You've got a glass of ice water, there is plenty of ice in the glass. You forget about it, leaving it sitting on the table for several hours. You come back and see that all the ice has melted in the glass. Has all the water overflowed and made a mess on the table?
that does not wash nash,
you have a plate, you place 5 nice crisp little cookies on it, then you stragically place 12 ice cubes around those five little crisp cookies. You leave that and forget about it,returning later and what have you got then?
Since you won't answer my question, I'll do it for you. The water does not overflow out of the glass. Except for some condensation around the outside of the glass, there is no mess on the table.

As for your example, you would have plate of water with 5 floating cookies and no water on the table. I'm not sure how that is supposed to prove your point, it really has nothing to do with the physics involved.

When water is frozen, it expands and takes more space. When it melts, it takes less space. Just as the ice in the glass melting didn't cause the water to overflow, the polar ice caps melting will not raise the ocean level to a scale that it would swallow islands and continents. To say that melting polar ice caps will raise the ocean level defies physics.

The story you provided did not have any scientific evidence that rising temperature caused the oceans to rise, nor did it link humans with the temperature rise or the waters rising. In other words, that story is complete bunk.

I'm not saying that our temperature isn't rising, it could be. I'm saying that the temperature rise is slight and is a natural occurrence.
why THANK YOU nash! How silly of me,,,I had almost thought as ice melts and becomes in the LIQUID form it could POSSIBLY errode shorelines or create rises in the LIQUID form of water in the areas where were previously dry land.
So glad we have you here to set us straight on how the difference is between the DENSITY of water and ice! and which would be the most damaging to dry land areas.
You're right, water erodes the land in liquid form. Erosion has been a part of the natural process since the beginning of time. You're also right about ice being denser than water. I'm missing how all of this proves global warming is caused by humans.
The remark about ice, water level and condensation has been... has been... shall we say "largely uninformed." Using an example of ice melting and condensation forming on a drinking cup is a very poor attempt to explain a very complex issue.

And, that's too sad.

What hasn't been accounted for is the story of Noah and a global flood. Mix in with it the theories about Pangea, separation of the shelfs, and a shifting of the tectonic plates, and you've got a really interesting upheaval of unparalleled proportion, on a magnitude that makes the San Francisco earthquake, the tsunami in Thailand and ever other cataclysmic event COMBINED! pale by comparison. In other words, we're talking about a massive upheaval which would have made mountains.

Everyone ought to know and understand some basic fundamentals about hydrogeology, chemistry and physics. However, most don't and most won't.

Even the reference to "the physics involved" fails to account for very important variable... environmental water vapor. For example, why does flooding occur if a fixed amount of water is in the environment?

Let's examine just one issue: condensation.

Water and its vapor are everywhere! Especially in the South in the summer! Why, if the Almighty hadn't invented air conditioning, in the South, we'd be done for!

Simply put, condensation occurs when two surfaces with different temperatures contact each other.

The condensate comes from water vapor in the environment, which is called humidity.

We see the phenomenon with contrails, or the condensation trails of jets in the skies. If you've ever flown a small aircraft, you know that even on the hottest summer day, it's freezing cold up in sky and in those clouds. It's also much less dense.

The hot exhaust gasses cause water vapor in the upper atmosphere to condense around the area of heat. What has happened, is that heat has 'driven away' water vapor from other areas, thus causing it to concentrate. When it cools, it concentrates.

Think of it this way: Examine the condensation around an air conditioning coil. In the concept of air conditioning, moisture is removed from the air, and cooled moisture-free air is blown back in.

The reason contrails form is because the area with the cooler temperature has a greater capacity to hold more water vapor at a particular temperature and pressure than does the warmer area. Watch contrails sometime. The longer they stick around, typically means a higher concentration of atmospheric water vapor. Inversely, the quicker they dissipate, the less likely it it to rain. (The fact that in select heavy air traffic corridors, contrails can increase cloud cover up to 20% is concerning.) As the air temperature rises, the point at which clouds (and contrails) form increases along with the vapor pressure.

The concepts to understand in that process include Dew Point, Relative Humidity and environmental pressure made by atmospheric water, also sometimes called vapor pressure. Barometric pressure is also important.

