Temperature on global warming turned up
William Elliot
Methane Bubbling Through Seafloor Creates Undersea Hills
> http://www.mbari.org/news/news_releases/2007/paull-plfs.html
>
> For Immediate Release
>
> Methane bubbling through seafloor creates undersea hills
> Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute
> 5 February 2007
>
> According to a recent paper published by MBARI geologists and their
> colleagues, methane gas bubbling through seafloor sediments has created
> hundreds of low hills on the floor of the Arctic Ocean. These enigmatic
> features, which can grow up to 40 meters (130 feet) tall and several
> hundred meters across, have puzzled scientists ever since they were
> first discovered in the 1940s.
>
> This conceptual drawing (not to scale) shows Paull's hypothesis that
> methane gas from deep hydrate deposits could push sediment up from below
> the ocean bottom to create a pingo-like feature. The gray lines in the
> background are from a seismic profile through one of these enigmatic
> features.
>
> Writing in the January issue of Geophysical Research Letters, MBARI
> geologists Charlie Paull and William Ussler and their coauthors
> described the results of field work they conducted on the Beaufort Sea
> Shelf, offshore of the north coast of Canada. In this area of year-round
> sea ice and permafrost, the team spent over a month mapping the seafloor
> and collecting sediment cores and gas samples from these underwater
> hills, which they call "pingo-like features."
>
> "Pingos," small, dome-shaped, ice-cored hills, are found in many Arctic
> regions. "Pingo-like features" are similar in shape and size to pingos
> on land, but are found underwater, on the continental shelf in several
> parts of the Arctic. Previous studies have suggested that pingo-like
> features are pingos that formed on land but were submerged when sea
> level rose following the end of the last ice age, over 10,000 years ago.
>
> Based on their geologic fieldwork and subsequent chemical analysis of
> the gas and sediments from eight pingo-like features, Paull and his
> coauthors propose an alternative hypothesis: Pingo-like features form
> when methane hydrate (a frozen mixture of gas and seawater) decomposes
> beneath the seafloor, releasing gas that squeezes deep sediments up onto
> the seafloor like toothpaste from a tube.
>
> The geologists based this hypothesis on a number of observations and
> measurements. First, sound waves bounced through the pingo-like features
> showed that they were not built up from layers, but consist of a jumbled
> mixture of sediment and small nodules of fresh-water (rather than
> salt-water) ice. Carbon-14 dating of organic matter in the sediment at
> the crests of several hills showed that this sediment was deposited
> before the last ice age, thousands of years before sediments on the
> surrounding seafloor. Finally, many of the pingo-like features were
> surrounded by shallow "moats," where the seafloor within a kilometer of
> the hill had apparently subsided.
>
> Even with evidence that pingo-like features were made of older, deeper
> sediment that had been pushed up from beneath the seafloor, the
> geologists still had to figure out what geologic process could generate
> enough pressure to lift seafloor sediments. The most obvious source of
> such pressure was methane gas, which the researchers observed bubbling
> out of the tops of several pingo-like features.
>
> After chemically analyzing this gas, the researchers concluded that it
> originated as methane hydrate, an ice-like mixture of water and methane
> that forms within sediments under much of the Arctic seafloor and
> beneath permafrost areas on land. Methane hydrate can only remain solid
> at low temperatures and high pressures. Such conditions exist several
> hundred meters below the seafloor in this part of the Arctic Ocean.
>
> The researchers suggested that such buried hydrates might be decomposing
> and releasing large amounts of methane gas. This seemed possible because
> the seafloor in this area has been gradually warming over the last
> 10,000 years, after being flooded as sea levels rose at the end of the
> last ice age. Although within a few degrees of freezing, the seawater in
> this region is at least 10 degrees Centigrade (20 degrees Fahrenheit)
> warmer than permafrost-filled soil. Thus, when the ice sheets from the
> last ice age melted and the ocean flooded the continental shelves, it
> caused the seafloor sediment to become warmer.
>
> Over thousands of years, the scientists believe, this "wave" of warming
> moved downward through the sediment. Eventually it reached the frozen
> methane hydrates, hundreds of meters down. Even a slight temperature
> increase could have caused some of the buried methane hydrates to
> decompose, releasing methane into the surrounding sediments.
