In December I mentioned that global warming may not be the only thing melting Greenland. Scientists have found at least one natural magma hotspot under the Arctic island that could be pitching in.
Gakkel Ridge in the Arctic may also contain active volcanoes.
Now we have reports relating to an article in Nature Geoscience:
Herald Tribune: ‘Antarctic volcanoes identified as a possible culprit in glacier melting’
Excerpt: Volcanically, Antarctica is a fairly quiet place. But sometime around 325 B.C., the researchers said, a hidden and still active volcano erupted, puncturing several hundred yards of ice above it.
The Nature Geoscience article:
Published online: 20 January 2008 | doi:10.1038/ngeo106
A recent volcanic eruption beneath the West Antarctic ice sheet
Hugh F. J. Corr & David G. Vaughan
Indirect evidence suggests that volcanic activity occurring beneath the West Antarctic ice sheet influences ice flow and sheet stability. However, only volcanoes that protrude through the ice sheet and those inferred from geophysical techniques have been mapped so far. Here we analyse radar data from the Hudson Mountains, West Antarctica, that contain reflections from within the ice that had previously been interpreted erroneously as the ice-sheet bed. We show that the reflections are present within an elliptical area of about 23,000 km2 that contains tephra from an explosive volcanic eruption. The tephra layer is thickest at a subglacial topographic high, which we term the Hudson Mountains Subglacial Volcano. The layer depth dates the eruption at 207 BC (+/-240 years), which matches exceptionally strong but previously unattributed conductivity signals in nearby ice cores. The layer contains 0.019–0.31 km3 of tephra, which implies a volcanic explosive index of 3–4. Production and episodic release of water from the volcano probably affected ice flow at the time of the eruption. Ongoing volcanic heat production may have implications for contemporary ice dynamics in this glacial system.
British Antarctic Survey, Natural Environment Research Council, Cambridge CB3 0ET, UK
Jennifer Marohasy BSc PhD is a critical thinker with expertise in the scientific method.
Ancient Antarctic eruption noted:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7194579.stm
Wow, so they just appeared? Over the last three decades?
Yes, Nathan … or at least were only recently found and some seem to be active.
See http://www.volcano.si.edu/world/vol_extra.cfm?name=Jun%20Jaegyu for information about Jun Jaegyu volcano which is at the tip of the Antarctic Peninsular.
There is a huge difference between “were recently found” and “recently appeared”.
Especially when you are trying to make a causal link.
And does recent mean in the last 30 years or sometime in the Holocene?
And in that link, it says the volcano made an anomaly of 0.052 degrees C. HUGE!
If you want to be pedantic, and you clearly do Nathan, the volcano in question was only discovered a couple of years ago (like 2004). See http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/05/040527235943.htm which reports finding of geothermal heating but doesn’t specify how much.
A single instance of an anomaly of 0.052 degrees doesn’t mean a lot but at what depth was that and what was the anomaly at other times. There’s also some other volcanoes in the area but I don’t know if they are active and I don’t know if the entire region has been fully explored.
At http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2004AGUFM.T11A1248H you’ll find that the JJ volcano is the volcanic center of the James Ross Island Volcanic group
see also http://www.nsf.gov/news/news_summ.jsp?cntn_id=100385 and http://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/news/reports/2004/CORC04/05_10_04.htm (which has a picture from the echo sounder)
John,
There’s nothing wrong with being pedantic. You can’t just attribute the loss of ice off the Antarctic Penisula to some volcano because one was found.
The point is that the volcano could have been there few the last few hundred thousand years. Why has the Antarctic Peninsula just decided to take notice?
And why is the warming of the Antarctic Peninsula generalised? It’s a big area. A group of volcanoes, underwater, at the northeastern most extent of the peninsula seems an unlikely solution as the volcanoes have probably been there for a long time. Either they erupt and have an immediate effect lasting about 2-3 years or they stay warm and have an effect over a few thousand years. The warming of the peninsula falls outside these timescales.
Being a trifle pedantic here myself, but where does John “…attribute the loss of ice off the Antarctic Penisula to some volcano…”?
Chrisgo, the 3rd post.
He is suggesting that the ice loss in the area is attributable to the volcano. I expanded to the whole peninsula because it is the whole peninsula that is experiencing ice loss.
Nathan, the observation stations that have reported warming are located near the extremity of the Antarctic Peninsular not far from where volcanoes have been recently discovered.
A map of Antarctic volcanoes – no, I don’t know which have recently been active – is at http://icecap.us/images/uploads/AntarcticVolcanoes2.jpg and a map of recent warming is at http://icecap.us/images/uploads/antarctic_temps_AVH1982-2004.jpg.
Speaking personally I think there’s good grounds for assuming that recent warming on the Antarctic Peninsular is probably at least partly due to volcanic activity. If you can prove otherwise I’d be happy to consider your claims.
There is a shortage of geological understanding here – the presence of volcanoes indicates that there is a higher heatflow in the general area of the crust. The volcanoes are just where the magma has found an outlet to the surface.