Simply put again, the Dew Point is that point where evaporation ability and condensation ability equal each other.

Though the discussion could get more technical, suffice it to say that the greater an object's ability to resist temperature change (also called insulation power) the less condensation will occur on it. Although, at some point, at a given temperature, humidity and pressure level, condensation will occur.

In the natural environment, we call that "rain."

Here's a three-hour GOES-8 movie that shows the proliferation of contrails.
http://cimss.ssec.wisc.edu/wxwise/class/CONTRL.mpg

A GOES-8 movie of the contrail left 12 November 1995 launch of STS-74 (Space Shuttle Atlantis).
http://cimss.ssec.wisc.edu/wxwise/class/Shuttle.mpg

Here ends lesson one.
Yes, there is global warming on the planets
Earth and Mars. Whether its due to human activity or changing flux of flow of plasma on the surface of the sun and resulting changes in solar winds is the rub. Global warming has occurred on Earth numerous times.

Latest UN study predicts a 17-inch rise in the ocean's heighth vs Gore's movie that predicts a 20-foot rise. GIGO again, when one uses computer models unconnected to actual occurrence.

As the islands being inundated, are we to assume the oceans rises in certain spots and not everywhere, in contradiction with the laws of phsics? The islands rest on tectonic plates that rise and fall. There are other reports of islands rising, that don't make the news.
quote:
Yes, there is global warming on the planets
Earth and Mars. Whether its due to human activity or changing flux of flow of plasma on the surface of the sun and resulting changes in solar winds is the rub. Global warming has occurred on Earth numerous times.

Latest UN study predicts a 17-inch rise in the ocean's heighth vs Gore's movie that predicts a 20-foot rise. GIGO again, when one uses computer models unconnected to actual occurrence.

As the islands being inundated, are we to assume the oceans rises in certain spots and not everywhere, in contradiction with the laws of phsics? The islands rest on tectonic plates that rise and fall. There are other reports of islands rising, that don't make the news.



Excellent post.

I haven't seen Gore's movie, so I had no idea he was predicting the sea level to rise 20 feet. That's just insane. Keep in mind that while he's telling us to burn less fossil fuels and use less energy, he's flying all over the world on his private jet, to and from one of his several mansions. Each one of his homes is several times larger than ours requiring much more energy to heat and cool. He burns far more fuel and consumes much more energy than the average family does. So if he's right and we are causing global warming, then he's one of the major contributors. Apparently he's not too worried about the 20 foot rise in ocean levels.
quote:
Originally posted by interventor:
Yes, there is global warming on the planets
Earth and Mars. Whether its due to human activity or changing flux of flow of plasma on the surface of the sun and resulting changes in solar winds is the rub. Global warming has occurred on Earth numerous times.

Latest UN study predicts a 17-inch rise in the ocean's heighth vs Gore's movie that predicts a 20-foot rise. GIGO again, when one uses computer models unconnected to actual occurrence.

As the islands being inundated, are we to assume the oceans rises in certain spots and not everywhere, in contradiction with the laws of phsics? The islands rest on tectonic plates that rise and fall. There are other reports of islands rising, that don't make the news.


there is a large resort in the keys, which when purchased almost 20 years ago was 15.5 acres, it sold recently (for over $100 million dollars) and the official report states that there are only 14 acres there, above water. they are planning to level the current resort and build ultra high end condos. part of their plan is to "reclaim" the land by building a wall and bringing in fill from the main land, or to use dredge material if possible.

we know that there is climate changes and we also know that it is part of a natural cycle, the debate should be if we are accelerating this cycle or not with our pollution. and speaking of pollution, in general we are trashing the planet. it would be great if we could focus on saving this place for our children and grandchildren, but there's no money in that....
quote:
You're also right about ice being denser than water. I'm missing how all of this proves global warming is caused by humans.


Ice is less dense than water... thats how it floats. Water reaches its maximum density @ 4°C, lower than that, it begins to lose density.

So if the ice melts, and remains at or near 4° it would be more dense than the ice it is replacing, displacing the ocean by the difference in water densities.

example: water at -10°C weighs 0.9982 g/cm3
while water at 10°C weighs 0.9997 g/cm3

yes that isn't a large difference, but when you start expanding it beyond cubic centimeters it can add up.

and your glass of ice water, is not supercooled ice with a greatly reduced density, so you won't have as much of a variance in density.

