NationStates Jolt Archive

I consider myself to be a reasonable individual. I accept that global warming is happening, though I believe that it won’t be as big a deal as everyone says. I think peak oil will be much more destructive, but that’s beside the point.

The point is about rising sea levels. Now, I’m sure that this has been addressed hundreds of times and I’m sure I’m missing something.

Today a friend of mine told me that he heard a physicist from some university in the Midwestern United States talking about rising sea levels on the radio. The physicist essentially denied the possibility of the sea levels rising. He used the example of a glass of ice water. When ice in a glass melts, the water level in the glass goes down because ice is less dense than water and was taking up more space in its solid form. He then went on to say that if the ice caps melt, then the oceans should recede, not swell.
He even made the claim that the scientific community involved in global warming research, which he is among, never think about this.

When my friend told me this I was floored. There has to be a reason what the physicist was saying is wrong. What is it?

Edit: So I just finished talking to my friend who heard the physicist on the radio.

He added that the physicists talked about the ice that’s on land. He compared that to what’s in the water, and it’s negligible compared to floating ice and submerged caps.

he has forgotten about the existence of greenland and antarctica. or to use the ice cubes in a glass metaphor - take a glass filled with water...now dump a bucket of ice cubes into it.

http://www.aquarium.gdynia.pl/images2/ant2.jpg

Note that the majority is not floating.

I presumed it was because lots of the ice isn't in the water, such as what's covering Antarctica and Greenland. Since it's on top of the land mass, it's not affecting the sea level at the moment. Is that right?

Damn, beaten to it.

http://igloo.gsfc.nasa.gov/wais/articles/images/waisschem.gif

Note that the majority is not floating.
Thanks.

Actually, he's right about the argument. Ever melt a cube of water floating in a galss of ice? Water level actually goes down. So, all the ice that melts will actually lower the water level that it is floating on. Not a big problem.

But wait, Sea Levels Are Rising!! How!?!?

Easy, not all the ice is floating. Namely, Greenland and Antarctica. When land based ice falls into the ocean, then we have a problem. Going back to our ice in a galss of water jar, imagine that you have so much ice that some of it is actually sitting on the rim of the glass itself, and there is even a cube supported by those cubes. Now he have a problem. Those cubes will fall in, and in doing so, will raise sea levels. Ice displaces water equal to its own weight. Thus, floating ice has already raised the sea levels in proportion to its own mass, so melting the floating ice will lower sea levels. Melting ice that's perched above the sea, however, is just pouring water into a cup that's nearly brimming over.

Now's the time to think about selling off that Florida real estate.

When land based ice falls into the ocean, then we have a problem.

don't even need to get to the land-based stuff to fuck ourselves good. there are huge stretches of ice that are grounded on the sea floor and rise high above where they would if they were floating. if those break up and come loose, they will displace an absolutely immense amount of water.

So I just finished talking to my friend who heard the physicist on the radio.

He added that the physicists talked about the ice that’s on land. He compared that to what’s in the water, and it’s negligible compared to floating ice and submerged caps.

So I just finished talking to my friend who heard the physicist on the radio.

He added that the physicists talked about the ice that’s on land. He compared that to what’s in the water, and it’s negligible compared to floating ice and submerged caps.

Um, an entire continent, called, you know, Antarctica? Plus, just because it's negligible, doesn't mean it isn't there at all. The density differential is even more negligible (this is what I get for having An Inconvenient Truth shown during each and every one of my science classes this year. Thank you, Al Gore).

Um, an entire continent, called, you know, Antarctica? Plus, just because it's negligible, doesn't mean it isn't there at all. The density differential is even more negligible (this is what I get for having An Inconvenient Truth shown during each and every one of my science classes this year. Thank you, Al Gore).
Right, but what he’s saying is, all the ice melting in the water will cancel out the ice melting in Greenland and Antarctica.

Right, but what he’s saying is, all the ice melting in the water will cancel out the ice melting in Greenland and Antarctica.

that's just factually untrue.

I'll bet that "Radio Physicist" was trying to earn $10,000.

Free Soviets is right. This is the part where you check to see who happens to be footing the bill for this show, and paying the experts. We've given evidence that states sea levels can rise, evidence that was originally published in science journals that was peer reviewed.

And it was said by Al Gore. Excelsior!

We've given evidence that states sea levels can rise, evidence that was originally published in science journals that was peer reviewed.
Guess what, here’s a peer who’s bring ignored. Not very scientific, and I doubt the guy is a conservative or corporate tool, he talked about the rich poor divide being an issue that politicians need to address.

Guess what, here’s a peer who’s bring ignored. Not very scientific, and I doubt the guy is a conservative or corporate tool, he talked about the rich poor divide being an issue that politicians need to address.A report by more than 2000 of the world's leading scientists in the field just released its findings that see levels are rising, and will continue to rise faster (even discounting the Larson Ice shelf and Gleenland glacier melts), and you choose to believe ONE "physicist" on ONE radio program!? The way that peer-review works is that concencuss, ie. majority rules. It looks like this guy is on the fringes, catering to your personal discomfort at a radio station near you.

most of the ice is on land far more than what is in the arctic ice cap...plus there is continental rebound, when the ice on Greenland and Antarctica melts both land masses will rise as they are no longer under the tremendous weight of their glaciers...so I believe they will displace even more water ...very complex and hard to predict...

a little web search on relative thickness of ice...Antartica up to 5km thick, Greenland 3km...the Arctic Cap mere meters, submarines can punch through it...if both Antarctic and Greenland were to melt they would cause a sea level rise of about 80 meters...that physicist hasn't a clue about geography...

http://hypertextbook.com/facts/2000/HannaBerenblit.shtml

Guess what, here’s a peer who’s bring ignored.

assuming what he said is being accurately transmitted here - we are playing something like climate change telephone at this point - it's not that he's being ignored. it's that he's being laughed at for getting the basic facts wrong. hilariously, irredeemably, moronically wrong.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antarctic_ice_sheet