Slashdot Mirror
Giant Iceberg to Collide with Glacier
OECD writes "NASA reports that a massive 100-mile-long iceberg is on a collision course (movie) with a floating glacier near the McMurdo Research Station in Antarctica. NASA scientists expect a collision to occur no later than January 15, 2005."
Cold Fusion?
Welcome to Iceburg, Drygalski. Population 0.
Roland Emmerich is going to make another movie....
God DAMN IT.
Cool!
Giant sandcastle about to hit oasis, stay tuned.
Life is just nature's way of keeping meat fresh.
That's the day after tommorow...well it almost is.
What's an iceburg?
------- I fumbled my registration and I now must suffer
I'll have one of those Kahoona Iceburgers. Fries with that, please. Easy on the ice, though.
Its one thing to be scared its another to do something about it.
Well, it's an iceberg the size of Long Island. Even if it is of no consequence, it's still sort of cool.
a city in greenland?
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
OECD writes "NASA reports that a massive 100-mile-long iceberg is on a collision course (movie) with a floating glacier near the McMurdo Research Station in Antarctica. NASA scientists expect a collision to occur no later than January 15, 2005."
That is some of the worst amateur journalism I've ever seen. How about telling us what the consequences are, what's been said about the event, SPELLING ICEBERG CORRECTLY?
MODS!
Things like this dont happen too often. Surely someone can sacrifice a few bucks to set up a camera in the front row. Maybe it could be some inspiration for those CGI effects in Hollywood.
What kind of important work are these people getting paid for when the most exciting news they can come up with is a giant iceberg that could knock of the tip of some other big chunk of ice. How much time does it take to even notice that? I mean, wow. I thought my job was boring....
Don't take life so seriously. No one makes it out alive.
tsumanis, icebergs, mudslides, giant asteroids on a collision course with earth, windows exploits. armegeddon?
...wait for collision, it will create those little ice cubes for your favourite drink. And remember: Everything is under control.
839*929
This collision will cause a huge Tsunami, please, if you are on land, please seek safety on the ISS. Thank you.
Of course it's cool. If it weren't, it would be just liquid water, or even steam.
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
IcebUrgs?
So Slashdot has evolved beyond mere typos on the editor's comments and now sports typos on the headlines...
I've always found interesting that, in English, two words that are spelled differently can be pronounced the same.
There are two kinds of people in the world: Those with good memory.
Why is it they are relying only on satellite imagery? What about placing multiple cameras strategically on the iceburg and glacier itself?
.. even at 1 or 2 meter resolution it sucks .. no depth perception and even worse it's overhead only.
I think I remember reading in an article before that they were only going to have satellite imagery due to cost and logistics issues.
I dont believe satellite imagery will show anything nearly as spectacular as cameras on the ground
I really dont see why the scientists decided not to have cameras transmitting or recording on the iceburg and or glacier itself. Or at minimum from an external vantage point.
Will we finally find out what happens when an unstoppable force meets and immovable object?
News at 11:00.
What if we could tow a 100 mile iceberg to SE Asia to help with water supplies? Wouldn't that be intense!
... ice*BERG*.
Other than the "Ooh, big Tonka truck go boom!" aspect of it all, why is this an article?
Yep. Cloning sheep. After all. the whole point of sheep is that they're all supposed to be the same...
:-D
well when all the penguins down there cluster themselves into a giant beowulf penguin named guido to push the giant iceburg away from the family home of dave the tv repair penguin, then maybe you'll see the significance.
Why is it that any environmental event worse than a mild hailstorm is now attributed to a global climate catastrophe bought on by humanity?
Where's Bruce Willis and a nuke when you need them? The poor penguins must be saved from the iceberg!
"We need to get over this notion, that, for Apple to win... Microsoft must lose." - Steve Jobs, 1997
.. environment.
If anything it will make for some great video footage.... thousands of penguins swept away in a tsunami.
READY.
PRINT ""+-0
Antartica must be liberated
Yup and after the collision we'll all freeze to death in a matter of seconds...
Why the hell mention that stupid movie. Come on, while there is evidence that global warming is indeed melting icecaps and sometimes thus causing areas to cool down rather than warm up, an iceberg crashing into a glacier is hardly a sign that some hollywood blockbuster is about to become true.
East Coast Brewers
After reading the news post, the article, all the comments, and even watching the video, I tried very hard to imagine the many possible ways something interesting could come of this.
I finally just decided that this story is stupid.
"Everything you know is wrong. (And stupid.)"
Moderation Totals: Wrong=2, Stupid=3, Total=5.
What could happen if lange amounts of fresh water hit the oceans? Right, the salt level changes. The stream (sush as Gulf stream) start moving, re-designing the climate. We're heading for an ice-age. By the way, when are you stupid americans going to have a look at that Kyoto thing?
-> More Tolerance Is Less Extremism <-
.. long island broke off! If that's not sensational, then i don't know what is.
- quote from Day After Tomorrow.
Is that an Iceburg Lettuce? Damn GM crops!
Man did you guys watch that video? I mean, it was pretty crazy how long island just detached and flew down to antarctica! And this is going to happen when?!
or else!
Less consequence? Can you say tsunami?
If you live in southern Chile, or anywhere else that's close to Antartica, head for the hills!
Think of all that poor lettuce!
link
movie
I, for one, disagree with the findings of those scientists.
It is my belief that the iceberg is stationary and that the rest of Earth (including the glacier) are moving.
Is there an analogy between this and meteors? We keep not seeing little ones until they're on us or even past us - is it the same with icebergs?
If a big section of ice were to break up, would it affect sealevel in a significant way? Even if we know these bergs won't, how much warning will we get before a a big one happens?
In Green mars a large portion of antarctica breaks up, raising Earth's sealevel by around 8 metres. Though it's not due to happen 'til 2127.
The asteroid which caused the "dinosaur extinction" 65 million years ago was only 10 km (6 miles) wide.
