70 Metre Rise In Sea Level?

[TrueSceptic]

Depends what you mean by little... +1 would flood a number of cities only in North Germany.

That was purely about Australia, and related to land area affected, not population.

 

[Old Bob]

70 meter rise? did you mean 70mm. Where do you get those silly estimates from. From the latest info we are cooling. Past times when the Vikings lived and grew crops on Greenland the world temp. was much higher than now so much more ice must have melted. Ancient maps show the ant-Arctic with out ice and with out inundation how else could they have known that it is in two sections,which has only recently been proven with deep radar scans. Chicken Little comes to mind.

 

[Damien Evans]

70 meter rise? did you mean 70mm. Where do you get those silly estimates from. From the latest info we are cooling. Past times when the Vikings lived and grew crops on Greenland the world temp. was much higher than now so much more ice must have melted. Ancient maps show the ant-Arctic with out ice and with out inundation how else could they have known that it is in two sections,which has only recently been proven with deep radar scans. Chicken Little comes to mind.

Feel free to not spew forth your ignorant ravings here.

 

[Megalodon]

70 meter rise? did you mean 70mm. Where do you get those silly estimates from. From the latest info we are cooling. Past times when the Vikings lived and grew crops on Greenland the world temp. was much higher than now so much more ice must have melted. Ancient maps show the ant-Arctic with out ice and with out inundation how else could they have known that it is in two sections,which has only recently been proven with deep radar scans. Chicken Little comes to mind.

You wouldn't mind providing some evidence for all those interesting assertions of yours, would you?

Namely:

That the global temperature is dropping (hint: it's not. Of the 10 warmest years on record, 8 were in this decade, plus 98 and 97. 2008 was the 9th warmest year on record)

That the global temperature was much warmer in the time when the Vikings lived and grew crops on Greenland (hint: it wasn't. It was a temporary localized warming); and specially, that much more ice melted (hint: it didn't)

That ancient maps show the Antarctic without ice and divided in two sections (this one I want to see)

Cheers

 

[BenBurch]

70 meter rise? did you mean 70mm. Where do you get those silly estimates from. From the latest info we are cooling. Past times when the Vikings lived and grew crops on Greenland the world temp. was much higher than now so much more ice must have melted. Ancient maps show the ant-Arctic with out ice and with out inundation how else could they have known that it is in two sections,which has only recently been proven with deep radar scans. Chicken Little comes to mind.

The stupid - IT BURNS!!!

What a load of woo.

Especially basing anything on 14th century maps that also show unicorns and dragons...

 

[macdoc]

Old Bob - the first known dementia victim due to denier Koolaid overdose.

 

[lomiller]

Is that true? I thought the mass of the ice was what kept the land masses down. Is there an example of a land mass that stayed down once the ice was removed?

Hudson’s Bay. During full glaciation, it’s the center of the North American Ice sheet which forces the continental ice sheet down. The ice does keep the land mass down, but the rebound rate is only a few inches per year.

 

[BenBurch]

Hudson’s Bay. During full glaciation, it’s the center of the North American Ice sheet which forces the continental ice sheet down. The ice does keep the land mass down, but the rebound rate is only a few inches per year.

Hudson Bay was a low spot to start with though, being an astrobleme.

 

[lomiller]

Hudson Bay was a low spot to start with though, being an astrobleme.

There is the possibility of a large impact crater in the south eastern part of Hudson Bay but my understanding is that this is an ongoing debate.

I don’t think it’s possible to say what the region as a whole would look like if there had been no glaciations. The entire Hudson bay region is in the middle of some of the oldest parts of the North American continental crust, so even if it would have been lower I can’t see how it would ever be below sea level without the weight of the ice on top of it.

 

[luchog]

Except with massage parlors, streetwalkers, and a plentiful crack supply... Unless its gotten better in the last decade...

Not really, no. If anything, it's been getting worse.

 

[CapelDodger]

Especially basing anything on 14th century maps that also show unicorns and dragons...

And nary a mention of trolls, let alone astroblemes.

 

[TellyKNeasuss]

Using my handy slide rule and easy-to-find calculations of the volume of the land-based icecaps, I came up with a 70-metre sea level rise if the Greenland and Antarctic sheets melted. I did not factor in the density of H2O in different states at various temperatures, nor did I include the change in elevation of the land masses currently icebound. I also figured that the time it will take is about 125 years, if the one-metre projected rise in the next twenty is accurate, and if the rate of melting increases exponentially. I did not include other high elevation glacial melting but the volume of glacial non-polar ice is small compared to those two regions.

