It’s aliv-v-v-v-e! Evidence for recent geological activity on our moon has been reported in Nature.1 Katharine Sanderson introduced the findings in [email protected], in an item titled, “The moon has gas: Eruptions confound the idea that our nearest neighbour is a geological dead zone” –Some think the Moon has been geologically dead for billions of years. But Peter Schultz of Brown University, Rhode Island, is not one of them. His results show that some lunar craters were formed as recently as 10 million years ago by gas eruptions, suggesting that there’s still something bubbling away beneath the Moon’s surface. In terms of lunar geology, 10 million years is yesterday. It was thought that all volcanic activity stopped 3.2 billion years ago, and that any young craters were caused by meteor impacts. Time to think again, say Schultz and his colleagues in this week’s Nature1.Here is the abstract from the paper by Schults et al.1 It hints at a serious intellectual tension between the evidence for recent activity and the belief that this activity should have ceased billions of years ago:Samples of material returned from the Moon have established that widespread lunar volcanism ceased about 3.2 Gyr ago.2 Crater statistics and degradation models indicate that last-gasp eruptions of thin basalt flows continued until less than 1.0 Gyr ago, but the Moon is now considered to be unaffected by internal processes today, other than weak tidally driven moonquakes and young fault systems. It is therefore widely assumed that only impact craters have reshaped the lunar landscape over the past billion years. Here we report that patches of the lunar regolith in the Ina structure were recently removed. The preservation state of relief, the number of superimposed small craters, and the ’freshness’ (spectral maturity) of the regolith together indicate that features within this structure must be as young as 10 Myr, and perhaps are still forming today. We propose that these features result from recent, episodic out-gassing from deep within the Moon. Such out-gassing probably contributed to the radiogenic gases detected during past lunar missions. Future monitoring (including Earth-based observations) should reveal the composition of the gas, yielding important clues to volatiles archived at great depth over the past 4-4.5 Gyr.This tension continues in the body of the article. “Both morphological and spectral criteria indicate that the exposed surfaces within Ina are exceedingly young,” the authors say. “In fact, our observations do not preclude the possibility that it is still in the process of formation.” The 10 Myr figure, clearly, was intended as an upper limit. Moreover, Ina is just one of four such features they identified. Since these four trend along a rille around the Imbrium basin, “These occurrences in similar structural settings indicate that volatiles (for example, juvenile CO2 and even H2O) trapped deep within the Moon episodically escape along crustal weaknesses, thereby continually freshening the regolith.” Another clue that something very recent is going on comes from the identification of Polonium-210 alpha particles by the alpha particle spectrometer on Lunar Prospector. These short-lived radioactive decay products (half-life = 138 days) “indicate radon release within the past 60 yr.” If these features indicate recent geological activity, it could mean that at least some craters were formed by gas explosions, [email protected] explained. It has long been assumed that all craters formed since the ancient volcanism stopped were from impacts. Although these findings are “suggestive, rather than definitive,” the implications take lunar scientists back to square one, Sanderson concluded: Lunar scientists will now be forced to rethink assumptions made about the Moon. “There is more to the Moon than we had previously discovered,” says Schultz. “This shows there’s still some [geological] life. We just have to learn how to take its pulse.”See also popular reports on this story posted by National Geographic and Brown University.1Schultz, Staid and Peters, “Lunar Activity from Recent Gas Release,” Nature 444, 184-186 (9 November 2006) | doi:10.1038/nature05303.2Gyr = billions (giga) of years; Myr = millions of years.No sooner had we speculated that the Egyptian anomalous craters (11/01/2006) might have been endogenic, leading to new hypotheses about other solar system craters, than this report appears in Nature suggesting the same thing. Imagine: some craters on the moon forming from the inside out, in recent times. That is a startling change in thinking. Undoubtedly many, if not most, are still impact craters (the authors did not consider secondaries; see 06/08/2006), but it’s hard to understate the surprise that geologists must feel finding something this young on a moon their minds have been trained to think as old, old, old. The authors, for sure, considered details that might distinguish the young features from the presumably old ones, and do not doubt the 4.5-Gyr accepted age. (How could they and keep their jobs?) But then they had to