Talk:Lake Agassiz
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada and related WikiProjects, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles on Canada-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project member page, to join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. |
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. |
| Low | This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale. |
 |
|
 |
 |
Lake Agassiz is part of WikiProject Lakes, a WikiProject which aims to systematically improve lake-related articles using the tools on the Project page. You are welcome and encouraged to edit the article attached to this page and to join the project. |
 |
| Start | This article has been rated as start-Class on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.) |
|
Contents |
[edit] Lake size
bigger than all of the present-day Great Lakes combined
Wasn't it actually bigger than all modern lakes combined? I think I heard this somewhere, but don't have a source. —Michael Z.
[edit] The numbers don't add up
The article says the lake formed around 11,700 years ago & then drained about 11,000BC, which would be 13,000 years ago. I'm sure this is a typo on someone's part.
Rob 9 July 2005 00:23 (UTC)
-- Updated using info from the first external reference --
That struck me too, and the Science News paper quotes 13000 years ago as formation date.
Akhen3sir 16:41, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Differences in dates
The article as now written (8 May 2007) uses dates apparently derived from an abstract of a piece by S. Perkins, which is now listed in the web sources as Lake Agassiz Overview. Being just an abstract, it does not have footnotes or cites. (Presumably the full article does). Those dates differ from the paper by Fisher listed under the printed media sources (but also available online) as River Warren boulders. The Fisher piece is richly sourced and may represent more recent research.
It may be appropriate to change the dates to conform with the Fisher article, give date ranges, or explain the matter in footnotes. I am inclined to do the former but wanted to raise it here first. Kablammo 20:20, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- Do employ your access to the most recent scholarly publications to improve the article in every way. --Wetman 22:22, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Names
Might "Glacial Lake Agassiz" be a better name? -Ravedave 02:28, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
- Google finds 124,000 hits for "Lake Agassiz" but only 41,700 hits for "Glacial Lake Agassiz", and most of those don't use the word "glacial" as part of its proper name. "Lake Agassiz" appears to be the most common name for the lake, so we should stick with it. Foobaz·o< 07:20, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
- The existence of a named Wikipedia article itself greatly increases the mention of that name, so the "Google test" here means little. And every article which prefers Glacial Lake Agassiz will also yield a Google return for Lake Agassiz. Having said that, it does not much matter which form of the name is used here, as there are redirects, and there is no modern Lake Agassiz. Both Lake Agassiz and Glacial Lake Agassiz are in common and proper usage to refer to this glacial lake. Kablammo 13:41, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] New research
Whoever wants to incorporate that new piece of research into the article, which doubts that Lake Agassiz played any key role in the 8.2k event: http://sciencenow.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/2007/816/3?etoc Nils Simon 08:21, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Map
A current map is needed. There are a number of maps available on the internet, but do not have a waiver of copyright. The present map is from 1895, and while it is consistent with modern maps of Agassiz' extent in the United States, does not show the full extent of the lake's various stages in Canada. Canadian maps are subject to Crown copyright; unlike works of employees or agencies of the United States, copyright is retained by the Candian federal government (and works of the provinces are also copyrighted). Has anyone found a free version of a more recent map? Kablammo 20:02, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Carbon 14 years different than real years?
In a few places the article cites two different numbers of years before present -- one in "years" and the other in "carbon 14 years". I'm not aware of there being a standard "carbon 14 year" that's any different than a real one... just that there's often uncertainty associated with carbon dating. How do we reconcile these different numbers and use a different description than "carbon 14 years"? Jerde (talk) 13:56, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
- It's not really just an uncertainty but actually a systematic difference – radiocarbon years (which is probably a better term than "carbon 14 years") assume the athmosphere C-14 level to be constant, whereas solar years, of course, do not. See Radiocarbon dating. -- Jao (talk) 14:53, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
- See also Before Present - which indicates that "before present" means before 1950. This (usually, if not always, I think) applies to carbon 14 dates. Cheers Geologyguy (talk) 14:57, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
