Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Melting Ice Cap (Greenland) Triggering Earthquakes

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
Hissyspit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 06:20 AM
Original message
Melting Ice Cap (Greenland) Triggering Earthquakes
Source: Guardian UK

Melting ice cap triggering earthquakes

Paul Brown in Ilulissat The Guardian Saturday September 8 2007

The Greenland ice cap is melting so quickly that it is triggering earthquakes as pieces of ice several cubic kilometres in size break off. Scientists monitoring events this summer say the acceleration could be catastrophic in terms of sea-level rise and make predictions this February by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change far too low.

The glacier at Ilulissat, which supposedly spawned the iceberg that sank the Titantic, is now flowing three times faster into the sea than it was 10 years ago.

Robert Corell, chairman of the Arctic Climate Impact Assessment, said in Ilulissat yesterday: "We have seen a massive acceleration of the speed with which these glaciers are moving into the sea. The ice is moving at 2 metres an hour on a front 5km <3 miles> long and 1,500 metres deep. That means that this one glacier puts enough fresh water into the sea in one year to provide drinking water for a city the size of London for a year."

He is visiting Greenland as part of a symposium of religious, scientific, and political leaders to look at the problems of the island, which has an ice cap 3km thick containing enough water to raise worldwide sea levels by seven metres.

Read more: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2007/sep/08/climatechange/print


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
PetrusMonsFormicarum Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 06:27 AM
Response to Original message
1. Also evidence
that the retreating ice cap on Greenland is causing the earth beneath it to "spring back" as the tremendous weight of the ice lifts.

An opposite effect is being seen in the American south/Gulf of Mexico where oil pockets are sought after, exploited, emptied, and cause both serious water-table issues and sinkholes/shallow earthquakes.

Interesting how these phenomena are related . . .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truthisfreedom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 06:52 AM
Response to Original message
2. It would be a good thing if we could capture this ice before it either melts or falls into the
ocean. Perhaps large barges parked at the edge could catch it before it even hits the ocean's surface, to haul it away for use as drinking water in parts of the world that are short of clean water.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
iamjoy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 07:30 AM
Response to Reply #2
4. That's What I Thought!
If it's going to be breaking off - why let it go to waste? OF course there are certain logistical concerns, but surely clever people can put their minds to it and solve those problems.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ezlivin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 10:12 AM
Response to Reply #4
16. Certain logistical concerns, indeed!
First logistical concern: Finding a barge large enough to contain "pieces of ice several cubic kilometres in size."

Second logistical concern: Finding something to tow said barge.

Other than that, you're good to go!

;)

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
midnight armadillo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 10:59 AM
Response to Reply #16
23. Skip the barge
Just attach towlines to the iceberg and tow it. Use enough ships and you'll move it.

Of course, put it in a harbor for harvesting and its meltwater would dilute the salt water harbor enough to kill all the sea life...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truthisfreedom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 12:19 PM
Response to Reply #23
28. It would have to be towed into a lock of some sort.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GliderGuider Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 09:14 PM
Response to Reply #28
51. Icebergs have been towed before.
Edited on Sat Sep-08-07 09:15 PM by GliderGuider
http://www.athropolis.com/arctic-facts/fact-berg-tow.htm
http://academic.evergreen.edu/g/grossmaz/ESLINGHM/

One problem is volume loss during the tow. I've seen some suggestions that a large rubber membrane be passed under the berg and attached to a flotation collar around it. The membrane would contain the melt water during the tow, but the problem is that the tow then becomes very unwieldy.

