The real mystery of the Gamburtsev Mountains is their origin. Their presence in East Antarctica does not fit into our existing understanding of the geologic history of Antarctica. The Soviets' identification of these mountains was equivalent to an archeologist finding a fully suited astronaut inside a pyramid. Our current understanding of the sequence of geologic events in East Antarctica indicates the last evidence of large-scale tectonics was over 500 million years ago. Since then, East Antarctica has been basically a pretty boring place geologically. A 500-million-year-old mountain range old should have been worn away by now. Either the tectonic history of the Antarctic continent is wrong or something special about these mountain ranges has kept them from being eroded flat as a pancake.
It intriguing to think that the ice sheet has protected these mountains, but the ice sheet is only 35 million years old—the blink of an eye geologically. Maybe these mountains are much younger than we think or perhaps there is something about East Antarctica we do not know. A mantle plume producing vast outpourings of lava like Hawaii or Iceland or maybe something new in the sliding about of the global plates. We should have a much better idea soon.
Our equipment is waiting in large aluminum boxes at McMurdo Station, the U.S. base perched on the flanks of a large active volcano. The Twin Otter aircraft will arrive tomorrow and the process of turning this rugged little commuter aircraft into an airborne imaging system on skis will begin. The British are awaiting the arrival of their aircraft, now slowly moving down the coast of South America. Soon we will be able to begin to answer questions about the roots of these mysterious mountains. While Lovecraft's team was terrified of alien beings, we must now worry about weather across an entire continent, equipment failures and altitude sickness.
Looking For a Lake
When you walk through the woods toward a lake, first you will often see ducks, loons, mergansers or other waterfowl flying intently towards the water. Soon you may notice marshy wetlands. Getting closer, you will hear the harsh rattling call of the kingfisher waiting to skewer a fish from the lake. As the trees thin, the horizon will open and the waters of the lake will stretch before you.
Walking toward a subglacial lake, there are far fewer clues. There are no trees to obscure your vision, only white snow and blue sky in every direction. The only hint of the lake will be when your colleague walking a quarter of a mile ahead suddenly disappears into a 15-foot- (4.6-meter-) deep moat. This 2.5-mile- (four-kilometer-) wide moat is the result of the ice sheet "sagging" as it goes afloat over the lake. There will be few other clues of the lake beneath your feet. The two miles (3.2 kilometers) of ice effectively hides the underlying terrain and the winged waterfowl have long ago fled these Antarctic lakes.
Appreciating a subglacial lake requires a little more distance to get perspective on the vast, apparently featureless ice surface. The first person to get a little distance was a Russian pilot, who transported scientists and engineers between the Soviet camps in East Antarctica in the 1950s. Staring out the window when the sun was low, he began to notice that there were large, extraordinarily flat places in the ice sheet. He catalogued these sites on the aviation maps with the hopes of writing a thesis on the phenomena upon his return to Moscow. Unfortunately, he was killed in a crash and subglacial lakes were relegated to myth status in the polar community.
See what we're tweeting about
12 Comments
Add Comment"Two teams will build the camps, one on the north side and the other on the south side of the mountain range. The heavy equipment and fuel for the southern camp will be delivered by a surface traverse that will pass first through the South Pole."
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIf one camp is across the south pole from the other camp, won't both of them be on the north side?
Our school will be following along! Some 8th grade students have decided to research your team's work in the Antarctic for their polar project. You have already inspired the next generation! Thank you!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHey! Where are all the liberals who think Space is a great waste of money? You know, the "We have to many problems here on Earth" people? The "if we only had that nickel NASA spends ..." Come on guys be consistent. This is a great waste of money. Government should NOT give welfare to 'science' unless it directly supports welfare programs to people OR unless it directly supports mismanagement of money and resources, to achieve an uncertain goal based on dubious politicized 'science' so the government can step in to 'offer' itself as the solution. Like Health Care and Global Warming ... uh ... Climate Change (can't have a changing climate can we!). The proper role of science is to support government expansion.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisFor more information on the International Polar Year 2007-8, and ways that people all around the world can get involved, talk to scientists in the polar regions directly, and learn more about these critical regions, please visit www.ipy.org.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisGreat Sheila if you want patches for your 8th graders let me know - e-mail me at mkt@ldeo.columbia.edu
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe reference to North and South camps is in relation to their placement relative to the subglacial mountain range - one is north and one is south of it.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI'm one of the ..uh. grunts / meteorology techs / mountaineers on this project. I've got a blog at http://patriotearth.blogspot.com where I'll be posting pics when I get back in January, in case you're interested in seeing some of the grittier sides of Antarctic field work. ;-)
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisA map sure would be helpful to understand the logistics and the scale of this project. As mentioned in the article, maps are often distorted or minimized, and missing mountains aren't likely to be noted even if one found a good map. So as a reference point, if you draw a line from the south camp to the north camp and continue it on, what is the first country the line would hit or what longitude would it fall on? And would you point readers to a good map with the 'missing mountains' on it?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHow much geologic mapping has occurred over the past several decades in Antartica? Is there a geologic map of the continet available for "public" viewing, showing the data that is currently available? Have different research teams from different countries shared information to produce a single map showing all of the information known to date? In the mapping of rock types, what is the standard that is used for designating different strata? Are there any exposed areas of limestone on the Antarctic continent?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisGreat work, Robin, & thanks also for sharing your experience Ian. I've indulged in very romantic ideas of the noble few dedicating their lives to pure research and life on the ice, but after reading up on firsthand accounts, am now reconsidering these dreams...
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisPossible explanations as to the mountains .
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thishttp://www.continuitystudios.net/guestvid.html
http://www.nealadams.com/nmu.html
For an interesting interview of Robin Bell on the subject of the Gamburtsev Mountains: http://www.sciencepoles.org/index.php?/articles_interviews/gamburtsev_dr_robin_bell_on_antarcticas_ghostly_mountains/&uid=1311
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this