Won't answer the question of if humans cause it, since we've had several ice ages and periods when the planet was warmer than it is now.

I agree with George Carlin: "The planet isn't going anywhere. WE ARE! Pack your s**t, folks. We're goin' away."
Nilla Wafers would dissolve speedily. Witness your banana pudding and how soggy it is on day two. Oreos would take a bit longer to get soggy, but the would. Now, take the 99 cent oatmeal cookies, that would take a while. If we covered the entire planet with cheap oatmeal cookies, would we last longer........?
quote:
Here is a quote from Newsweek magazine:

“There are ominous signs that the Earth’s weather patterns have begun to change dramatically and that these changes may portend a drastic decline in food production– with serious political implications for just about every nation on Earth.”

A headline in the New York Times reads: “Climate Changes Endanger World’s Food Output.” Here is a quote from Time Magazine:

“As they review the bizarre and unpredictable weather pattern of the past several years, a growing number of scientists are beginning to suspect that many seemingly contradictory meteorological fluctuations are actually part of a global climatic upheaval.”

from articles in 1975 editions of Newsweek Magazine and The New York Times, and Time Magazine in 1974. http://time-proxy.yaga.com/time/archive/printout/0,23657,944914,00.html

They weren’t referring to global warming; they were warning of a coming ice age.


quote:
“[Those] who claim that winters were harder when they were boys are quite right… weathermen have no doubt that the world at least for the time being is growing warmer.”

Time Magazine | January 2, 1939

quote:
Time Magazine in 1951 pointed to receding permafrost in Russia as proof that the planet was warming.


quote:
In 1952, the New York Times noted that the “trump card” of global warming “has been the melting glaciers.”


quote:
There are many more examples of the media and scientists flip-flopping between warming and cooling scares.

Here is a quote from the New York Times reporting on fears of an approaching ice age.

“Geologists Think the World May be Frozen Up Again.”

February 24, 1895 edition of the New York Times yep, that's 1895, not 1995

excerpts from a speech given on the Senate floor on 9/25/06 by Senator James Inhofe Chairman, Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. Full speech HERE
quote:


OK nash, let's change your experiment a little, you have a funnel that holds a gallon of water if you close the outlet. Balance this funnel in a quart jar, fill it with ice, let the ice melt. NOW WHAT HAVE YOU GOT?
My calculations say you have a quart of water in the jar, and more than a half gallon of water all over the table, and on the carpet under the table.
quote:
Originally posted by EdEKit:
quote:


OK nash, let's change your experiment a little, you have a funnel that holds a gallon of water if you close the outlet. Balance this funnel in a quart jar, fill it with ice, let the ice melt. NOW WHAT HAVE YOU GOT?
My calculations say you have a quart of water in the jar, and more than a half gallon of water all over the table, and on the carpet under the table.


Yep, Ed... that is very true!!!!
quote:
OK nash, let's change your experiment a little, you have a funnel that holds a gallon of water if you close the outlet. Balance this funnel in a quart jar, fill it with ice, let the ice melt. NOW WHAT HAVE YOU GOT?
My calculations say you have a quart of water in the jar, and more than a half gallon of water all over the table, and on the carpet under the table.



That doesn't make any sense. How is that a comparason to the Earth? The oceans are like a glass of water with ice floating in it, not a gallon funnel and a pint jar.

By the way, I went to the beach for New Year's. The week prior, the weather was predicted to be rainy and stormy for most of time I would be there. It rained once, late Saturday night. The rest of the time it was very pleasant. If science can't predict the weather a week in advance, how can they predict it a decade or more in advance?
everyone is wasting their time on this subject. it does not matter how juvinile you get with explainations it all goes ZIP right over head.
It makes no difference that ski resorts all over Europe are closing due to lack of snow,it makes no difference that one of Canadas 5 largeset glacier plates has broken off, it makes no difference that Eastern shoreline holdings are becoming alarmed at how fast the water levels are rising,it makes no difference that there are certain species of animals already beginning the starvation because their food sources no longer exisit in plentiful enough amounts to support them,it makes no difference there are ships already having to devise different routes out of fear of flocting ice that was never before there but is now due to melting ,,,,, it makes no difference.
So long as people ignoring it are around it is non existant,,until it foils their vacations,prevents some of the niceties of their own personal life and wishes. WHEN THIS happens we will hear the squaking and how something has to be done! So no need to make any preperations for a world with this problem until the soft folks are interrupted.
Dang i am so relieved to understand this now.
I have asked this question a number of times and have yet to get a straight answer;

If the planet is being heated causing the ice caps to melt does that not also increase the evaporation rate of the water? This would result in more clouds blocked sunlight and increased precipitation which would result in a moderating effect. The result of course of a huge moderation [cooling] would eventually create an increased level of ice caps and a renewal as nature has always demonstrated. The fear I would be more concerned with would be the earth becoming too cold. In human survival terms which would have a much larger risk in the increased rate we would expend natural resources in order to stay warm. The one part of the equation which is never discussed is the fact every drop of water on this planet from it’s creation is still here in one form or another. Where else could it go? So much for the claim of a non renewable resource being depleted. 20 years back the talk of selling bottled water would have been laughed at and look at us now, trained sheep consumers, slaves to the media as political correctness is used as a whip to control our voice.

It is with amazement we hear the Global warming fear mongering always it is accompanied by pictures of polluted lakes and streams which will not be dealt with in Kyoto, or will the other major pollutants associated with the largest sources which cause acid rain, polluted water and respiratory problems. Much as the smoking ban fans created a phantom to distract us away from science. The six cities research showed a huge disparity between most and least polluted cities. Hospital admissions which decreased with pollution level decreases in all of what are termed smoking related diseases. I find it inexcusable environmental groups are promoting this scam.

Somehow the media groups who are paid billions of our tax dollars every year to incite fears remain credible. Spreading the word with new research not available even a decade ago no new methods of estimating has been created affording new insights. Reams of new research is being created tour Jour; complimenting industry advocates in the battle for market share. Now with UN involvement joining with stakeholders or NGOs of political and industrial interest, the political map is up for grabs as well. Utilizing the same methods of calculation Hitler used to promote his health scare advocacy. It boggles the mind the news rooms who should be taking out the trash support Industry and continually punish us for their crimes.

Charity foundations holding over 7 Trillion dollars in North America alone should be made to pay for the failings of industry The silent majority needs to speak up before the transition to total fascism is complete or we are all classed as third world nations in the current health scare agenda.
quote:
I have asked this question a number of times and have yet to get a straight answer;

If the planet is being heated causing the ice caps to melt does that not also increase the evaporation rate of the water? This would result in more clouds blocked sunlight and increased precipitation which would result in a moderating effect. The result of course of a huge moderation [cooling] would eventually create an increased level of ice caps and a renewal as nature has always demonstrated. The fear I would be more concerned with would be the earth becoming too cold. In human survival terms which would have a much larger risk in the increased rate we would expend natural resources in order to stay warm. The one part of the equation which is never discussed is the fact every drop of water on this planet from it’s creation is still here in one form or another. Where else could it go? So much for the claim of a non renewable resource being depleted. 20 years back the talk of selling bottled water would have been laughed at and look at us now, trained sheep consumers, slaves to the media as political correctness is used as a whip to control our voice.

It is with amazement we hear the Global warming fear mongering always it is accompanied by pictures of polluted lakes and streams which will not be dealt with in Kyoto, or will the other major pollutants associated with the largest sources which cause acid rain, polluted water and respiratory problems. Much as the smoking ban fans created a phantom to distract us away from science. The six cities research showed a huge disparity between most and least polluted cities. Hospital admissions which decreased with pollution level decreases in all of what are termed smoking related diseases. I find it inexcusable environmental groups are promoting this scam.

Somehow the media groups who are paid billions of our tax dollars every year to incite fears remain credible. Spreading the word with new research not available even a decade ago no new methods of estimating has been created affording new insights. Reams of new research is being created tour Jour; complimenting industry advocates in the battle for market share. Now with UN involvement joining with stakeholders or NGOs of political and industrial interest, the political map is up for grabs as well. Utilizing the same methods of calculation Hitler used to promote his health scare advocacy. It boggles the mind the news rooms who should be taking out the trash support Industry and continually punish us for their crimes.

