PDA

View Full Version : Rising Sea Levels


BladePilot
22nd Apr 2009, 19:00
So the Polar Ice caps melt so what? Why have none of the scaremongers mentioned Mother Earths 'balancing tanks'? The Dead Sea is nearly 1400ft below our 'normal' sea levels and it has a huge catchment area and what of the many other empty basins around the world which lay well below 'normal' sea levels?
So why all this doom and gloom about rising sea levels wiping out half of our inhabited shore line towns and cities when really what will happen is that all the empty basins the 'balancing tanks' will just fill up and cancel out any rise in worldwide levels.
With the technology around today these so called experts should be figuring out a way to construct massive canals to allow the rising seas to overflow into these natural basins (if it doesn't occur naturally) rather than inciting fear and panic amongst the worlds population with their doomsday scenarios.:*

Global Warming ..... Sorted :ok:

Roger Sofarover
22nd Apr 2009, 19:18
Bladepilot

You could be the Saviour of the earth:ok: Where did that idea come from then?

OFSO
22nd Apr 2009, 19:23
If we all avoid flushing our toilets as much as possible, the extra water liberated by the melting polar caps could be contained in the cisterns of the world, no ?

Also, if every human drank the recommended 3 litres of water a day - AND AVOIDED GOING FOR A PEE ! - now there's another 3 times 6,775,051,651 litres absorbed right now. (Assuming 6,775,051,651 people in the world, which there was at 8 p.m. european time).

Golly, I bet we could drain the seas dry !

bnt
22nd Apr 2009, 19:46
When the Arctic ice melts, the sea levels do not change, because that ice is already displacing its weight in water before it melts. Ditto for icebergs and ice shelfs. Call me blasé, but I'm honestly unconcerned by a long-term rise in sea level, since populations will have plenty of time to plan and adjust. It won't be a case of waking up to find your town permanently under water, not unless people are that blind.

However, if Greenland or Antarctic ice melts quickly, and that water ends up in the sea, that's going to be a different kind of problem. Plus, the Greenland situation is worrying, because a major change in the amount of cold fresh water, hitting that part of the Atlantic, could slow and/or divert the Gulf Stream. Without the heat that current brings from the Carribean, northern Europe freezes. (Here in Dublin I'm at over 53° latitude, about the same latitude as Liverpool, Hamburg, and Edmonton, Alberta, where the average January daily temperature is -11.7°C . :ooh:

Rollingthunder
22nd Apr 2009, 19:50
Well, at least we could cut down on the iceberg patrols.

Always look for the bright side.

BladePilot
22nd Apr 2009, 20:03
RS, it just came to me in a flash or was that a flush?:)

1DC
22nd Apr 2009, 20:18
Sometimes you people don't understand anything, this problem can be solved quite easily and also end the recession at the same time. All we have to do is build two giant icemaking machines, one at each pole and just use the water from the ice that is melting to make more ice and put it back again. The machines will have to be massive will require either a big long wire to provide the power or their own power stations , all this investment will kick start the economy and we will all be rich again.. Simple.. If only this thread had started earlier it could have been in the budget....

EDDNHopper
22nd Apr 2009, 20:59
1DC, I wouldn't invest a single cent/penny in your business concept.

Their own power stations would have to be huge, thus emitting even more CO2 etc, thus triggering an even faster melting of the ice remaining, and of the new ice produced by your machines. These in turn would then have to produce even more ice to make up for the loss, thus requiring even more power so eventually you would have to build a third and fourth power plant. In short, you would produce power to produce ice to produce power. Nothing would come out of it execept billions of Euros/Dollars invested in, literally, hot air. Lousy concept.

Did you work for Lehman Brothers?

Now Cosmos, on the other hand, there's an idea. Except I wouldn't send club soda up but ice cubes for the Gin&Tonics.

Wait a minute, ice cubes....?

bnt
22nd Apr 2009, 21:06
Years ago I read a novel that was so outrageous in its premise that I remembered the name: Sunstrike. A mad scientist, claiming to be helping astronauts work in space, instead builds a plastic sheet that completely blocks the sun's rays from reaching the Earth. The Earth plunges in to a devastating Ice Age in a matter of weeks, billions die... but a hero saves the day, naturally. It took me some searching to find more details today, but I finally did: Amazon has a couple of reviews (http://www.amazon.com/Sunstrike-George-Carpozi/dp/0523403658/ref=sr_1_1), and notes that it was written in 1978.

The reviews are not good, but it had me wondering whether such technology is possible today... a shield could be made from microscopically-thin Mylar, and could be made only slightly opaque. Then, once the world has gotten used to its new energy budget, all you need is a rogue dictator with a few dumb missiles, just enough to blow the shield out of its orbit, and a demand for ... ONE MILLION DOLLARS! :E

radeng
22nd Apr 2009, 23:18
According to some Swede who is supposedly the worlds expert on the subject, it's load of rubbish because the ice caps are moving rather than just melting. Some get smaller, otherd are getting bigger.

