1 million years of ice core data??!!

[Badger]

I find this really exciting! They have an ice core from the Antarctic that goes back 740 000 years, and they're going for another 100 m of ice, to take it back to around a million years.

I can't wait to see the resultes!

http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/science/06/10/environment.climate.reut/index.html

[Eos of the Eons]

By studying past climate patterns and comparing them with present conditions, the researchers hope to get a better idea of future trends and how atmospheric conditions will influence them.

15 000 years at least until another ice age...that translates into how many generations for humans (mind boggles...I'm no good at math).

A million years of climate to study. How long will take to study each year of the sample? That translates into how long to study the whole sample?

It is fascinating. I hope they do find some patterns of weather over x amount of years. I think they are more interested in what atmospheric condition + temperatures + air content consistently go together though?

[Badger]

Based on 20 yrs per generation, the next iceage isn't due for another 750 generations.

[kedo1981]

No it's the day after tomarrow; oh wait thats the stupid movie my wife drug me to

[Rob Lister]

This is probably a dumb question but how do they know that the sample core, at some part, skips a few years. Perhaps even omits a few years because average above-freezing temperatures 'deleted' them?

[iain]

Originally posted by Rob Lister
This is probably a dumb question but how do they know that the sample core, at some part, skips a few years. Perhaps even omits a few years because average above-freezing temperatures 'deleted' them? Several different cores have been taken in different parts of the world over the last few years, so presumably they can compare them and spot anomolies that way.

[fishbob]

This is probably a dumb question but how do they know that the sample core, at some part, skips a few years. Perhaps even omits a few years because average above-freezing temperatures 'deleted' them? My guess - they count annual snowfall layers to come up with the age. There probably is some error range associated with that number. There is also probably some correlation with other data (volcanic ash that can be dated or ice cores in other areas) that can be used to tighten up the missing data errors.