Get out of the way! It's floating fast! lOOKOUT Long Island! Swim away!!!!
Garcon ! Un perrier on the rocks s'il vous plaît !
that'll certainly take the edge of penguin power
we don't want THAT to happen, do we? :(
Is it me, or could they not have worked out that there was a possibility of collision earlier? I'm glad they aren't driving cars in my neighbourhood :p
Aside from looking cool and being important to penguins (the two things that the article seems to focus on) this can affect things that are actually important.
2 47 96.100
The ice tongue that the iceberg is going to hit is the ocean end of a glacier. If that is knocked off by the collision that could be like pulling the cork from a bottle. It may cause the glacier to discharge into the more rapidly than it otherwise would, raising sea levels.
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=mg184
Is there anything that could possibly have less consequence?
;)
If there is, I'm sure Slashdot will find that too.
Iceberg dead ahead!!
This is the sig that says NI (again)
... the last tsunami was caused by the largest earthquake in the last 40 years, over a length of 1200 km.
You seriously think a localized collision will cause any noticable reaction at all in Chile? There just isn't enough energy to cause much of anything.
Sure there may be waves around the collision, but if you have sense enough to stay away from that you'll be fine.
This is a sign of either global warming, End Times, change in the Earth's magnetic poles, or Nature's protest of Republicians plan to remove environmental protections.
Any way you look at it, someone can write a book and make profit from it.
No.
The melting of icebergs physically cannot have an effect on sea level, since ice floats and thus displaces the same volume whether in liquid or solid form. So, icebergs melting isn't a sign of anything.
Antarctica melting, however, will introduce new liquid into the ocean, so that would be bad.
Quick! Contact Bruce Willis!
I wear pants.
I'm ignorant and uninformed, so perhaps you could go one step further and confirm whether or not the melted FRESH water could cause any significant changes in... well, anything. I'm suspecting a "no", but I've been more than mistaken in the past...
(been a long time since i did some math)
From the site:-
"The B-15A iceberg is a 3,000-square-kilometer (1,200-square-mile) behemoth"
Pulling figures from the nether region, i'm assuming the berg to be 100mts high. This would give us:-
Surface area = 3000 sq. km = 3000 x 1000 x 1000 = 3 x 10^9 sq. mt.
Thus, volume of berg = 3 x 10^9 x 100 = 3 x 10^11 cubic mts.
Now, i know that roughly, 1 cubic meter of ice (water) = 1000kg.
Thus, weight of berg = 3 x 10^11 x 1000 = 3 x 10^14 kgs.
That's 3000000,000,00,000kgs. = 3000000,000,00 metric tons = 300000000 kilotons = 300000 million tons!
If my math is correct, then oooh boy, this is going to be one heck of a fender bender.
http://www.nasa.gov.nyud.net:8090/vision/earth/loo kingatearth/ice_berg_ram.html
Not much, if you live in Montana.
But if you live in Texas, or Louisiana, or Florida, it's got quite a lot of consequence. Ice melts on its exposed edges. So break it up into smaller pieces and it melts faster, decreasing the salinity of the ocean, and thus affecting circulation, which leads to changes in storm patterns. Had any hurricanes lately?
Melting of floating ice, of course, doesn't change the sea level. But the floating glacier provides back-pressure which holds back the much larger glacier on shore. If you break off the floating part of the glacier and release the back-pressure, more of the non-floating part slides down into the sea and starts to float, and that does change the sea level. How high do you want your tide today?
I'm old enough to remember when discussions on Slashdot were well informed.
Is there an analogy between this and meteors? We keep not seeing little ones until they're on us or even past us - is it the same with icebergs?
:), although there hasn't been such a big iceberg from Antarctica for quite a while (Refering to Iceberg B-15 / B-15A, which has been around since March 2000, causing starvation of ALL penguin chicks due to inability of their parents to get food because of much greater quantities of sea ice in McMurdo Sound).
Probably
If a big section of ice were to break up, would it affect sealevel in a significant way? Even if we know these bergs won't, how much warning will we get before a a big one happens?
Its not the fact that the sea ice breaks up, its the fact that the sea ice is holding back billions of tonnes of ice that is currently on Antartica, which would raise sea levels, and sea levels only have to rise by a small amount 30 to 40 cm / 1 foot for catastrophy to occur. huge areas of the world will become submerged, many millions (possibly billions) of people will be displaced.
In Green mars a large portion of antarctica breaks up, raising Earth's sealevel by around 8 metres. Though it's not due to happen 'til 2127.
Whilst Green Mars is fiction, the rise in sea levels caused when Antartica does melt aren't, and at the rate we're going, the melting of the Antartic ice will be inevitable in less than 10 years time, due to positive reinforcement from the amount of CO2 that humans are pumping into the environment (SUV's, Air planes, Coal / Gas fired powerstations etc...).
I need a new sig...
Ice is less dense than water, thus about the top 10% or so is above the surface- in theory it would increase the level of the ocean.
Of course the actual water volume of even the largest icebergs would be a piss in the ocean in the grand scheme of things. My guess is more water would evaporate from the oceans surface in a day.
Isn't CNN going to "embed" any journalists and cameramen and going to broadcast the event live?!
I'm much more funny, interesting and insightful than the moderators think
Well that iceberg should be part of the polar ice cap for a start. Not that you care unless you live in Holland or Bangladesh. Or even Florida if are capable of complex thoughts. See what I am getting at?
Your depleted uranium petition? :-)
_O_
.|< The named which can be named is not the true named
Icebergs are not necessarily made of freshwater. Most are composites of rocks, dirt, and salt water.
Occasionally you'll get the random caveman thrown in for good measure.
Or use your favorite torrent.
Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
MOD -1 REDUNDANT
Reason: Don't use so many caps. It's like YELLING.http://dictionary.reference.com/search?r=67&q=iceb urg
Nothing costs nothing
You are an idiot.
