Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I have a stupid question. Breakdown a melting glacier into an icecube. Now use a glass of water for the ocean Why doesnt the cup over flow when you put in the icecube and let it melt?
i think you are confusing sea ice with glaciers.
sea ice melt/freeze wont cause sea level rise.
adding water/ice to the ocean via melting glaciers does cause more water to be added to the oceans and thus can (can) impact sea level.
Now sea level is very complicated. heat content can cause sea level to contract/expand, evaporation can impact, ENSO/La Nina/El Nino, PDO etc all impact.
Glacial melt has been steady and continuous since the end of the Little Ice Age.
Sea Level Rise has been steady and predictable since the end of hte Little Ice Age.
If the ice cube is already in the water and it melts, the glass does not get any fuller as a result of the ice cube melting.
So if the entire Arctic ice cap melted today in it's entirety, the water level of the oceans would not be affected by that, as all of that ice covers the arctic ocean and is therefore already in the water.
You're expecting these people to think......don't.
How old is the eastern ice-sheet in Antarctica?
~2.3 Million years old, right?
Why?
Because the ice there never melts completely.
Why isn't the ice-sheet on Greenland 2.3 Million years old?
Because the ice-sheet is only 110,000 years old.
Why isn't the ice-sheet on Greenland not more than 110,000 years old?
Because the ice melts every damn time there's an Inter-Glacial Period, and there are at least eight (8) such well-documented periods.
And what normally happens when it melts is it triggers an event like the Younger Dryas. But if that happens late enough in the glaciation retreat cycle then it tends to trigger then end of the interglacial warm period.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mircea
I call BS on your fallacies....plural.
Just because one can do some thing, it does not logically follow that one should do that thing, or ought to do that thing, or has a right or entitlement to that thing.
Tsunamis are known to cause widespread death and destruction -- comparatively a false analogy to "Climate Change" which does not cause widespread death and destruction.
You cannot stop tsunamis.
Note that tsunami drills are not free......they cost lots and lots of money...evidence you suppressed.
The same is true for earthquakes.
You neglected to mention that I do not live in California, yet I subsidize the Life-Styles and Standard of Living for Californians at my expense, which reduces my Standard of Living and negatively impacts my Life-Style.
In a Free Market, there would not be any coercive regulations compelling involuntary transactions, and non-residents of California would not be suffering to subsidize the Life-Styles of Californians.
That means Illinois and Indiana and Ohio and Michigan residents keep their hard-earned money in their own pocket.
That means insurance companies are free to charge Free Market rates for earthquake insurance.
That means taxes aren't used to subsidize earthquake insurance.
That means land and property values in California become worthless overnight.
If Californians cannot steal money from Texans to pay for their earthquake insurance, and also force certain insurance companies to offer insurance at below Market rates, then Californians would be forced to bear the true and real cost of earthquake insurance.
Since most Californians and businesses in California could not afford it, they would flee California, freeing up $Billions in Capital to be invested elsewhere improving the lives of the majority of Americans, instead of a small select minority in California.
Yes, it does....especially when there is no climate change.
Has Earth been dislodged from its orbit and is spiraling toward a collision with the Sun?
No, so there is nothing to be done.
Has Earth been ejected from its orbit and is moving away from the Sun?
No, so there is nothing to be done.
Has there been a Toba-like Event inducing nuclear winter?
No, so there is nothing to be done.
Has there been a massive out-gassing of volcanoes inducing nuclear winter?
No, so there is nothing to be done.
Has there been an event on scale or par with the Deccan Traps, causing Climate Change?
No, so there is nothing to be done.
Has there been an impact event by an asteroid or comet causing Climate Change?
No, so there is nothing to be done.
The pending collapse of the Greenland ice sheet would be a big event. But it begs the question how much AGW do we need to keep from having the next ice age?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mircea
Those are the actions of an emotionally immature species that has a god-complex.
If Florida Gov. Rick Scott didn't want the terms "climate change" or "global warming" officially associated with his state, he won't be happy with the media attention his decision has sparked. In Florida, about 300,000 houses worth about a total of $145 billion are vulnerable to a rise in the sea level caused by climate change. Sea-level rise was another term that Scott prohibited, saying it should be called "nuisance flooding,"
This has happened before: In North Carolina in 2012, the legislature said it would ignore studies that mentioned sea-level rise.
Question, why is greenland melting supposed to cool the earth? That seems rather counterintuitive.
That is one of his pet theories....He thinks that melting ice caused the Younger Dryas period, but there is no evidence for that or several other possible causes of that event. https://geosciencesocietysio.wordpre...r-dryas-event/
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.