It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

New Zealand EQ caused 30 million tons of ice from Glacier

page: 1
14
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 22 2011 @ 09:58 AM
link   
I see there are a few threads about this big earthquake down there but I didn't read anything about this huge glacier breaking off 30 millions tons of ice.
How will that affect the ocean I wonder?
I think it's time to really consider leaving coastal regions including Florida. Things just aren't feeling too good.




The earthquake that struck Christchurch has caused some 30 million tons of ice to break off from New Zealand's biggest glacier. Tour guides at the Tasman Glacier in the Southern Alps say the quake caused the ice to "calve" from the glacier, forming icebergs in the terminal lake. Tourists of Glacier Explorer boats say the icefall caused waves of up to 3.5 meters in height which swept up and down the lake for 30 minutes. The glacier is about 120 miles (200 kilometers) from Christchurch on the west coast. The powerful earthquake struck Christchurch on Tuesday, toppling tall buildings and churches, crushing buses and killing at least 65 people.

hisz.rsoe.hu...


Now we can speculate as to why those poor whales beached themselves yesterday.




posted on Feb, 22 2011 @ 10:02 AM
link   





The magnitude 6.3 earthquake that devastated Christchurch was strong enough to shake 30 million tonnes of ice loose from Tasman Glacier at Aoraki Mt Cook National Park.

Passengers of two explorer boats were hit with waves of up to 3.5 metres as the ice crashed into Terminal Lake under the Tasman Glacier at the mountain.

Aoraki Mount Cook Alpine Village tourism manager Denis Callesen said huge icebergs formed in the lake, which were then rocked by massive waves for 30 minutes.

The danger to passengers could have been worse if not for safety proceedures put in place when it was suspected the area was becoming unstable, he said.

"We have procedures to deal with this type of event and for some time have stayed 800 metres away from the Terminal Face as we suspected it was becoming unstable," he said.

It was the third biggest amount of ice to fall in the history of the Terminal Lake, which is now over six kilometres long and two kilomtres wide in places, said Mr Callesen.

He said today's aftershock was the first quake felt at the Aoraki Mt Cook since the major quake last September.

- NZ Herald Staff

www.nzherald.co.nz...



posted on Feb, 22 2011 @ 10:04 AM
link   
reply to post by Human_Alien
 


I know nothing about glaciers or earthquakes or what this could do but you mentioned Florida and well I live on the East coast of the state. How could it affect Florida?

For the record I have had numerous dreams of tsunamis and the oceans receeding here since I was younger. They always freak me out. I have had many where i am at the beach and the water just starts to go back and then a huge wave hits. It is very disturbing and is probably why I avoid the beach at all costs.


Hopefully someone who knows about this will come along and answer.

S^F

As for the whales I do agree that had to do with the EQ. I have read that animals sense things like this so to me it seems very possible that the beaching of those wales is in relation to the EQ that hit....As for the people their I wish them well.



posted on Feb, 22 2011 @ 10:12 AM
link   
So the ice collapse displaced the lake and now the lake is larger in size? Interesting.

Thanks for the link to the information.

So what will the icebergs just sit there in the lake until they melt?
Any estimates on how long the melt could take? 5 years? 500years?



posted on Feb, 22 2011 @ 10:12 AM
link   
reply to post by Human_Alien
 


Yes, I agree with you it should be a very big concern. Earth is at a turning point and we'll all see sonner or later what will happen to it. The true turning point (and I'm waiting for this date to see) will be on the 4th of march which you described well in a previous thread about brown dwarf Nibiru approaching our solar system (sorry I can't find the thread for link tough)
. Anyways, good job and I appreciate somebody doing thread making others people mind getting a little
in our era of conspiracy and great changes.

One thing is for sure, earth cannot continue going how it is THERE HAS to be a dramatic change for a better future.



posted on Feb, 22 2011 @ 10:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by mblahnikluver
reply to post by Human_Alien
 


I know nothing about glaciers or earthquakes or what this could do but you mentioned Florida and well I live on the East coast of the state. How could it affect Florida?

For the record I have had numerous dreams of tsunamis and the oceans receeding here since I was younger. They always freak me out. I have had many where i am at the beach and the water just starts to go back and then a huge wave hits. It is very disturbing and is probably why I avoid the beach at all costs.


Hopefully someone who knows about this will come along and answer.

S^F

As for the whales I do agree that had to do with the EQ. I have read that animals sense things like this so to me it seems very possible that the beaching of those wales is in relation to the EQ that hit....As for the people their I wish them well.


I don't know if this particular glacier will or can affect Florida but I really think this is just the beginning. MSM is warning about a Solar Katrina that's coming our way.

It is my strong belief this is all happening due to Nibiru (Tyche). I just can't shake this feeling. Too many things (on grand levels) are happening at once.....including but not limited to this Global financial meltdown!



posted on Feb, 22 2011 @ 10:23 AM
link   
Replying to give you a bump and subscribe.
My first response when I read the head line was "Great, just frigging great."
I mean what else is there to say? I wonder what this means for sea levels and such. Keep an eye on it for us H_A. I want to know what authorities are going to say about this. (if anything, hah!)



posted on Feb, 22 2011 @ 10:32 AM
link   
The more I read and hear about these events, the happier I am that I live where I do. No oceans, no coastline... the nearest ocean is far beyond the great mountain ranges of the Rockies. On the other sides I have nothing but prairies for 1000's of miles. When the sh*t hits the fan, eventually, I will make like an Iron Maiden song and "Run To The Hills.."



posted on Feb, 22 2011 @ 10:39 AM
link   
This happened in a "terminal" lake. What is that? If its what I think (havent googled yet), this one probably wont effect sea levels at all unless this "lake" water, by some other "event" ends up draining into the sea, after this one melts. (IMO)



posted on Feb, 22 2011 @ 10:39 AM
link   
A Glacier that is already floating on the water will not cause a rise in water levels. If it was on land, THEN it will cause a raise in water levels. The weight of the glacier on the water was already displacing the water at just in a solid form whereas now it will still be the same even it if melts.



posted on Feb, 22 2011 @ 10:43 AM
link   
thanks for the thread.very interesting...all this talk about rising sea lvls and tsunamis has me wondering...i live in maine and in the event of a tsunami i can manage to get 75 miles away from the shore and 2000 feet above sea lvl in about 30 min. time.now i was wondering...is that good enough?can someone help me out w that?
thanks so much for this awsome site!



posted on Feb, 22 2011 @ 11:01 AM
link   
we need all the worlds ice to melt to dilute all the CO2 we put into the oceans from burning hundreds of Trillions of barrels of oil and hundreds of Trillions of coal/natural gas we've burnt.

We've released millions of years of stored sun energy/carbons in only 100 years. Our CO2 levels haven't been this high in 45 million years....and we ain't even had our strato volcanoes go off yet. It's going to get worse, not better.

Our only hope is if the US Navy uses John Kanzius's method to use radio waves to burn salt water (breaks H20 into Hydrogen/Oxygen better than electrolysis)..and we start using the oceans as a fuel source...cleaning them at the same time. They've got contracts researching it right now. But they're stupid and want to use the Fischer-Tropsche process to turn salt water into diesel/jet fuel.....just making matters worse. They want to use that method because if technology gets out to use saltwater to power your car Governments/corporations wouldn't make Trillions.

So now we have to hope China/Russia perfects John Kanzius's salt water burning method. Radio waves break H20 into hydrogen/oxygen VERY easily..less energy required than electrolysis.



posted on Feb, 22 2011 @ 12:47 PM
link   


I see there are a few threads about this big earthquake down there but I didn't read anything about this huge glacier breaking off 30 millions tons of ice. How will that affect the ocean I wonder?

I think it's time to really consider leaving coastal regions including Florida. Things just aren't feeling too good.


I don't know how much that would raise water levels, any part of the glacier that was already under the water, wouldn't count in being able to raise the levels, it's already in the water.

I wonder how much fresh water it takes to mess up the salinity of the ocean? Even if it isn't enough to affect the world's oceans, it might affect sea life in the immediate area of where ever it ends up melting, just by putting in too much fresh water.



posted on Feb, 22 2011 @ 12:53 PM
link   
@H_A

I've been reading a lot of your threads lately especially the Nibirus stuff.

It seems that my child dreams are finally coming true, my dreams back in the day's when I was younger was always that earth had a massive planet to look at, bigger then the moon but it destructed all in it's way...

