Slashdot Mirror
What's Hidden Under Greenland's Ice?
Roland Piquepaille writes "Ice has covered Greenland for millions of years. So what's hidden under this ice cap? Mountains and valleys? Rivers and lakes? Of course, we might know it sooner than we would have liked if the ice covering Greenland continues to melt. But researchers from Ohio State University have decided that they wanted to know it next year and have developed a radar to reveal views of land beneath polar ice. Their first tests of this new radar, which helps them to catch 3-D images of the ground under the ice, took place in May 2006. The next images will be shot in April 2007. Here are some images of the new GISMO device and what it can do."
shouldn't any mountain ranges be pretty well worn down by now? Scandinavia doesn't have any huge mountains due to the ice ages, so I'd imagine that the same goes for Greenland.
Likely? No... but if it happened it might make certian people reconsider that greenhouse gas/climate change tradeoff issue.
-- 3 events that reshaped the world in the 20th century: WW1, WW2, and WWW
That doesn't really reassure me. Anyone who's lived in a particularly cold climate can tell you that precipitation increases as it gets warmer (given sufficiently cold temperatures), and tends to lessen as it gets very cold, due to the air's inability to hold as much moisture at lower temperatures; it could be that the increased depth of the ice pack in the interior is a direct result of increased snowfall due to warmer atmospheric conditions. That would be rather consistent with increased snowfall in the interior (hence deepening of the ice) and melting at the edges.
I don't know for sure if that's the case, but the fact that the ice depth is increasing in the interior doesn't necessarily refute climate change. It's certainly not an open-and-shut case.
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
The medieval warming period followed the so-called "mini-Ice Age" of the 12th century. During this period, the Black Forest in Europe shrunk to smaller than its current size - all due to people cutting down wood for fires. These fires significantly increased the carbon in the atmosphere. The planet warmed up as a result, slowly but at a sustained rate for over a century. The Black Forest later grew back and the carbon was taken out of the air.
"Software is too expensive to build cheaply"
a lot like the terrain on Baffin Island, another arctic island which underwent intense glaciation in the last ice age - and emerged from it due to slightly milder climate. This picture of Mount Asgard on Baffin Island is likely quite representative of what would be under Greenland's ice. Minus, of course, the moss/lichen/pioneer plants.
Having grown up in the Northeast I'd like to know when it is that we've ever had a white Christmas. In fact, a few years ago I read something about how contrary to the expectation that we should get snow on Christmas very few parts of the country actually see snow on a consistent basis for the holiday. I don't remember the percentage exactly, but it was quite high.
Make it so they can be disabled on the "Customize Stories on the Homepage" part of the user prefs. Seriously, how many Piquepaille blogspams are there compared to Apache stories? Personally, I'd leave them on, but the icon or whatever would be a warning - even though there's usually no substance to the "story", sometimes there are worthwhile posts within the comments. Hopefully, this would also improve said comments, since complaints about these blog posts would no longer be justified.
People taste Greenland beer in Copenhagen. The new beer is said to taste cleaner and smoother. A brewery in Greenland is producing beer using water melted from the ice cap of the vast Arctic island. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/5234194.stm
"It's very simple: The ice sheet atop Greenland has been growing, not melting. I have provided ample evidence to support this assertion. Evidence in the form of observations, not predictions and computer models."
It's anything but simple and you still don't get it. Your "observational evidence" is a confirmation of climate model predictions and the "observational evidence" from the GRACE study (that has been repeatedly pointed out to you, but you have repeatedly ignored), is much more accurate since it was designed specifically to measure the ice mass.
"If you guys want to rationalize that thicker glaciers equals global warming, then go right ahead."
If you want to engage in willfull ignorance to suit your politically inspired dogma, then go right ahead. I am assuming you a smart enough to have a dogmatic political opinion since I cannot think of another reason why you would ignore thousands of scientific papers and concentrate of just two well known skeptical abstracts. Like king Canute, the only person you are fooling is yourself.
If you really want to argue against AGW using the built in skepticism of science then there is a method for doing so, first hypothisise AGW is not happening and then try and prove yourself wrong by prediction and observation. The IPCC reference pages are full of of people smarter than you and I that have tried and failed.
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
> The Vikings that fell for it and settled there ended up all dying some time later,
> leaving behind only a few interesting archaeological sites.
They lasted five hundred years or so.
European settlement in what later became the United States hasn't been around that long, yet.