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.

 

One of World's Biggest Glaciers Gigantic Perito Moreno Glacier in Lake Argentino

page: 1
5

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 24 2012 @ 10:08 PM
link   
Would you do this, me I probably wouldn't one of my fears is heights, but these photographs were so awesome, I couldn't help but post this article, and make a comment. Something this size should make (I know it does me) feel insignificant to the scheme of things.

It must be nice to have the kind of courage and tenancity to climb and walk around something like this, never thought people would want to walk around on something like this, unless maybe for science. Way cool. Sorry don't have latest version of flash, or I would upload these beautiful pictures, still think it might be worth clicking on though.





Sara Malm




The great wall of ice measures 97 square miles and is 19 miles in length so climbing it is not an easy afternoon.The glacier is so large it forms a natural dam, splitting the lake in to two halves.



Incredibly, it is one of only three Patagonian glaciers that is still growing.













Read more: www.dailymail.co.uk...




posted on Jun, 24 2012 @ 11:09 PM
link   
reply to post by 1loserel2
 


Good post.. Being a man of Science, I cant help but wonder what this place looked like 50-100-500+ years ago. With global warming, global climate shifts and everything else in affect, I bet this beautiful glacier is maybe a shadow of what she used to be.



posted on Jun, 25 2012 @ 03:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by SickeningTruths
reply to post by 1loserel2
 


Good post.. Being a man of Science, I cant help but wonder what this place looked like 50-100-500+ years ago. With global warming, global climate shifts and everything else in affect, I bet this beautiful glacier is maybe a shadow of what she used to be.


"Man of science", really? What sort of "science" may I ask?

I also want to know how CLAIMING "i am a man of science" without posting any evidecen to back your claims makes you right.

BTW, here, read some REAL science.


Hormes, A., Beer, J. and Schlüchter, C., 2006. A geochronological approach to understanding the role of solar activity on Holocene glacier length variability in the Swiss Alps. Geogr. Ann., 88 A (4): 281–294.


Abstract — We present a radiocarbon data set of 71 samples of wood and peat material that melted out or sheared out from underneath eight present day mid-latitude glaciers in the Central Swiss Alps. Results indicated that in the past several glaciers have been repeatedly less extensive than they were in the 1990s. The periods when glaciers had a smaller volume and shorter length persisted between 320 and 2500 years. This data set provides greater insight into glacier variability than previously possible, especially for the early and middle Holocene. The radiocarbon-dated periods defined with less extensive glaciers coincide with periods of reduced radioproduction, pointing to a connection between solar activity and glacier melting processes. Measured long-term series of glacier length variations show significant correlation with the total solar irradiance. Incoming solar irradiance and changing albedo can account for a direct forcing of the glacier mass balances. Long-term investigations of atmospheric processes that are in interaction with changing solar activity are needed in order to understand the feedback mechanisms with glacier mass balances.

The Role of Solar Activity on Holocene Glacier Length Variability in the swiss Alps


edit on 25-6-2012 by ElectricUniverse because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 25 2012 @ 03:17 AM
link   
And another research based on REAL science plus some more information...


The Holocene, Vol. 16, No. 5, 697-704 (2006)
DOI: 10.1191/0959683606hl964rp


Multicentury glacier fluctuations in the Swiss Alps during the Holocene
Ulrich E. Joerin
Institute of Geological Sciences, University of Bern, Baltzerstrasse 1, CH-3012 Bern, Switzerland, ujoerin@geo.unibe.ch

Thomas F. Stocker

Climate and Environmental Physics, Physics Institute, University of Bern, Sidlerstrasse 5, CH-3012 Bern, Switzerland

Christian Schlüchter

Institute of Geological Sciences, University of Bern, Baltzerstrasse 1, CH-3012 Bern, Switzerland

Subfossil remains of wood and peat from six Swiss glaciers found in proglacial fluvial sediments indicate that glaciers were smaller than the 1985 reference level and climatic conditions allowed vegetation growth in now glaciated basins. An extended data set of Swiss glacier recessions consisting of 143 radiocarbon dates is presented to improve the chronology of glacier fluctuations. A comparison with other archives and dated glacier advances suggests 12 major recession periods occurring at 9850- 9600, 9300-8650, 8550-8050, 7700-7550, 7450-6550, 6150-5950, 5700-5500, 5200-4400, 4300-3400, 2800-2700, 2150-1850, 1400-1200 cal. yr BP. It is proposed that major glacier fluctuations occurred on a multicentennial scale with a changing pattern during the course of the Holocene. After the Younger Dryas, glaciers receded to a smaller extent and prolonged recessions occurred repeatedly, culminating around 7 cal. kyr BP. After a transition around 6 cal. kyr BP weak fluctuations around the present level dominated. After 3.6 cal. kyr BP less frequent recessions interrupted the trend to advanced glaciers peaking with the prominent ‘Little Ice Age’. This trend is in line with a continuous decrease of summer insolation during the Holocene.

hol.sagepub.com...

To the claim that the 20th century, or even the 21st century have been hotter than in the past there is the following peer-reviewed research among MANY others...



