Isaac Asimov
"Fight for your opinions, but do not believe that they contain the whole truth, or the only truth." Charles Dana
and it refers to being a jackass.
Why, pray tell, am I a jackass? Because I pointed out the inaccuracy of the time frame given? Because I requested you do research before posting hoaxes as fact?
I'm not going to argue with you. It's pointless.
"If knowledge can create problems, it is not through ignorance that we can solve them." Isaac Asimov
"Fight for your opinions, but do not believe that they contain the whole truth, or the only truth." Charles Dana
You are not a jackass. And you have have convinced me of the fact that my "article" is indeed a fake. I congratulate you.
The links you gave do say that some of this is an urban legend in their opinions. While the "bat" was fabricated, no conclusive evidence was given that the core part of the story ever happened. (I read the entire pages you cited above) They were chasing a long trail of news articles in a remote part of the world.
In order to prove this news article wrong, (not the bat story), I would need more credible sources than what you provided in the above three links.
I cannot say with certainty whether this story is true or false. I am simply asking what others believe here.
As for the research that you suggest I did not do; you are wrong. I looked into it to see if I could prove it wrong or not and came up empty. No absolute proof exists to discredit the article.
And thanks ever so much for congratulating me on my faith in hell. I will certainly take that to heart. Got lemons dear??
"The links you gave do say that some of this is an urban legend in their opinions. While the "bat" was fabricated, no conclusive evidence was given that the core part of the story ever happened. (I read the entire pages you cited above) They were chasing a long trail of news articles in a remote part of the world."
The importance of that "long trail of news articles" is of importance here for the simple fact that this story has been passed around as fact when that's just not show. Following that "long trail of news articles" to the original source is how one goes about finding out where the story originated and hearing the account from that original source.
"In order to prove this news article wrong, (not the bat story), I would need more credible sources than what you provided in the above three links."
I gave you links, two of which traced the story back through all of it's wonderful little manifestations, but that was not credible enough for you. Okay. I can handle that. Here's more for you.
At the time this story originated, scientists were drilling in the Kola Peninsula of Russia. A quick search of the Kola Peninsula drilling will back up the already given research that this "Hole to Hell" is nothing more than a fabricated hoax. They didn't retrieve any sounds from hell, they didn't refuse to drill because they were scared, they didn't hit 2000 degree temperatures, they didn't break through to hell.
What did they actually find? Temperatures of 179 degrees at 49,000 ft, and mud boiling with hydrogen gas.
Why did they stop drilling? They didn't have equipment able to take the heat that was expected at further depths. The hole has not been closed back up. They're still using it for research purposes today.
http://asuwlink.uwyo.edu/~seismic/kola/
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2002EGSGA..27.3349L
http://www.damninteresting.com/?p=567
"I cannot say with certainty whether this story is true or false. I am simply asking what others believe here."
My issue with this is that you said "It is the very sounds coming from hell itself." and
"You can view this article and listen to the proof(sound-recordings) here"
If you were simply asking what others believe, you would not have mentioned that the sound recordings were proof of hell's existence.
"As for the research that you suggest I did not do; you are wrong. I looked into it to see if I could prove it wrong or not and came up empty. No absolute proof exists to discredit the article."
And yet you still posted it as proof and that is where the problem lies. As I said in my original post, had you stayed away from posting the hoax and merely gave your position and asked others, there wouldn't have been a problem.
"If knowledge can create problems, it is not through ignorance that we can solve them." Isaac Asimov
"Fight for your opinions, but do not believe that they contain the whole truth, or the only truth." Charles Dana
"If you were simply asking what others believe, you would not have mentioned that the sound recordings were proof of hell's existence."
True. My bad.
Can anyone prove (this is the operative word), that the recording is a fake? Can anyone prove (theres that word again) that this tape is not real and that the original was recorded as noted in the article? Can anyone prove (oh my 3 times now for that bad word) that the tape has been inspected, analyzed and proven to be anything other than what it says? If so, where is the proof. Not beliefs that it is fake, not theory that it is fake, but proof!!!
