Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: SunkenCiv
This area of Norway was also much lower in elevation than it is today, since the weight of the glacial ice was enough to depress the land itself. That means the coastline at the time was also higher than it is today.

So, was it lower than it is today, or higher than it is today?

5 posted on 06/04/2018 5:04:13 PM PDT by RegulatorCountry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: RegulatorCountry

I’m sure the women were just as pretty back then. Just ask Tiger.


6 posted on 06/04/2018 5:11:22 PM PDT by DIRTYSECRET (urope. Why do they put up with this.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: RegulatorCountry

It never really changed - the coast was, and always ever will be - at sea level!

While the weight of the ice does have some effect - the main issue is all of the water was up in the ice (world wide) so the sea level was low, and coastlines were low. Ice melts, sea level comes up and the coastlines move inland, putting a lot of the coastal settlements underwater. (Of course I’m guessing you knew that already).

The “rebound” effect of the ice is pretty limited. But it is still going on with minor elevation changes, and some oddball small earthquakes.


8 posted on 06/04/2018 5:22:46 PM PDT by 21twelve
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: RegulatorCountry
Both.

12 posted on 06/04/2018 5:58:52 PM PDT by SunkenCiv (www.tapatalk.com/groups/godsgravesglyphs/, forum.darwincentral.org, www.gopbriefingroom.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson