Russian scientists reach buried Antarctic Lake Vostok

page: 4
85
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 6 2012 @ 07:02 PM
link   
reply to post by Jace26
 


Sorry but you don't just get a large part or a territory due to your proximity to it! It's not like it;s joined or a distance that you can travel on a small boat or something. Being the closest country to the land doesn't automatically give you the right to that territory. Look at all the British territory around the world that had been claimed huge distances from the UK. If nobody is there and you start colonising it you have more right to it than another country that happens to be near by but has never bothered to go there in any significant way.




posted on Feb, 6 2012 @ 07:04 PM
link   
reply to post by PhoenixOD
 


Well you certainly don't sound like one.
Australia takes its claim there VERY seriously, in fact in order to protect Australian territorial waters in Antarctica the government has suggested warships be sent. Which I would have thought violated the Antarctic Treaty which bans military operations there. But we'll see...



posted on Feb, 6 2012 @ 07:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Jace26
 


Sorry but it is a separate country to Australia so claiming you deserve it merely for being near by is poking your nose in trying to get something for nothing.Territory is not claimed by being close to it! It makes it easier to claim territory yes, but you can't claim it after other nations have actually bothered to go there, survey it and establish themselves on it. Unless you want to try and conquer it from the people who have arrived there.



posted on Feb, 6 2012 @ 07:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Daughter2
 





Why are all these countries spending money doing this research. My instinct tells me the lake already has been tested and something really important found - now everyone wants a look.


I like the way your instints work
you should start a thread.

It fits in with some of the things I have read recently about needing special permission and no go areas of Antarctica. Please note, I only read that somewhere on ATS and in no way do I know this as a fact.
If



The answer to "Who owns Antarctica" is "no-one and everyone".

Why cant anyone explore Antartica at their own risk?

Maybe more recent technology has allowed these nations to discover somthing very interesting is bellow the ice.
Now the race is on!
Also from the link www.msnbc.msn.com...


It's an effort that began more than 10 years ago, and one that has been plagued by difficulties — and this season, the stakes are higher than ever. If they don't reach the lake before they are forced to leave for the winter, the Russian team will be forced to wait two more years to sample water from the lake, and discover what may be living in it.

Maybe they (the teams from the US and the UK) are not worried about the current Russian scientists finding much, only a small sample of the water.

This has to be a hollywood dream, there are so many scenarios that could make some great movie plots that havn't already been done.
edit on 6/2/12 by dadfortruth1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 6 2012 @ 07:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by clintdelicious
reply to post by Jace26
 


Sorry but you don't just get a large part or a territory due to your proximity to it! It's not like it;s joined or a distance that you can travel on a small boat or something. Being the closest country to the land doesn't automatically give you the right to that territory. Look at all the British territory around the world that had been claimed huge distances from the UK. If nobody is there and you start colonising it you have more right to it than another country that happens to be near by but has never bothered to go there in any significant way.


No, we actually got it because Britain gave it to us (transferred sovereignty to us).
So nevertheless it is very close, we have historical ties to it as well which most countries particularly northern ones like China, Brazil, Russia, America,etc have no historical connection.
In fact this here will explain Australias historical connection;


The Australian claim is based on a long historical association with this part of Antarctica. Australia's Douglas Mawson (later Sir Douglas Mawson) led a group of Australians and New Zealanders in the 1911 to 1914 Australasian Antarctic Expedition, which had bases at Commonwealth Bay, south of Tasmania, and the Shackleton Ice Shelf south of Perth. This expedition explored extensively along the coast near the bases.

Mawson also led the British, Australian and New Zealand Antarctic Research Expedition (BANZARE) of 1929 to 1931. During this expedition Mawson claimed what is now Australian Antarctic Territory as British sovereign territory. Early in 1933, Britain asserted sovereign rights over the claimed territory and placed the territory under the authority of the Commonwealth of Australia.


en.wikipedia.org...

"If nobody is there and you start colonising it you have more right to it than another country"

Thats right, nobody was there, and an Australian claimed it for Australia, so we have more right to it than other countries.
edit on Mon Feb 6 2012 by DontTreadOnMe because: IMPORTANT: Using Content From Other Websites on ATS



posted on Feb, 6 2012 @ 07:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Jace26
 


Sorry if I'm ignorant of the issue but is Australia's only basis of it's claim that it is closest to it? Were they the first to send people there and to discover and explore it? That's normally how new fund territories and claimed I believe, You can't just come along after a while and say 'wait you may have been here long before us, but we come from somewhere closer than you so that means that you now have to hand it over to us, you may have done the discovering, exploring, surveying etc but we are nearby....' being near doesn't mean a thing I'm afraid.