Another problem is the energy needed to tow the berg. The second link above talks about a proposal to use nuclear reactors to supply the energy, which is a great idea from the CO2 perspective but brain-dead from any other point of view. Towing bergs with oil-fueled vessels might be practical for short distances, but maybe not for longer ones. It would probably be better to develop more efficient desalination technology and use it where the fresh water is needed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truthisfreedom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 11:50 AM
Response to Reply #51
67. Use the membrane idea, but set up a controlled spill at one end which would be used
for propulsion. As the berg melted, the collected runoff water would be used as a sort of jet to drive the berg to a chosen destination.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tinrobot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 02:05 PM
Response to Reply #2
39. Too much ice.
We're talking enough ice to cover entire states. A puny barge towing some ice would be like an ant trying to stop a freight train.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PATRICK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 07:12 AM
Response to Original message
3. Revisit the Ice Age theory
Does this "surprising and shocking" development mean that the last calculations that global warming was irreversible must now include a possibility instead of a swift kick back to the Ice Ages? More cold water, more sluggish gulf streams. Dead stream, no warming but an Ice Age.

Apparently it is too soon to leap at any answers when the community is continually "sunned" by actual developments. This is no comfort to the rosy wishful thinking of the corporate paid scoffers since all scenarios are most likely disastrous- and obviously understated according to a dominant mindset among most professional world scientists. If the outliers- or pessimists as they are often mis-characterized- are correct, whose outcome is really closest to what is happening? You won't ever hear that voice very well among the general exclamations of shock.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NashVegas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 09:51 AM
Response to Reply #3
13. Depends, Depends
In previous ice ages, the earth was able to reclaim eventual balance naturally. I suspect with humans around, determined to save as many millions of lives as possible, and *especially* to keep the economy running, I don't see any natural correction in sight.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RaleighNCDUer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 01:36 PM
Response to Reply #3
36. That's why we talk about 'global climate change' instead of
Edited on Sat Sep-08-07 01:41 PM by NCevilDUer
'global warming'. These are such complicated systems, with so many interlinking variables, that it is nearly impossible to say where it's going; only that we're the ones in the handbasket.

ON EDIT: re complex systems, do you think ANY models predicted the effects of earthquakes creating new cracks and fissures in the ice sheet, causing them to allow more surface melt to infiltrate the glaciers, dripping to the bottom and further lubricating them on their rush to the sea? In a recent thread I suggested that, because of unknown unknowns, we could see the collapse of the Greenland sheet in as little as 10 years - highly unlikely, I know, but suddenly now a lot less unlikely.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bjobotts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 02:35 PM
Response to Reply #3
40. Does not apply. Ice in a glass of H2O only cools for so long if temps rise
Now pour the glass into a pond.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FarCenter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 09:09 PM
Response to Reply #3
50. For an Ice Age, with glaciers, you need an open Arctic Ocean
One feature of previous Ice Ages was a huge ice sheet covering northern Canada. At present, northern Canada gets very little precipitation, and an ice sheet cannot form.

However, the Arctic Ocean ice coverage appears to be much diminished this year, so if it opens up there will be a source of moisture for the winds that blow southeast from the pole.

See http://nsidc.org/news/press/2007_seaiceminimum/20070810_index.html for the current ice coverage. It is interesting that the Greenland glacier referred to in the story is in the northwest part of Greenland. The Arctic Ocean north of the Canadian archipelago has the largest remaining older ice cover.

Another variable is the depth of water over the Scotland-Greenland sill. As the Greenland ice cap melts, there is more flow north from the Atlantic into the Arctic Ocean. This also warms the Arctic Ocean, allowing a longer open water season.





Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Christa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 07:41 AM
Response to Original message
5. This is the part I don't get
Yesterday Christian, Shia, Sunni, Hindu, Shinto, Buddhist and Jewish religious leaders took a boat to the tongue of the glacier for a silent prayer for the planet.

:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
theHandpuppet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 08:46 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. I'd rather they speak out for family planning
But of course that's a no-no, so let's all just hop on a boat and pray.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WileEcoyote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 12:09 PM
Response to Reply #6
27. Got that right
There can be no discussion of zero population growth allowed even among more Liberal groups.

