[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   

File: 1.10 MB, 1341x1318, scientists in shambles .png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16137023 No.16137023 [Reply] [Original]

Why do scientists brazenly maintain this antiquated model of Earth's core?

>> No.16137047

Cause it looks like a jawbreaker and those are delicious.

>> No.16137049

its an approximation, like bohr's atom. It isnt wrong, just not precise

>> No.16137080

Hollow earth is such fascinating theory - a whole new world, ecosystem, maybe even civilization. Far superior to flat earth which is just thinly veiled religious screeching. Hollow earthers are much more trustworthy because they don't have ulterior motives and simply want to have fun.

>> No.16137249

Fixed overhead inner sun gets old real fast though.

>> No.16137268

What do you mean? I don't understand your image.

>> No.16137271

yeah i guess there is a massive ocean of liquid metal near the core

>> No.16137273

That's what the official Science(tm) says. The official narrative is that the inner core is solid but the outer core is liquid metal, mostly iron and nickel: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth%27s_outer_core

So what's the contention?

>> No.16137630

The ocean they are talking about isn't the outer liquid core.
>This underground water supply rests some 400 miles (700 km) beneath our feet. Notably, this find could help explain the origin of our planet's water. Specifically, it may help us determine where Earth's seas came from.
>It is important to note that the water resides inside a blue rock called "ringwoodite." This rock exists in the mantle of our planet, which is the layer of hot rock between Earth's surface and its core. This means that the newly discovered "ocean" isn't a vast reservoir of churning blue water. Instead, the water is contained (trapped) in the molecular structure of minerals that is found within Earth's mantle rock.

>> No.16137636

Serious question: why doesn’t the water in the ocean work its way through cracks down to the inside of the earth?

>> No.16137723

Theres water inside the earth, below the ocean.
Basically water doesnt like to be there, because it turns into steam, and it tries to work its way up since gas flows up.

>> No.16138950
File: 258 KB, 600x477, 1713400505412117.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>waltuh, wah uh..

>> No.16138958

water is supercritical at that point, it doesn't turn into steam

>> No.16139113

It still tries to find its way up, even by random convection it does, same as natural gas.

>> No.16139561

it most certainly does. Rocks have large faults and microscopic fractures, cavities and pores, and water seeps through them, everywhere, including deep into the crust, waaaaay the fuck down there, far below the ocean.
Not just that those rocks then dive into the mantle, when the oceanic crust is subducted below continental crust, and that water, in those rocks, gets dragged down with it. As a matter of fact, there are metamorphic rocks that can only form under those circumstances of tremendous pressure, heat, and water.
- a geologist :)

>> No.16139563

>The ocean
it's not an ocean like the surface ocean, it's just a huge amount of water locked in the rocks.

>> No.16139565

Though the diagram has no scale to verify the dimensions, structure-wise, that is how the core is layered, yes. (as best as we can tell with our instrumentation, obviously)

>> No.16139864

They know they can say whatever they want about the Earth core because they know for certain that they will never been disproved since the deepest boreholes don't even go down 15 miles.

>> No.16139887

If it was wrong you could analyze the seismic data yourself and do the math

>> No.16139898

they literally say it in the title, ocean NEAR earth's core. the title and underground "oceans" are brainrot

>> No.16141357

>you could analyze the seismic data
thats just a fallacy which has long since been disproved

>> No.16141427

Read Baxter's hard sci-fi books Ark and Flood. He used the early papers predicting the sub crustal ocean in Flood to get enough sea level rise for the plot. All the melted ice on Earth only gave him about 1/4 the sea level rise the plot needed so in his story earthquakes crack the crust and allow the sub crustal ocean to leak to the surface and give us 400+ feet of sea level rise.

>> No.16141438

>Theres water inside the earth, below the ocean.
Water dissolving and water removing
There is water at the bottom of the ocean
Under the water, carry the water
Remove the water from the bottom of the ocean
Water dissolving and water removing

>> No.16141544

>vibrations travelling through something is a fallacy and has been disproved
Mental retardation

>> No.16141561

you only believe in that junk because you have no experience with it
>i know its true because i saw it in a documentary on the soience channel on tv

>> No.16142527

>If it was wrong you could analyze the seismic data yourself and do the mat
All you have is a scientific model to explain the behavior of waves. It the observations of waves fit the theory of waves, then its scientifically true. However you will never have direct evidence of what the earth is really like, just indirect through its effect on waves.