admit that the new findings are forcing lunar scientists to “rethink assumptions made about the Moon.” It’s been almost heresy to consider the moon being geologically alive. Only a few “last gasp” episodes from isolated craters like Aristarchus, location of numerous lunar transient phenomena sightings, have been considered as interesting but anomalous. The moon was supposed to have cooled and quieted down three billion years ago. You can almost sense the astonishment as they first talk glibly about billions of years, then 10 million, then 60 years, then Yikes, it might be even active today! Isn’t it just like secular scientists to sidestep the most serious implications of their discoveries? At the end, the scientists focused on how this finding might help future astronauts understand what resources are available to exploit. Come on; this is a story with big epistemological ramifications. The lesson can be stated as a question you should train children to ask when they hear things about the unseen past taught as accepted fact: “How do you know that?”(Visited 9 times, 1 visits today)FacebookTwitterPinterestSave分享0
By Alan BaldwinLONDON, England (Reuters) – Six-time Formula One world champion Lewis Hamilton says he is yet to start talks with Mercedes to extend his contract beyond this year, despite media reports they had stalled already over wage demands.The 35-year-old Briton denied the speculation in a post, subsequently deleted, on Instagram.“FYI (Team principal) Toto (Wolff) and I have not even spoken about contract yet,” he said.“Nothing is being negotiated currently, papers making up stories.”Reports in Italy had suggested Hamilton was seeking $60 million a year. Red Bull’s motorsport head Helmut Marko was then quoted by Autobild as saying only Ferrari would be willing to pay such an amount for a driver.Ferrari said last year that chairman John Elkann had met Hamilton socially, fuelling speculation about a future move to the Italian team. Hamilton’s last contract talks turned into something of a paddock saga, with the eventual announcement of a two-year extension in 2018 following months of speculation.“I just kept delaying it. I had a contract in place so I didn’t feel like I had to rush,” the champion, who conducted his own negotiations, said at the time.Hamilton’s future is already in the spotlight after Ferrari last month committed long-term to Monegasque youngster Charles Leclerc and Red Bull made sure Max Verstappen was locked in for four more years. The pair are both considered Hamilton’s heirs-apparent, and their contract extensions mark them out as the future of their respective teams, making a Hamilton move from Mercedes less likely.The Briton, who joined Mercedes from McLaren at the end of 2012, gets on well with Finnish team mate Valtteri Bottas and has said going elsewhere would not be an easy decision.Mercedes want the Briton to stay but the situation has been clouded by uncertainty over Wolff’s own future and the German manufacturer’s commitment to a sport it has dominated for the past six years. Ole Kaellenius, chief executive of parent Daimler, said on Wednesday that Mercedes were not preparing to leave Formula One, after reports that the matter would be discussed at the next board meeting.Mercedes launch their new car on February 14, with testing in Barcelona starting five days later.The season opens in Australia on March 15 with Hamilton chasing several Formula One records, including Ferrari great and Mercedes predecessor Michael Schumacher’s 91 wins and seven titles.
Facebook Twitter SHARE Home Indiana Agriculture News Next Month’s AG CONNECT Expo in KC also Soon Headed to Indy Next Month’s AG CONNECT Expo in KC also Soon Headed to Indy Facebook Twitter By Andy Eubank – Dec 26, 2012 The AG CONNECT Expo is now about a month away and is scheduled for Kansas City, Missouri. The annual event has also been held in Atlanta and Orlando, but Indianapolis will be the host city in 2015. Farmer Kip Tom from Warsaw explains the expo has been looking for strong Midwest-located venues.“It’s an event that spans across the United States as far as the attendees. In fact it’s absolutely international. I know they’ve had a number of people coming in from Europe and South America at the same time, so Indianapolis has a good draw for it. We have a great convention center, a great place to exhibit some of the technologies and equipment that many of us are interested in. At the same time we have a lot of entertainment and hotels to host our guests with.”Tom agreed that pulling off a successful AG CONNECT should be easy considering the the success of the Super Bowl earlier this year.“Hey we pulled off the Super Bowl as good as anybody could pull one off and I hope we get it back here in a few years, but Indianapolis is all about hosting events like this and pulling off a class act while they do it.”Tom told HAT recently that AG CONNECT Expo sets itself apart from other shows in a number of ways.