Standard Noise
22nd Apr 2009, 23:31
Nils-Axel Morner is his name and here's a wee link to an interview he did a while back........

http://www.larouchepub.com/eiw/public/2007/2007_20-29/2007-25/pdf/33-37_725.pdf

vonbag
22nd Apr 2009, 23:55
You see, I am with OFSO here again. ;-)
On the other hand, I am one of the supporters (with facts) of the Global Warming theory, but I am of that sort of individuals who don't like to take unilateral/gratuitous/ ubiquitous flak (especially if I am not wearing my specially designed flak jacket). You can forget I try a confrontation on the specific thread. You can call me a "Japanese", from this point of view,
if you wish. I did learn a lot from them.

22 Degree Halo
23rd Apr 2009, 00:12
You don't get away that lightly! :}


I am one of the supporters (with facts) of the Global Warming theory


I like facts, can you provide, please :-)

con-pilot
23rd Apr 2009, 00:40
On the other hand, I am one of the supporters (with facts) of the Global Warming theory,

Would that be AGW, man caused global warming, or the fact that the climate is going through a warming trend?

Or conversely, as even the AGW people have now changed that to just 'Climate Change', is man causing this change?

Thank you.

GROUNDHOG
23rd Apr 2009, 09:06
I'm all for it!

If the sea rose about two feet it would flood the road between me and the river and I could have my own mooring at the bottom of the garden increasing the value of the house by about double!

Now where's me blowlamp.....

MagnusP
23rd Apr 2009, 09:10
EDDNHopper: less of a problem if you build nuclear power stations.

hellsbrink
23rd Apr 2009, 09:13
All we have to do is build two giant icemaking machines, one at each pole and just use the water from the ice that is melting to make more ice and put it back again.

You only need one, Antarctic ice shelf is growing.

The survey of Antarctica by the British Antarctic Survey and Nasa found sea ice in the South Pole has increased at a rate of 100,000 square kilometres (38,601 square miles) a decade over the last 40 years even as the ice cap in the North Pole melts.
The scientists said the reason was the hole in the ozone layer, caused by the use of CFCs. The ozone layer absorbs heat in the atmosphere, but the emergence of the hole – almost the size of North America – has cooled temperatures, resulting in more ice.


So, we have to get rid of some ozone and then everything will be hunky-dory

BladePilot
23rd Apr 2009, 10:22
The survey of Antarctica by the British Antarctic Survey and Nasa found sea ice in the South Pole has increased at a rate of 100,000 square kilometres (38,601 square miles) a decade over the last 40 years even as the ice cap in the North Pole melts.
The scientists said the reason was the hole in the ozone layer, caused by the use of CFCs. The ozone layer absorbs heat in the atmosphere, but the emergence of the hole – almost the size of North America – has cooled temperatures, resulting in more ice.


Bugga! does this mean the Earth will eventually be 'out of trim' and start to wobble out of control? Actually no becasue the Oceans act as giant liquid stabilisers!

I thought some Scientists had claimed that the Ozone hole was Earths very own 'pressure valve' which was actually allowing nasty stuff to be released into space?

Chimbu chuckles
23rd Apr 2009, 11:07
bnt the only way the Gulf Stream slows down or reverses is if the world stops spinning and/or the wind stops blowing...you need to realise that Hollywood produces science fiction not science fact.:ugh:

Roger Sofarover
23rd Apr 2009, 11:50
We are being spun yarn after yarn in a money spinning, fear spinning extravaganza.

We are suckers for statistics and the governments know it. How about they started giving us all the statistics.

A few days ago its was reported all over the media that a huge ice bridge had collapsed in the Antarctic and it was a sure thing that GW is getting worse.

BBC NEWS | Science & Environment | Ice bridge ruptures in Antarctic (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7984054.stm)

A quote from the article is
Scientists say the collapse could mean the Wilkins Ice Shelf is on the brink of breaking away, and provides further evidence of rapid change in the region.This is utter irresponsible fear mongering

What they fail to say is that there is actually 43% more ice in the Antarctic than in 1980, as can be seen from satellite images from the National Snow and Ice Data Center, University of Colorado.

The data at the National Snow and Ice Data Center's website is very interesting.

NSIDC BIST: Compare data: Sea Ice Index: Extent, Concentration, and Concentration Anomalies (http://nsidc.org/cgi-bin/bist/bist.pl?annot=1&legend=1&scale=100&tab_cols=2&tab_rows=2&config=seaice_index&submit=Refresh&mo0=03&hemis0=S&img0=extn&mo1=03&hemis1=S&img1=conc&year0=2009&year1=1980&.cgifields=no_panel&referal=globalwarminghoax.com)


Please go and visit and have a play. In 1980 the extent of sea Ice in the Antartic was 3.5 million sqkm. This year there are 5 million sqkm:confused::confused:

The Artic has 100,000 sqkm more ice than this time last year.

But lets not talk about that. The collapse of a little ice bridge in the Arctic is much more important. And there are some really scary pictures of it too, just to keep you terrified. We are being lied to. AGAIN!

