Talk:Greenland Ice Sheet Project

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Greenland Ice Sheet Project article.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

Contents 1 Vertical or horizontal? 2 Controversy? 3 Ridiculous 4 When? 5 Why are they drilling?

[edit] Vertical or horizontal?

Out of curiosity, I was wondering if I should be looking at the image featured on this page vertically or horizontally. I see layers when I tilt the photo on it's side, but since the photo is posted the way that it is. . .--Hyokano 11:00, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Controversy?

No websites of any repute are used so this section is going to go away... and not return. Do the people who write this stuff actually believe that the hundreds of actual scientists working on real research are all getting this wrong? There is no controversy except in a few deluded people's heads. I guess Antarctica ice cores must present a slight problem... oh wait no the compression was caused by the giant still living dinosaurs skating around with the flying (and skating) spaghetti monster. Kare Kare 12:49, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

lol someone beat me to it. Cheers Kare Kare 12:51, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ridiculous

I want to avoid a science vs religion debate here. But to not include information on people who disagree with a finding or "fact" flys in the face of the reason. The links & sites i included are reputable to anyone from an opposing view. The organizations themselves are listed in wikipedia and if you want to discuss their reputation, go there.

This is a critical issue for public discussion! There is much debate, lawsuits and legislative action around a discussion of evolution vs creation being taught in public schools. The age of the earth is one of the critical points in this debate. I did not remove any of the information presented by the GISP2 team. Please don't remove information about those who dispute their findings.

The dispute is not scientifically credible, and even if it were, it would belong in places like ice core before coming here. There is no discussion of the ice age at all here, and hence no need for a "rebuttal". Dragons flight 16:22, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Who gets to decide if something is scientifically credible? There are plenty of very educated people (scientist & non) i know who disagree with these interpretations. Does the majority get to decide? Kind of weak logic if you ask me. I appreciate your suggestion about location of the information though.

[edit] When?

drilling to bedrock at Dye 3 began in the summer of 1979

Are more precise dates available here? The poetic phrasing "summer of 1979" is not encyclopedic and it is a violation of the Manual of Style. It is ambiguous because it is not summer at the same time all over the world and Wikipedia is supposed to cater to a global audience. If a more precise date can be supplied from primary references, eg: "February, 1979", it should be used instead. -- B.D.Mills  (T, C) 23:47, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

I beg to disagree on the poetic comment. Given that this is an area that gets annually covered in ice/snow, stating the work was started during the summer is as relevant as stating that the everest is usually climbed before the monsoon season. Just my 2 cents Galf 09:31, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Why are they drilling?

Sorry but I couln't find any mention of why they are drilling these holes in the first place. --Now might i do it pat 16:21, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Fair point I suppose. I've added a brief sentence; see ice core for more William M. Connolley 16:26, 10 August 2007 (UTC)