The reason that 10% sticks out of the water is that the iceberg all together weighs as much as the volume of submerged part would if it were liquid water.
Try this at home: float an icecube in a glass of water. Watch it melt. See the water level stay the same.
Moron.
Quick! Gather up your children and amble away as though your life depends on it.
-he who laughs last, is a bit slow.
journal
It was in a movie written by Art Bell, it's gotta be true.
OT but... I used to love his show when they'd have the "Time Traveler Hotline" open. Always reminded me of Peabody & his boy Sherman.
--
The Marines: The few, the proud, the not very bright. - Slashdot tagline 04/21/05
Try this at home: float an icecube in a glass of water. Watch it melt. See the water level stay the same.
Everytime I try this experiment I get thirsty and wind up drinking some of the nice cold water.
I'll just have to take your word for it.
I don't know. I am suprised though that not a single nutter has connected the tsunami disaster with it, yet.
___
No power in the 'verse can stop me
This must be the most boring bit of news I ever read in my life. Do I miss some extention in the geek gene that would make this appear to be spectacular to me?
___
No power in the 'verse can stop me
How high do you want your tide today
Well, my current elevation is 100-1000 meters, so bring on the high tides.
However, in the recent poll, 45% of respondents were less than 100m, so they might complain.
appended to the end of comments you post, 120 chars
Global warming is a fact, whether you like it or not. Some still argue as to what caused it (humans or it's a natural phenomenon) but, in my opnion, it does not matter. We all will have to deal with the effects and theres no reason to deny it.
Wow.
How much bigger does a 100 mi long iceberg need to be before its classified as a floating glacier?
Snow cones for everyone!
Maybe it's because those who normally connects environmental disasters with human activity are not nutters but highly educated and intelligent scientists?
For the best experience, I recommend viewing it with the Jaws theme song.
Now all I need is a martini the size of Poland.
...has a woman driver?
...penguin refugees flee to Chile.
Mother nature never ceases to amaze us !
Chris ,
Php Programmers.
I have doubts anything spectacular would be seen on shore. Most likely, the bottom of the iceburg, which we are always told is 90% of the volume, would strike the bottom before reaching close to shore. It is probably dragging on the bottom right now.
Not much of a story. Yawn.
I'm not denying it. Read what I said!
I just can't help but feel that constantly bringing up the day after tomorrow every time an iceberg is mentioned doesn't help make people take this seriously. The movie was after all, a movie made for entertainment. It was over the top, excessive, and oh so very hollywood.
East Coast Brewers
You really need to let out some of that pent up anger. Losing your virginity would be a start.
What's happening at Antartica?
According to inside Aussie news reports, the US has decided to evacuate its base at McMurdo in the Antartic and has requested the Russians to also send its icebreaker the 'Krasin' to assist evacuation. The Krasin, which I believe is one of their biggest, is reported to be presently south of the equator under full steam to meet a US icebreaker. The story goes that 2 large icebergs are grounded in McMurdo Bay preventing supplies reaching the Base.
There's something wrong with that story.
This time of the year is favorable for all manner of activity at Antartica. The Russian tourist ship the icebreaker 'Kapitan Khlebnikov' is probably at the Antartic with tourists now. Or at least it is capable of cancelling the tourists and rushing from its permanent dock in New Zealand or Tasmania to evacuate staff.
These big icebreakers are probably engaged to remove huge quantities of instruments and people. Why are they rushing to remove instruments, equipment, etc, and people??
It is doubtfull that the grounded 2 icebergs would halt supplies. What is incoming...might be a good question with this story??
I am suspecting, more than anything incoming, is that ice is shearing off the Antartic land mass and the Base is draining out to sea.
http://theboomshelter.com/
How tall did you say you were?
Simon says: "Ice melts on its exposed edges. So break it up into smaller pieces and it melts faster" - RIGHT - so why are we allowing ice breakers in the Arctic? Won't that help it break up and melt much faster?
Try this at home: float an icecube in a glass of water. Watch it melt. See the water level stay the same.
Yep it's true, melting ice does not increase volume.
No Salt water does not freeze, the ICE is mostly Fresh water and rocks and dirt maybe.
check this link for an explaination
melting ice does not increase volume
This ice goes to eleven.
So the legendary capital of the Iceland, the nest of the Elves has eventually resurfaced?!!
Now, mod me down freely. My karma can't get any worse...
I'm not sure just how fresh the water in Icebergs is but increased amounts of fresh water in the Ocean can cause problems.
I remember watching a program a while back which said that due to global warming huge russian rivers were dumping much more than the usual amount of fresh water in the North Atlantic.
The North Atlantic contains one end of the Gulf Stream where the warm water sinks down and flows back to the Gulf Of Mexico to be reheated. Apparently if the salinity of the water reduces by any more the warm water might not sink down and in effect turn off the Gulf Stream at which point we in the UK would be pretty f#cked.
How many other scientist agree with this idea though I am not sure.
I'm no tree hugin hippie by far... but...
There is a huge difference in 'our fault' or 'natural progression'. The difference being either
1. 'That's just the way it is... some thing will never change'. What a catchy tune. And as you said all we can do then is deal with the effects.
OR
2. We can change the course of things by changing our actions. We'd then need to deal with cause AND effect
OR
3. Heaven forbit it's a combination of the two. So many people polarize the issue without realizing that in all probability it's a natural phenomenon WORSENED by Human stupidi... er... I mean activity.
No hippie here but I do look forward to Hydrogen Cars and crap like that. Fun stuff. Will help minimize our impact, so that hopefully the natural course of things is less severe.
When will NASA admit to the public that their advanced, super-sophisticated, collision-detection-system (that's been working so well for them in recent months)has been foiled again by a NASA employee eating chips carelessly over their satellite maps?
=Cheers! Chris McAllister
Explain frozen soups.
If you want to get really technical, "ice" can only be formed by water, good old H two O. But since we are talking about icebergs here, well, those suckers are made up of frozen seawater.