This should be simple for the expert panel we have here that like to try and discredit so many things.
How about this... you or smarterthantheaveragebear do the research? I've already checked it out. It was proven to be a fake. A few minutes doing some research into the recording will show that.
"If knowledge can create problems, it is not through ignorance that we can solve them." Isaac Asimov
"Fight for your opinions, but do not believe that they contain the whole truth, or the only truth." Charles Dana
anytime I make a statement of claim or post a belief, I am required to post my evidence or proof. (if you don't believe this just check the number of times that I, or anyone else for that matter, have been told to show my proof or to prove my statement) Yet when you are asked to show proof that something is a fake (as I said no links where people say it must be or that they believe it is, but proof) you refuse to do so. Any forensic scientist can tell by a audio analysis of the original if it was actually made within the time frame claimed. They can tell from the echo's if it was recorded below ground. They can split the audio and remove all excess noise to see what is actually being said, etc. Not only that, but the type of celluloid that was used in the manufacture of the tape (original tape) will tell them within a very narrow period of time when it was made.
You can't fit everyone into the same box based on experiences with other users. It doesn't work that way and we don't all fit. I might ask you to do the research when you claim something as fact, but I will also do that research on my own if I haven't already. And many of those you have had encounters with in the past are just as willing to give the facts and research behind their position on a given issue. It's simply a matter of how those individuals are approached.
I have already done the research and made a decision based on that in this instance and am asking you to do so before you form an opinion on the merits of the tape. I've sent along quite a bit of information that proves the story is a hoax. Why then if the story is a hoax would the tape that is tagged to that story be real? Analysis of the tape has been performed as well. I've checked that out as well.
But, why should I continue sending along what I have when I'm getting nothing in return? I'm being asked to provide proof that the tape is a fake, but you are not trying to prove to me that it is real, you're simply telling me you don't buy my research without showing me what you have.
I don't operate that way. I expect everyone to do their own research, investigation, etc just the same as I do mine. I have nothing that tells me that you have done so. Why continue sending along what I have when it's your responsibility to find the answers since it is you with the question?
"If knowledge can create problems, it is not through ignorance that we can solve them." Isaac Asimov
"Fight for your opinions, but do not believe that they contain the whole truth, or the only truth." Charles Dana
I "Did Not" claim it was real, I asked for you or Darwin to provide the proof that it was a fake. Since neither of you have been able to do so, I must understand that you cannot, so the point of the tape being real or fake is a point that cannot be proven. You make claims and do not back them up. As I said, I did not say it was real. Evidently you do not read posts very well, or do not comprehend them. Much the same as the terms of service you want to enforce.
These are the terms of service posted for this site. You will remember you said something about calling names. Show me in the Terms of Service, and if it is there check out Darwins heading in this post....
Terms and Conditions of Use / Privacy Policy
Welcome to ProgressiveU.org ("Site"). Because we want this Site to be a space where you and your peers feel comfortable expressing your ideas sharing and opinions, we ask you to abide by a few policies. In return, we make certain promises to you about what you can expect from us.
These Terms of Use set forth the conditions for your use of this Site, including our Privacy Policy. By using this Site, you agree to be legally bound by and comply with them. If you are under eighteen, then you and your parent or legal guardian acting on your behalf are deemed to have consented to these Terms of Use when you use our Site. If you do not agree to comply with these Terms of Use, you are not authorized to use this Site.
ProgressiveU.org ("ProgressiveU," "we" or "us") may modify these Terms of Use in the future, so please check this page regularly. If you continue to use the Site after we post a change, we understand that you agree to the new terms.
Blog Posts, Comments, and Forums
Our Site includes blog posts, comments, forums, and other messaging features (collectively, "blogs") that allow you to communicate with other visitors to the Site. Messages distributed through the blogs on the Site represent the views of participants and visitors, and not those of ProgressiveU.
The content you post on the Site is not private or confidential. Please read our privacy policy for advice on keeping your information and personal account safe. By posting content on the Site, you grant us a non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free unrestricted license (with the right to sub-license) to reproduce, modify, translate, transmit, or distribute in whole or in part any message file, data or other communication you post on the bulletin boards in any form now known or later developed.
