Author |
Share Topic Topic Search Topic Options
|
opuslola
Tsar
suspended
Joined: 23-Sep-2009
Location: Long Beach, MS,
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4620
|
Quote Reply
Topic: Megaflood 'made Island Britain' Posted: 15-Jan-2014 at 21:06 |
Well Red, it seems that during Ice Ages, there can be created vast lakes kept in bounds by Ice Dams, and to make the theory have some feet, maybe that is what caused the great fast flow of water?
I.e. the ice dam broke!
Regards, Ron
Edited by opuslola - 15-Jan-2014 at 21:06
|
http://www.quotationspage.com/subjects/history/
|
![Back to Top Back to Top](forum_images/back_to_top.png) |
red clay
Administrator
Tomato Master Emeritus
Joined: 14-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 10226
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 15-Jan-2014 at 09:19 |
Why?
|
"Arguing with someone who hates you or your ideas, is like playing chess with a pigeon. No matter what move you make, your opponent will walk all over the board and scramble the pieces".
Unknown.
|
![Back to Top Back to Top](forum_images/back_to_top.png) |
opuslola
Tsar
suspended
Joined: 23-Sep-2009
Location: Long Beach, MS,
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4620
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 15-Jan-2014 at 00:33 |
Dear
RedClay, would you like to reconsider your post here?
Ron
|
http://www.quotationspage.com/subjects/history/
|
![Back to Top Back to Top](forum_images/back_to_top.png) |
elenos
Chieftain
Joined: 13-Jun-2007
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1457
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 26-Jul-2007 at 00:57 |
I fould that interesting about the water channels, but again not enough information.
|
elenos
|
![Back to Top Back to Top](forum_images/back_to_top.png) |
DukeC
Arch Duke
Joined: 07-Nov-2005
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1564
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 25-Jul-2007 at 13:35 |
More specifically the water from melting icesheets that could be over a mile in thickness that often formed huge lakes behind icedams and other features. When these gave way incredible force was released, and the floods were often repeated.
The evidence the article cites is the water channels etched into the bottom of the English channel.
Edited by DukeC - 25-Jul-2007 at 14:39
|
![Back to Top Back to Top](forum_images/back_to_top.png) |
elenos
Chieftain
Joined: 13-Jun-2007
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1457
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 25-Jul-2007 at 02:45 |
Yes, very good, but I have already answered a similar question. For all others wanting to ask the same question, yes I agree! Water from iceberg melt can change lands. But the original article doesn't say anything like that. As I have pointed twice now that original article needs more evidence ans is badly worded.
|
elenos
|
![Back to Top Back to Top](forum_images/back_to_top.png) |
DukeC
Arch Duke
Joined: 07-Nov-2005
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1564
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 25-Jul-2007 at 01:24 |
Water has the potential to dramatically alter landforms, the Missoula Floods removed an estimated 50 cubic miles of land from eastern Washington state.
The peak flow of the largest floods is estimated to be 40 to 60 cubic kilometers per hour (9.5 to 15 cubic miles per hour).[1][2] The maximum flow speed approached 36 meters/second (80 miles per hour).[3] Up to 1.91019 joules of potential energy were released by each flood, the equivalent of 4500 megatons of TNT.[4] The cumulative effect of the floods was to excavate 210 km (50 mi) of loess, sediment and basalt from the channeled scablands of eastern Washington and to transport it downstream.[1] |
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missoula_Floods
|
![Back to Top Back to Top](forum_images/back_to_top.png) |
elenos
Chieftain
Joined: 13-Jun-2007
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1457
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 19-Jul-2007 at 22:04 |
Very good point, Red Clay. What Im saying is it would have
taken more that just a lake to make the English Channel a
permanent feature. The explanation given by the researcher for the event is
just not good enough to carry water so to speak. However the article you sent
gives example of believable causes. it is estimated from the annually-banded Greenland
ice-core that the annual-mean temperature increased by as much as 10C in 10
years. Great stuff, brief and to the point. As that same article says,. This
is a touchy subject that is currently the focus of much research.
Have you noticed how some, dont know who, dispute causes
for greenhouse affects? Cutting down carbons may prevent climate change in the
short term but not in the long term, for sudden climatic variation is a natural
feature of this earth. We dont have to worry about it for may take a lifetime,
but then, have you heard, beware of 2012!
|
elenos
|
![Back to Top Back to Top](forum_images/back_to_top.png) |
elenos
Chieftain
Joined: 13-Jun-2007
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1457
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 19-Jul-2007 at 21:15 |
Great map, Dolphin, love it. In Australia the word "stoush" is an adjective and a verb. A lot of these great old words are dying now, unfortunately. During WWI the newspapers refered to the "The Great Stoush" and a battle was "a bit of the stoush". Yes, many Australian terms did originate from Ireland. But much traces back to the seventieth century.
