Ancient Superflood Brought Climate Chaos

ABC Science News ^ | 8-15-2003 | Bob Beale

[Cultural Jihad]

An interesting chart. Is there any easy explanation of the age axis?

[Carry_Okie]

Correct, that's because IMO you are wrong. Consider the Davidson Current, a freshwater current floating on top of and against the California Current that occurs seasonally off the Oregon coast. It moves north at about two knots driven against the wind and the current by coriolis forces. Its displacement moves faster than the current, but not with the speed of wave energy. For the displacement from this event to reach the Mediterranean, it would have had to travel under the entire north polar ice sheet of that time (which was huge and blocked many existing channels between Hudson Bay and the Atlantic). That's one long gravity push around a very tortuous path subject to coriolis centering forces that would tend to pile a freshwater displacement toward the North Pole rather than leak it by gravitational body forces into the Atlantic. The oceans are very lumpy places because coriolis forces are very powerful. Consider that the center of the Pacific is about 12 feet above its "level" at the edges.

[VOA]

bump

[RightWhale]

If one wants to place limits on the water flow, then the time will be lengthened. In the three major floods at the end of the Ice Age, ocean levels rose worldwide 100 to 200 feet each in a period of two weeks, and that was because it took time for the lake to drain. To reach the Mediterranean will take two days. If you want a quick answer there it is. If you want to design a planetwide detailed computer model of the flooding go for it.

[Carry_Okie]

In the three major floods at the end of the Ice Age, ocean levels rose worldwide 100 to 200 feet each in a period of two weeks, and that was because it took time for the lake to drain.

The article says the following: "It took less than a year to discharge," a much more believable number.

To assume that these scientists understand all there is to know about modeling worldwide flow for how a glacial lake would drain under breakout conditions the like of which no modern human has EVER witnessed, requires more credulity than is warranted by the data. It is not unusual for all sorts of wild claims to be made in the executive summary of a paper in order for the grantor to be happy. The principal information here is that there is solid evidence there was a lake, a good estimate of its volume, and they may have evidence that it did break out. It MIGHT have taken two weeks for the lake to drain, but I seriously doubt that our knowledge of how fresh water distributes displacement from under a massive ice age cap is so sophisticated. IMHO, they're claiming a whole lot more certainty about events 8,500 years ago than I think our archaeological knowledge can justify.

I would assume a breakout like this might start a chain reaction, lifting vast amounts of sheet ice that would then flow into the oceans to melt. That is a much more likely scenario given the posited impact on global climate.

Let's do a little arithmetic. Lets divide the released volume of the lake, according to the article, by the current surface area of the world's oceans to see how far they would rise as a result of the released water (I know that the ocean surface area was smaller then, but it works for a crude reality check):

(163,000 km³/361,800,000 km²)(1,000 m/km) = 0.45 meters.

Try it yourself.

Think about it. The authors say that this lake is twice the size of the Caspian Sea. Now spread that water over 70% of the Earth's surface and ask yourself if that volume would be large enough to add 100 feet of water. You might also ask if the lake represents sufficient thermal mass to cool the atmosphere by itself. I doubt it. However, the ICE that might have been released into the oceans with the breakout might have sufficient heat of transformation to have such an effect, particularly because the melting fresh water might develop a thermal inversion layer at the surface.

Glacial collapse raised sea levels over 100 feet, not some damned lake. It didn't happen over a matter of days.

[MissAmericanPie]

I don't think so, the flood in Noah's day was something so profound that when Peter writes of it in the new testament, "For this they are willingly ignorant, the world that was then, standing in the water and out, perished, the world we live in now, is reserved for fire, and the judgement of ungodly men", he makes it clear that we no longer live in anything similar to the pre-flood climate conditions of Noah's day.

For instance according to scriptures, it had never rained on the face of the earth up until the flood of Noah. The earth was watered by a mist rising from the ground. The inhabitants of the earth had no idea what rain was, much less a flood.

While science agrees that at one time the earth was watered by a mist rising from the ground, they maintain that this was billions of years before mankind "evolved". The bible contradicts their findings and places man being alive and well at the time that this climate condition was typical. I know where I'd place my money.

[Aric2000]

Placemarker

[SunkenCiv]

· join list or digest · view topics · view or post blog · bookmark · post a topic ·
	Gods Graves Glyphs	Just updating the GGG info, not sending a general distribution. To all -- please ping me to other topics which are appropriate for the GGG list. GGG managers are Blam, StayAt HomeMother, and Ernest_at_the_Beach
· Google · Archaeologica · ArchaeoBlog · Archaeology magazine · Biblical Archaeology Society · · Mirabilis · Texas AM Anthropology News · Yahoo Anthro & Archaeo · · History or Science & Nature Podcasts · Excerpt, or Link only? · cgk's list of ping lists ·