Look at the Falklands, they are far from the UK but they are a million times more British than Argentinian!



posted on Feb, 6 2012 @ 07:14 PM
link   
I guess I'll ask again, since no one on here can give me a straight answer.

Everyone keeps talking about some "METALLIC OBJECT" on the bottom of Lake Vostok. So can someone PLEASE give me some more information about this?

Or are people simply making this up?



posted on Feb, 6 2012 @ 07:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Jace26
 


Thank you for that info, just shows how little we hear about it because I have heard the British and Norwegan exploration stories but never heard that one! Apologies that I assumed you were basing it on something else and thank you for educating me. I am going to get stuck in to this now!



posted on Feb, 6 2012 @ 07:16 PM
link   
reply to post by clintdelicious
 


DID YOU NOT READ WHAT I JUST WROTE??????




Sovereignty over the Territory was transferred from Britain to Australia under the Australian Antarctic Territory Acceptance Act 1933, which came into effect in 1936. This act stated:

That part of the Territory in the Antarctic seas which comprises all the islands and territories, other than Adelie Land, situated south of the 60th degree south latitude and lying between the 160th degree east longitude and the 45th degree east longitude, is hereby declared to be accepted by the Commonwealth as a Territory under the authority of the Commonwealth, by the name of the Australian Antarctic Territory.


www.antarctica.gov.au...
IT IS AUSTRALIAN TERRITORY, MUCH LIKE THE FALKLANDS ARE BRITISH TERRITORY. AUSTRALIA WAS THERE FIRST, WE MAPPED AND EXPLORED IT, WE MADE CLAIMS TO IT, WE WERE THE FIRST THERE, ITS OURS.
edit on Mon Feb 6 2012 by DontTreadOnMe because: IMPORTANT: Using Content From Other Websites on ATS



posted on Feb, 6 2012 @ 07:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Jace26
 


No matter who *claims* it. If anything of amazing value, be it mineral, technological, whatever. If it turns out to be of extreme value...pieces of paper won't mean squat.

The one with the most power, guns, ammunition, will *take* and keep it.


Des



posted on Feb, 6 2012 @ 07:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Destinyone
 


Yes very true, but the only way to take control of the Australian Antarctic Territory is to take over Australia first otherwise the mining operations would be under consistent assault as Australia is very close to it and has already expressed it will fight to keep control of it.



posted on Feb, 6 2012 @ 07:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by UnstoppableDestroyer

I guess I'll ask again, since no one on here can give me a straight answer.

Everyone keeps talking about some "METALLIC OBJECT" on the bottom of Lake Vostok. So can someone PLEASE give me some more information about this?



You are right, UnstoppableDestroyer.

You are referring to the cause of the "Magnetic Anomaly".
Fact is, nobody knows for certain.
Official explanations suck, as they often do, and smell of a cover-up.

I can only give you my personal take.
Either it is an Alien Spaceship, buried there thousands of years ago,
or an Alien "device" of some sort.

Or... we enter in the Hollow Earth Theory realm,
which I do not discard at all.
It is a possibility. Quite interesting possibility, in my opinion.

I do not buy that it is anything "natural".
edit on 6-2-2012 by HeywoodFloyd because: edit



posted on Feb, 6 2012 @ 07:26 PM
link   
reply to post by UnstoppableDestroyer
 


try this www.exohuman.com...

I think I read a good ATS thread not long ago.



posted on Feb, 6 2012 @ 07:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Jace26
 




AUSTRALIA WAS THERE FIRST, WE MAPPED AND EXPLORED IT, WE MADE CLAIMS TO IT, WE WERE THE FIRST THERE, ITS OURS.


Really..?


The first confirmed sighting of mainland Antarctica cannot be accurately attributed to one single person. It can, however, be narrowed down to three individuals. According to various sources, three men all sighted Antarctica within days or months of each other: Fabian von Bellingshausen, a captain in the Russian Imperial Navy; Edward Bransfield, a captain in the British navy; and Nathaniel Palmer, an American sealer out of Stonington, Connecticut.



The first person to realize that he had actually discovered a whole continent was Charles Wilkes, the commander of a United States Navy expedition. His 1840 voyage discovered what is now known as Wilkes Land, on the southeast quadrant of the continent.



In 1903, the Scottish National Antarctic Expedition established Osmond House, a meteorological observatory on Laurie Island in the South Orkneys. A year later, ownership of the base was passed to Argentina and it was renamed to Orcadas Base. It is the continent's oldest permanent base, and, until World War II, the only one present.