The convict used what was called the "flash" language common among Londoners of the period which included rhyming slang. That gave a whole new flavor to the English language. To have a "butchers hook" was to go and take a look. "Me old china" could mean your wife, meaning dinner plate, meaning, oh never mind. It started off as a way of confusing authorities who always wanted to speak proper!
|
elenos
|
![Back to Top Back to Top](forum_images/back_to_top.png) |
red clay
Administrator
Tomato Master Emeritus
Joined: 14-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 10226
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 19-Jul-2007 at 19:23 |
Originally posted by elenos
Britain became separated from mainland Europe after a catastrophic flood some time before 200,000 years ago, a sonar study of the English Channel confirms.
I read carefully through the evidence. I found it confusing about what it was trying to say and nowhere near the usual BBC standard of scientific reporting. That a hypothetical lake caused such a huge flood is beyond belief. I would say to produce evidence of this mystical lake before producing the secondary evidence of flooding which could have been caused by other factors. Then the article does not mention core samples. For all the millions of core samples taken in the area one could produce a pattern that shows whether it was fresh of salt water that first flowed through. This technique is well known. |
Beyond belief? This is from a publication by The Earth Institute At Columbia U.
Around 15,000 years ago, the Earth started warming abruptly after ~ 100,000 years of an "ice age"; this is known as a glacial termination. The large ice sheets, which covered significant parts of North America and Europe, began melting as a result. A climatic optimum known as the "Blling-Allerd" was reached shortly thereafter, around 14,700 before present. However, starting at about 12,800 BP, the Earth returned very quickly into near glacial conditions (i.e. cold, dry and windy), and stayed there for about 1,200 years: this is known as the Younger Dryas (YD), since it is the most recent interval where a plant characteristic of cold climates, Dryas Octopetala, was found in Scandinavia.
The most spectacular aspect of the YD is that it ended extremely abruptly (around 11,600 years ago), and although the date cannot be known exactly, it is estimated from the annually-banded Greenland ice-core that the annual-mean temperature increased by as much as 10C in 10 years.
Why was there a Younger Dryas?
This is a touchy subject that is currently the focus of much research. One explanation is the one involving a thermohaline circulation (THC) shutdown, triggered by a catastrophic discharge of freshwater from Lake Agassiz (figure 2). The consequence is a rapid reduction in northward ocean heat transports, leading to an abrupt cooling over Northern Europe and North America. That is why so much attention is focused on the behavior of the North Atlantic ocean circulation: not only by scientists, but also Hollywood screenplay writers. Bear in mind, however, that the greenhouse world we are creating through fossil fuel burning might not behave at all like the Earth of 12,800 years ago, so that this scenario may be irrelevant for future climate change.
![Lake%20Agassi](http://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/res/pi/arch/images/agassi.jpg)
Figure 2: (Left) The outline of Lake Agassiz just before the catastrophic flood. At that time its outlet was to the south into the Mississippi drainage. (Right) The outline after the opening of the eastward outlet. A volume of 9500 cubic kilometers of water was suddenly released to the northern Atlantic through the St. Lawrence Valley (Leverington et al. 2000). (Source: Broecker, 2003)
A problem with this hypothesis is the timing of meltwater pulses that are supposed to have triggered the THC shutdown: it was found that a second meltwater pulse, albeit slightly smaller than the first one, occurred at the end of the YD (Fairbanks, 1989): why didn't it also trigger a similar chain of consequences in the climate system?
An alternate explanation (Clement et al., 2001) invokes the abrupt cessation in the El Nino -Southern Oscillation in response to changes in the orbital parameters of the Earth, although how such a change would impact regions away from the Tropics remains to be explained.
The respective merits of both hypotheses have been laid out by Broecker (2003). The issue is far from being settled, and actively researched at Lamont and elsewhere.
Were there any other events like this one?
There are many other examples of abrupt climate change in the last 50,000 years, which bear the rather cryptic names of Heinrich, and Dansgaard/Oeschger events.
|
"Arguing with someone who hates you or your ideas, is like playing chess with a pigeon. No matter what move you make, your opponent will walk all over the board and scramble the pieces".
Unknown.
|
![Back to Top Back to Top](forum_images/back_to_top.png) |
Parnell
Suspended
Suspended
Joined: 04-Apr-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1409
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 19-Jul-2007 at 12:01 |
And see that little bit that eats into the north, we are at nearly the very northern part of that.
|
![Back to Top Back to Top](forum_images/back_to_top.png) |
Dolphin
Arch Duke
Suspended
Joined: 06-Feb-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1551
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 19-Jul-2007 at 11:18 |
No worries Denbomb, arguments are what get me up in the morning. Seriously.
We would call a stoush a 'bit a banter' in were we come from, but not if it came to blows. Its a northern Ireland term but sure I'm right on the border anyway so have a mix of the cultures. Me and Parnell both hail from a small county called Monaghan, on the border of Northern Ireland. It the light blue county near the top.
