COSMOS magazine


Share |


News

Ancient rivers buried under outback desert

Friday, 12 March 2010
Cosmos Online

Single page print view

Sand dunes in the Simpson Desert.

Sand dunes in the Simpson Desert, covering a river system that is up to 50 million years old.

Credit: Michael Hutchinson/ANU

SYDNEY: An ancient river system buried 35 metres below the sand dunes Simpson Desert in Central Australia has been revealed by a team of Australian and American researchers.

This network of rivers and streams under the desert can be utilised for its valuable resources such as water in a sustainable way, the researchers said.

"We have gained insight into how the landscape works so we can manage water responsibly," said researcher Michael Hutchinson from the Australian National University in Canberra, a main contributor to the study published in the latest edition of the Australian Journal of Earth Sciences.

Hidden under thick sand dunes

Scientists have always suspected rivers and streams once traversed the Simpson, but the thickness of the overlying dunes and bedrock in this area and limitations in landscape sensing technology have always held research back.

A team from ANU, after more than a decade of work, have conquered the thick overlying dunes and bedrock and developed complex new Digital Elevation Model (ANUDEM) software that successfully mapped the subtle topography that underlies the landscape of today.

The software models how water moves across the surface of the continent. It infers the location of the underground river system by joining the lowest points from ground-level elevation measurements, Hutchinson said.

Vast river system

Using their new software, the team from ANU mapped the course of the rivers buried roughly 35 m under the Simpson Desert for the first time. The rivers are vast, covering hundreds of kilometres, the researchers said.

It is estimated the rivers and streams are some of the oldest in the world, at least 50 million years old, from a time when the desert was greener and wetter than it is today.

The results looked right according to the team, as the underground rivers were mapped where they were expected to be according to current adjoining rivers in the area.

"The ancient drainage systems are thought to have originated in the wet climate of the late Cretaceous, they are that old," Hutchinson said.


Readers' comments

science

science is proven wrong and revised all the time thats the point of it so our knowledge grows and what we thought was true before may have been wrong. religion doesn't change much as there is no evidence which can change for it as there is no evidence.

Do you anything about Australia?

The first paragraph mentions Sydney for no apparent reason, then Canberra (they are in totally different states).
There is nothing in the story about Sydney, so why use it?

Sydney

"SYDNEY" is the dateline: it tells readers where the writer is based. Canberra is where the ANU is based.

re: Sidney

The city mentioned at the beginning of the article merely states that is where the reporter is reporting from.

It would be interesting to

It would be interesting to find out if the "green period" of the Simpson desert is correlated with the "green period" of the Sahara Desert - as ancient watercourses have been found there as well - lying beneath the sands.

Thanks

Thanks for not bringing religion into this like several others have. I just don't understand that. This is science, pure and simple. Proven facts based on proven methods. Not superstition belief and false stories based on corrupt power of past kings and church(es) which still seem to keep so many people gripped in false beliefs and promises which hold back humanity today.

And, yes, I agree with you in wondering if there is some correlation with this and other reports of underground rivers the same (or close to) age. Perhaps that will come up later.

Yes there is a correlation between the two.

Yes there is a correlation between the two.
I am sure with a little googling you can find the facts.

science? religion?

Science vertifies its information by using some methods. in your word proven, in my word no. Religion uses other methods. Many think they are proven. It is all about trust in an athority and THEIR method. not THE method. i cannot comprehend a 4 pages matematic formula that proves something after their own methods. i either trust them and their truth, or i do not. that goes with any truth from the bible as well. science is just another authority, just like religion.

science? religion?

Science vertifies its information by using some methods. in your word proven, in my word no. Religion uses other methods. Many think they are proven. It is all about trust in an athority and THEIR method. not THE method. i cannot comprehend a 4 pages matematic formula that proves something after their own methods. i either trust them and their truth, or i do not. that goes with any truth from the bible as well. science is just another authority, just like religion.

Incorrect!

Apologies! Your last entry was incorrect! Correct entry is:

Science verifies.
Religion assumes.

Now, that's better.