We welcome active debate but in order to ensure a safe and civil online environment, ProgressiveU reserves the right to remove any content you post on the Site or terminate your participation. To maintain that safe and civil environment, you agree not to upload, post, display, distribute, transmit or otherwise publish on the Site any material that:
(1) is libelous, obscene, pornographic, harassing, or abusive;
(2) is violent, hateful, or threatening to anyone or any group;
(3) infringes any copyright, trademark, trade secret or other proprietary right of another;
(4) violates anyone's right of privacy or publicity or is otherwise illegal;
(5) contains code that can disrupt or damage the Site, its underlying software or any hardware or computer equipment, including viruses, bugs, worms, or trojan horses; or
(6) sells or promotes any products or services.
You may not use this Site while impersonating any other person or entity, to collect or use any information about other participants for any purpose, or to distribute chain letters, junk mail, "spam" solicitations, commercial advertising, or other bulk communications of any kind.
Copyright
The content on this Site is licensed under a Creative Commons License, except where otherwise noted.
Except for the foregoing, you may not copy, distribute, transmit, display, modify, create derivative works from, enter into a database, or in any way exploit any existing part of our Site, including computer programs and other coding.
Disclaimers
Our Site is available "as is" and "as available." We do not warrant that the Site will be uninterrupted or error-free. There may be delays, omissions, interruptions and inaccuracies in materials available through our Site. We do not make any representations or warranties about the accuracy, completeness, timeliness or reliability of any statement or information displayed or distributed on the Site or available through links on the Site. We reserve the right to correct any errors or omissions in the Site. If you rely on our Site and any materials available through it, you do so solely at your own risk.
To the maximum extent permitted under law, we deny all express or implied warranties with respect to the Site or any information that is available through the Site, including without limitation fitness for a particular purpose.
Although we intend to take reasonable steps to prevent the introduction of destructive materials to our Site, such as viruses, worms, and "trojan horses," we do not guarantee or warrant that our Site or materials that may be downloaded from our Site are free from such destructive features. We are not liable for any damages or harm attributable to such features.
Limitation of Liability
We and our officers, directors, and employees are not liable for any claim, loss or injury based on errors, omissions, interruptions or inaccuracies in our Site, including claims, loss or injury that result from your breach of any provision in these terms of use.
We are not liable for any direct, indirect, incidental, consequential, special, punitive, or exemplary damages (including lost revenues or profits, loss of business, or loss of data) arising out of or in connection with our Site, Site services, Site materials, or these terms of use, regardless of whether such liability is based in tort, contract or otherwise. Some states do not allow the limitation of liability for these kinds of damages, so these limitations or exclusions may not apply to you.
Indemnification
You agree to indemnify us against all losses, expenses, damages and costs, including reasonable attorneys' fees, we incur as a result of your violation of this Agreement. We have the right, but not the obligation, to take over the exclusive defense of any claim for which we are entitled to indemnification. You agree to provide us with whatever cooperation we reasonably request.
Termination
We reserve the right to terminate the Site and its Terms of Use at any time without notice for any reason, including your violation of any of the provisions of the Terms of Use. The Limitation of Liability and Governing Law Sections of these Terms of Use, and the restrictions imposed on you with respect to material you download from the Site survive any such termination, as does your license to ProgressiveU of any content you provide to us on the Site.
Governing Law
These Terms of Use are governed by the laws of the State of California applicable to contracts made and performed there without regard to its conflicts of law principles.
Severability
If any provision of these Terms of Use is deemed unlawful, void or for any reason unenforceable, then that provision will be considered severed and will not affect the validity and enforceability of any remaining provisions.
PRIVACY POLICY
ProgressiveU is committed to maintaining the privacy of personal information you provide to us when you use our Site. This Privacy Policy describes how we collect and use your information. This Privacy Policy is part of the Terms of Use, which you consent to when you use our Site.
Who Can Participate?
You must be fourteen years of age or older to register or post content on this Site. We do not knowingly collect any information from anyone under age fourteen.
Collection of Your Personal Information
ProgressiveU collects personal information from you when you register or participate in a ProgressiveU contest, such as your name, gender, age, certain address information (city, state and country), email address, college or university, topics of interest to you, and a short bio about yourself ("Personal Information"). We also ask you to respond to questions about your opinions and preferences from time to time as well as surveys about the Site. Your bio is available to all Site users.
We collect your Personal Information so that we can learn who is participating, to enable us to create diverse communities for online discussions. It also helps us evaluate whether this Site is doing its job: giving you access to news about current events and the tools you need to analyze what you read and take advantage of digital media. We may also use your email address to contact you directly with information such as newsletters.
Anonymous Information
We may also collect information about Site users that is not associated with any information that identifies you to help us evaluate how the Site is used, to facilitate use of the Site, to analyze user interests, and for systems administration purposes. This type of information includes the user's IP address, browser type, and Site usage data, such as what pages are visited and time intervals between Site visits and individual web page visits ("Anonymous Information").
ProgressiveU collects Anonymous Information by using "cookies." A cookie is a string of information that is sent by a web site and stored temporarily in your computer's memory. Although you are not required to accept the use of cookies, your participation in the Site will be easier if you have not disabled the cookie technology on your browser.
Sharing With Third Parties
We treat your contact information as private and confidential. We will not provide your contact information to any other organization unless you specifically authorize us to do so.
We treat your name, city, state, and comments as public information. We may, for example, make your comments along with your city, state, and country available to the press and public online.
We will send you updates by e-mail. We will do our best to respect your time and attention. You can remove yourself from the mailing list at any time.
Security
We store your Personal Information and Anonymous Information in a secure manner and safeguard it from unauthorized access in a secure, restricted-access database. However, no data transmitted over the Internet can be guaranteed to be 100% secure. Therefore, you provide us with your Personal Information and use our Site at your own risk.
Keeping your information secure is also your responsibility. You should take action to protect your anonymity when you use this Site. Please do not share your password with anyone and change it when prompted by us. After you have finished using the Site, log off and exit your browser so that no unauthorized persons can use the Site with your name and account information. When you post messages, do not give your full name, telephone number, or home address. Keep identifying information to a minimum. Please notify us immediately at info@progressiveu.org if you suspect that anyone may have gained unauthorized access to your Personal Information or account.
Review and Update Your Personal Information
Please contact ProgressiveU at info@progressiveu.org or at the address listed below with respect to any inquiries about our Privacy Policy, our Site, or if you wish to update, correct, or delete any information you have provided to us either online or offline. If you have registered on the Site you may change certain Personal Information you have provided to us by accessing the My Account portion of our Site. If you request any changes that cannot be made in the Preferences section of our Site, we will contact you by email to confirm those changes.
ProgressiveU.org
3182 Campus Drive
San Mateo, CA 94403-3123
http://www.progressiveu.org or info@progressiveu.org
Links to Other Web Sites
We may make content or services from other web sites available to you from links located on our Site. When you click on these links, you are leaving our Site for others that are governed by their own terms of use and privacy policies. Please read the terms of use and privacy policies of third-party sites that you visit. We have no control over these other sites or their content. Except for information or services clearly identified as being supplied by ProgressiveU, we do not in any way review, operate, or control any material, information, products or services on other sites. Because we are not responsible for and cannot control these outside resources or their content, you should direct any concerns regarding a linked site to the administrator or webmaster of that site.
"This should be simple for the expert panel we have here that like to try and discredit so many things."
The term discredit, as per it's definition, implies that you wish us to give cause for disbelief. The fact that you wish us to discredit the tape leads me to believe that you would like us to provide proof that the tape is a fake in order to disprove something that you find to be real.
Now, as to the ToS:
(1) is libelous, obscene, pornographic, harassing, or abusive.