Charity foundations holding over 7 Trillion dollars in North America alone should be made to pay for the failings of industry The silent majority needs to speak up before the transition to total fascism is complete or we are all classed as third world nations in the current health scare agenda.


Great post. I wonder what the folks in Denver think about Global Warming right about now?
quote:
Originally posted by NashBama:
quote:
OK nash, let's change your experiment a little, you have a funnel that holds a gallon of water if you close the outlet. Balance this funnel in a quart jar, fill it with ice, let the ice melt. NOW WHAT HAVE YOU GOT?
My calculations say you have a quart of water in the jar, and more than a half gallon of water all over the table, and on the carpet under the table.
the OCEANS DO HAVE ICE FLOATING ON THEM. and Sir, Greenland and Antartica, and Iceland, and the Alps, and Mt Killamanjaro, and The Andes and the Rocky Mountains, ALL HAVE ICE FLOATING ON THEM TOO. In fact, the North Polar Ice Cap could melt entirely without raising sea level my much. BECAUSE THAT ICE IS FLOATING IN THE OCEAN. BUT GREENLAND'S ICECAP HAS MORE ICE AND WATER IN IT THAT THE POLAR ICE CAP. That ice is NOT IN THE OCEAN, IT IS IN THE FUNNEL.


That doesn't make any sense. How is that a comparason to the Earth? The oceans are like a glass of water with ice floating in it, not a gallon funnel and a pint jar.

By the way, I went to the beach for New Year's. The week prior, the weather was predicted to be rainy and stormy for most of time I would be there. It rained once, late Saturday night. The rest of the time it was very pleasant. If science can't predict the weather a week in advance, how can they predict it a decade or more in advance?
quote:
Originally posted by kevin:
I have asked this question a number of times and have yet to get a straight answer;

If the planet is being heated causing the ice caps to melt does that not also increase the evaporation rate of the water? Yes This would result in more clouds blocked sunlight and increased precipitation which would result in a moderating effect. NO The result of course of a huge moderation [cooling] would eventually create an increased level of ice caps and a renewal as nature has always demonstrated. Yes and it will take about 45 thousand years. The fear I would be more concerned with would be the earth becoming too cold. In human survival terms which would have a much larger risk in the increased rate we would expend natural resources in order to stay warm. The one part of the equation which is never discussed is the fact every drop of water on this planet from it’s creation is still here in one form or another. Where else could it go? So much for the claim of a non renewable resource being depleted. 20 years back the talk of selling bottled water would have been laughed at and look at us now, trained sheep consumers, slaves to the media as political correctness is used as a whip to control our voice.

It is with amazement we hear the Global warming fear mongering always it is accompanied by pictures of polluted lakes and streams which will not be dealt with in Kyoto, or will the other major pollutants associated with the largest sources which cause acid rain, polluted water and respiratory problems. Much as the smoking ban fans created a phantom to distract us away from science. The six cities research showed a huge disparity between most and least polluted cities. Hospital admissions which decreased with pollution level decreases in all of what are termed smoking related diseases. I find it inexcusable environmental groups are promoting this scam.

Somehow the media groups who are paid billions of our tax dollars every year to incite fears remain credible. Spreading the word with new research not available even a decade ago no new methods of estimating has been created affording new insights. Reams of new research is being created tour Jour; complimenting industry advocates in the battle for market share. Now with UN involvement joining with stakeholders or NGOs of political and industrial interest, the political map is up for grabs as well. Utilizing the same methods of calculation Hitler used to promote his health scare advocacy. It boggles the mind the news rooms who should be taking out the trash support Industry and continually punish us for their crimes.

Charity foundations holding over 7 Trillion dollars in North America alone should be made to pay for the failings of industry The silent majority needs to speak up before the transition to total fascism is complete or we are all classed as third world nations in the current health scare agenda.

As for the "fear mongering." This week it was reported by the BBC, two populated Islands in the Ganges River Delta have been completely submerged by rising sea levels. More than 100 thousand people have been displaced. Also, at least one South Pacific island has been evacuated as sea water encroaches on it.
quote:
Greenland and Antartica, and Iceland, and the Alps, and Mt Killamanjaro, and The Andes and the Rocky Mountains, ALL HAVE ICE FLOATING ON THEM TOO.


