Antarctic Craters Reveal Strike

BBC ^ | 8-23-2004

[blam]

Antarctic craters reveal strike

The asteroid may have raised sea levels by up to 60cm

Scientists have mapped enormous impact craters hidden under the Antarctic ice sheet using satellite technology. The craters may have either come from an asteroid between 5 and 11km across that broke up in the atmosphere, a swarm of comets or comet fragments.

The space impacts created multiple craters over an area of 2,092km (1,300 miles) by 3,862km (2,400 miles).

The scientists told a conference this week that the impacts occurred roughly 780,000 years ago during an ice age.

When the impacts hit, they would have melted through the ice and through the crust below.

Professor Frans van der Hoeven, from Delft University in the Netherlands, told the International Geographical Union Congress in Glasgow that the biggest single strike seared a hole in the ice sheet roughly 322km (200 miles) by 322km.

Impact melt

This would have melted about 1% of the ice sheet, raising water levels worldwide by 60cm (2ft).

The research suggests that an asteroid the size of the one blamed for killing off the dinosaurs 65 million years ago could have struck Earth relatively recently.

Early humans would have been living in Africa and other parts of the Old World at the time of the strikes.

But the impacts would have occurred during an ice age, so even tidal waves would have been weakened by the stabilising effect of icebergs on the ocean.

The craters were resolved using satellite data to map gravity anomalies under the ice sheet.

[blam]

GGG Ping.

[Slings and Arrows]

The asteroid may have raised sea levels by up to 60cm

It's Bush's fault!

[Izzy Dunne]

We need more money to build the Antarctic Asteroid Deflection System.

NOW!

[HawkeyeLonewolf]

Blah blah blah blah blah...

Since the earth is only about 10,000 years old, I love these liberal dating methods claimed as "fact"

[bert]

The impact area is still emitting ions that are captured by atmospheric ozone molecules thus the hole in the ozone layer.

The emission rate is variable and the reason has not yet determined. The best way to measure the emission variation is to measure the ozone hole.

[aruanan]

When the impacts hit, they would have melted through the ice and through the crust below.

The sorry state of journalism.

[aruanan]

Since the earth is only about 10,000 years old, I love these liberal dating methods claimed as "fact"

For whichever reason you're saying this: poor child.

[Modernman]

Since the earth is only about 10,000 years old, I love these liberal dating methods claimed as "fact"

You're wrong. The earth isn't 10,000 years old. It was created last Thursday and all the evidence to the contrary is just a practical joke by the Creator.

[HawkeyeLonewolf]

For whichever reason you're saying this: poor child.

Just going with science, not the fanciful belief systems of Anti-God pseudo-scientists.

[HawkeyeLonewolf]

http://answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/young.asp

[Darksheare]

Too bad they don't have a map of the crater to show, I'd like to see it.

[HawkeyeLonewolf]

And for Ice Age education...

http://answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/iceage.asp

[Ol' Sox]

...even tidal waves would have been weakened by the stabilising effect of icebergs on the ocean.

I had no idea that icebergs had a stabilizing effect on the ocean. I don't believe it.

[Modernman]

Ah, Answers in Genesis. How many times do we have to discredit that site before you creos stop relying on it as an authority?

Anyway, I'm still sticking by my belief that the Earth was created last Thursday. It's no whackier than your view.

[Gorjus]

I had no idea that icebergs had a stabilizing effect on the ocean. I don't believe it.

Remember, this is about damping out waves. When the wave hits the iceberg, part of it reflects directly, and part of the energy is consumed lifting the iceberg which - when it comes back down - creates more waves headed back in the reverse direction. Net effect: The original incident wave is diminished. Do it enough times (like, in an ice ace when there are lots of icebergs) and a single massive wave becomes a lesser wave and lots of return waves.

If there's enough ice to make a solid ice sheet on the water, then even more energy is consumed breaking that ice sheet to lift the ice as the wave passes.

How significant it would be overall is unclear, but the incremental effect is not hard to understand.

[HawkeyeLonewolf]

What have you disproven from their site? So far, good honest science wins out.

[Lockbar]

I guess fluffy snow softened the blow.

[camas]

who knows how long a year was in the beginning???

[Modernman]

What have you disproven from their site? So far, good honest science wins out.

That site has been hashed out on literally dozens of FR threads. It really has no credibility here, not even with most creationists.