Name calling is abusive. If you would like, I will gladly remove the header, where DB called smarterthantheaveragebear a dweeb, where she attacked him back in response to that and where I was presumably called a jackass. I can then go on to your blog postings and remove those that call users flakes, those that accuse others of having some disease, etc. Since I did not remove those other blog postings from you or smarterthantheaveragebear's replies here that violated the ToS, I also did not remove DB's. Since I did not remove yours earlier or hers now, I saw no point in removing his. Would you like me to remedy that now and remove them all or would you like to continue as rational adults, stop name calling and stop pointing out the name calling of others when you and others are just as guilty of that same transgression?
Whatever your decision, I will not argue with you.
"If knowledge can create problems, it is not through ignorance that we can solve them." Isaac Asimov
"Fight for your opinions, but do not believe that they contain the whole truth, or the only truth." Charles Dana
you can argue semantics if you want. And going that route you could also note that people call others names in Loving ways also, in that case, you need to remove friend, buddy, pal, homey etc. When a personal attack is made in a derogatory manner, directly to the person speaking to, that is abusive. A person making notes in a general sense without singling out individuals, you would be hard pressed to ascertain that anyone in particular was the target. If I said that Darwin's Beagle was a ***************, in any post then I would be abusive. I may have thought it, but I didn't post it, much as I am sure that he, and you, have thought unkind thoughts of me.
Do we now have to cope with the thought police?
I saw 2 posts that you put up that seemed to have the sole purpose of insulting 2 progressiveU members. I wouldn't talk.
Fundamentalist's like SAVED and smarterthantheaveragebear take a lot of comfort in the selective use of the terms "prove" and "proof". What they want to believe is obviously true unless it can be shown to absolute certainty that it is false. What they don't want to believe is obviously false unless it can be shown to absolute certainty that it is true.
This comes in very handy since virtually nothing can be shown to be true or false to absolute certainty. For instance, neither SAVED nor smarterthantheaveragebear can show to absolute certainty that the Flying Spaghetti Monster isn't at this very moment looking over their shoulder.
The mere fact that something cannot be shown to absolute certainty to be false doesn't mean that it is true, or even REASONABLE TO BELIEVE that it is true.
SAVED is trying to claim that unless we can disprove the "recording from hell" then it is reasonable to believe that it is an actual recording from hell. Let's take a look to see if that is really so.
The story first started making waves in the early 1990's when it was broadcast on the Trinity Broadcasting Network (TBN). TBN is a fundamentalist Christian network. TBN evidently got the story from Texas evangelist R. W. Schambach. Schambach got the story from what has been described in some sources as a Finnish Scientific Journal and by others as "a well-respected Finnish Newspaper". Both sources agree that the name of the Journal/Newspaper is "Ammennusastia".
When the website truthorfiction.com traced the story back to that point they found that Ammennusastia is neither a scientific journal or a newspaper. It is a monthly newsletter for Finnish Christians.
The people there claimed they got the story from a "major news article" written in the newspaper Etela Sournen. It turned out that it was NOT a major article. It was in a letter-to-the-editor section.
The man who wrote the letter got the story from a newsletter written by Finnish missionaries called Vaeltajat. They in turn got the story from one of their readers who claimed to have gotten it from a newsletter written by Jewish Christians from California. That was as far as truthorfiction.com could trace the origin of the story.
So already it is a story whose origin is very murky. It is classical Urban Myth material already.
So, what WAS the story? Well, I doubt if it comes as a surprise to much of anyone that the story has several versions. Here are the details that are included in most versions of the story:
A geological group in Siberia drilled a deep hole 14.4 kilometers (9 miles) into the earth's crust. At that point the drill bit acts strangely suggesting that they had hit a hollow cavity.
A measurement made at the tip of the drill bit showed the temperature to be about 2000 degrees Fahrenheit. The geologists lower a special microphone designed to listen for the movement of tectonic plates down the hole. There to everybody's surprise they hear the voices of several million people crying out in agony.
The conclusion of Dr. Azzacov, the project manager of the team, is that the deep core of the earth is hollow, and they have recorded the sounds of people in hell. The link that smarterthantheaveragebear left above is a link that has that recording.
So is that a story that is reasonable to believe? Was such a hole ever drilled? Well, sort of ... in Russia's Kola penninsula the deepest hole ever drilled into the Earth's crust was made. It went down 12 kilometers (not 14.4). It did not hit any hollow cavern at that depth. The scientists were surprised at the heat at that depth ... 180 degrees Fahrenheit (not 2000 degrees).
Are there things about the story that don't ring true? Er ... A WHOLE BUNCH. (1) They drilled down 9 miles and declared the earth to be a hollow ball?? The Earth is over 4000 miles in diameter. A shell 9 miles thick cannot possibly have the mass the Earth has. It cannot possibly transmit seismic waves the way the Earth does during earthquakes. It cannot possibly have been created through accretion of celestial bodies the way it is thought to have been formed. It's eggshell-like nature could not possibly have survived a major hit from a meteor.
(2) Voices from hell??? These are supposed to be tormented souls. Do they talk using ordinary sound waves like we do?
(3) No one can validate the existence of a Dr. Azzacov.
(4) Such a sensitive microphone would be immediately melted at 2000 degrees even with the best cooling technology we have. Furthermore, getting the sensitive microphone to the bottom of a 14.4 kilometer hole without destroying it by banging it on the sides of the hole first would be a major technological feat as well.
OK, what about the recording? Is that not evidence for Hell? I've listened to the recording. To me it sounds a lot like the neighborhood kids playing and acting up around our neighborhood pool. Other websites have likened the non-descript noise as to that coming from a busy bar. If you are at all interested I would encourage you to listen to it and see what you think.
So is it reasonable at all to believe the story? To determine that you need to ask yourself which is more likely ... That a group of geologists drilled down 9 miles into the earth and recorded the sounds of millions of actual people writhing in the agony of eternal damnation; or the story - with its murky provenance, non-verifiable information, details that make no sense with what we know - is an urban legend with a faked recording.
I think the answer is so obvious I do not need to tell you what I think.
Cheers,
Darwin's Beagle
===
Evolution says that we share a common ancestor with a jackass. It does not give us license to act like one.
** Subject line edited by Fallon.
...is that people post stuff like this up on this site and yet still expect the rest of us to take them seriously.
In the future, might I suggest that you at least take the time to look up your stories on one of the internet hoax-busting websites. SNOPES is my personal favorite.
http://www.snopes.com/
Legend: Scientists drilling in Siberia went too far and ended up punching a hole through to Hell, where the screams of the damned drifted up to them.
Status: False.
Origins: In 1984, an article about an experimental well in Russia's Kola Peninsula appeared in Scientific American. The Kola well reached 12 kilometers into the ground, where scientists encountered rare rock formations, flows of gas and water, and temperatures up to 180°.
...
Those who did the actual drilling of this very real well did not break through to a hollow centre, and certainly no piteous screams of the damned were heard. That part — all of it — was pure embellishment added after this real event was turned into a legend.
...
Though it's impossible to pinpoint when the news story about a well in Russia transformed into a story about scientists breaking into Hell or who was responsible for that transformation, we do know that in 1989 the Trinity Broadcasting Network (TBN) aired a "Scientists Discover Hell" story and placed the event as happening in the Kola Peninsula. A Norwegian schoolteacher visiting California heard that broadcast and took the story back to Norway with him. He then mailed it to a Christian magazine in Finland. In the form of a letter from a reader, it reached a Finnish missionaries newsletter. From there it returned to the United States, reaching both the TBN people and other evangelists who then claimed they had gotten it from a respected Finnish scientific journal.
In the spring of 1990, the legend as we now know it appeared in both Praise The Lord (February) and Midnight Cry (April). Debunkings of it showed up in Christianity Today (July) and Biblical Archaeology Review (November). Even so, the Weekly World News ran the story in 1992, this time setting it in Alaska and claiming thirteen oil rig workers were killed when the Devil came roaring up out of the ground.
You can't beat that for embellishment.
Read the full article, here...
http://www.snopes.com/religion/wellhell.htm
percivale
-------------------------
"Vi Veri Vniversum Vivus Vici." ~ V.