On-line Publication Documentation System for Stockholm University
Full DescriptionUpdate record

Publication type: Article in journal (Reviewed scientific)
Author: Grudd, H (Department of Physical Geography and Quaternary Geology)
Title: Torneträsk tree-ring width and density ad 500–2004: a test of climatic sensitivity and a new 1500-year reconstruction of north Fennoscandian summers
In: Climate Dynamics
Publisher: Springer, Berlin / Heidelberg
Volume: 31
Pages: 843-857
Year: 2008
Available: 2009-01-30
ISSN: 1432-0894
Department: Department of Physical Geography and Quaternary Geology
Language: English [en]
Subject: Physical geography, Climatology
Abstract: This paper presents updated tree-ring width (TRW) and maximum density (MXD) from Torneträsk in northern Sweden, now covering the period ad 500–2004. By including data from relatively young trees for the most recent period, a previously noted decline in recent MXD is eliminated. Non-climatological growth trends in the data are removed using Regional Curve Standardization (RCS), thus producing TRW and MXD chronologies with preserved low-frequency variability. The chronologies are calibrated using local and regional instrumental climate records. A bootstrapped response function analysis using regional climate data shows that tree growth is forced by April–August temperatures and that the regression weights for MXD are much stronger than for TRW. The robustness of the reconstruction equation is verified by independent temperature data and shows that 63–64% of the instrumental inter-annual variation is captured by the tree-ring data. This is a significant improvement compared to previously published reconstructions based on tree-ring data from Torneträsk. A divergence phenomenon around ad 1800, expressed as an increase in TRW that is not paralleled by temperature and MXD, is most likely an effect of major changes in the density of the pine population at this northern tree-line site. The bias introduced by this TRW phenomenon is assessed by producing a summer temperature reconstruction based on MXD exclusively. The new data show generally higher temperature estimates than previous reconstructions based on Torneträsk tree-ring data. The late-twentieth century, however, is not exceptionally warm in the new record: On decadal-to-centennial timescales, periods around ad 750, 1000, 1400, and 1750 were equally warm, or warmer. The 200-year long warm period centered on ad 1000 was significantly warmer than the late-twentieth century (p < 0.05) and is supported by other local and regional paleoclimate data. The new tree-ring evidence from Torneträsk suggests that this “Medieval Warm Period” in northern Fennoscandia was much warmer than previously recognized.

www.diva-portal.org...


edit on 25-6-2012 by ElectricUniverse because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 25 2012 @ 03:22 AM
link   
reply to post by 1loserel2
 


BTW, beautiful pictures.


As to whether I would go up there, I have not been in that same location, but have been on other areas under similar conditions with -42 degrees F, without wind chill factor. brrrr. Makes me cold just by remembering.

It is beautiful though being surrounded by mostly white and blue.


edit on 25-6-2012 by ElectricUniverse because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 25 2012 @ 02:33 PM
link   
reply to post by ElectricUniverse
 


Wow, is all I can say, I've never met a real mountain climber before, how in the world do you deal with the wind chill factor? I can say if it gets 45 or 52 degrees with a nice little drop in the windchill I have to layer up> I can't imagine being anywhere colder, since I came to this state and my blood thinned.

Sidenote, I bet its not only beautiful (freshly fallen snow is a beautiful sight) but I bet its quiet and serene there as well



posted on Jun, 26 2012 @ 04:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse

Originally posted by SickeningTruths
reply to post by 1loserel2
 


Good post.. Being a man of Science, I cant help but wonder what this place looked like 50-100-500+ years ago. With global warming, global climate shifts and everything else in affect, I bet this beautiful glacier is maybe a shadow of what she used to be.


"Man of science", really? What sort of "science" may I ask?

I also want to know how CLAIMING "i am a man of science" without posting any evidecen to back your claims makes you right.

BTW, here, read some REAL science.


Hormes, A., Beer, J. and Schlüchter, C., 2006. A geochronological approach to understanding the role of solar activity on Holocene glacier length variability in the Swiss Alps. Geogr. Ann., 88 A (4): 281–294.


Abstract — We present a radiocarbon data set of 71 samples of wood and peat material that melted out or sheared out from underneath eight present day mid-latitude glaciers in the Central Swiss Alps. Results indicated that in the past several glaciers have been repeatedly less extensive than they were in the 1990s. The periods when glaciers had a smaller volume and shorter length persisted between 320 and 2500 years. This data set provides greater insight into glacier variability than previously possible, especially for the early and middle Holocene. The radiocarbon-dated periods defined with less extensive glaciers coincide with periods of reduced radioproduction, pointing to a connection between solar activity and glacier melting processes. Measured long-term series of glacier length variations show significant correlation with the total solar irradiance. Incoming solar irradiance and changing albedo can account for a direct forcing of the glacier mass balances. Long-term investigations of atmospheric processes that are in interaction with changing solar activity are needed in order to understand the feedback mechanisms with glacier mass balances.

The Role of Solar Activity on Holocene Glacier Length Variability in the swiss Alps


edit on 25-6-2012 by ElectricUniverse because: (no reason given)


For that book your writing.. I'm an Environmental Studies and Resource major.


and to elaborate on my post a little more so you Al Gore haters don't bum rush me.. I understand your post, and your absolutely right, on the "Global Warming" thing, I'm not 100% on board with Mr Gore. HOWEVER, I believe that the small % of global warming DOES have some sort of affect. When you put that small % of global warming and natural changes together you get a much different affect. Higher sea levels, warmer and colder sea levels.. there is a ripple effect and that ripple effect..

Either way, don't bash people.. its not flattering
edit on 06/26/12 ? by SickeningTruths because: (no reason given)

edit on 06/26/12 ? by SickeningTruths because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 26 2012 @ 04:29 PM
link   
reply to post by ElectricUniverse
 


You're kidding, right? Do you really feel the need to challenge somebody because they call themself a "man of science" and ask questions from that standpoint?

ATS is really going downhill...



posted on Jun, 26 2012 @ 04:35 PM
link   
reply to post by captaintyinknots
 



My point exactly, I did not say I was a "Scientist" I said I was a man of science, always have been. Even as a child. But yes.. again, I do major in a field of science.




top topics



 
5

log in

join