Those aren't polar ice caps. Those snows have melted and returned, it's part of the natural cycle of the Earth. You mentioned the snows in the Rockies are disappearing, have you watched the news lately? Denver has been covered in record snow fall. Even if the snows were disappearing and the ocean level was rising, there is still no evidence that we are responsible as opposed to the Earth simply changing on it's own.
I don't know if "global warming" exists or not, but just read this. While the Arctic ice cap is currently shrinking, the Antarctic ice cap is thickening. Go figure.
quote:
Originally posted by NashBama:
quote:
Greenland and Antartica, and Iceland, and the Alps, and Mt Killamanjaro, and The Andes and the Rocky Mountains, ALL HAVE ICE FLOATING ON THEM TOO.


Those aren't polar ice caps. Those snows have melted and returned, it's part of the natural cycle of the Earth. You mentioned the snows in the Rockies are disappearing, have you watched the news lately? Denver has been covered in record snow fall. Even if the snows were disappearing and the ocean level was rising, there is still no evidence that we are responsible as opposed to the Earth simply changing on it's own.

Whoa here fella, you apparently don't recognize that the GREENLAND ICECAP HAS BEEN THERE FOR ABOUT 50 THOUSAND YEARS OR MORE. You don't seem to know about Glacier National Park in Washington State. You don't seem to know that the Snows of Killamajaro fall on GLACIERS. You seem to think that Iceland is Ice Free in the summer. WELL IT JUST AIN'T SO.
What you are FAILING TO ADMIT IS THIS...VIRTUALLY EVERY GLACIER ON EARTH IS RECEEDING AT HISTORICALLY HIGH RATES.
Again, glaciers are not polar ice caps. I never said anything about glaciers.

Again, there is no link that the warming effect, if there is one, is caused by humans and is not happening naturally.
Gee NashBama,

Have you looked at the computer modeling? Human activity is not the underlying cause of global warming, it is a CONTRIBUTOR. The environment has been warming for 50 millenia or so. There has been a noticable, appreciable and accellerating increase in the RATE of warming over the past 150 years.
The combination of natural and human induced warming speeds up the changes in global climate.(that is why we call it CLIMATE CHANGE) This reduces the time available for ADAPTING to the changed situation. Humans are great at adapting to the environment, The range of the human species is the totality of the earth.
There are a couple of things we cannot easily adapt to. One is CROP FAILURE. Agriculture is an adaptation that has made it possible for the Human population of the earth to grow from about 150 million 2000 years ago to over 6 billion today. Agriculture, combined with transportation allows humans to be fed in Antartica, The only continent where humans are unable to prosper and reproduce. What adaptations will be necessary during the next millenium for the population of humans to remain at 6 billion, or even increase? One, agriculture will have to expand, if coastal regions are innundated by the sea, the land mass available for expansion will decline. Two, transportation will have to continue, or increase. Transportation TODAY is dependent on fossil fuels, they are not sustainable, and their use is accellerating the warming of the global climate. Three, the human population will have to stabilize, it cannot grow indefinitely. Present technologies do not provide the energy resources necessary to continue Mechanized Agriculture indefinitely. We are consuming, at an unsustainable rate, the food resources of the wild world. Mainly fish stocks. We are also consuming the Oxygen resources in the form of timber, and expansion of agriculture into jungles and forests. We are also putting toxins into the environment that are damaging the ability of the ocean to sustain its viability. I have read at least one abstract that predicts human life spans will begin to decline before the end of this century due to toxins in the atmosphere and our food supplies.
If we don't start to adapt to these problems now, we may not have time to adapt later.
quote:
<snip>
Latest UN study predicts a 17-inch rise in the ocean's heighth vs Gore's movie that predicts a 20-foot rise. GIGO again, when one uses computer models unconnected to actual occurrence.

As the islands being inundated, are we to assume the oceans rises in certain spots and not everywhere, in contradiction with the laws of phsics? The islands rest on tectonic plates that rise and fall. There are other reports of islands rising, that don't make the news.

The UN prediction, if I recall correctly is a 17 inch rise in 50 years. As a direct result of the partial melting of "permanent" ice caps. Gore's prediction is based on a longer time span, a continuing increase in global temperatures, without mitigation and an increase in the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere without condensation into clouds. Warm air will hold more water vapor than cool air. Humidity is a measure of the amount of vapor in the air, and by the way, that vapor is also a heat trap. Clouds are NOT water vapor. They are condensed water, and they provide a reflective action that prevents solar energy from remaining in the environment.
Islands and Venice being innundated are the result of two factors subsiding land masses, and rising sea levels. A 17 inch rise overall in the Atlantic would cause a larger rise in the Medeteranian. Because the outflow of the Medeteranian is constricted by the Straits of Gibralter, but, if the level rises by say 4 feet because of that effect, the Sani will become another outflow, AND it will be under water, along with the Suez Canal.
Just to personalize this a little, The gulf of Mexico has a higher level than the Pacific Ocean. For much the same reason. The tide comes in, the tide goes out, average change a few feet, amount of beach underwater at high tide, quite a bit along the gulf coast, add 17 inces to the high tide, how much more beach is under water at high tide?
It still doesn't prove that the warming effect is not natural and we are causing it. In history there have been ice ages and warm periods, it's just what the Earth does and we can't stop it.
A little simple geology and physics here. The ice in the Artic is mostly in the ocean, including ice shelves. The land under the ice is small scattered islands. The Antartic has large ice shelves projecting out from the continental land mass.

Most of this ice in already in the ocean. Like a glacier 90 percent is already in the ocean. The remaining 10 percent above water may melt and contribute to ocean levels. But, the 90 percent is already there.

Also, water, unlike most liquids, expands as it freezes and contracts as it melts. Therefore, the entire mass of ice will be less than it is now. Don't remember the coefficient of expansion (many years since college) but it should about even out. Only real major addition would be from land based glaciers.
I think global warming is benevolent...longer growing seasons, less expense to heat homes, less dependency on foreign heating oil...more time at the beach....embrace the change and manage to it..... SPF 30 for everyone.
I am spraying freon into the air cause I'm cold today
quote:
Originally posted by NashBama:
It still doesn't prove that the warming effect is not natural and we are causing it. In history there have been ice ages and warm periods, it's just what the Earth does and we can't stop it.

Nash Bama, It is Sunday Morning, and I am doing some catching up.

YOU DON'T GET IT DO YOU?

Global warming, or climate change has been constant for a billion years or more. It is what has driven the evolution of ALL life on this planet, and the geological wonders. Sand Dunes are Desert that was once sea bottom. THE ENTIRE GREAT PLAINS WAS ONCE UNDER THE SEA.
Some of the changes are Techtonic. For example, New York Harbor is the result of CANYONS subsiding into the Atlantic as the continental plate shifted. The Mississippi delta is the result of silt deposits from a slowly rising land, and the great plains are the same. BUT. over the last 40 thousand years, the earths climate has been warming. OVER THE LAST FIFTY YEARS THE WARMING HAS ACCELLERATED.
The ONLY, cause of the ACCELERATION has been the comsumption of FOSSILE FUELS. The underlying warming is a NATURAL event. In past epochs the warming was reversed as the Planet ADAPTED as a whole system, and began to cool again. The Accelleration of the warming is REDUCING THE TIME AVAILABLE FOR ADAPTATION.
One of the theoretical outcomes is as follows:
The planet, unable to adapt to the rapid change, will continue to heat up instead of starting to cool down. The temperature will rise to a point where the adaptation is NOT POSSIBLE. The temperature will continue to rise as a result, and the EARTH WILL BE AS UNINHABITABLE AS VENUS.
EdEKit....

Sounds like you read too much science fiction. You may want to lay off the Arthur C. Clark novels.

No real proof of what your saying except computer models that have an error of plus or minus 200%.
quote:
Global warming, or climate change has been constant for a billion years or more.


I have two words for you. Ice Age.

As I've said before and as you ironically pointed out in your post, the Earth is constantly changing. It always has, it always will. The tempature may be slowly rising, it's done so in the past. It will then cool just like it as in the past. There isn't one scrap of scientific evidence that proves we are responsible for a global tempature rise or that we have the ability to stop it if it's really happening.

Add Reply

Post

×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×