Keep up saying sensible things like this and you'll definitely become ostracized from the world community...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Duppers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 01:22 PM
Response to Reply #6
32. here, here. nt
yes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Baby Snooks Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 08:50 AM
Response to Reply #5
7. I get it...
They think their mythical god is going to magically stop global warming. What Republicans think as well. Ask any Republican what they think about global warming and they will tell you that we just need to get back to "God's Law" and "family values" and God will take care of us. Never mind about the "family of man."

This is one of many indications that the scientists are indeed wrong and we will see sea level rise much sooner than they originally thought. And this will be followed, as has been pointed out, by an Ice Age as the cooler fresh water disrupts the Gulf Stream. Ask any Republican about that and they will tell you that it doesn't matter because only the godless liberals, which is how they refer to Democrats, live on the beach so it will get rid of them quicker and when the weather is cooler everyone will regret having supported PETA and they will wish they had held on to their mink coats.

Of course if you ask a Republican where God is, they will tell you on the dollar bill of course. What you're up against.

And Congress sits by and does nothing while Rome burns. And the glaciers melt.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truth2power Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 09:40 AM
Response to Reply #7
11. "What you're up against." Just so you know
that what you've described in your second paragraph is not overstated.

I had a conversation with one of these people this past week, and he repeatedly reduced the most incongruous issues to a matter of "family values." At some point this starts to get really bizarre, as the subject diverges from anything that a "family" would have any control over. "What we're up against" indeed!

:hi:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
demgurl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 11:12 AM
Response to Reply #7
25. Mythical god or not, I see this as a wonderfully positive thing.
When there are so many people who can't agree with each other, I never thought I would see leaders from so many religions come together to try and make a change. And it does not even have to be a prayer they all said. The fact that so many people, who have drastically different beliefs, want everyone to be aware of this phenomenon says a lot. I am not so sure they were doing it to pray as much as they were doing it to raise the consciousness of the masses.

I feel honored to have read this and have it happen in my lifetime. I can not remember a time in my past when people from such vastly different beliefs worked so closely to make changes. These are people who usually ostracize those within their own communities for thinking differently. If there ever was a miracle, these people working together, in harmony, just may be it.

Whether someone believes, or not, we can help them further their agenda (and in the process ours) by letting religious people we know about this. When they see their leaders cting upon this something may stir inside of them and then they may truly know how important this issue is. This is a great opportunity for all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pokercat999 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 04:28 PM
Response to Reply #25
69. It would have been a wonderfully positive thing if..........
There actually was a "god" and it fried them on the spot as a sign to the rest of humanoids to get off their collective ass. Too bad "god" is a figment of the humanoid imagination.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, hence no god and no extraterrestrial flying craft or beings to operate them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yardwork Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 10:27 AM
Response to Reply #5
19. No Pagans represented, I note.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nodehopper Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 10:47 AM
Response to Reply #19
21. who cares? prayer is not the answer here, actually listening to evidence-based research is
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kool Kitty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 01:32 PM
Response to Reply #21
35. Well said,
very well said.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joe Chi Minh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 03:16 PM
Response to Reply #21
41. Sure, mankind is a by-word for being able to control the forces of nature.
Edited on Sat Sep-08-07 03:20 PM by KCabotDullesMarxIII
Tornadoes, tsunamis, floods, forest fires. Gee whizz! How you people can kid yourselves, even as the planet looks as if it's beginning to implode! You people would be criminals if you had any awareness.

Well, of course, they are working on meteorite diversion by nukes in space, aren't they....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nodehopper Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 07:39 PM
Response to Reply #41
45. well, a course of action
rooted in evidence-based research and projections certainly has a greater likelihood of succeeding than prayer. Are you angry that US didn't sign the Kyoto protocol? Those sorts of agreements, to reduce emission, are about taking practical measures suggested by data. Or is praying about it just as good?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KittyWampus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 09:33 PM
Response to Reply #45
53. are you really so ignorant of what prayer is, that you'd suggest an either-or situation?
That the inward action of prayer is somehow anathema to outward action?

You need to learn about how the freaking universe works.

Every positive change that has ever occured due to human intervention has occured because some person and/or persons took the time to organize their thoughts and energy and VISUALIZED things being different.

