Category talk:Hollow Earth

= Discussion About the Category =

Hollow Earth Theory is Pseudoscience?
Based on arbitration and clarification on same, the Pseudoscience category, which has been applied to this category, requires a reliable source indicating that it is in fact pseudoscience to sustain its application. Can you point out some reliable source that will settle the matter? If not, we'll need to remove the Pseudoscience category tag from this category. Thank you.-- self-ref (nagasiva yronwode) (talk) 23:07, 9 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Start here. &mdash; Scientizzle 00:06, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't understand why you think this is a reliable source. The author of that site is a philosopher, not a scientist. Are any of the sources he uses for that web pages reliable sources indicating that the Hollow Earth theory is pseudoscience? Martin Gardner, whose text i love, isn't a scientist, he's a mathematician and author. Could you explain your logic? Also, is this questionable science? Is it just an alternative theoretical formulation? If either of these two we should not, by PSCI, label it pseudoscience. How does a thing qualify as 'obvious pseudoscience'? What demosntrates this obviousness? Thanks.-- self-ref (nagasiva yronwode) (talk) 01:42, 10 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Please see PSCI. Qualifies under obvious pseudoscience.   Orange Marlin  Talk• Contributions 00:45, 10 October 2008 (UTC)