Ernest Shackleton, who had been a member of Scott's expedition, organized and led the British Imperial Antarctic Expedition (1907–09), again with the primary objective of reaching the South Pole. It came within 180 km (97 nautical miles) before having to turn back. During the expedition, Shackleton discovered the Beardmore Glacier and was the first to reach the polar plateau. Parties led by T. W. Edgeworth David also became the first to climb Mount Erebus and to reach the South Magnetic Pole.



US Navy Rear Admiral Richard Evelyn Byrd led five expeditions to Antarctica during the 1930s, 1940s, and 1950s. He overflew the South Pole with pilot Bernt Balchen on November 28 and 29, 1929, to match his overflight of the North Pole in 1926. Byrd's explorations had science as a major objective and pioneered the use of aircraft on the continent. Byrd is credited with doing more for Antarctic exploration than any other explorer. His expeditions set the scene for modern Antarctic exploration and research.



In 1956, a United States Navy expedition set up the first permanent base at the South Pole, Amundsen-Scott South Pole Station, by airlift, to support the International Geophysical Year. In 1958, Edmund Hillary's party in the New Zealand party of the Commonwealth Trans-Antarctic Expedition became the third group in history to reach the South Pole by land, and the first group of motor vehicles to reach the pole. The British team led by Vivian Fuchs, met them at the pole shortly afterwards


Source The history of Antarctica



edit on 6-2-2012 by PhoenixOD because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 6 2012 @ 07:37 PM
link   
post removed for serious violation of ATS Terms & Conditions



posted on Feb, 6 2012 @ 07:40 PM
link   



posted on Feb, 6 2012 @ 07:54 PM
link   
reply to post by UnstoppableDestroyer
 


I do think its possible that there is some geothermal activity going on down there that might keep the water liquid. I've seen it indicated in several images of the lake but these seem to just be theoretical. As for the Metallic / magnetic anomaly i cant really guess at this time. But its certainly one of the more interesting features of this lake.

edit on 6-2-2012 by PhoenixOD because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 6 2012 @ 08:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by UnstoppableDestroyer
I guess I'll ask again, since no one on here can give me a straight answer.

Everyone keeps talking about some "METALLIC OBJECT" on the bottom of Lake Vostok. So can someone PLEASE give me some more information about this?

Or are people simply making this up?


They don't know what is down there, only that there are magnetic anomalies, it's very likely natural from volcanic activity. A large vein of iron ore could explain the readings.



posted on Feb, 6 2012 @ 08:08 PM
link   
Whelp, it looks like they got more than they bargained for.


I'm just going to go ahead and drill into a 500 million year old lake.

*OH MY GOD IT'S...*radio cut off*


Big suprise! They finally finish drilling through and no one hears for the again...I think we've seen this before somewhere....



posted on Feb, 6 2012 @ 08:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by UnstoppableDestroyer
I guess I'll ask again, since no one on here can give me a straight answer.

Everyone keeps talking about some "METALLIC OBJECT" on the bottom of Lake Vostok. So can someone PLEASE give me some more information about this?

Or are people simply making this up?


It is refered to as a magnetic anomally.
I joined ATS yesterday, so as to address this question in a round about way.
Here is my first post on ATS from the other thread. VBT

Magnetic anomally would refer to something caused by ferrous deposits, (Iron or steel) structures, or artifact.

If Wiki is correct about Iron deposits, my hunch is right. In our experience, it probably doesnt belong there, thus the government interest.
Wiki: "Iron-rich sedimentary rocks have economic uses as iron ores. Iron deposits are located on all major continents with the exception of Antarctica".

Logic tells us it is not a alien space craft. It would not be built of heavy materials, if indeed there are such craft.

High levels of Oxygen would cause steel or iron to degrade rapidly, although Nitrogen may inhibit this action.
The Early Iron Age was around 1200 - 1000 BCE
The Iron Age II was around 1000 - 586 BCE Egypt: Beginning of iron production

Iron is a very common element and iron ores occur in the mountainous areas of the eastern desert and Sinai, though high grade ores are rare
In antiquity, casting was not achieved anywhere but in China. The required temperature of 1530°C was not reached in western Eurasia until the Middle Ages. All other metals used by the Egyptians either had a low melting point and/or could be worked cold.
According to the written records the first smelted iron reached Egypt from Tinay, an unknown country probably in western Asia.
This being the only mention of iron in 18th dynasty documents, one may assume that iron was still fairly rare in western Asia at the time. The papyrus Harris, a very extensive and detailed inventory of items donated to temples by Ramses III, mentions iron just once, in a listing of Nile god statues made of various metals: Iron, a statue of the Nile god, nusa.

What might that leave us with? Possibly something meteoric.

My First post on ATS. Greetings, my Friends!
VBT





top topics
 
85
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join