>
> Paull and Ussler's data suggest that this newly released methane
> migrated sideways under the seafloor, held in place by an impermeable
> layer of frozen soil that lies between the hydrates and the seafloor.
> Eventually it collected and moved toward the surface along faults or in
> other areas where the sediments were relatively weak.
>
> Eventually the extruded sediment collected to form the low undersea
> hills visible on bathymetric charts. At the same time, areas on either
> side of the mounds, where much of the gas and sediment originated,
> slowly collapsed, forming the deeper "moats" observed by the
> researchers.
>
> According to Paull, "We don't know if this gas and sediment was burped
> up in a single year, or moved slowly like a glacier." In either case,
> Paull's data suggest that pingo-like features are growing in response to
> warming that started thousands of years ago. Thus, their growth is not a
> result of human-induced global warming. However, Paull's research does
> show that pingo-like features are still growing and releasing methane
> today.
>
> Because methane is a potent greenhouse gas, climate scientists would
> like to know how much is bubbling up from the seafloor worldwide. Future
> research on methane hydrates and pingo-like features may help address
> this question. As Paull phrased it, "Pingo-like features are one of the
> places where we see methane coming up through the seafloor. As yet we
> don't know how important they are, since we don't know how much gas is
> coming up in the Arctic as a whole or in other seafloor areas."
>
> This study also provides scientists with clues to how buried methane
> hydrate deposits might behave in other parts of the world in response to
> global warming. According to Paull, "One of the questions we're trying
> to answer is 'What do buried hydrates do when they are suddenly warmed
> up?' In this case, we have a field experiment that's been going on for
> thousands of years."
>
> ###
>
Brad Guth
news:Pine.BSI.4.58.07...@vista.hevanet.com
This one seems rather Mailgate/Usenet taboo/nondisclosure rated, thus it
must be offering us too much of the truth and nothing but the truth.
Mailgate: Message not available:
"Temperature on global warming turned up" by William Elliot
The regular laws of physics and I'm strongly suggesting that as much as
90% of our inside and out GW fiasco is derived from our moon, which
isn't discounting the 10% impact as caused by humanity (at best I'd buy
into a 75%/25% ratio). In other words, if we all departed Earth and let
nature take its planetology course, this Earth would continue to thaw
from the last ice age this planet will ever see. As long as we have
that pesky moon of ours, ice age trapped methanes and CO2 will in fact
keep "Bubbling Through Seafloor Creates Undersea Hills", though at a
reduced rate if the human factor were entirely eliminated.
http://www.mbari.org/news/news_releases/2007/paull-plfs.html
You folks do realize that Earth isn't getting itself any bigger, whereas
if anything it's ever so gradually shrinking, exactly as it should.
Imagine that, another truth being told that we're not supposed to know
about, just like we're not supposed to realize that our magnetosphere
has been losing its worth at 0.05%/year.
Clearly our nifty orbiting mascon/moon is in fact so 'one of a kind'
unusually massive and nearby, so much so extra special that as such it
can't but help to transfer and thereby induce an amount of thermal
energy into our environment by way of tidal forces (inside and out),
plus whatever's unavoidably contributed from all of those reflected and
secondary worth of IR/FIR photons.
This following topic link is still a tough mainstream nut to crack, much
less sell, as it's representing a serious load of perfectly weird
notions based entirely upon the regular laws of physics, that's having
to do with our creating a surplus of shade for Earth, by way of
relocating our moon to Earth's L1. (easier said than done)
Next Space Station: 7.35e22 kg at Earth's L1
Earth's L1 for accommodating something of the robust mass of our moon,
that also has the LSE-CM/ISS of 256e6 tonnes of our interplanetary
gateway to deal with, is essentially a planetoid parallel parking zone
that's roughly 4 fold further away than its current 384,400 km orbital
status, thus 1.5376e6 km representing 1/16th the mutual attracting or
holding force of gravity, as well as having cut the amount of tidal
energy that's getting applied back into Earth's environment should be of
a similar reduction. However, once fully aligned with the sun while
parked within this halo orbit of Earth's L1 should actually not allow
that combined sol+moon tidal energy to at most drop to half of
whatever's currently taking place. I haven't fully polished off the
physics math in order to prove all of this, but I do believe it'll end
up being somewhere between this third amount less and perhaps half of
what tides we're currently dealing with, which is actually quite a
significant reduction in tidal energy transfer, that by rights should
also tend to cool off our terrestrial environment (inside and out).