>> No.16143465

Every time a new deep borehole is drilled, whats observed at the deepest depths is contrary to what the (((experts))) have claimed they would find. The soientists' predictions are never even close to being accurate. All of their "but muh seismic waves" claptrap is a bunch of lies, they have no idea whats going on down there, but they do know that nobody has any way of disproving their claims of knowing whats going on down there, so they publish them anyway. It will be centuries before anyone penetrates even 100 miles down, let a lone seeing whats going on in the core.

>> No.16143620

>agartha schizos are back on the menu

>> No.16143806

Science should be based on more delectable models. For example, I really love the physics idea of spaghettification.

>> No.16143966
File: 1.80 MB, 854x480, soggy bog boys.webm [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>welcome to Agartha, bitch

>> No.16144707

>It will be centuries before anyone penetrates even 100 miles down, let a lone seeing whats going on in the core.
And until then soience will be dishonestly claiming they know exactly whats going on down there, because thats how soientists earn their living, by lying.

>> No.16144925

By the way, the "ocean" isn't what you're imagining: it's just water locked microscopically within fractures and rock pores. However, the volume of rock we're talking about is so large, that the amount of water locked down there is enormous, on the sale of oceans.
In regards to the life down there: well, microbes can penetrate and live deep in the rocks within those said fractures and pores. Again, the volumes of rocks we're talking about are planetary-scale, so the total mass of all those lifeforms is huge.
How do we know this? We find life in rocks we drill from deep down there, and they're not contaminants from the surface since they are species of microbes which we simply cannot find alive on the surface, they can only survive under the conditions found down there.

>> No.16144927

>claiming they know exactly whats going on down there
wrong, these are theories, some even still hypotheses, all earth sciences know this, myself included, so get off your arrogant high horse, smart ass.

>> No.16145952

Those theories are based on ideas that have been disproved

>> No.16145985

Hmm, I wonder if I can blame this on the Jews somehow

>> No.16146203

Water also becomes Incorporated in the chemistry of the rock. Just look at what happens to the subduction of oceanic crust under neath the continental crust

>> No.16147558

Supercritical H2O doesn't behave like normal water

>> No.16147575

>sound is fake
Great hypothesis, can't wait for your paper and evidence

>> No.16148293

the people who claim they know whats in the center of the planet have no idea what they're talking about, that has already long since been proved. you only still believe them because you're an irrational soiyentism religious cultist

>> No.16148374

Why does earth need to be hollow for an underground civilization to exist? There are huge cave systems still being discovered to this day.

>> No.16149195

Caves are hollow

>> No.16149230
File: 33 KB, 596x596, 1703059617374399.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

You don't have to look inside a bottle to know it's filled with water when you know exactly how much it should weigh and what its properties are, most information is directly extrapolatable from other known behaviours of observed things.

>> No.16150757

the bottle could be filled with any substance of the same density and you'd never be able to tell the difference

>> No.16150768

Mind discussing your up-to-date and correct model them? I'm all ears.

>> No.16150774

And I can guarantee that other substance has a different chemical makeup and atomic lattice which would give it different properties

>> No.16150822

An ancient civilization at the center of the earth
Where mister Hitler waits for the Reich’s next birth

>> No.16151275

>How do we know this? We find life in rocks we drill
>from deep down there
We don't drill that far. We barely pierce the crust; these water-infused rocks are beyond the mantel near the core.

>> No.16151279

I thought he was on the south pole, on the moon.

>> No.16152520

>Hollow earth is such fascinating theory - a whole new world, ecosystem, maybe even civilization. Far superior to flat earth which is just thinly veiled religious screeching. Hollow earthers are much more trustworthy because they don't have ulterior motives and simply want to have fun.
This conspiratard meme is sponsored by King Kong vs Godzilla

>> No.16153547

The "rocks" down there don't have pores, they're liquid and the "water" is supercritical H2O

>> No.16154248

such as?

>> No.16154269
File: 29 KB, 685x606, 1688007180401155.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Are you retarded? If it isn't water it's something else, which means it would react differently to any experiments you might subjugate it to, because different elements react differently to different things, who would've guessed.