Apart from the mere inconvenience of adapting to a 70-metre rise in the sea levels, is there any good reason we couldn't accommodate that? It sounds like an astonishing opportunity for capital investment, and the rate is not fast enough to outweigh the returns.

What was your source for the 1 meter sea level rise in 20 years? There was a Scientific American article on the subject a couple of years ago:

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=how-much-will-global-warming-raise-sea-levels

The reports it cites only project a few meters increase by 2100.

 

[BenBurch]

And nary a mention of trolls, let alone astroblemes.

The map has something that looks like a troll, in fact!

[imgw=1024]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/70/Piri_reis_world_map_01.jpg[/imgw]

 

[Old Bob]

Feel free to not spew forth your ignorant ravings here.

Gee Damien didn't know you were the be all and end all, my mistake. If you want to see the above look in the mirror. Thousands of scientists have refuted the global warming scam. The Pacific islands that have rising sea levels is because the globe slowly changes shape over time and at the moment it is bulging more at the equator. The ancient maps of Antarctic are in the hands of the Vatican along with much knowledge. The North West Passage was open for some of our early explorers, it's not open now. Yep the sky is falling, keep up the panic, makes you sound smart.

 

[Megalodon]

Gee Damien didn't know you were the be all and end all, my mistake. If you want to see the above look in the mirror. Thousands of scientists have refuted the global warming scam. The Pacific islands that have rising sea levels is because the globe slowly changes shape over time and at the moment it is bulging more at the equator. The ancient maps of Antarctic are in the hands of the Vatican along with much knowledge. The North West Passage was open for some of our early explorers, it's not open now. Yep the sky is falling, keep up the panic, makes you sound smart.

If the Vatican is hiding the maps, how do you know about them?

Again, you wouldn't mind providing some evidence for all those interesting assertions of yours, would you?

Namely:

That the global temperature is dropping (hint: it's not. Of the 10 warmest years on record, 8 were in this decade, plus 98 and 97. 2008 was the 9th warmest year on record)

That the global temperature was much warmer in the time when the Vikings lived and grew crops on Greenland (hint: it wasn't. It was a temporary localized warming); and specially, that much more ice melted (hint: it didn't)

That ancient maps show the Antarctic without ice and divided in two sections (this one I want to see)

That thousands of scientists have refuted anthropogenic global warming (hint: not the ones in relevant fields)

That the Pacific islands have rising sea levels because the globe slowly changes shape over time and at the moment it is bulging more at the equator (hint: you're sooo wrong it hurts)

That the North West Passage was open for some of our early explorers, it's not open now (hint: you failed on this one too)

Question: are you misinformed, misinforming or trolling?

 

[varwoche]

Thousands of scientists have refuted the global warming scam.

In your phenomenally fertile imagination.

The ancient maps of Antarctic are in the hands of the Vatican along with much knowledge.

I love it! I welcome you to the CTs Concerning Global Warming Science thread to present your evidence (the one thread where a/gw conspiracy theorists dare not go, preferring instead the drive-by approach).

 

[TrueSceptic]

Gee Damien didn't know you were the be all and end all, my mistake. If you want to see the above look in the mirror. Thousands of scientists have refuted the global warming scam. The Pacific islands that have rising sea levels is because the globe slowly changes shape over time and at the moment it is bulging more at the equator. The ancient maps of Antarctic are in the hands of the Vatican along with much knowledge. The North West Passage was open for some of our early explorers, it's not open now. Yep the sky is falling, keep up the panic, makes you sound smart.

This is a joke, isn't it?

Next you'll be telling us about the shape-shifting reptilians who actually run the world.

 

[BenBurch]

And what about the Unicorn on that Pier Reis map, eh? Is that being hidden from us by the Vatican too???

 

[macdoc]

Next you'll be telling us about the shape-shifting reptilians

you think he's a Scientologist??.....hmmmm might be something in that love the rol

 

[BenBurch]

you think he's a Scientologist??.....hmmmm might be something in that love the rol

No, I think the poor dupes in the Scientology fraud aren't the ones with the Lizard People.

BTW, I hear rumors that major Justice Department heat is coming down on the "Church" of Scientology. Might be a while as they collect evidence, but expect something in a year or two if what I was told is true.