Of course the 24 hour rotation of Earth in relationship to Earth's L1 is
no longer the same as our moon's existing 1.023 km/s. In one weird
sense we'd have to speed that moon of our's up to 112 km/s, which is
actually worth 6e23 joules, and that's seemingly going to be a tough
notion to accomplish because, it's existing 1.023 km/s of 2e20
centripetal joules worth of orbital energy is clearly insufficient for
that of L1, of which can't exactly be derived out of thin air unless
having been continually pulled along and subsequently established by a
sufficient other centripetal force, for getting our moon out to Earth's
L1 in the first place.
Here's some more of this weird math, suggesting what it'll take.
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/cf.html#cf
r = 1.5376e9 meters
M = 7.35e22 kg
V = 112e3 m/s
Centripetal force: Fc = 5.996254e23 N = 6.11448e22 kgf
6.11448e22 kgf * 9.80665 = 5.996e23 joules Earth-->L1
However Sol-->Earth L1 is what takes that centripetal energy back
-5.996e23 joules Sol-->L1 = 0.0 joules (near zero G)
However, since our moon is already keeping up with Earth is why there's
no real delta-v increase in its orbital velocity. In fact, it's having
to slightly reduce its average orbital velocity that'll become primarily
in relationship to Sol, as having become our binary associated L1
planetoid, as our solar shade instead of being a pesky moon.
In spite of all the usual status quo flak of Usenet's anti-think-tank
and naysayism that's typically of a faith based mindset, of borg like
individuals going postal in order to keep each and every one of their
infomercial lids on tight, whereas giving Earth some badly needed shade
while improving upon the usage of our moon's L1, at the very same time
as having moderated those global warming tidal forces by at least a
third, is what's actually quite doable in spite of whatever their
all-knowing god has to say.
BTW; my LSE-CM/ISS or at the very least a scientific (Earth facing)
tethered science platform or space depot may likely become another
requirement, that is unless having a slightly rotating L1 planetoid
isn't a problem. However, any possible rotation may remain as nullified
since the moon's original L2 tethered mass of 1e12 kg will likely still
exist at some reduced amount of mass, now modified as per acting on
behalf of representing the planetoids's (Sol facing) L1 tethered science
platform(s). In spite of my best dyslexic encrypted efforts, this
moon-->planetoid thing is certainly damn confusing, isn't it.
If you have similar or obviously better math, I'd like to hear about
that. However, if you only wish to topic/author stalk and bash upon
whatever in order to continually whine about the matter of your having
to keep everything exactly as it was, such as when your Earth was flat
and everything else was still in orbit around your faith-based solitary
existence, then don't bother. The same goes if your conditional laws of
physics only applies to terrestrial matters, or on behalf of supporting
those matters orchestrated by and thus approved by the status quo which
you must worship at all cost.
On the other honest topic constructive hand, even if your subjective
interpretations and subsequent ideas or whatever best swag is way off in
another dimension, it's not going to be all that upsetting to my kind of
open mindset way of thinking that's more often outside the box than not
to start with. If you simply can not manage to safely think for
yourself without blowing yet another mainstream status quo gasket, then
perhaps not all is lost when our resident LLPOF warlord(GW Bush) has a
perfectly good paying, non-thinking as well as non-caring job without
ever involving a speck of remorse, for you and others of your kind.
-
Brad Guth
--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG
Brad Guth
news:Pine.BSI.4.58.07...@vista.hevanet.com
Why is this topic Mailgate/Usenet banished?
BTW; Global Warming is for real, and it's real in more ways than one.
At least we can honestly say that it's partially (10%~25%) caused by
humanity, and that there are direct and indirect environmental
consequences of our past, present and future actions. However, because
of the vast amount of required energy, the continued thawing of Earth
since the last ice age this planet will ever see, is not entirely our
fault.
Rather oddly, but not hardly a surprise if going by these extra special
infomercial days of promoting all that's pro big-energy and of having to
protect their puppet government(s) mainstream status quo butt, plus
seeing those usual cover thy butt-loads of faith based damage control on
steroids, whereas this following topic of perfectly honest science seems
as though rather Mailgate/Usenet taboo/nondisclosure rated, therefore it
must be offering us too much of the truth and nothing but the truth.
