Ice Melt

[turnkey4099]

The volume of ice is greater than water right? That's why pipes burst?
So ice takes up more space than water. The mass stays the same.
If the polar ice caps are 90% under water and frozen, they will take up less space, the volume will decrease if they melt. That would make the ocean level go down.

I didnt say the glass of ice water weighed less, I said the level in the glass went down.

The extra volume of the frozen ice is ABOVE THE WATER and basically disappears as the the ice melts back to to water volume. The level in the glas DOES NOT CHANGE. It is basic science taught in every school in hte nation. It can also be confirmed by your own experiment in a few minutes.

 

[Sono]

Originally Posted by tjkubota93
The volume of ice is greater than water right? That's why pipes burst?
So ice takes up more space than water. The mass stays the same.
If the polar ice caps are 90% under water and frozen, they will take up less space, the volume will decrease if they melt. That would make the ocean level go down.

I didnt say the glass of ice water weighed less, I said the level in the glass went down.

Ice and snow have a lot of air in them as well, only that on land that melts add to the rise... whats in/on the water is already accounted for.

 

[tjkubota93]

There is no land at the north pole, so the ice cap there floats on the sea. Its melting will not significantly affect global sea levels. It is the ice caps that sit on land (Greenland and Antarctica) that will raise sea levels when they melt and the water flows downhill into the sea.

Chris

This makes sense thanks

 

[Chris616]

The Obamas will be long dead before human caused global warming raises sea levels enough to affect their new purchase.

Chris

Same answer. In the 21st century (the one that we're in), sea level rise is projected to be anywhere between 10-40 inches. Considering the time horizon for even the longest mortgage, lenders aren't taking much risk.

Chris

Sea level rise - Wikipedia

Al Gore disagrees with you...the father of climate change panic.

Could you provide a reference that we can read that supports what you've written, please.

Chris

Absolutely...

Al Gore's movie 'An Inconvenient Truth' says sea levels could rise up to 2 feet. Is this true? | Scienceline

Arctic ice cap grows same year Al Gore predicted it would disappear, networks ignore | National Snow and Ice Data Center

Gore's no Arctic ice in 5? yrs. prediction a bust

I could go on...

Thanks for the links.

Only the first link deals with sea level rise, so I'll address that one here. Part of the first paragraph of the webpage, commenting on Al Gore's film "An Inconvenient Truth" reads:

"His narration tells the audience that, due to global warming, melting ice could release enough water to cause a 20-foot rise in sea level "in the near future""

This is a total falsehood. I hope everyone reading this takes the time to look at the evidence shown below and prove that to yourselves. This reinforces how important it is to consider the sources of the information that we're using to build our opinions and ask ourselves if they're credible.

Here is a link to the full text of "An Inconvenient Truth":
Full text of "An Inconvenient Truth"

Since I had my cynic's hat on tonight, I wanted to be sure that the transcript above was legit, so I paid $3 and watched the film on YouTube, since I've never seen it before. I read along on the transcript as the film played. Other than a handful of spelling errors, it is accurate.

You can copy/paste the text from the link above into your favorite word processing software and search for the quotation attributed to the film, but you won't find it. You won't find something close to it. The author of the website made up the information, knowing that most people wouldn't fact-check it. This is the only section that contains "20 feet" or "20 foot" or similar. It doesn't mention timing at all:

"But I want to focus on West Antarctica because it illustrates two factors about land-based ice and sea-based ice. It's a little of both. It's propped up on tops of islands, but the ocean comes up underneath it. So as the ocean gets warmer, it has an impact on it. If this were to go, sea level worldwide would go up 20 feet. They've measured disturbing changes on the underside of this ice sheet. It's considered relatively more stable, however, than another big body of ice that's roughly the same size. Greenland would also raise sea level almost 20 feet if it went."

Chris

The film is actually quite good. Not too scientific. Easy to understand. If you're "on the fence" about global warming why not watch it? There were some errors in it, but they don't take away from the overall message. I liked this quote attributed to Mark Twain:

"What gets us into trouble is not what we don't know. It's what we know for sure that just ain't so"

 

[EddieWalker]

Thanks for the links.

Only the first link deals with sea level rise, so I'll address that one here. Part of the first paragraph of the webpage, commenting on Al Gore's film "An Inconvenient Truth" reads:

"His narration tells the audience that, due to global warming, melting ice could release enough water to cause a 20-foot rise in sea level "in the near future""

This is a total falsehood. I hope everyone reading this takes the time to look at the evidence shown below and prove that to yourselves. This reinforces how important it is to consider the sources of the information that we're using to build our opinions and ask ourselves if they're credible.

Here is a link to the full text of "An Inconvenient Truth":
Full text of "An Inconvenient Truth"

Since I had my cynic's hat on tonight, I wanted to be sure that the transcript above was legit, so I paid $3 and watched the film on YouTube, since I've never seen it before. I read along on the transcript as the film played. Other than a handful of spelling errors, it is accurate.

You can copy/paste the text from the link above into your favorite word processing software and search for the quotation attributed to the film, but you won't find it. You won't find something close to it. The author of the website made up the information, knowing that most people wouldn't fact-check it. This is the only section that contains "20 feet" or "20 foot" or similar. It doesn't mention timing at all:

"But I want to focus on West Antarctica because it illustrates two factors about land-based ice and sea-based ice. It's a little of both. It's propped up on tops of islands, but the ocean comes up underneath it. So as the ocean gets warmer, it has an impact on it. If this were to go, sea level worldwide would go up 20 feet. They've measured disturbing changes on the underside of this ice sheet. It's considered relatively more stable, however, than another big body of ice that's roughly the same size. Greenland would also raise sea level almost 20 feet if it went."

Chris

The film is actually quite good. Not too scientific. Easy to understand. If you're "on the fence" about global warming why not watch it? There were some errors in it, but they don't take away from the overall message. I liked this quote attributed to Mark Twain:

"What gets us into trouble is not what we don't know. It's what we know for sure that just ain't so"

When I was a kid, I learned from my dad that if you do not know everything about a topic, bring up something that you do know and see if the person lies to you about that. If they do, question everything else they tell you.

An Inconvenient Truth is probably the foundation of almost everyone's belief in Global Warming. Unfortunately, it's also become an Albatross because of all of it's misleading and outright lies. Add to that Al Gores massive use of energy and hypocrisy, and it's astonishing that somebody who claims to believe in Global Warming would actually bring this movie up.

Al Gore's 'nine Inconvenient Untruths' - Telegraph

For me, it was the claim about polar bears that jumped out at me as pure fantasy. Their numbers have been increasing dramatically l since the 1970's around the world. They can easily swim a hundred miles and do so regularly.

Polar Bear Population - FactCheck.org

This is actually a very good example of source that has to lie to push an agenda.

 

[EddieWalker]

And you cite yet another obvious right wing troll site. You are not reading real news, dude! You can research your sources to see how honest they are. You continue to seek out questionable opinions because they have the viewpoint you want to confirm. Expand your news sources and maybe you will see things a bit differently.

All your link showed was that NASA was adjusting their models and data, which they do regularly as new data and improved models come online. Perhaps, you know, to improve their accuracy? you'd rather believe otherwise, we get that.

American Thinker - Media Bias/Fact Check

Plenty of coal power plants have gone offline in the last decade, btw. Reasonable people would readily admit that the vast majority of their energy production was replaced by gas, not renewables, though.

Good to hear that we are both aware of NASA adjusting their data. Do you think that today's measuring tools are more accurate then in the 1800's? or are they based on the exact same scale of the mercury thermometer which reads exactly that same today as it did 200 years ago? Can we also agree that in the 1800's when the mercury thermometer read 100 degrees, that's the exact same temperature that we feel when our mercury thermometers read 100 degrees? So why adjust the temps from the 1800's?

Something else to question. In the 1800's, cities did not have asphalt or concrete roads. They did not have airports with hundreds of acres or more of asphalt and concrete. They also did not have AC compressors outside their buildings. Since almost all "official" weather measuring devices are at airports, and thousands have been found next to AC condensers, which period of time do you think gave us the more accurate temperatures?

If NASA and NOAA didn't "adjust" the official temperatures of the 1800's, would there still be a warming trend with today's temperatures?

 

[rekees4300]

Reminds me of the Gilligans Island episode where they thought the island was sinking. Turns out Gilligan was using the professors measuring stick to anchor his lobster pot. Problem was, Gilligan kept anchoring his pot farther out, so he could catch bigger lobsters.:laughing:

The Earth has 7 billion Gilligans, that's why Climate Change is winning.

 

[Chris616]

When I was a kid, I learned from my dad that if you do not know everything about a topic, bring up something that you do know and see if the person lies to you about that. If they do, question everything else they tell you.

I'm not sure if that was directed at me in particular or "global warming believers" in general. I'll admit that I don't know everything about the subject - far from it. I do know how to critically evaluate the credibility of the information that I read, though. That's what I'm trying to get everyone else to do.

I've presented lots of facts. Anyone is free to check them for accuracy, and I'll continue to do the same for the material that others post.



An Inconvenient Truth is probably the foundation of almost everyone's belief in Global Warming. Unfortunately, it's also become an Albatross because of all of it's misleading and outright lies. Add to that Al Gores massive use of energy and hypocrisy, and it's astonishing that somebody who claims to believe in Global Warming would actually bring this movie up.

Al Gore's 'nine Inconvenient Untruths' - Telegraph

Actually, it was "Snobdds" who brought up the movie, attributing something to it that we can all confirm wasn't even in the film. The first of the "nine alleged errors in the film" in the link just above is the same one:
"Mr. Gore claims that a sea-level rise of up to 20 feet would be caused by melting of either West Antarctica or Greenland "in the near future"."

I'm not going to go through the other eight, since my posts tend to be a bit long-winded. Some are valid criticisms of the film and others aren't. As I wrote yesterday, "There were some errors in it, but they don't take away from the overall message."



For me, it was the claim about polar bears that jumped out at me as pure fantasy. Their numbers have been increasing dramatically l since the 1970's around the world. They can easily swim a hundred miles and do so regularly.

Polar Bear Population - FactCheck.org

This is actually a very good example of source that has to lie to push an agenda.

Here's the only quote from the film regarding polar bears:

"So there is a faster buildup of heat here, at the North Pole, in the Arctic Ocean, and the Arctic generally than anywhere else on the planet. That's not good for creatures like polar bears who depend on the ice. A new scientific study shows that for the first time they're finding polar bears that have actually drowned, swimming long distances, up to 60 miles, to find the ice."

There isn't anything about what is happening to their numbers, but that also wasn't one of the "nine alleged errors in the film" in your first link. I'm unsure why you're bringing this up. People have certainly suggested a link between diminishing sea ice in the arctic and decreasing polar bear numbers, but because of the remoteness of where they live the "jury is still out" on this until more research is done. This quote from the Wikipedia entry on polar bear sums it up:
"Of the 19 recognized polar bear subpopulations, one is in decline, two are increasing, seven are stable, and nine have insufficient data, as of 2017'"

I agree with what you've written about how far polar bears can swim. That narrative from the film is sensationalism. This whole global warming discussion would be a lot better if both sides just stuck to the facts.

Text in red by me.
Chris

 

[AWSubie]

I suppose the global warming debate is entertaining... in the long term roughly 4 billion years from now, the sun will expand into an orange giant and incinerate the earth... so I guess you can call me a solar system warming believer. I do not advocate spending any tax dollars to prevent solar system warming, although I do like the idea of space exploration (I guess that’s the Trekkie in me).

 

[2LaneCruzer]

I suppose the global warming debate is entertaining... in the long term roughly 4 billion years from now, the sun will expand into an orange giant and incinerate the earth... so I guess you can call me a solar system warming believer. I do not advocate spending any tax dollars to prevent solar system warming, although I do like the idea of space exploration (I guess that’s the Trekkie in me).

Man, you had me scared there for a minute...I misread your post as 4 million the first time around.