Mind you, if a large block slips out quickly, it has the potential to release a sizeable wave.
You are winningly confident in your abilities as an armchair climatologist, not to mention your political science skills are totally unmatched on this planet. Your mother must be so proud she's fit to burst with joy. I would like to subscribe to your informative newsletter.
You're right. You're the sharpest knife in the drawer. You've got it together so well you're a seven-can six-pack. The Kyoto protocol is a bunch of pinko commie leftist partisan hogwash expressly designed to get you into an itchy, brown wool commie skirt and red lip gloss just in time for the community sing of "All Hail Dear Leader", and has nothing to do with a consortium of scientists from all over the globe and countries that span the entire political spectrum.
You're certainly astute, and not glib. Your comments are totally focused and concise, and not sweeping, reactionary generalizations. Every single climate scientist and adherent to the Kyoto protocol is leftist scum. Because there's only right, and wrong, right?
Did you know that there has been a descriptive phrase invented on the internet just for you?
Unrelenting fucktard.
May you, your shithole of a trailer and your even more ignorant cousin/sisterwife get sucked into an F5 tornado, along with that walking mange of a coondog and that pile of wrecked steel and cinderblocks you call a driveway, you nunshitting popefelcher.
Please stop logging in here, lackwit. The chiggers that fall out of your mullet are absolutely disgusting. Your dog smells. You smell worse than a tour-ripe hippy rolling - stoned - in a steamy March meadow full of fresh cowpies. You have no idea how much we've been spending on deadly toxic fumigants to delouse the place after you finally leave.
Salt water *does* freeze if you get it cold enough.
Hey, leave glib out of it! If you take away my glib I won't be able to run gtk, and that'll take out firefox :-(
A giant misspelling assaults the eyes of Slashdot readers everywhere.
"The Day After Tommorow" was a movie where I enjoyed the ability to fast forward through the dialoge.
Disaster films are fun, but they have to stretch them out with dumb actors yapping. How much dialoge are they going to cram into the disaster movie about the Tsunami
Don't say they won't make that movie, thousands script writers are probably working on it write now, pitching it as featuring DiCaprio and J-Lo, with a love scene featuring a crashing wave montage.
Bacardi + slashdot = negative karma.
Ok everybody. Imagine in your heads two pieces of ice hitting each other. Now imagine this isn't happening for 4 days. Is it something you're looking forward to yet?
What will happen when Iceberg B-15A collides with the Drygalski ice tongue?
A) Tsunami
B) Earthquake
C) Catastrophic rising sea levels
D) Global warming
E) Global cooling
F) A and C
G) C and D
H) C and E
I) Bump and yawn
My money is on 'I'.
It's been on Nasa's site for a week now
printf($randomline(sigs.txt) \n "-- "$randomline(authors.txt));
-- myself
This is old news, this is the plot from "The Day After Tomorrow".
I claim this solid matter in the name of Troll Kingdom; bring your own tea bags, you Brittish shit-faces.
That's no Brit, that's American icon, George Burns.
Actually, someone has already tried to connect the tsunami with global warming. Not sure how, but they claimed that the tsunami was caused by it. I'm still skeptical about global warming seeing as how antartica is getting colder and the ice there is growing, among other things.
Fly me to the moon Let me sing among those stars Let me see what spring is like On jupiter and mars
Giant Icebug to Collide with Slashdot. Orthographical pieces probably will fall in the comment ocean, causing changes in its pH, leaving users with a cold feeling the day after tomorrow.
The Ghost of Long Island has possessed a large iceberg in Antarctica, which is now running amok. Bloody crazy environmentalists.
Who are these "Brittish" of which you speak?
There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
Is there any chance of a big wave resulting from this ?
I seem to remember seeing a documentary where a 'small' piece of an iceberg resulted in a huge wave about a mile further down near the shore....
HEEEEEYYYYY!!!!
I like coondogs! Don't insult them!
Tsunami #2, anyone?
"Tell me something I don't know! Get out of the way!"
k = m * v^2
So size (et mass) DOES matter.
I don't have a sig.
We are not doing the Earth right and it is fighting back for its survival.
There's this bar - and there's a Chinese guy and a Jewish guy who find themselves seated next to each other a couple of nights. Things are going pretty good until one night after a few too many, the Jewish guy hauls off and decks the Chinese guy.
The Chinese guy picks himself up and says "What the hell was that for?!"
The Jewish guy snaps "That was for bombing Pearl Harbor."
"Pearl Harbor? Pearl harbor was bombed by the Japanese!"
The Jewish guy shrugs "Chinese, Japanese, what's the difference?!"
The next night they find themselves at the bar again, and after a snootful, the Chinese guy hauls off and decks the Jewish guy.
He picks himself up and shouts "What the hell was THAT for?"
The Chinese guy says "THAT was for sinking the Titanic!"
"Are you nuts? The Titanic was sunk by an iceberg?!"
"Yeah, well - iceberg, Goldberg - what's the difference?!"
"Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
If they can do that, can't they just pick up the Iceberg and move it to prevent this catastrophe?
I'm sure glad they didn't bring the iceberg up here for comparison.
Krusty: "What is the freaking holdup?"
--RJ
I've seen this stated in exactly one TV documentary. A documentary, which claimed that each and every other study on global warming is based on false data. Has this new study been peer-reviewed? Does anyone have any more info?
while true;do echo -e -n "\033[s\n\033[u\134_\033[B";done
How long before those urban survivalist fantasists start believing that a hummer has lost it as the ultimate in urban cool, and start looking for a nuclear powered icebreaker to keep on their moorings. Tsunami proof, oil shortage proof, sea level rise and wandering berg proof,probably a good place to be when an asteroid strikes, and almost as economical as the average SUV. I guess the Russians have a few to sell to raise some foreign currency.
Panurge has posted for the last time. Thanks for the positive moderations.
Since this is more on the scale of an SUV or a monster truck, I'd presume it's a guy with an undersized dick driving it.
The sooner you kill yourself the better off we'll all be, you pinko-commie homo teabagger.
...$20 on the glacier. I think it can take that little guy.
FLR
I can't remember the last time that /. informed its readers of something _ahead_ of time that isn't measured in decades.
Laws are for people with no friends.
Hydrogen Cars? What?!? And stop driving the Great American Gas Guzzling SUV??? And you claim you're not a hippie?
Anyone who is for better gas mileage and against burning tire dumps is a hippie! Or a communist. Or a terrorist. Or worse: a terhippunist!
Go to nasa's site (ice_berg_ram.html, there click on the 15A Iceberg Blocks McMurdo Sound link on the end of the page.
Now, in the last paragraph, you can find this: "As a result, many chicks could starve, says Antarctica New Zealand in the Associated Press."
They got chicks in Antartica and they need rescue? I'm so there!
No more I say.
best.
:)
flame.
ever.
thankyou AC for making me laugh out loud - 'nunshitting popefelcher'
now thats a keeper
Fry: heh, Yakov Smirnoff said it
Leela: No he didn't.
Brilliant idea, jackass, how about you stop reacting to the superficiality of the argument and focus on the guts of it?
Are we saying that it's never happened before? No. Will it happen again? Definitely. The problem isn't that happens, it's that it may begin to happen so often.
Seriously, what is your problem with wanting to breath clean air? Is the end of the world nigh? No. Are problems going to result from our effect on the world? Probably. It's happened to (some) of our water, an our land, and it probably will happen in the air, too. Is it such a horrible fucking thing that we -- oh, I don't know -- take care of the only inhabitable planet we have? If you were told that you could only ever have one car, house, bike, or computer for the rest of your life, and there would never be any replacement, would you a) shit all over it or b) take extra special care of it?
The sheep don't think all sheep all look alike. Else where did they come from to begin with?
According to NASA, "a collision between the iceberg and the ice tongue could make things easier for both penguins and ships. If the ice tongue collapses, the way may be opened for sea ice to escape the Sound." Well thank God. Those poor, strange, waddling creatures will do ok in the long run.
The B-15A iceberg is a 3,000-square-kilometer (1,200-square-mile) behemoth that has a history of causing problems. It is the largest fragment of a much larger iceberg that broke away from the Ross Ice Shelf in March 2000. Scientists believe that the enormous piece of ice broke away as part of a long-term natural cycle (every 50-to-100 years, or so) in which the shelf, which is roughly the size of Texas, sheds pieces much as human fingernails grow and break off.> :P
Part of the natural cycle for this. Yes, things are melting. Yes, things are breaking off. But not all that melts or breaks off is a sign of the end of the world. See, what happens is that ice expands, and...well, if you can't read an article, then I doubt you'd understand.
Did anyone notice Jerry Bruckheimer in the area with a pick axe?
Josh
"It doesn't affect me so bring on the tides."
That's a pretty brave position, tough guy. Try saying it when your elevation is sea level and within five miles of the ocean.
Laws are for people with no friends.
Read Michael Chritons "State of Fear". yes, I know it is a novel and all about chriton not being a scientist, but he has an extensive bibliography in the book that points out what the scientists themselves have said and links to the raw data on temperature measurements going back to 1829.
Fly me to the moon Let me sing among those stars Let me see what spring is like On jupiter and mars
There's a large section to the upper left of the Long Island shaped piece that breaks away from the main section and appears to have rejoined the main section in a later image. Isn't it possible that the large piece will do this as well?
free online diet tracking.
It hasn't happened yet so it's hardly old news, it seems to me it is a theory which deserves a lot more investigation.
Don't fear the penguins.. Let them have an easier path to feed.
Its all about the penguins. Thats why the story is hear(sic)..(and not about the spelling)
at which point we in the UK would be pretty f#cked.
Oh...darn...hey, pass the peanuts...
Dennis Miller must be your idol.
PRL, Penguin Rescue League needs your $ NOW!
Without your contribution, 100's of thousands of penguins will die.
Contribute now!
$1000(Chilly Willy Club level) donors will be rewarded* with limited edition DVD's of Zelda the penguin girl, IN ACTION!
* CWC donations received after the 15th will be rewarded with a copy our exclusive penguin recipe book PLUS! a frozen bird.
I fer 1 dont think you reefuted the point with yer add homeny response.
I like the debate your typo generated, I never got -1 offtopic/+1 underrated before :-)
(I like the iceberg collision too, by the way)
allmybasearebelong2u
Somewhere in Antarctica:
Oh, sure, NASA says it's on a collision course, they say it's going to hit no later than Jan 15th... but the odds will keep going up, and up (1:1, 1:1 confirmed by a lot of people, 1:1 confirmed by tons of penguins looking at it...) , and then poof... 1 in a billion.
I'm not falling for that one again!
The last Slashdot post by McFrostyGuy1131.
"Try this at home: float an icecube in a glass of water. Watch it melt. See the water level stay the same."
/.)
Well of course it stays the same. The excess water leaks out through the glass sweating on the outside. Duh...
(For the less informed - this is a joke - consider it like getting finacial guidance on
unless i'm off my rocker and forgot sciance class, wouldn't that reduce the water level, as ice has a higher volume than liqid water?
upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
Actually, IIRC, scientists have already measured a drop in both the salinity of the atlantic ocean, and a drop in the volume of water moving in the gulf stream. Where people disagree is the effect that this would have on the climate. Most scientists seem to think that the temperature drops will be counteracted by increases in temperature due to global warming, leading to worse winters in the UK and northern europe but leaving them inhabitable. Some scientists are worried that the gulf stream might change direction towards the ice caps so increasing the rate of ice melting. Others are worried that if the gulf stream stops, it would reduce the temperature in northern europe enough to cause a new ice age, something that would have major effects on a global scale. No one actually knows. http://www.bbc.co.uk/weather/features/science_natu re/the_day_after_tomorrow.shtml
http://www.bbc.co.uk/climate/impact/gulf_stream.sh tml
"As a writer / novelist you might want to spellcheck your sig.
An honest question- how is this related to aeronautics or space?
Funny how this government article makes absolutely no mention of global warming. And it insinuates that melting ice caps are a wonderful boon, as well.
Scientists believe that the enormous piece of ice broke away as part of a long-term natural cycle (every 50-to-100 years, or so) in which the shelf, which is roughly the size of Texas, sheds pieces much as human fingernails grow and break off...
Ironically, a collision between the iceberg and the ice tongue could make things easier for both penguins and ships. If the ice tongue collapses, the way may be opened for sea ice to escape the Sound.
We know where leadership by an anti-intellectual "strongman" who scapegoats minorities and likes boisterous rallies goes
AC, I recognize your, um, prose. Think we have been at odds before. But your mix of troll and truth are great here. Sorry to only see it modded flamebait. And, as stated before by others, 'nunshitting popefelcher' is absolutely hilarious.
Hmmm... wouldn't this be a direct indication that NASA has been looking in the wrong direction?
What we really need is a ten day waiting period and a background check before you can buy a congressman.
Peanuts, Monkeys ?
I can already hear the Celine Dion playing in my head.
I believe there is a company in Canada that takes icebergs and melts them down for their "pure" water to make vodka. Iceberg Vodka info
Perhaps we should send them down to pick up this iceberg and prevent the collision.
Imagine the carnage we could have prevented!
Or, in the other case, how many penguins we can save.
Live forever, or die trying.
We allow ice breakers in the Arctic because transportation of goods is the most important thing in the world. Duh.
Even if such things are NOT the result of human intervention (which is doubtful); we still need to be prepared to deal with them.
The Earth is getting warmer, the effects that this may or may not have on the climate, ocean currents, and many other things could dramatically impact life.
Would you also tell us that if a large asteroid is coming towards us, well it's happened before, just let it happen again?
What?
"Speed 3: Ice berg of doom"
"Oh my god, if this ice berg goes slower than 1 mile a year we're ALL GONNA DIE!!!"
You have two hands and one brain, so always code twice as much as you think!
There will be no collision. It was proved with scientific fact in the movie "A Christmas Story." When a cold object comes in contact with a tongue, the end result is a call to the fire department.
New data states that there is now less the 1:35,000 chance that the Glaciar will miss the iceburg. New data shows a 1:16,000 chance that a newly discovered meteor will hit earth. REPENT SINNERS!!!
Saaaaaaaay. That would make a GREAT movie....
Er....
Proverbs 21:19
Let's just hope Mahdi comes at the same time. All the nutters gone in one fell swoop!
Religion is the opiate of the masses. The wealthy smoke the real stuff.
The critical temperature of sulfur is 1041 C, which is the highest temperature sulfur could be in a truly liquid state.
Religion is the opiate of the masses. The wealthy smoke the real stuff.
If you break off the floating part of the glacier and release the back-pressure ...
Just how much "back-pressure" does a floating object exert? In a glacial context, I would say none. A floating object, even an iceberg, is going to offer very little resistance when being pushed by a glacier.
I'm so, so, so tired of Chicken Little predicting the end of the world every time a geological event involving ice occurs. Icebergs break off all the time and I'm still high and dry in Florida. What makes this one any different other than the fact that it made it into the news?
This icebUrg is obviously funded by Microsoft in an attempt to eliminate the Linux Penguin. Shameful..
_______
Huh?
Never was one for SUV's. To much 'look at my overcompensation for having a small dick'. And then there's the gas prices in California (where I currently reside). I don't like the thought of giving some Saudi Arabian 2.50 per gallan of my money. You do the math on a full tank of gas. Fuck that.
By you do deserve a mod or 5 for funny. That shit made me crack up.
...only one can survive.
(sorry, just had to quote They Might Be Giants!)
What Would Sutekh Do?
the movie was quoting something that actually happened
Regarding extensive bibliographies, it's an old junk science propaganda trick, used by slimy characters on the fringes of any serious issue. Just because someone has a lot of references doesn't mean the references say what they claim.
Regarding Chrichton, he twists science around for his living, which is fearmongering for entertainment. His accusations might be just based on projection of his own behavior rather than any deep understanding of science.
mt
Because "Melting of floating ice, of course, doesn't change the sea level."
The Arctic is all floating ice. The topic today is the Antarctic where much of the ice exists on top of dry land. Melt that and your coastline changes.
It isn't a theory, it is a hypothesis.
Using the revised estimate of 1750000million tonnes, and guessing a nice slow drift rate of 0.1ms^-1, how much kinetic energy is involved?
= 0.5 * 1.75*10^15 * (0.1)^2
= 17.5TJ (!)
That's a metric shedload, but it will be released over a few days. Once the thing comes to rest I think we can reasonably expect a new range of ice hills, rather than a billion par-boiled penguins.
Global warming is not a fact. What is a fact is that the climate of this planet fluctuates over time in ways that we do not fully understand. It is very hard to justify any scenario in which our actions could have a significant impact on that climate.
Do you really think we can prevent the next ice age by driving more H2s? Do you think we could have prevented the damage caused by the recent tsunami by building bigger restraining walls (if you do you need to take a closer look at just how powerful nature is.)
Geez, here you've got a gigantic source of relatively clean water, so get a fleet of tugboats and drag it where it'll do some good. First spray it with a reflective overcoating to slow melting, then tow it to the Middle East or Africa. You can put it in a holding pen and slice off huge chunks with lasers. Instant irrigation!!
"I improvise. It's my greatest talent. I prefer situations to plans..." --Wintermute, William Gibson's "Neuromancer"
Just high enough to wash away this mudslide, thanks!
Don't worry. You'll be able to order it on pay per view. It will be the next Pride Fighting Championship match.
I can visualize the commercials already. "Saturday! Saturday! Saturday! Will the newcomer Iceberg be able to defeat the monstrous Glacier!? Find out this Saturday, on PPV channel 427! Only $89.99. Call your cable or satellite operator to order today!"
Since we are headed for another ice age you could view greenhouse gas emmisions as a good thing and a long term pro-environment approach to preventing an expected natural distaster (that is, the next ice age)
Looked at that way do you really think we could prevent an ice age? About as likely as it would be for our emmisions to cause the polar ice caps to melt. Not very.
a giant aircraft carrier.
maybe theres something the government is telling us
"He's a real midnight golfer"
We're not headed for an ice age, we're still in the processes of emerging from the previous one, and have yet to officially not be in an ice age.
What?
Is it just me who was worried about the illustrations? Do Americans really need an illustration to know how big Antarctica is? Couldn't all those NASA scientists, you know, put a scale on the photo instead? Like a small black bar saying "I am 100 km long" or something? Come on, I already accepted people using Texas as a non-SI unit of choice for measuring asteroids, but can't we do better than that with iceberg images? At least on nasa.gov?
And don't get me started with the gratitious use of metaphors, hyperboles and paraboles, not to mention good old cliches. "Largest Demolition Derby", "best seat in the house", "clash of the titans" and "dent their bumpers" - what's up with that? Is NASA writing for rednecks now? Do they feel they have to compete with wrestling for audience?
I thought an interesting science story can be exciting by itself, without using craptastic language like "the enormous piece of ice broke away". In the previous sentence they used perfectly concise "the largest fragment of a much larger iceberg that broke away from the Ross Ice Shelf in March 2000", wasn't that enough? Are they afraid that some hillbilly didn't get it the first time? If I can no longer go to nasa.gov for decent science coverage... well, I am out of words then.
Future Wiki -- If you don't think about the future, you cannot have one.
A superficial wave, though, and given the place where it's likely to happen, anyone in the vicinity would be warned, no biggie.
Yes, the center of Antarctica has gotten colder because of tightening circulation of the Antarctic polar vortex (wind patterns). This is mostly due to another man-made phenomena: the ozone hole. Without ozone you drive up the thermal boundary layer which leads to more intense circulation.
As far as I know this is only clearly significant for the interior of Antartica. I'm not sure what is happening on average around the edges of Antartica, but I know in at least some areas (e.g. Ross Ice Shelf) they see clear warming and diminishing ice.
the face on the picture flip through? It is on day 12/23. Freaky.
...
I don't know how someone would go about measuring the back-pressure, but it has been experimentally determined that when the floating ice is knocked off, the speed with which the glacier on land moves increases. The extent to which this was true did surprise some people.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
When you give up your car, I could use it.
Know your pads. One time pad: good for cryptography. Two timing pad: where to take your mistress.
It's a distraction. They're trying to draw our attention away--this is planned for the same time as the next probe slamming into Mars . . .
hawk
...so? Every now and then, these story synopses here on /. don't really make the point of why we should care. This is one of those.
but have you considered the following argument: shut up.
There has been a measured (by Norwegian scientists) decrease in the Gulf Stream by 50% already over the past few decades...
...is getting calls from Jim Sokolove as we speak...
While the topic started out 'cold', this reply, in response to Simon's post about consequences and Montana has turned 'hot'!.
... In the summer of 2003 there were already signs that the caldera remains wide awake. Norris Geyser Basin, the hottest thermal area in Yellowstone, sprouted new mud pots. Ground temperature on the trail soared to 200 degrees Fahrenheit, too hot to touch. Porkchop Geyser, dormant since 1989, erupted on July 16. Park officials responded by barring access to half of the 2 miles of Norris Geyser trails." [Ibid.] These two "mud pots" are approximately 70 feet high and 2,300 feet long!
Yellowstone National Park (Wyoming) sits on a high plateau supported by a hot mantle plume. This so-called hotspot has been the site of three caldera-forming eruptions in the last two million years. The last eruption, ~630,000 years ago, generated ~1000 km3 of pyroclastic sheet flows and airfall tephra which fell as far away as Louisiana.
In contrast, the eruption of Mt. St. Helens in 1980 was a volcanic sneeze. Scientists are saying that America will one day again experience another Yellowstone eruption. Sooner or later, geologists warn, the "supervolcano" beneath Yellowstone, will strike. The eruption of pent-up energy will cover half the United States in ash, in some places up to 3 feet (1 meter) deep. Earth will be plunged into a perpetual winter that would last years. Some plant and animal species will disappear forever. Even humans could be pushed to the edge of extinction, and anthropologists suggest it won't be the first time.
Simply put, anyone living within 600 miles of Yellowstone could be sitting in a modern day Pompeii (?Montana?).
In addition, for those living outside this area and West of the Mississippi River, there could be grievous consequences as well, because systemic processes are now building beneath Yellowstone that paint a very clear picture of a major eruption event in its early stages." In 2003 Yellowstone National Park (National Park Service) posted the following notice which is still in effect.
Temporary Closure Notice
Last summer, approximately 4,800 feet of trail was closed. In October 2003, all but 1,000 feet of that closure was lifted. Approximately a 1,000-foot segment of trail in the Back Basin of Norris is still closed. The closure begins at Green Dragon and continues to near Pearl Geyser. The closure is clearly marked. The foot trail itself is at boiling temperatures and the potential for a steam explosion is considered to be very high. While predictions can be made for volcanic explosions, steam explosions cannot be predicted. Steamboat and Echinus Geysers and all of Porcelain Basin remain open to the public.
Just south of Norris basin is a bulge in the earth about 28 miles across and 7 miles deep that has pushed the ground up more than 5 inches since 1996, according to research by Chuck Wicks, a geophysicist with the U.S. Geological Survey in Menlo Park, California
Yellowstone's other hibernating danger
Geologists have long known that the 10,000 hot springs and geysers in Yellowstone National Park are evidence of magma, hot molten rock below the surface. And they know that long ago the region experienced colossal eruptions on a scale never seen in recorded history. But an important question has evolved in recent years: Is Yellowstone dying or just hibernating?
