![]() | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
How much water was in it? Seems a fairly obvious thing to include. Fig ( talk) 14:21, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
Seems interesting to include this new study in the article. http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v483/n7391/full/483549a.html Palaeoclimate: Tahitian record suggests Antarctic collapse, Robert E. Kopp, Nature 483, 549–550 (29 March 2012) doi:10.1038/483549a — Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.166.73.163 ( talk) 13:14, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
The text says, "global sea level rose between 16 meters (52 ft) and 25 meters (82 ft) in about 400–500 years, giving mean rates of roughly 30–60 mm (0.098–0.197 ft)/yr."
But I digitized the graph using WebPlotDigitizer, and found that the Meltwater Pulse 1A segment runs from 14.81K to 13.74K years ago, and shows sea-level rising from -108.7 to -79.0 meters (total of 29.7 meters), for a rate of: (108.7 - 79.0) / (14.81 - 13.74) = 27.8 mm/yr
Obviously those numbers are not quite consistent with the text. The duration of of the Pulse is longer in the graph, and the amount of SLR is greater, but the rate of SLR is lower, than the text reports. NCdave ( talk) 18:23, 4 April 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Meltwater pulse 1A. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 08:02, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
What I was wondering about is, that there is no mention in the article of possible sudden water discharge events from the European and Asian continent, or even in southeast Asia, into the interconnected world oceans.
Due to the laws of hydraulics all this possible events even on different continents have to be seen as a whole, in sum.
A water pulse, speak, a lot of additional water in short time, can only come from big reservoirs on land or due events of a sudden strong rise of temperature. But even "on land" can today mean under water, since the level than was 120 meters below. Every depression which lies higher then that was then a lake that even can suddenly break.
Another aspect is the rise of the whole earth crust, of a whole continent, due pressure relief from ice and even big water bodies. This would rise the sea level too (maybe, because the crust floats also on a non compressible liquid, the magma).
Or when very big previously suspended ice masses, bridges, suddenly slid or drop or break of into the ocean.
And what about the thing of more dust in the atmosphere before the ice maximum? With the beginning of more rain after the melting there maybe was a sudden temperature rise due purification of the atmosphere.
A lot of work for scientist for years to work that all out. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.114.202.121 ( talk) 23:44, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
And I even have another theory. What if the peek is no sudden peak, but a sudden addition.
Imagine that a lot of the melting water first also filed up all ancient and even new depressions on land, so that at the beginning just a part of the melting water reached the oceans. Than, much later, when all this depressions startet to overflow, this additional water startet to reach the oceans.
I thought about that all after seeing this picture and article, even if this event fits better with the Meltwater pulse 1B (maybe the additional overflow of the Black Sea into the Mediterranean):
https://ars.els-cdn.com/content/image/1-s2.0-S002532271730035X-gr1.jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.114.202.121 ( talk) 00:21, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
Another important thing concerning water level rises is the shape of the repository. A high but narrow glas rises faster in water level with the same amount of liquid than a wide soup bowl. Don't know, if this is paid attention to in the case of the littoral shape of the coastline of the continents. Maybe today they know the exact shape of the earth even under water to predict future sea level rises. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.114.202.121 ( talk) 01:39, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
How much water was in it? Seems a fairly obvious thing to include. Fig ( talk) 14:21, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
Seems interesting to include this new study in the article. http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v483/n7391/full/483549a.html Palaeoclimate: Tahitian record suggests Antarctic collapse, Robert E. Kopp, Nature 483, 549–550 (29 March 2012) doi:10.1038/483549a — Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.166.73.163 ( talk) 13:14, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
The text says, "global sea level rose between 16 meters (52 ft) and 25 meters (82 ft) in about 400–500 years, giving mean rates of roughly 30–60 mm (0.098–0.197 ft)/yr."
But I digitized the graph using WebPlotDigitizer, and found that the Meltwater Pulse 1A segment runs from 14.81K to 13.74K years ago, and shows sea-level rising from -108.7 to -79.0 meters (total of 29.7 meters), for a rate of: (108.7 - 79.0) / (14.81 - 13.74) = 27.8 mm/yr
Obviously those numbers are not quite consistent with the text. The duration of of the Pulse is longer in the graph, and the amount of SLR is greater, but the rate of SLR is lower, than the text reports. NCdave ( talk) 18:23, 4 April 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Meltwater pulse 1A. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 08:02, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
What I was wondering about is, that there is no mention in the article of possible sudden water discharge events from the European and Asian continent, or even in southeast Asia, into the interconnected world oceans.
Due to the laws of hydraulics all this possible events even on different continents have to be seen as a whole, in sum.
A water pulse, speak, a lot of additional water in short time, can only come from big reservoirs on land or due events of a sudden strong rise of temperature. But even "on land" can today mean under water, since the level than was 120 meters below. Every depression which lies higher then that was then a lake that even can suddenly break.
Another aspect is the rise of the whole earth crust, of a whole continent, due pressure relief from ice and even big water bodies. This would rise the sea level too (maybe, because the crust floats also on a non compressible liquid, the magma).
Or when very big previously suspended ice masses, bridges, suddenly slid or drop or break of into the ocean.
And what about the thing of more dust in the atmosphere before the ice maximum? With the beginning of more rain after the melting there maybe was a sudden temperature rise due purification of the atmosphere.
A lot of work for scientist for years to work that all out. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.114.202.121 ( talk) 23:44, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
And I even have another theory. What if the peek is no sudden peak, but a sudden addition.
Imagine that a lot of the melting water first also filed up all ancient and even new depressions on land, so that at the beginning just a part of the melting water reached the oceans. Than, much later, when all this depressions startet to overflow, this additional water startet to reach the oceans.
I thought about that all after seeing this picture and article, even if this event fits better with the Meltwater pulse 1B (maybe the additional overflow of the Black Sea into the Mediterranean):
https://ars.els-cdn.com/content/image/1-s2.0-S002532271730035X-gr1.jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.114.202.121 ( talk) 00:21, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
Another important thing concerning water level rises is the shape of the repository. A high but narrow glas rises faster in water level with the same amount of liquid than a wide soup bowl. Don't know, if this is paid attention to in the case of the littoral shape of the coastline of the continents. Maybe today they know the exact shape of the earth even under water to predict future sea level rises. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.114.202.121 ( talk) 01:39, 4 June 2018 (UTC)