>> No.16155766

you can't thing of a single way to tell the difference between water and some other substance of the same density because you're a pseud

>> No.16155866

I'm sorry you didn't go to school but that doesn't apply for all of us.

>> No.16155926

I read the subcore is an 8 mile diameter of "crystallized nickel silicide".

>> No.16155939

conductivity. Based on the element's electronegativity and valence electrons.

>> No.16155947

>crystallized nickel silicide is a class of intermetallic compounds that are formed by the reaction of nickel and silicon at high temperatures. They have unique properties, such as low electrical resistivity and high thermal stability, and are used in a variety of applications, including microelectronics, electrical contacts, wear-resistant coatings, and structural components.
Cool. Earths core is probably generating 10,000 gigawatts every second.

>> No.16156018

These are not theories they are hypothesis because there's no evidence for it

>> No.16156988

how do you plan on testing that through the walls of the bottle?

>> No.16158125
File: 60 KB, 720x479, soyence magic.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]


>> No.16158667

You can make up whatever soience stories you want about the Earth's core since you know nobody will ever see it in your lifetime. Maybe its made out of dark matter.

>> No.16160180


>> No.16161561

Because scientists are all fundamentally dishonest people

>> No.16161581

Prove that it's not correct. I'll be waiting, OP.

>> No.16161610

imagine believing in jawbreaker earth theory

>> No.16162568

using seismometers to map the earth's core is akin to using divining rods to map groundwater, both are just dumb voodoo tier superstitions that only an idiot could be tricked by

>> No.16162655

yeah man why isnt it actually inside out and filled with cum ?

>> No.16163470

but also
>predict earthquakes or volcanic eruptions? no i can't do that, can't even get close

so that pretty much proves they have no idea what they're talking about and all of the knowledge they brag about are just empty guesses. if they really knew how the planet was constructed they would be able to predict earthquakes

>> No.16163790


Does "Earth" even have an "inside"? Probably not.

>> No.16163965

Saying you can predict an earthquake or volcanic eruption is like saying you could predict how many pieces of glass a vase shattered into if you took that vase, locked it in a shipping container and dropped it into the middle of the ocean.

you'd have to have extremely precise, large-scale observations of interactions between continental plates at an almost molecular level throughout tens or hundreds of square kilometres of rock pressed tightly up against other, barely distinguishable rock, all of which is happening hundreds of metres or even kilometres underground. it's a wonder that we get any warning at all.

>> No.16164443

Soientists are good at making grandiose, nondisprovable claims of superior knowledge, but they're incapable of using their supposedly superior intellect to do anything useful and that proves that their supposedly superior intellects are a lie and that their nondisprovable claims of superior knowledge are equally false

>> No.16164444

An ocean of lava yes

>> No.16164462

>It isn't wrong

Can you please show me the scientific proof of this claim? I was not aware we have gone down to the core so we could make this claim. I'm eager to see the evidence you surely have

>> No.16164557

Just like how a change in transparent material causes light to be bent, the same happens for sound waves. in this case, when an earthquake happens, very minor shocks can be detected all over the planet, since the shockwave can travel through the planet. but if there are layers in the earth with significantly different properties, youd expect the shockwave to be bent when in travels in, which is exactly what happens, meaning we can make an educated guess at what the density and composition are of whatever is down there if we do the math on how much the waves were refracted, as well as how thick the layer is.

>> No.16164593

>Every time a new deep borehole is drilled, whats observed at the deepest depths is contrary to what the (((experts))) have claimed they would find. The soientists' predictions are never even close to being accurate. All of their "but muh seismic waves" claptrap is a bunch of lies, they have no idea whats going on down there, but they do know that nobody has any way of disproving their claims of knowing whats going on down there, so they publish them anyway. It will be centuries before anyone penetrates even 100 miles down, let a lone seeing whats going on in the core.

>> No.16164601

Who cares what's in this gay ass core anyway, its not like we can get there.

>> No.16164621

I've been there thoughever.

>> No.16165280

Well golly, anon, consider me stumped. I thought decades of observations, evidence and rock solid peer reviewed papers was going to be difficult to disprove, but if some retard on 4chan going "nuh uh" is enough to overturn centuries of research, I just don't know what to believe anymore. maybe I'll pick up fascism and start saying jews are lying about science for no reason.