I just always wanted to put that map up..
|
![Back to Top Back to Top](forum_images/back_to_top.png) |
elenos
Chieftain
Joined: 13-Jun-2007
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1457
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 19-Jul-2007 at 08:42 |
I forgot that was just an Australian term! I try not to use them. It means a fight, come to blows, a dispute, a heated argument, no idea of the origin.
|
elenos
|
![Back to Top Back to Top](forum_images/back_to_top.png) |
Parnell
Suspended
Suspended
Joined: 04-Apr-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1409
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 19-Jul-2007 at 08:15 |
Whats a 'stoush'???
|
![Back to Top Back to Top](forum_images/back_to_top.png) |
elenos
Chieftain
Joined: 13-Jun-2007
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1457
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 19-Jul-2007 at 08:09 |
Whoa! Seems I'm missing out on a good stoush here. And here's me sitting with the TV on with a program about global warming!
|
elenos
|
![Back to Top Back to Top](forum_images/back_to_top.png) |
Parnell
Suspended
Suspended
Joined: 04-Apr-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1409
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 19-Jul-2007 at 08:05 |
I was just messing around really Kinsella, didn't mean to annoy you or anything - but my point is that you cannot possibly point the finger at me for using someone elses opinion to back up my own as being stupid - I don't claim to be a Climate scientist, and neither can you. My 'opinion' on a scientific matter is irrelevant, as is yours. Which is why we have to argue facts on issues like Global warming, not our 'opinions'
Is that any clearer??
|
![Back to Top Back to Top](forum_images/back_to_top.png) |
Dolphin
Arch Duke
Suspended
Joined: 06-Feb-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1551
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 19-Jul-2007 at 08:04 |
Global warming is happening in hundreds of years, says who? How do we know how long it will take? The biggest supercomputer in the world cannot predict that with any accuracy so its just guesswork, we simply don't know. There are glaciers growing in New Zealand. Why is that? Does it refute global warming? Of course not. But what it does do is prove that not everything is black and white in nature, science, of interpretation of data, or of the accepted role we have in all this.
And I can offer proof, just like you can, because I read books, I read the paper, I browse the internet, I keep informed. This is not a knowledge issue, it is an interpretive one, meaning that no matter how much facts you put on the table, others can be sourced to refute them. Simply, none is right or wrong, but some are harder to prove than others, such as global warming. This is an abstract, media created term that does not specify the true insinuations behind its catching exterior. Its not like the exoskeleton of invertebrates containing chitin, or the amount of bones we have in our hand, this issue by its nature is vague, and no matter how many sources you forward to back your point, it will not be proven beyond doubt. Yeah, the world is changing, and quickly, and yeah the people are changing too, and very slowly. Does this equal the end of civilisation as we know it? Maybe, but we've only been here for a blink anyway, so what ya goina do? I aint goina start losing sleep about how i'm killing the world, because the world is going to live on, it is just our present array of organisms that won't. It's just a matter of time. We may make it quicker, yeah, but what's a blink in a day of time?
|
![Back to Top Back to Top](forum_images/back_to_top.png) |
Dolphin
Arch Duke
Suspended
Joined: 06-Feb-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1551
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 19-Jul-2007 at 07:51 |
Who's being arrogant now?
Ok so i'm moronic and ridiculously vague and arrogant and cliched, and you think that to put this in your post is to make your point more valid? Thats just silly, you can't bang on about facts and references if you use personal insults to further your point. In fact, it totally discredits it. That is why you cant try to patronise or correct me, as you fail to meet even your own standards.
|
![Back to Top Back to Top](forum_images/back_to_top.png) |
Parnell
Suspended
Suspended
Joined: 04-Apr-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1409
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 19-Jul-2007 at 07:32 |
There has been an upward thrend since the middle ages, long before the industrial revolution, so our behaviour is contributory to the trend, it is not all our fault. Simple as that we do not have to take complete responsibility. In fact, fossil records have shown numerous dramatic increase in global temperatures, paired with subsequent falls. It is only in our constrained notions about timescale that we think this wont happen again. We are a drop in a stream in the ocean of time and such changes will happen again, whether we add to it or not.
|
Its happens usually in geological time, which implies hundreds of thousands of years. In this case, Global warming, its happening in hundreds of years. Really, cop on FFS.
|
![Back to Top Back to Top](forum_images/back_to_top.png) |
Parnell
Suspended
Suspended
Joined: 04-Apr-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1409
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 19-Jul-2007 at 07:31 |
What are you right about? You cannot have an opinion on something (Especially something scientific) if your not informed. Believing otherwise is being MORONIC. You have offered no proof for any of your assertions, and you have the arrogance to say that you are right! Global warming isn't an idea... Keep your cliches for the elitist psychology/philosophy crap - this is real stuff, with real issues with a real science if not properly adressed will have us all in bother.
|
![Back to Top Back to Top](forum_images/back_to_top.png) |