“Probably first and foremost it’s an exhibition and a hall that’s full of seminars and meetings going on, but it’s just producers. It’s people that are involved in transactions with companies like CNH, Agco, John Deere, many of those, and it gives us as producers the ability to have direct linkage and conversations with people developing some of the technologies we put in play on our farm today. They like it as well because they know when someone walks up to them this is someone that buys their products and they can ask good questions about what do you really need from us? So it’s a great opportunity to network with the leadership of many of the companies we’re involved with in transactions on our farms.”The expo is January 29-31, 2013 and early bird registration and education fees are good through January 4th.[audio:https://www.hoosieragtoday.com//wp-content/uploads//2012/12/Kip-Tom-on-AG-CONNECT.mp3|titles=Kip Tom on AG CONNECT] SHARE Previous articleVillwock Outlines Top Farm Issues for 2013Next articleEthanol Discount to Gasoline Widens to Biggest in 3 Months Andy Eubank
By Susan Stamper BrownApparently, integrity and critical thinking are not qualities found in today’s mainstream media.We know this after watching the CNBC-hosted Republican debate billed as one which would focus on “the key issues that matter to all voters—job growth, taxes, technology, retirement and the health of our national economy.”Obviously, that did not happen.Instead, Americans watched moderators with the seeming intellectual prowess of June bugs disrespectfully hurl boneheaded attacks and stupid questions at GOP presidential hopefuls, offering millions of viewers a front row seat to observe proof positive they are nothing more than extensions of, and left-wing propagandists for, the Democratic Party.For this gift we should be thankful.Americans needed to see this irrefutable idiocy for themselves. CNBC promised candidates an opening question on financial or economic issues but instead were lowballed with: “Tell us your biggest weakness in 30 seconds.” Later, one moderator went so far as to ask a ridiculous question about fantasy football.It was almost as if moderators didn’t want crucial matters discussed, circumventing any possibility of intelligent debate with off-the-wall questions and personal attacks. In fact, a Media Research Center analysis found that 65 percent of the “questions” posed by moderators John Harwood, Carl Quintanilla and Becky Quick “hit the candidates with negative spin, personal insults or ad hominem attacks.” Ad hominem attacks like asking if one of the candidates was running “a comic book version of a presidential campaign” or disparagingly asking the world-renowned neurosurgeon, Dr. Ben Carson, if he could do math.At that point I was rather thankful a baseball bat was not in arm’s reach, or my living room would be minus one flat screen. I was not alone. Public outcry shows it backfired. Presidential debates are intended to field the tough questions so voters can gain a window into each candidate’s vision for how he or she would lead America.Senator Ted Cruz was right when during the debate he defended fellow GOP contenders saying, “The men and women on this stage have more ideas, more experience, more common sense than every participant in the Democratic debate,” which reflected “a debate between the Bolsheviks and the Mensheviks.” And I would add the “Bull-shi-viks” but I wasn’t onstage.Truth is, the left-stream media have no interest in allowing Americans to think for themselves and form their own opinions. The world burns, rogue nations toy with nuclear weapons, the world’s economy teeters on the brink of collapse — and the left-stream media are preoccupied with “gotcha” questions. And protecting Hillary Clinton.“Comes with the job,” said moderator John Harwood after The Blaze News asked him to respond to the overwhelming outcry from critics after the debate. Comes with the job? Apparently, asking Democrat Party contenders similar questions with the same condescending tone doesn’t come with the job. Nor does questioning Hillary about Benghazi or about Her Highness’s metastasizing email scandal presently under FBI investigation.Senator Marco Rubio nailed it during the debate when he said the Democrats’ “ultimate SuperPAC” is the mainstream media. “Last week,” Rubio said, “Hillary Clinton went before a committee. She admitted she had sent emails to her family saying, ‘Hey, this attack at Benghazi was caused by al-Qaeda-like elements.’ She spent over a week telling families of those victims and the American people that it was because of a video. And yet the mainstream media is going around saying it was the greatest week in Hillary Clinton’s campaign. It was the week she got exposed as a liar…”And the mainstream media will continue to remain silent to ensure her coronation.After the debate, CNN reported that some CNBC employees were heard saying “they were proud that the moderators had pointedly challenged the GOP candidates and potentially changed the course of the presidential race.” That’s all they cared about and that’s the reason why people trust the left-stream media about as much as they trust Hillary Clinton.FacebookTwitterCopy LinkEmail