Each Dream with this Big Planet in the Sky was causing Havoc on Earth and I was running for my Life..Now if this is really coming true if something or someone allready prepared me for what has to come.

I am trying to inform my Family about it, my friends but they all think I am nuts...Well no one want's to believe it.

I have a lot of Friends in Australia and the NZ Earthquake shocked me as well.

To be Honest...I don't know even know what I can do if this happens..Stay at home and wait? Or try to get into a plane?

No Clue


It is just a matter of time I think.

Thanks for your many posts, I like it a lot.



posted on Feb, 22 2011 @ 07:02 PM
link   
reply to post by Human_Alien
 


How much does one Gigatonne of melted ice (1 km³ of water) raise the oceans?

The oceans occupy 361 million square kilometers ( 361 x 10^6 km²) of the Earth’s surface.

If one cubic kilometer of water (i.e., one gigatonne of water) is spread evenly over the entire 361 million square kilomters, the thickness of the new layer of water will be given by:

1 km³ / 361 x 106 km² = 2.78 x 10-6 meters = 2.78 microns.

Or, in terms of gigatonnes:

1 Gt x (1 km³/Gt) / 361 x 106 km² = 2.78 x 10-6 meters = 2.78 microns / Gt

That is, one cubic kilometer of water (i.e., one gigatonne of water) will add less than 3 millionths of a meter to the oceans!

30,000,000 tons is 33.33 times smaller so this lot, if it was not in the glacier lake which it is, would manage to raise the sea level by 0.0834 MICRONS.


Oops: Linky poo

edit on 22/2/2011 by PuterMan because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 22 2011 @ 07:13 PM
link   
[Not to be a wise guy but can you translate 0.0834 MICRONS, to inches?
please puterman
edit on 22-2-2011 by G.A.G. because: addressed to incorrect author



posted on Feb, 22 2011 @ 07:16 PM
link   
Didn't it fall off into a lake and not the ocean?
It should have next to no effect at all on the oceans, Mt Cook and the Tasman glacier are inland by a fair way. Not to metion the fact that your own link has stated that this is only the 3rd largest piece of ice to have snapped off in the LAKE. How much did the two larger ones effect the ocean?
They didn't, because it's a lake, it created the lake yes but nothing happened in the ocean at all.



It was the third biggest amount of ice to fall in the history of the Terminal Lake, which is now over six kilometres long and two kilomtres wide in places, said Mr Callesen.


en.wikipedia.org...


It is estimated that the Tasman Glacier will eventually disappear and the terminal Tasman Lake will reach a maximum size in 10 to 19 years time. In 1973 Tasman Glacier had no terminal lake and by 2008 Tasman Lake was 7 km long, 2 km wide and 245m deep

edit on 22-2-2011 by pazcat because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 23 2011 @ 05:57 AM
link   
reply to post by G.A.G.
 


Hi G.A.G

0.834 Microns = 0.00003283464566929134 Inches. There are 25,400 microns in an inch so put another way you would need 304556.355 of those icebergs to raise the global sea level by 1 inch.

Convert Microns to Inches



posted on Feb, 23 2011 @ 06:08 AM
link   
reply to post by thruthseek3r
 


The world is NOT ending on March 4th!

Get over it!

Stop bringing the doom forward!



posted on Feb, 23 2011 @ 06:24 AM
link   
reply to post by muzzleflash
 




Corect me if I'm wrong , but isn't that what Archimedes discovered 2200 years ago?!

library.thinkquest.org...

" When an object is immersed in water, it feels lighter. In a cylinder filled with water, the action of inserting a mass in the liquid causes it to displace upward. In 212 B.C., the Greek scientist Archimedes discovered the following principle: an object is immersed in a fluid is buoyed up by a force equal to the weight of the fluid displaced by the object. This became known as Archimede's principle. The weight of the displaced fluid can be found mathematically. The fluid displaced has a weight W = mg. The mass can now be expressed in terms of the density and its volume, m = pV. Hence, W = pVg.

It is important to note that the buoyant force does not depend on the weight or shape of the submerged object, only on the weight of the displaced fluid. Archimede's principle applies to object of all densities. If the density of the object is greater than that of the fluid, the object will sink. If the density of the object is equal to that of the fluid, the object will neither sink or float. If the density of the object is less than that of the fluid, the object will float. "



new topics

top topics



 
14
<<   2 >>

log in

join