Evidence Points To Huge Underground River Beneath Amazon

chill writes "Researchers at the department of geophysics of the Brazil National Observatory have showed evidence of the existence of an underground river that flows 13,000 feet beneath the Amazon. The newly-named Hamza is said to be 3,700 miles long, flowing 13,000 feet below the Amazon. Both rivers flow from west to east, but the Hamza flows at only a fraction of the speed of Amazon."

Comments

No a river, it's called an Aquifer

[thomasdz]

Geesh.... the term "underground river" evokes an image of a continuous flow of only water perhaps going through a long cave or something... not water travelling through rock, also known as an "Aquifer"

Re:No a river, it's called an Aquifer

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes. this BBC article gives a more informative and balanced explanation.

Even the evidence for unusual amounts of subsurface groundwater flow is equivocal. It looks like a rather ordinary aquifer.

Re:Hamza?

[Chris Mattern]

They named it for the Brazilian scientist who led the discovery team, Valiya Hamza. What more indigenous do you want?

Re:Hamza?

[Omestes]

...while its proper name, given by Native Americans, is Weemoteeuktuk.

Proper to whom? Which group of Native Americans, there are tons of them up there. The Navajo, the Ute, the Hopi, the Paiute, the Havasupai, the Hualapai? I'm sure I'm missing some tribes.

I wasn't aware that names weren't allowed to change. The first name something is given, is its name forever. I'm sure this is going to make me loose some "cultural feel good woo" points, but I'm past the point of caring. A name is a name, it isn't a magical identifier. The proper name for the Grand Canyon, in English, is "The Grand Canyon". Why is this proper? Because if I mention it to another English speaker they will know what the hell I'm talking about. If I say "Weemoteeuktuk", no one (even most natives) won't have a damn clue. If, in whatever language, "Weemoteeuktuk" is meaningful, and common, then that is the proper name within the smaller community, though they too will recognize what I'm referring to what I say "The Grand Canyon", making the term much more useful and ubiquitous. And thus superior, and this closer to "proper".

No, I don't think some mythical sense of inclusion is more important than clarity and the ability to communicate. The latter are the point of language, the former is for the the sociologists and odd Caucasian apologists.