Mailgate/Usenet indext listed as; Message not available:
"Temperature on global warming turned up" / by William Elliot
The regular laws of physics and I'm strongly suggesting that as much as
90% of our inside and out GW fiasco is derived from our recently
obtained moon, which isn't discounting the 10% impact as caused by
humanity (at best I'd buy into a 75%/25% ratio). In other words, if we
all departed this Earth and let nature and the laws of physics take its
planetology course, this Earth would continue to thaw from the last ice
age this planet will ever see. As long as we have that pesky moon of
ours, ice age trapped methanes and CO2 will in fact keep "Bubbling
Through Seafloor Creates Undersea Hills", though at a reduced rate if
the human factor were entirely eliminated.
http://www.mbari.org/news/news_releases/2007/paull-plfs.html
You folks do realize that Earth isn't getting itself any bigger, whereas
if anything it's ever so gradually shrinking, exactly as it should.
Imagine that, I've shared yet another truth as being told that we're not
supposed to know about, just like we're not supposed to realize that our
magnetosphere has been losing its worth at 0.05%/year.
Clearly our nifty orbiting mascon/moon is in fact so 'one of a kind'
unusually massive and nearby, so much so extra special that as such it
can't but help to transfer and thereby induce an amount of thermal
energy into our environment by way of tidal forces (inside and out),
plus whatever's unavoidably contributed from all of those reflected and
secondary worth of IR/FIR photons that have little if any trouble
getting through to the surface that getting a little extra sooty and
otherwise polluted by the day, which includes less snow and ice coverage
that means upon average a lower global albedo, that in turn represents
an even better sol and moon energy absorber that in turn keeps our
nighttime atmosphere more cloud covered due to the increased levels of
h2o in our atmosphere.
Here's some more of this weird math, suggesting as to what it'll take.
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/cf.html#cf
r = 1.5376e9 meters
M = 7.35e22 kg
V = 112e3 m/s
Centripetal force: Fc = 5.996254e23 N = 6.11448e22 kgf
6.11448e22 kgf * 9.80665 = 5.996e23 joules Earth-->L1
However Sol-->Earth L1 is what takes that centripetal energy back
-5.996e23 joules Sol-->L1 = 0.0 joules (near zero G)
However, since our moon is already keeping up with Earth is also why
there's no real delta-v increase in its orbital velocity. In fact, it's
having to slightly reduce its average orbital velocity that'll become
primarily in relationship to Sol, as having become our binary associated
L1 planetoid, representing our solar shade instead of being such a pesky
moon that's causing us all sorts of grief.
In spite of all the usual status quo flak of Usenet's anti-think-tank
and naysayism that's typically of a faith based mindset, of borg like
individuals going postal in order to keep each and every one of their
infomercial lids on tight, whereas giving Earth some badly needed shade
while improving upon the usage of our moon's L1, at the very same time
as having moderated those global warming tidal forces by at least a
third, is what's actually quite doable in spite of whatever their
all-knowing god has to say.
My LSE-CM/ISS or at the very least a scientific (Earth facing) tethered
science platform or space depot may likely become another requirement,
that is unless having a slightly rotating L1 planetoid isn't a problem.
However, any possible rotation may remain as nullified since the moon's
original L2 tethered mass of 1e12 kg will likely still exist at some
reduced amount of mass, now modified as per acting on behalf of
representing the planetoids's (Sol facing) L1 tethered science
platform(s). In spite of my best dyslexic encrypted efforts, this
moon-->planetoid thing is certainly damn confusing, isn't it.
If you have similar or obviously better math, I'd certainly like to hear
about that. However, if you only wish to topic/author stalk and bash
upon whatever in order to continually whine about the matter of your
having to keep everything exactly as it was, such as when your Earth was
flat and everything else was still in orbit around your faith-based
solitary existence, then don't bother. The same goes if your
conditional laws of physics only applies to terrestrial matters, or on
behalf of supporting those matters orchestrated by and thus approved by
the status quo which you must worship at all cost.
On the other honest topic constructive hand, even if your subjective
interpretations and subsequent ideas or whatever best swag is way off in
another dimension, it's not going to be all that upsetting to my kind of
open mindset way of thinking, that's more often outside the box than not
to start with. If you simply can not manage to safely think for
yourself without blowing yet another mainstream status quo or whatever
faith based gasket, then perhaps not all is lost when our resident LLPOF