A large impact crater beneath Hiawatha Glacier in northwest Greenland

Abstract

We report the discovery of a large impact crater beneath Hiawatha Glacier in northwest Greenland. From airborne radar surveys, we identify a 31-kilometer-wide, circular bedrock depression beneath up to a kilometer of ice. This depression has an elevated rim that cross-cuts tributary subglacial channels and a subdued central uplift that appears to be actively eroding. From ground investigations of the deglaciated foreland, we identify overprinted structures within Precambrian bedrock along the ice margin that strike tangent to the subglacial rim. Glaciofluvial sediment from the largest river draining the crater contains shocked quartz and other impactrelated grains. Geochemical analysis of this sediment indicates that the impactor was a fractionated iron asteroid, which must have been more than a kilometer wide to produce the identified crater. Radiostratigraphy of the ice in the crater shows that the Holocene ice is continuous and conformable, but all deeper and older ice appears to be debris rich or heavily disturbed. The age of this impact crater is presently unknown, but from our geological and geophysical evidence, we conclude that it is unlikely to predate the Pleistocene inception of the Greenland Ice Sheet.

Surgery, fields, and phenomena

“…Here, the academy in Austria and elsewhere should think different, but, unfortunately, the academy does not represent an exception, it usually follows the uncritical conduct of reasoning and blind belief in the stage set by the ruling opinion guidelines in the majority of cases. There only exists a very small number of courageous scientists who are willed to put into question the ruling opinion and critically oppose the ruling view, opinion, and conduct of argumentation [4][5][6][7][8][9][10]. Those brave physicians leave the secure path and track and foster the development of novel possibilities for disease management and examination of human history [4][5][6][7][8][9][10].…”

“…In 20 years or so, the majority will follow their ideas, because the new ideas will have withstood the test of time. Based on the specialty and focus of the author, we will enter a bolus-based example of interest, which demonstrates what happens if we uncritically follow the ruling opinion, the ruling view, the ruling guideline [4][5][6][7][8][9][10].…”

“…As such, the easiest way to live is to follow the ruling opinion, to follow the guideline. It is much easier and less time-and brain substance-consuming to follow a guideline, which you may look up in the internet, when compared to living a critical appraisal and conduct of reasoning [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8].…”

“…Does the term "heavens" translate, transport, carry a deep wisdom of legacy from a lost ancient civilization, which may have been the precursor of our present civilization, which may have been wiped out by a gigantic cataclysm asteroid impact 12,000 years ago, as suggested by Graham Hancock et al? [6][7][8].…”

“…The majority does not want to take risk and responsibility. Next, we examine an example to show the effect and editorial result of uncritical following and blind belief in a given ruling opinion and guideline in medicine [4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14].…”