>> No.16166369

We know what the weather is going to be like in 100 years even though we also can't predict accurately what its going to be like in 3 days.
t. soience

>> No.16166571

Climate is not weather, anon. I can say that 100 years from now, just about half of any chunk of nickel-63 will have decayed into another material, but that doesn't mean i can predict whether someone will find a hunk of it lying on a bench in some lab and throw it in some kind of industrial-strength rock blender.

>> No.16166601

And how the FUCK are you gonna have life in hot supercritical water?

>> No.16166620

Extremophiles have lived in worse. Only place on earth that we can't find life is in the dallol hot springs, which are fascinating in their own right, I'm personally obsessed with the danakil depression in general. highly recommend reading up about it a little.

>> No.16166682

Still waiting on that proof, OP.

>> No.16167503

Is there a reason we don't just make a large scale digging operation or is just that nobody really cares? I can see how space exploration presents many technological obstacles but digging a giant hole not so much.

>> No.16167557

Climate is an average of weather. Weather systems are full of extremely complicated feedback loops. If you can't model the feedback loops well enough to model weather beyond a few days, how can you predict an average of weather 100 years hence?
Climate modelling is an inherently unscientific endeavour because the models are unfalsifiable in our lifetimes.
Every model that purports to "recreate" or "predict the current climate from a past starting point" have been arcanely manipulated to fit a very narrow timeframe of observations, but then become rapidly unreliable as soon as they get more than a few years into the future, mirroring how we can forecast the weather a few days in advance thanks to our crude weather models which we can plug recent weather observations into. They work a little bit, but the errors and deficiencies in the model rapidly multiply as soon as you deviate from observation.
This isn't a resolution problem with the models either. It's not something that is or can be improved with higher resolution models - higher models actually multiply the uncertainties because they increase the number of interacting parts.
Consider a weather or climate model that uses air cells of 100km x 100km. To some extent we can simplify the behaviour within each cell, and each cell affects the behaviour of adjacent cells on the next time slice.
If you "improve" the model with a reduction in cell size of 10kmx10km, then the behaviour within each individual cell MIGHT be modelled more accurately (though this isn't guaranteed), but you've now got 10x as many cell interactions, with all the concomitant errors accumulating with every interaction.

>> No.16167944
File: 1.32 MB, 1x1, Eschenbach-Climate-Models.pdf [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>Climate modelling is an inherently unscientific endeavour because the models are unfalsifiable in our lifetimes.
Thats not the only unscientific thing about them

>> No.16167951

Still waiting on that proof, OP.

>> No.16167969

I think someone needs to catch up on what technology can do. A blur function in excel literally predicts all particle interactions and life. I am sure we can model the climate.

>> No.16168601

Its already been proved wrong by the findings in experiments such as the kola borehole

>> No.16168645

??? NTA but the kola borehole did not come even close to hitting the bottom of the crust, how did any of its findings contradict our model of earth's layers?

>> No.16168756

lmao even

>> No.16169913

right, it barely scratched the surface and even with that shallow of a hole it still found that all of the predictions made by >muh soience were completely wrong.
if soience can't even predict what will be found at 10km depth then just imagine how wrong they must be about whats at 100km and 1000km depth

>> No.16170095

Every day I'm reminded just how braindead the denizens of this fucking board are and I have to thank you for not letting me forget

>> No.16170145

Wiki page says they found life there

>> No.16170710

Ah, that's news to me. After reading the study, though, it sounds less like they found life in the pools and more like they found life living inside hollow mineral deposits thar happened to be in the pools. that doesn't mean that those organisms can survive direct exposure to the pools' contents.

>> No.16171772

the soience you memorized out of your school textbooks and took on faith is completely wrong

>> No.16172925
File: 78 KB, 1000x1000, 1708448647290231.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]


>> No.16173057

>t. chronic contrarian

>> No.16173713

Hey I actually worked at a seismological laboratory, and it seems you have some doubts about seismic waves and its propagation through the earth. How can I help you?

>> No.16173715

>nobody has any way of disproving their claims
that's not true, there are competing ideas in seismology and they too get put to the test; some turn out to be WRONG, meaning that you too are so.

>> No.16173720

>claiming they know exactly whats going on down there
No, they do not. All geoscientists know that these are MODELS.