Your idea of prayer is nothing but a sick, carictature version that ignores its function and potential.

Like so many other athiests, you end up being a bigot with a one dimensional view of those who practise any and all spiritual activities.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ekwhite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 11:49 PM
Response to Reply #53
60. More than a little hostility there, I'd say
Perhaps a little more kindness in your explanation might be appropriate if you are portraying yourself as spiritual. I agree that there should not be a conflict between inward contemplation and outward action, but you cannot convince someone else of that fact by telling them they don't know how the universe works and calling their idea of prayer a "sick caricature."

I would have to say that NO ONE, including me, knows how the universe works. Anyone who claims otherwise is a charlatan or deluded. I'm afraid that your explanation sounds a little too much like "The Secret" to me.

I personally believe that the Judeo-Christian god does not exist. I certainly do not believe that we are the center of the universe. I do believe that action without contemplation leads to bad results (e.g. the Iraq War).

I do agree that right contemplation (prayer, if you like) leads to right action, and that right action sometimes, but not always, leads to right results. I also believe that a strong moral center, whether grounded in Hinduism, Buddhism, Christianity, or Secular Humanism is needed for positive change.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FarCenter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 11:42 AM
Response to Reply #53
66. Actually we do know how the universe works
Depending on the phenomena the univers either works completely deterministically or it obeys the laws of probability and statistics.

If there is a God in control, He is either entirely predictable and/or runs a scrupulously fair casino.

There is no evidence that the universe can have its course of events altered in any way by the activities of human minds, either directly or through supplication to some higher being.

If you think otherwise, suggest that you visit Las Vegas.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joe Chi Minh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 03:00 PM
Response to Reply #45
68. It's apples and oranges. Look for natural solutions first, then if the
problem remains, pray.

Our wickedness has not been restricted to causing global warming. There are many ways in which our demonic Western capitalism has been wreaking havoc on the natural world, and continues to do so. Not least of course, its human prey.

But I believe I have read that this issue of global warming may now be too far advanced for us to avoid all the catastrophic effects it threatens to entail. If so, you'd better get on your knees with everyone else.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kineneb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 01:30 PM
Response to Reply #19
34. depends on the definition of "pagan"
to the Abrahamic religions (Jewish, Christian, Moslem) all other religions/philosophies are pagan, including Shinto, Buddhist, etc. Maybe there were no Wiccans there, but the fact that some leaders of the desert religions would agree to even participate in such a conference means they have progressed, at least to some degree. Give credit where credit is due.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ekwhite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 11:35 PM
Response to Reply #19
58. No Pagans?
I believe that Christians, Sunnis, Shias, and Jews would consider Hindus, Buddhists, and Shinto pagans. The last time I noticed, they did not worship the Judeo-Christian-Muslim god.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RaleighNCDUer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 01:42 PM
Response to Reply #5
37. And they didn't stop it?
I'm shocked.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OKIsItJustMe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 08:01 PM
Response to Reply #5
46. What don't you get?
Why not pray for the planet?

Imagine a prayer something along the lines of, "God, we recognize we've made a mess of things. Help us see how to make things better."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Broadslidin Donating Member (949 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 09:03 AM
Response to Original message
8. A Glacier Suddenly Lurching 5km towards the sea in Only 90 Minutes....!
The religious leaders might have decreed
from their life boat,
a total ban on commercial air travel...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Baby Snooks Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 09:33 AM
Response to Reply #8
10. Those wonderful plumes from jet engines...
You see little if anything in the media about the problem of our crowded skies and the exhaust from thousands of planes in the air every day. It probably contributes more to the problem than anyone would care to admit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mnemosyne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 10:48 AM
Response to Reply #10
22. Nope, it's those damn smokers causing it.
Edited on Sat Sep-08-07 10:50 AM by vickiss
:evilgrin:


What a freakin mess we've made. Animals don't shit where they sleep.

Reaping what we've sown.