In the July 2001 issue of the journal Earth and Planetary Science Letters, University of Wisconsin geologists Ilya Bindeman and John Valley report new evidence indicating "a high probability of a future catastrophic eruption sometime within the next million years, and possibly within the next hundred thousand years." Analyzing minerals that serve as time capsules of past catastrophes, Bindeman and Valley have found support for other studies suggesting Yellowstone goes nuts every few hundred thousand years. They also propose a reason why: An epic hot spot.
Hot magma welling up from below acts like a burner, the researchers
Because Glaciers are formed in mountainous areas principally from snowfall they are pretty much 100% freshwater
And, yes, the glaciers are moving faster. And, yes, this could - eventually - effect water levels. And, no, there is no possible way that this would happen within 10 years time. There is a mere outside chance that it may happen over the next 200 (two hundred) years.
What we don't know is how much we can effect this change - in either direction.
Kinetic stupidity has a new brand leader: Allen Zadr.
Uh, the glaciers on Antarctica are continuously moving, and rebuilding. Snow falls year after year, after year, and the glaciers keep moving, and rebuilding.
They are continuously moving, but the sea ice shelf is holding back the glaciers from moving a lot faster, which has allowed so much ice to form on Antarctica. If the sea ice melts, all the glaciers would be able to "dump" their ice (which is currently over land) into the oceans, which would raise the water levels. It is not necesarrily the melting of the ice over Antarctica itself that will cause the sea levels to rise.
And, yes, the glaciers are moving faster. And, yes, this could - eventually - effect water levels. And, no, there is no possible way that this would happen within 10 years time. There is a mere outside chance that it may happen over the next 200 (two hundred) years.
Its not that it will occur in 10 years, but if we don't change the way that we currently use fossil fuels etc... it will be very hard to stop Antarctica melting within that 200 year timeframe, due to positive feedback in out atmosphere. (look to Venus for how positive feedback can occur, and how its atmosphere ended up as a 400 deg C maelstrom, as opposed to Earth, an essentially similar planet)
What we don't know is how much we can effect this change - in either direction.
What we do know is that CO2 levels are the highes they have been since known atmospheric history (420,000 years) and that CO2 levels have had a close correlation to temperature over that period. (Although we dont know that they are causally linked.)
Whilst we don't know how much we can affect this change, we do know that if we carry on as we are, things will certainly not get better, and warmer weather is not necessarily better, ~14,000 excess deaths occurred from heat related problems in France during Summer 2003, which is a lot more than the ~3,000 who died in 9/11. (Although 9/11 showed how bad the USA's homeland security was at the time - all the flights took off from US airports on internal flights.)
I need a new sig...
Hmmm... didn't read the "credible link" bit relating to the 10 years fact (oops...). The guy who said it was James Lovelock (the author of the GAIA hypotheses/theory) when asked about the likelihood / effects of global warming on this years (2004/5) Christmas Lectures on Channel4 in the UK. (another link).
He was referring to the "point of no return", after which there will be nothing we can do to stop global warming from melting the ice caps, not that Antarctica will melt in 10 years time. He was refering to the fact that the current CO2 levels in the Earth are around 370 ppm, and if it gets close to 400 ppm, then global warming will be unstopable. CO2 levels are currently rising at a rate of 2~3 ppm a year (which is where the 10 years fact comes from).
I need a new sig...
I would also point out that the "positive reinforcement" theory is also still actively disputed in scientific circles, in that the correlation exists, but the cyclic cause and effect hasn't been proven (though pointing to a planet that's much closer to the sun is good enough for some folk, I prefer more substance).
Overall, between 1979 and 1997, the mean temperature of the earth dropped slightly. Since 1997, the mean temperature of the earth has gained that back, and then some - all of this still looks like it could be a fairly natural process...
Certainly, the northern parts of Antarctica are, as you point out, a vital regional area to the overall health of the worlds low-coast regions - but a regional warming of parts of that continent (while other regions of the same continent are getting colder) over a relatively short period of time, does not necessarily indicate global warming influences.
The general belief of most environmental types is that, "if this _could_ be having a bad effect, then we should stop". I believe, "since this _could_ be having a bad effect, we should continue to actively study what is happening, until we know more."
(I don't believe you brought this one up, but it's related)... The Kyoto accord, that the US rejected, was unbalanced. It assumed every single country, as of 1996, had zero environmental controls. Then it said, you must improve your current emmissions by 'x' percent over the next 20 years. Well, if India puts cheap scrubbers on half of it's industries (something we already did to _all_ of our industries back in the 80s) they have fully complied with Kyoto, while we are forced to figure out how to produce even less emissions from our already scrubbed output. So - that said - I think it was smart of us to reject it. I'm happy that the rest of the world wants to clean up though.
That said, I am unhappy about the idea that several states, as varied as Florida and Minnesota, have chosen to stop their vehicle emmissions inspections. Great, our city air is a little cleaner than it was 20 years ago. Meanwhile, I know several people who have taken their older cars - that they "were going to get around to fixing" - back out of the garage, knowing that their cars are spewing horrible emmissions.
Kinetic stupidity has a new brand leader: Allen Zadr.
I can understand your sentiment, I tried not to be misleading, but obviously failed :)
:)
Cheers for the clarification on other stuff
I need a new sig...
So what is the worse case scenario? I have yet to see or hear any informed speculation on that. Should we be rushing to install tsunami warning radar in that area in case large portions calve off into the ocean, or are we just looking toward a slight rise in ocean levels due to melting over a period of time? It seems that not even the experts are sure. The following is an NPR interview with Thomas Wagner, geophysics program manager for the U.S. Antarctic Program. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?story Id=4285059&sourceCode=RSS