>> No.16173721

>Those theories are based on ideas that have been disproved
No, the current models rest on ideas not yet disproven.

>> No.16173723
File: 3.00 MB, 1688x1688, il_fullxfull.3142124153_sxsl.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

I'm serious

>> No.16173724

not really, it's based on the knowledge of seismic wave propagation, which is already quite well understood since you can study it in labs and even observe it near the surface. Unfortunately, it's the only technology we have to prove so deep into the earth, for now.

>> No.16173725

you can predict volcanic eruptions, yes. Obviously, not a decade in advance, but a few days, maybe weeks, it's possible and it has been done in places like Iceland and Hawaii.

Earthquakes, for now, still unpredictable, as far as I know, but we do know where they tend to happen and how often they tend to happen, which in a way is an accurate "prediction", though not temporally precise at all.

>> No.16173726

>Every time a new deep borehole is drilled, whats observed at the deepest depths is contrary to what the (((experts))) have claimed they would find.
as a professional geologist, believe me, you are wrong. The deeper we have probed, the more pressure we found in the rocks and the higher the temperature.
These sources you are putting your faith on, I wouldn't anon, I wouldn't.

>> No.16173728
File: 1.99 MB, 250x158, 1657218263423.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]


>> No.16173732

Russia drilled to about 15km before the project ended. That's it, that's the deepest ever.
The only other way we find samples of rocks from deeper still is either through volcanism, or tectonics/erosion.

>> No.16173739

>the predictions made by muh soience were completely wrong.
What exactly do you mean by this, was the rock cold? Was the surrounding rock not under extreme pressures?

>> No.16173743

Not at the mantle-core boundary, no.

>> No.16173746

>to prove
to probe*

>> No.16173853

I defer to you, seismologist-anon. I feel like i was probably tired when i claimed that volcanic eruptions are unpredictable, lol. It's hard to imagine having a way to accurately predict earthquakes even a day ahead of time, though. maybe putting infrasound detectors right on top of the fault, as well as drilling a borehole into the fault to have more accurate seismograph stations? those have probably already been done, though.

Vaguely adjacent question: Do you think "earthquake lights" are real, or are they just transformers exploding?

>> No.16173858

That anon was talking about the hydrothermal pools at the dallol hydrothermal system. You probably already know how cool it is, but look it up anyway.

>> No.16173866
File: 175 KB, 903x1007, 16541654654.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

In regards to earthquake prediction research, AI is looking very promising:
>the AI algorithm correctly predicted 70% of earthquakes a week before they happened

As far as earthquakes lights, they are real, we just don't know exactly what's going on yet, though we have some ideas proposed, but it's not like we can set up an experiment for the next earthquake because well, we don't know where and when they will next happen, but as seen above, that might be changing very soon. We'll see.

>> No.16174977

the drilling materials melt at the temperatures deeper than 15km

>> No.16176147

they abuse the peer review process to gatekeep anyone who disagrees with them. that way they never have to admit they're capable of being wrong about anything

>> No.16176853

People don't like to hear this because they don't to admit all the effort they wasted on memorizing lies, but thats really how it is

>> No.16177681

Reminds me of the Galileo trial. Modern science is the same as those inquisitioners, anyone who disputes the mainstream conventional wisdom gets excommunicated

>> No.16178820

Part of the reason religious cult brainwashing works is that the victims have sunk cost fallacy over the lies they've memorized. This effect is particularly bad in the soientism religion

>> No.16179438

Because they know they can spin whatever grandiose lies they want so long as they control the peer review process.

>> No.16180000

Imagine riding along with the water molecules over thousands of years

>> No.16180002

I am very surprised no-one has mentioned oil yet.
Without starting a flame war, what are the implications?

>> No.16180991

Oil is extracted from rock at depths below 5km by various gases and fluids which in a supercritical state at the depth, it works the same way supercritical solvent extraction does in laboratories, the solvent releases its extract ones the pressure on the solvent becomes low enough that it can no longer maintain the supercritical state.

>> No.16181008

>Why do scientists brazenly maintain this antiquated model of Earth's core?
The two articles you listed don't contradict the model...
Yes, for many kilometers below the earth's surface there are micro-organisms living in rocks in very low concentrations. Also there is a tiny amount of water in almost all rocks.
There are even pockets of super-pressurized water, air etc.
No it isn't literally an inverted ocean and amazon forest inside the Earth you dumb fuck.

