Ice probe peers at hidden BOTTOMS of oceans from SPAAACE Space is said to be the final frontier, but in fact there is also a penultimate frontier to be finished off before we get out there: the ocean depths, more than 80 per cent of which, until recently, had remained unmapped and unexplored. Not any more though, because a team of international brainboxes has decided to gaze down …
"Well, 'Volcanic Activity' can be anywhere between Krakatoa-level eruption to a tiny little sulfur fart from between some plates."
I question that. If they can detect sulphurous farts from space, from between plates or whatever, there ought to be a big red X centered on my house.
"Well, 'Volcanic Activity' can be .. a tiny little sulfur fart from between some plates."
I'm not sure the Welsh would appreciate that.
Seriously, I don't think there are any old plate boundaries under Wales. From what I recall of my geology the Welsh slates are related to the closing of the Iapetus & that boundary runs under the Solway & across under Ireland. And the closure took place a long time ago* - Welsh sites gave the Cambrian, Silurian and Ordovician their names.
So the placement of those red blobs is a bit odd.
Allowing for the fact that there was a tremor on or near that line on Boxing Day, 1974.
There's a blob about the area of Snowdon and that was a volcano millions of years ago, but long extinct. No idea what the other one in Wales is, as I can't see there was ever anything there.
Seismic activity is another matter and there are small faults dotted all over, and we do get minor quakes in places, but then again the dots should be all over the place.
"...CryoSat spacecraft, which was actually intended for working out what's happening to the world's ice."
You could film the ice sheets seamlessly in Ultra-High def at 25fps for the past billion years and then present the data, but the petro-chem fans would still complain about a lack of data.
I guess the CryoSat team realised this and went off to film some ocean trenches too as its more fun.
If you just show them evidence like that, then yes, they will still deny the concept of man-made climate change under the banner of correlation =/= causation.
The problems in convincing them is that:
1) the only way to conclusively prove that climate change is man made would be to create a whole new earth that shared our history, sans humans.
2) People rarely change their beliefs, even more so when doing so would reveal a very harsh truth, like how its probably their fault (People hate feeling guilty)
3) Some of the people on the 'climate change is man-made' side are goddamn crazy and are scaring people off
4) People see conspiracies everywhere and the fact that a few well-meaning scientists were caught faking data gives them a lot of evidence towards a conspiracy existing
"..the fact that a few well-meaning scientists were caught faking data.."
I assume you use the term "well-meaning" in the sense of "correct-thinking," yes? Sooo, apparently if a so-called scientist fakes data (because real data doesn't give the correct results), but their hearts are in the right place, we should all give them a pass? Maybe so. I know I'd be pissed if my data obstinately refused to conform to Known Truth. Heck, I might even be tempted to violate the most basic tenets of science!
I used to really like the weather underground site until the owner said that all that happened was a little data was hidden, no big deal. He is among the first to claim that deniers don't look at the data. I guess the site has been sold since to weather.com. I will admit http://www.wunderground.com still has the best user interface.
I am neither a denier or supporter but I see way too much politics and not enough science in the debate.
Pretty useless I would hazard. If it can't spot a thousand tonnes of hot nuclear sub at a few hundred metres down then the chances of spotting a hundred tonnes of cold spread out aircraft bits at a thousand and plus metres deep are pretty slim.
Paris doesn't look amused either.
Quite right. What Cryosat is looking for is more like in the many-million-ton range; and anyway, as a submerged sub has the same density and therefore the same gravity as the surrounding water, it won't lead to a surface-level depression!
If my task was to look for a missing airliner, though, I'd still appreciate a good subsurface map as it would certainly help to interpret what I'd see on my echo sounder. Though I guess I'd end up with a more detailed map from that anyway.
Back to a former topic: A sunken gazillion-ton ancient spaceship, now, that would be something completely different from a sub - that would create a signal.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
