Friday, May 20, 2022
Contact    |    RSS icon Twitter icon Facebook icon  
You are viewing: Home > News > Science & Technology > News story
Welcome Guest ( Login or Register )  

Did you know that you can now support us on Patreon ?

You can subscribe for less than the cost of a cup of coffee - and we'll even throw in a range of exclusive perks as a way to say thank you.
Science & Technology

Huge canyons discovered beneath Antarctica

May 25, 2018 | Comment icon 12 comments

Antarctica was once a warm region filled with forests and swamps. Image Credit: CC BY-SA 2.0 Eli Duke
Giant troughs running for hundreds of kilometers have been found deep beneath the ice at the South Pole.
It might seem like a barren wasteland of snow and ice, but beneath the surface Antarctica is home to a diverse landscape of tall mountains and deep gorges that remain completely hidden from view.

This latest discovery, which was made by a team of researchers led by Dr Kate Winter of Northumbria University, involved using airborne ice-penetrating radar to help map out the terrain.
The largest of the gorges, which has been named Foundation Trough, measures 350km long, 35km wide, and to reach it you would need to drill down more than 2km through the ice.

"These troughs channelise ice from the centre of the continent, taking it towards the coast," said Dr Winter. "Therefore, if climate conditions change in Antarctica, we might expect the ice in these troughs to flow a lot faster towards the sea."

"That makes them really important, and we simply didn't know they existed before now."

Source: BBC News | Comments (12)

Recent comments on this story
Comment icon #3 Posted by paperdyer 4 years ago
So Climate Change may do some good. Looks like "Stargate SG-1" may not have been too far from the mark about Antarctica, except for ETs.
Comment icon #4 Posted by Noxasa 4 years ago
SG-1 had some great writers!
Comment icon #5 Posted by Carlos Allende 4 years ago
_(Kurt Russell & monstrous husky creature look up from playing cards)_
Comment icon #6 Posted by Black Monk 4 years ago
And the Whacky Warmists were telling us in 2000 that British children won't know what snow is in 2010.
Comment icon #7 Posted by Calibeliever 4 years ago
I remember that, lol. And in 2001 most real climate scientists told those whackos to sit down and shut up. If yourmodels make a prediction within a certain range, someone always grabs up the most extreme (and improbable) end of that range and publishes it with !!! at the end of a sentence to sell papers. Then when it doesn't happen everybody says "See? they don't know anything" ... sigh.Al Gore, sensationalheadlines and paid for "experts" have made being a climatologist a very challenging job over the last 2 decades.
Comment icon #8 Posted by Skulduggery 4 years ago
I clicked on this thinking it was giant crayons that were discovered in Antarctica. The magic's gone, now. SMDH
Comment icon #9 Posted by Noxasa 4 years ago
Actually, none of the climate models of the 90's and early 00'spredicted measured observations within their so-called 95% confidence intervals. It's a total failure of climate science modeling. And as of yet, they have not shown to be able to predict the future any betterorshow that any current or historical temperature observations are not just part of normal non-anthropogenic climate variations. The science has a LONG way to go before people spend trillions trying to prevent something they can't even model accurately.
Comment icon #10 Posted by Calibeliever 4 years ago
We don't know everything, so let's not do anything. We know a lot. The scientific principle behind the95% confidence rating you're referring to relates tothe idea of causation and correlation. It implies the confidence that an effect is real vs a misunderstood coincidence. It had nothing to do with the reliability of one model vs another. You're just mixing up ideas.And poorly related facts presented as a logical argument isa political tactic to keep the dull-minded sedated. This is the problem I have when discussing this topic with people who have no real knowledge ofthe subject. Or of s... [More]
Comment icon #11 Posted by Doug1029 4 years ago
Unfortunately, a climate scientist, David Viner, said just exactly that. What he was thinking is beyond me. Climate changeCAN happen that fast, but it hasn't done so in about 10,500 years, so one wouldn't expect it to occur in just ten. Even the Pleistocene/Holocene transition took about 40 years. BUT: climate change is happening and the results are becoming more visible each year. That "Beast from the East" that did in Viner's prediction was the result of the Polar Vortex being pushed southeast from its newwinter home over Greenland by north-flowing warm currents in the Pacific. So V... [More]
Comment icon #12 Posted by Doug1029 4 years ago
If one is going to refer to climate models, one should use the current ones and not ones that are 25 years out-of-date. General Circulation Models (what most people think of as "climate models") have come a long way since then. Today's models couldn't even run on 1990s computers. Note that the most-conservative of the four forecasts made by the IPCC First Assessment Report, actually happened. The IPCC published four scenarios. The most-extreme one is what the newspapers like to report and climate change deniers like to ridicule, but the IPCC never said which of its scenarios would actually... [More]

Please Login or Register to post a comment.

 Total Posts: 7,265,193    Topics: 298,810    Members: 196,938

 Not a member yet ? Click here to join - registration is free and only takes a moment!
Recent news and articles