Low concentrations of life deep in the Earth can easily exceed that at the surface because you're comparing huge amounts of volume with just the two dimensional surface of the Earth.

This is the same reason for why the most common fish in the ocean is a deep-sea bioluminescent fish.
Although there is a far greater concentration of fish at the sea's surface a large volume of deep sea low concentration easily out-numbers it.
The fish are the Cyclothones.

Looks like the OP's in /sci/ are just as stupid as the OP's in any other board.

>> No.16181976

>The two articles you listed don't contradict the model...
yes they do

>> No.16182066

>yes they do
No they don't.
Please explain how they do.
I've just explained why they don't.
Please use your own brain and explain yourself.

>> No.16183120

>academia: you should be more open minded
>also academia: if you don't believe in our fairy tales we'll excommunicate you

>> No.16184050

It does. The oceans emerged from inside the earth.

>> No.16184087

No they didn't. the "oceans" they discovered are water trapped on a molecular level inside rocks. the ocean floor emerged from inside the earth though, a fact which supports the current model. almost all water on earth came from comets.

>> No.16184151

The South Pole is the conduit between the cores of the Earth and Luna - which itself holds an atmosphere and it's own native wildlife.

>> No.16185356

>almost all water on earth came from comets.
pure science fiction

>> No.16185531
File: 35 KB, 604x386, 1715672501185851.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>be empiricist
>demand psychical, observable, and even testable evidence from anyone making a claim
>proceed to believe fantastical notions about history with no empirical basis
wtf is their problem?

>> No.16186798

>wtf is their problem?
low IQ

>> No.16187541

Where do you think earth's water came from, then? Do you think it was just a big blob floating around in space? you do know that water freezes in space, and that a big chunk of frozen water flying around in space with a little bit of dust is basically what a comet is, right?

>> No.16188521

>i'm a soiyence expert cause i watched the black soiyence man tv show

>> No.16188530


>> No.16188535

They just like the feeling of pretending they get to determine if something is reasonable or not. It's understandable.

Obviously it's wrong and self-annihilating too but it definitely scratches the reddit itch

>> No.16189227
File: 84 KB, 847x476, jimmy.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

popsci makes them believe a lot of stupid things

>> No.16189229

Just say where you think earth's water came from, if not from comets.

>> No.16189233

i dont wanna discuss soience since its ickky. jesus created water so that white people could drink it

>> No.16190071
File: 108 KB, 560x420, FPYeZYrXEAkAzoR.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

That's right Heil Hitler btw

>> No.16190746

>jesus created water so that white people could drink it
this but unironically

>Heil Hitler
this but unironically

>> No.16190942

Hey, someone who actually looked at the articles here. OP seems to somehow be implying that legitimate scientists are publishing papers that brazenly support hollow earth and yet criticizing them for also not believing it. Showing both news articles here is misleading.

The first one says "ocean" in quotes because it's being dramatic. It's reporting on seismic findings that there's a chunk of stuff matching ringwoodite's density in the mantle, which is a rock that can contain water, thus a metaphorical ocean. There's a lot more volume under the earth than on its surface, so there's room for enough water mixed in with rock to together have more volume than the surface water, which is what they suggest.
Original article: https://futurism.com/scientists-discover-massive-ocean-near-earths-core3657686
Original paper: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0024493716301360

The second article has an image of microorganisms because that's what it's referring to. It doesn't cite a particular paper, but it covers various findings from digging a few km down (still in the crust) and looking at the microbes they find there. "Deep Earth" is somewhat misleading, at least in this context: the rest of the article mostly uses "deep biosphere", as in the deepest parts of where we see life (which is apparently about 5km into the earth, but life in oceans gets deeper). The article also over-hypes some findings, like "the genetic diversity of life... is comparable to or exceeds that of above the surface", which probably means they don't really know, but the microbes' DNA varied about the same amount, and the scientists want to get paid.
Original article: https://phys.org/news/2018-12-life-deep-earth-totals-billion.html

Basically, neither of the articles represent scientists supporting hollow earth because neither of them are about that at all, and their conclusions use the normal model of the earth.