And we deserve it. Karma.

Welcome to DU! :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DLnyc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 11:10 AM
Response to Reply #8
24. Probably a typo. My guess is 5m in 90 min, not 5km in 90 min
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RaleighNCDUer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 01:45 PM
Response to Reply #24
38. Even at that, it is fast enough to actually watch it move.
And that scares the shit out of me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftchick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 09:32 AM
Response to Original message
9. I hope the sea swallows this place first......
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lone_Star_Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 09:45 AM
Response to Reply #9
12. Is that Poppy Bush's Maine estate? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Divine Discontent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 10:02 AM
Response to Reply #12
14. a right click of the mouse into the properties of the pic says "bush" at the end
so I guess so.

they'll spend millions of dollars of public money defending it, if the flood waters actually do rise...

gotta preserve a national monument you know?

childhood home of der fuhrer and all....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
donsu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 10:10 AM
Response to Reply #14
15. water IS actually rising - many, many islands in the Pacific have

had to be abandoned because of rising seas. parts of islands in the Bahamas are flooding.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Divine Discontent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 10:16 AM
Response to Reply #15
17. thanks for the info! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftchick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 10:25 AM
Response to Reply #12
18. yes
Walker point Kennebunkport Maine. I repeat, I hope it goes first.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kestrel91316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 10:30 AM
Response to Reply #18
20. Heck, it looks like a sea level rise of 3" and a good strong Noreaster
would take that place out.

Guess that's why they bought that ranch down in Paraguay.......
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lone_Star_Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 11:20 AM
Response to Reply #18
26. Thought so, but was just making sure.
I agree. Let the sea reclaim that point in Maine first.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
everydayis911 Donating Member (134 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 12:34 PM
Response to Original message
29. I am not
a denier of global warming, but could some of this have to do with the alignment of the planets? Suppose to be lined up by 2012. Maybe the magnetic force of the ocean is losing it's field and this is what we can expect for another 5 years. Will the Earth lose gravity, will it be moved a little off it's axis? I would rather see the Earth go this way than by nukes any day. At least it would probably have a chance of rebuilding itself. And without us in it it would stand a greater chance of making it. I just feel real bad for the sea mammals and Polar Bears.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bhikkhu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 01:09 PM
Response to Reply #29
30. a bit of physics
Gravity is an effect of mass. Global warming has no appreciable effect on planetary mass.

The earth's magnetic field is a phenomena arising from the mass, composition, and temperature of the earth's core. The presence or absence of oceans, atmosphere, or life is inconsequential to the magnetic field.

The gravitational effects of distant planets upon the earth is next to nil, aligned or not. The effects of alignment upon our magnetic field are much less.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OxQQme Donating Member (694 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 04:03 PM
Response to Reply #30
43. A bit more physics
The gravitational force exerted upon the earth are HUGH! It lifts the waters of this globe in it's passage creating calculable tide charts.
The land mass gets lifted also, as measured from satellite based 'eyes', into high and low 'tides'.
The resultant vibration has been placed at somewhere around 7.5 hz, subsonic, F# in the musical scale and changing in age long cycles.
Or perhaps the earth is bulging from the magma heat inside, pushing through it's containment layer's capabilities and warming the ice from below.
huh?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bhikkhu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 11:42 PM
Response to Reply #43
59. That would be the gravitational effect of the moon
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sofa king Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 01:11 PM
Response to Original message
31. Total Greenland ice melt = 20 foot sea level rise.
Better start thinking of ditching that beachfront property. Twenty feet (6.5 meters) is enough to lop off the entire southern half of Florida up to Lake Okeechobee.