These thermal effects are not accounted for, (nor for that matter could they be) in GCM’s.
GCM’s assume a thermally stable earth about which only the atmosphere experiences thermally disparate behaviour, almost as if terra-firma were irrelevant.
Nathan: “You can’t just attribute the loss of ice off the Antarctic Penisula to some volcano because one was found.”
But, global warming cultists use every silly sign they can, such as it was “hotter” today, to claim that is proof of global warming, and fellow cultists fall all over themselves to embrace each ridiculous claim while ignoring legitimate and contrary evidence such as mentioned in the post.
Louis, on the time scales we are talking about the volcanic input is as good as constant. It’s not relevant to recent warming.
The point is that the volcanoes have probably been there since subduction commenced near the Straits of Magellan. It’s not some new event that could explain recent warming.
That’s true Woody. It was the 44 degree day we had in Perth on Boxing Day that convinced me of AGW.
So where were you when Perth recorded its hottest recorded temperature on 23 Feb. 1991 (46.2℃)?
South Perth, man it was hot!
My earlier response was tongue in cheek 🙂
Has been hot this Summer in Perth. Wouldn’t be surprised if it ends up being the hottest on record.
Not that I would draw any conclusions from that, it’s just weather.
Nathan
Subduction is actually mechanically impossible, and I would be cautious about the geological timescale as well, since there is some evidence we have that comprehesively wrong too.
Louis,
not sure what you have been reading regarding subduction, but you are wrong.
And what is wrong with the geological timescale?
I find what you write unbelievable, considering my geological training.
Nathan, and what is your geological training?
BSc (Hons) in geology and geophysics (UWA)
You are way off the mark if you think plate tectonics is ‘mechanically imposiible’.
It’s measured, and measurable.
Nathan,
Have a read of the New Concepts in Global Tectonics Newsletters http://www.ncgt.org. Quite a few geoscientists must be off the mark then.
I can send you the last two that are inaccessible if you are interested.
Nathan
summary of a recent conference in Europe
CHALLENGE OUR MYTHS
AAPG & AAPG EUROPEAN REGION ENERGY CONFERENCE
AND EXHIBITION
18-21 November, 2007
Megaron, Athens International Conference Centre, Greece
General Chairman: Geir Lunde
Un-Traditional Theories and Ideas in Global and Large Scale Geology
Co-Conveners: Stavros. T. Tassos and Karsten M. Storetvedt
The “Challenge Our Myths” AAPG Athens conference, under the inspired general chairmanship of Geir Lunde, was attended by more than 1200 international participants. During the three days, and in 25 parallel sessions, more than 300 oral and poster presentations were delivered. The whole conference, including sessions like Un-Traditional Theories and Ideas in Global and Large Scale Geology, Unconventional Resources – The Modern Theory of Abiotic Genesis of Hydrocarbons and Unconventional Heavy Oil Resources – Advances, Challenges and Case Studies, mark a turning point for the Geosciences.
It is the first time such themes have been raised at a larger Western geological conference. The general slogan – Challenge Our Myths – directly challenges both plate tectonics and the long-held view (in the West) that the mass of petroleum is “fossil fuel”. It is the first time at an important international geological conference that a session like Un-Traditional Theories and Ideas in Global and Large Scale Geology – in which fundamental geological and physical concepts were challenged and in their place comprehensive new propositions were presented in their place – was considered a highlight of
the whole conference.
In our session we had 25 presentations, 15 orals and 10 posters, covering a wide range of topics, from fundamental issues such as matter and energy, myth and para-myth, large and small scale tectonic movements, generation and propagation of earthquakes, oil and salt generation and exploration, the close association of petroleum provinces with the global tectonic pattern, to tsunami implications.
In the oral session, except for one presentation that was clearly pro plate tectonics, and another one that did not address the issue of global and large scale geology specifically, there was general consensus that subduction, and therefore plate (New Concepts in Global Tectonics Newsletter, no. 45, December, 2007 61) tectonics, is mechanically impossible. The alternative propositions varied from constant size to changing size (expanding) Earth. The importance of horizontal versus vertical movements, as well as of heat/molten Earth interior versus a solid Earth interior were debated, either as combined or independent issues. The poster session also covered a wide spectrum of subjects, from “hot” shales, sedimentary basins, interpretation of magnetotelluric and seismic surveys, the need for cooperation between geoscientists and engineers, great circles and expanding Earth, igneous diapirism, vertical tectonic movements, deep oil and gas reservoirs, to oil in granites.
The abstracts of all oral and poster presentations that were included in the program of the symposium are given below. The abstracts are as written by the authors.
Stavros TASSOS and Karsten STORETVEDT
s.tassos@gein.noa.gr; karsten@gfi.uib.no
I am not the same nathan. I am wondering why the media is is not reporting this? I am in j high & all of my teacher are telling me that global warming is all peoples fault. So can you send me some stuff to my Email Address about global warming.