This is a great site to mooch around if you are interested in GW (or importantly the lack of it)

Global Warming Hoax: News / Comments / Antarctic Sea Ice Up Over 43% Since 1980, Where Is The Media? (http://www.globalwarminghoax.com/comment.php?comment.news.109)

Sea ice at Antarctica is up over 43% since 1980 and we hear nothing in the news, yet Arctic ice is down less than 7% and they're all over it! We've been waiting for the main stream media to pick up on the increase of Antarctic ice but so far they're been totally absent. Guess its doesn't fit the plan.

vonbag
23rd Apr 2009, 15:19
Thanks for your kind hearted requests.
In time ... I will try to produce it.

Best, Paolo

ChristiaanJ
23rd Apr 2009, 15:24
How do you think the Dutch cope?

Half the country is now already below sealevel, not because of 'rising sea levels', but because the land is slowly tilting into the North Sea (something like between a foot and a metre per century, depending on the location, IIRC).

So for the last few hundred years they've been building dikes round the place, topped them off when needed, and pumped out the water.
No rocket science involved.

CJ

OFSO
23rd Apr 2009, 15:49
Sky News reports that "Hillary Clinton has compared the struggle to deal with climate change with her struggle to lose weight".

If she loses weight, where will it go ? Into the sea ? And how much will the sea level rise in consequence ?

WE SHOULD BE TOLD !

Storminnorm
23rd Apr 2009, 15:58
Join Hilary Clinton's battle against her fat!
Cut her head off!!!!

Sorted.

Will someone from Holland send me a good recipe for Frikandel
before they all drown please??

er340790
23rd Apr 2009, 19:58
Apparently the land I'm standing on is still undergoing 'glacial rebound' and has risen over 12 feet in the last few centuries. Fortunately this rate is faster than the rise in sea levels. (3-km ice sheets must weigh quite a bit.)

So you'll be pleased to know that I'm going to be alright.

ChristiaanJ
23rd Apr 2009, 20:20
Will someone from Holland send me a good recipe for Frikandel before they all drown please??Haven't had one for ages...
If you read Dutch, try google.nl and "frikandel recepten".
If not, I'll have a quick shufti and try and pull up a useable generic recipe and translate it.

CJ

Dushan
23rd Apr 2009, 22:20
With the technology around today these so called experts should be figuring out a way to construct massive canals to allow the rising seas to overflow into these natural basins (if it doesn't occur naturally) rather than inciting fear and panic amongst the worlds population with their doomsday scenarios.:*

Global Warming ..... Sorted :ok:

And if you did all that how would you charge for carbon offset credits?

Dushan
23rd Apr 2009, 22:25
Sky News reports that "Hillary Clinton has compared the struggle to deal with climate change with her struggle to lose weight".



She should know. Her husband likes fat chicks...

tony draper
23rd Apr 2009, 22:33
It's quite true the North of England is rising and the South is sinking so we shall have the last laugh of them Southeners.:rolleyes:

frostbite
23rd Apr 2009, 22:47
No you won't!

Cos all the water will have flowed down here and you won't have any.

G-CPTN
23rd Apr 2009, 22:49
You are obviously unaware of Kielder Water . . .

Kielder Water - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kielder_Water)

Storminnorm
24th Apr 2009, 20:27
We're 280 ft up, so I'm not too worried at the moment.
Mind you!!!!

BladePilot
25th Apr 2009, 22:19
And if you did all that how would you charge for carbon offset credits?


Carbon offset credits? what a load of utter Tosh! Jeez!

'Green Initiatives' file in the same bin as Pyramid selling:*

Paradise Lost
25th Apr 2009, 22:52
If the Antarctic is growing and the Arctic is shrinking, shouldn't we start shifting some of those cuddly polar bears down south to eat all the extra penguins?

hellsbrink
26th Apr 2009, 03:06
Paradise Lost

Noo need to do that, if you read Roger's post at the end of page one you'll see that the Arctic ice sheet has grown since 1980.

OFSO
26th Apr 2009, 10:38
Global Warming is REALLY evident here in N.E. Spain today - hard rain, 12º, and snow forecast down at 1500m dropping rapidly to 1200m or "ocasionally 1000m" said the weather lady. And after last year's drought Catalan reservoirs are back at 86%.

Uh uh - a polar bear just sauntered by.....

blue up
26th Apr 2009, 11:54
Isn't ARCTUS the greek word for bear? (Hence Anti-Arctus = No bears)

If you sent the polar bears to the antarctic then you'd have to rename it "The Arctic"?



Cardigan bay used to be above water, according to the experts who've found non-fossilised tree stumps under the sea, yet a hundred miles down the coast in the Vale Of Glamogan we have sections of land that used to be docks but are now about 50 feet out of the drink. Sea levels rising or land levels sinking? Maybe they are using a 'movable' datum for their calculations?

Storminnorm
26th Apr 2009, 12:08
Sections of land that used to be DOCKS in the Vale of Glamorgan?
Don't believe it at all!!! The taffs just screwed up the planning application!
(Too busy chasing sheep. Well, you've gotta be quick, or you get an ugly
one!)