http://calculatedearth.com/

Incidentally, I played with that page above to see what would happen if all ice on earth melted. At 80 meters of sea level rise, guess what part of America takes the biggest hit? Here's a hint: they'd better hope that Baby Jeebus tells them to start building arks.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
XemaSab Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 03:26 PM
Response to Reply #31
42. This is a fun website
A hundred meter rise would sure take care of a lot of "problem areas." :P
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
burrowowl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 10:10 PM
Response to Reply #31
55. Great site!
Thank you!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
frogcycle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 12:38 AM
Response to Reply #31
62. note the Mississippi Delta
the extension you see north from the Gulf of Mexico toward Lake Michigan is the delta of the Mississippi - the New Madrid Fault is actually a seam where two ancient landmasses fused; the Missouri, Mississippi, Ohio, and Tennessee Rivers all emptied into that bay*. As the rivers gradually silted in the bay, each forming a delta at its respective mouth, all the land that is now along the Mississippi River was formed. Had the Army Corps of Engineers not fucked with the process 100 years ago, what is now New Orleans would be high and dry, and what were offshore "barrier islands" in the 1920's (now gone) would be beachfront property.

Bottom line - Mother Nature will win. If we keep insisting on finding ways to screw up the planet, she'll give us a good sound spanking. With any luck, humankind will be reduced in number by at least 2/3 within a century, all of the existing geopolitical boundaries will be obsolete, energy sources will be limited of necessity to renewable ones, and population will be self-controlled as it is with other animals that overpopulate and exhaust their food supply. That may require draconian measures of forced birth control, euthanasia, etc., but hey, the Donner Party threw out their bibles and did what they had to. Desperate measures for desperate times and all that. The bible-thumping "go forth and multiply" crowd will probably be stoned to death.

* See: http://www.dbc3.com/NOLAPlan
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
and-justice-for-all Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 05:38 AM
Response to Reply #31
65. What if both Ice Caps went...
How long does life on Earth have left then?

I do not feel so sorry for Humanity, I do for the life that did not ask to be involved in this human destruction.

People: Evolutions mistake and soon to subject to Mother Natures Revenge.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 01:26 PM
Response to Original message
33. I posted this yesterday . . . . piece that broke off was 2X size of UK -- !!!!
Who deprived the world of this information over the last decades . . . . ?

Those private few who have controlled our natural resources --
and who have amassed great wealth thru destruction.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TechBear_Seattle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 04:26 PM
Response to Original message
44. Another cause for concern is the loss of the weight of the ice
Ice is heavy. Three kilometers of ice over many square kilometers is very heavy. So heavy, in fact, that it compresses the underlying rock. As the ice disappears, the weight pressing on the rock decreases and the rock will start to decompress. That decompression can happen slowly; it can also happen suddenly. If the ice disappears fast enough for decompression to happen suddenly, it will not be gentle. Or pretty.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
frogcycle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 12:39 AM
Response to Reply #44
63. The MidWest is still rebounding
from the last Ice Age. A couple of millimeters a year, as I recall.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DUlover2909 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 08:22 PM
Response to Original message
47. someone correct me if I am wrong
Edited on Sat Sep-08-07 08:26 PM by DUlover2909
I looked up the area of the earth covered by our oceans. It's 361 million km^2. If the the whole earth was just the oceans total area, and 4pi(r^2)= 361 x 10^6 km^2, then r = 5,360 km. The volume would be 4/3(pi)r^3 = 6.45 x 10^11 km^3. The total area covered by Greenland's ice sheet is 1,755,637 km (from wikidepia). If that's evenly distributed and it is 3km thick, that's a volume of 5,266,911 km^3. If we add 7 meters to the ball of water's radius, then the volume would be 4/3(pi)r^3 (r = 5,367 km) then the volume becomes 6.476 x 10^11 km^3. Subtracting the first volume from the second yields approximately 2.6 billion km^3. That's about 493 times as much water as Greenland holds in it's ice sheet. 7 meters divided by 493 is 14 millimeters, the amount that the oceans would rise if all the ice in Greenland melted.

I tried to be careful with this calculation, I am not perfect and so I would like to hear from someone that can check my math and tell me where I went wrong if indeed I did so.

Not trying to defend the Idiots (R) here. I am just curious. Thanks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Harper_is_Bush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 09:01 PM
Response to Reply #47
48. You're treating the Oceans as a ball...
Edited on Sat Sep-08-07 09:02 PM by Harper_is_Bush
The ocean is not a ball.

Think of it this way:

Think of the ocean as flat. It's 350m km/sq (I will round).
The expectation if greenland ice sheet melts is 7m rise (.007 km)
The volume required to raise 350m km/sq by .007km is .007 * 350,000,000 =
2,450,000 km/cube

greenland ice sheet is 1.7m km/sq by 3km deep
so....
1,700,000 * 3 = about 5m km/cube of ice.

So obviously, when it melts, it will be more than enough to raise the Ocean area by 7m.

Hope that helps.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GliderGuider Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 09:01 PM
Response to Reply #47
49. Make it a bit simpler
Edited on Sat Sep-08-07 09:03 PM by GliderGuider
Don't worry that the ocean is the surface of a sphere - I think that's where you went wrong. Think of it as a flat surface of 361 million square kilometers. When the Greenland ice cap melts, the water will flow out to cover this surface to a depth (in kilometers) determined by the volume of the ice cap in cubic kilometers divided by 361,000,000.

The volume of the Greenland ice cap is estimated at about 2.8 million cubic kilometers. Divide 2.8x10^6 by 361x10^6 and you get 0.00775 - the depth in kilometers. Multiply by 1000 to get the depth in meters: 7.75 meters.

The difference of 0.75 meters versus the "official" estimate is probably due to the volume of water needed to inundate coastal land. In effect the surface area of the ocean increases, reducing the height of the rise (for a constant volume if the length and width increase, the depth decreases). On the other hand, the official estimators might simply have rounded down, knowing that not all the ice would actually melt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DLnyc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 09:18 PM
Response to Reply #47
52. At least one serious mistake here.
If one adds 7 meters to 5360 kilometers, the total is 5360.007 kilometers, not 5367 kilometers.

A more direct calculation might be as follows:
Wikipedia gives the volume of ice on Greenland as 2.85 million km^3 (less than the 5.26... million km^3 you have)
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenland_ice_sheet )
and, as you note, about 361 million km^2 for the area of earth's oceans
( see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ocean )

So a more direct calculation gives:
2.85 million cubic kilometers / 361,000,000 square kilometers = about 0.007895 km = 7.895meters
as the expected change in depth to the oceans. Of course a volume of ice gives only about 7/8 that volume of water, so we should use
7.895 X (7/8) = about 6.908

Your method of converting the ocean-covered part of the globe to a (smaller) sphere and then adding to that shpere's radius would work, I suppose, if you used the correct number, 5360.007, instead of 5367 -- but it seems like an unnecessarily complicated aproach.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DUlover2909 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 10:48 PM
Response to Reply #52
57. Yeah, I messed that adding 7 thing up, hehe thanks.
I see what you all mean about thinking in terms of a flat surface. Thanks gang. =)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Usrename Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 01:52 AM
Response to Reply #57
64. There are some folks who are offering new theories about this.
In the geological record, the rise and fall of sea level are out of phase with the advance and retreat of the glaciers during the ice ages.

Here's an interesting theory on why this could happen:

PDF WARNING: http://home.wanadoo.nl/bijkerk/Pulsating-ice-age.pdf
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 09:35 PM
Response to Original message
54. Can someone explain how melting ice caps could cause earthquakes?
Im actually more concerned about the underwater nuclear testing/blasting that is creating the earthquakes along with the monsoons.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bhikkhu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 11:53 PM
Response to Reply #54
61. The weight of the ice upon the earth's crust
in Greenland, has depressed the crust below sea level throughout the center of the land/ice mass. The loss of ice weigh leads to a "springing back" of the crust, or readjustment.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leaninglib Donating Member (268 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 10:31 PM
Response to Original message
56. When in the area...
be sure to wear a hard hat.

For the sky is surely falling.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun Jul 14th 2024, 05:49 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC