Quote from Tresor: Now watch for a few minutes as the ice changes into water. What you will see is that the level of water in your glass did not raise (no single water drop fell of the glass). This little physics experiment proves that a diminishing of the ice from the Earth will NOT cause the see level to go up by even 1 centimeter. Even if all the Arctic ice turns into water, this will not cause the see / ocean level to increase by one milimeter. The ice has greater volume than water. Let's try ANOTHER little experiment. Pretend that a lot of the ice is NOT in the water, but is ABOVE the water, as in Greenland, Antarctica and to a lesser extent, northern Canadian islands, Iceland, glaciers, ice fields, etc. Now lets take your glass of water, and then add 3 ice cubes. Now let us see if the level remains the same. What, it didn't? NOW you understand the problem (I certainly hope). Greenland alone is considered sufficient to raise the oceans by 7 feet. Antarctica is much worse.
Hi Thunderdog, The above see level ice and the ice below the see level is pretty tiny compared to the amount of water in oceans, seas, lakes, rivers, etc. This huge amount of water will easily absorb the whole of Earth's ice. The rest of unabsorbed water (water unlike most substances does not change its volume and density monotonicaly - I do not know how to say this in English - but your physics teacher will help you) will increase only the humidity. If you put an ice rock of a 2 milimetres x 3 milimetres in your glass that will be about all ice on earth. Think this way: Even if the overall temperature on Earth rises by 10 Celsius degrees and the temperature on both poles rises by 10 Celsius degrees (from - 40 to -30). This temperature still is not suffiecient to turn the ice into liquid water The borders of the ice on both poles may melt; the core will remain unchanged and solid. Regards
Hahaha, Do you know why Greenland is called Greenland? 1000 years ago Vikings grew apples there. There was no ice in Greenland 1000 years ago. Did you hear of any water level rising 1000 years ago? Of course you didn't because this would mean that the laws of physics were different 1000 years ago than they are now. Please also consider this. What kind of heavy industrial pollution was 1000 years ago that there was no ice on greenland? Did Vikings run billions of cars and managed millions of factories on Earth at that time? Please stop worry about see level to rise. There is equilibrium on Earth. The planet will cope with the issue. Our wallets may not survive Al Gore's fiscal experiment though
wow ... i never thought of that. maybe thats why it gets cooler at night and in the winter. all the while, I just assumed it was due to a decrease in the amount of CO2 I exhale in my sleep and while sitting on my ass snowed-in during the winter.
Hilarious. Unfortunately for you most polar ice is on land. You might want to look up "the antarctic" and "Greenland." So now fill up a cup of water, take the ice cubes and dump them on the table.
Holy cow. That's quite funny -- I think you're just teasing us now. You're comparing the volume of a glass to the surface area of the water covered areas of the Earth. You work on why that might be wrong and get back to us.
Yes, but how high will the temperature need to go to melt the antarctic ice, the ice that is actually on land? (Hint: the coldest day recorded in the antarctic is 11 degrees colder than dry ice). And like the other poster mentioned, Greenland was named GREENland for a reason. Obviously, the much warmer north poll would melt faster, at least on the edges, but none of that ice sits on land.
The average temperature right now. That's how high. Perhaps you should read up on this before espousing opinions. Sigh. The coldest day doesn't matter, the warmest day matters. Good luck on your research.
bigdave takes another head shot for team Obama. Wow, that may leave a mark. Tresor, brilliant points.