Rising sea level and the flooding of the American continent

Status
Not open for further replies.

Del

Sky isn't falling, ground is rising
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 10, 2006
Messages
4,048
Reaction score
1,781
Location
In a hole in the dark in a cold cold place
If the poles melted...


I've read if all the ice melted the seas would rise about 20 feet from Greenland's ice, almost nothing from the Arctic and 200 feet from Antarctica.

Is there a map somewhere that would indicate the new shape of the continent if the sea rose to its maximum?

I've found maps to about a 20 foot rise.

Short of a flood map, is there a topo map that shows general altitude of the south west? Everything I've found is much too localized.

Thanks
 

Del

Sky isn't falling, ground is rising
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 10, 2006
Messages
4,048
Reaction score
1,781
Location
In a hole in the dark in a cold cold place
Thanks Ideagirl. I've been there before. This time the video actually worked. :D

Still it is the 20 foot limit. It is the difference between sea waters encroaching tens of miles vs hundreds of miles (I suspect).

What would be drowned after worst case?
 

Vincent

Cheers
Poetry Book Collaborator
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
1,934
Reaction score
468
Florida and Bangladesh. California's Central Valley. A lot of Louisiana. And most every coastal city in the world.
 

blacbird

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 21, 2005
Messages
36,987
Reaction score
6,158
Location
The right earlobe of North America
Any good contour map will show you land elevations graphically. Go to the library and look up a good atlas.

Oh, by the way, New Orleans will be flooded. In case you hadn't guessed.

caw
 

Del

Sky isn't falling, ground is rising
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 10, 2006
Messages
4,048
Reaction score
1,781
Location
In a hole in the dark in a cold cold place
Any good contour map will show you land elevations graphically. Go to the library and look up a good atlas.

Yeah, the nerest library of any worth is 45 miles and I have travel limitations. I always get there eventually armed with all the information and misinformation I collect beforehand.

Oh, by the way, New Orleans will be flooded. In case you hadn't guessed.

caw

No, They put up sandbags. :D
 

Vincent

Cheers
Poetry Book Collaborator
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
1,934
Reaction score
468
Oh, and before you write the thing, really research into what it would take to get that 200 foot sea-rise. Most of the Antarctic ice shelf is very, very thick and firmly in place, and global warming itself probably wouldn't be enough to shift it anytime in the next few thousand years.

There are sections, however, that could concievably slide free and melt pretty fast, adding 20 feet. That might not sound like much, and it might not change the Atlas too much, but it would have a hell of an impact on civilisation.

But I will admit that the idea of submerged cities, coastlines, entire countries, has a kind appeal to it. Once you get past the billions of dead people.
 

Puma

Retired and loving it!
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 21, 2006
Messages
7,340
Reaction score
1,536
Location
Central Ohio
Another issue - ice is less dense than water. Only the portions of the polar areas that are actually above sea level would increase the level of the oceans, melting of the subsurface ice would decrease it (but not a lot)

Delarege - I'm not sure whether Goggle Earth has topo maps or not - it might and it's an excellent research tool. There's also a possibility you might find some world topo maps that are on the internet through a Goggle search - just be sure to put what you're looking for in quotes to eliminate random hits ("topographic map" "North America") Hope this helps. Puma
 

Vincent

Cheers
Poetry Book Collaborator
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
1,934
Reaction score
468
One fun thing you can do if you live in a coastal city is walk down the street near the waterfront, counting up to the 15th floor or so on the taller buildings. The new watermark :)
 

Rekd

Banned
Joined
Jan 10, 2007
Messages
116
Reaction score
4
Location
teh Debug Window
Website
undermyhelmet.com
Another issue - ice is less dense than water. Only the portions of the polar areas that are actually above sea level would increase the level of the oceans, melting of the subsurface ice would decrease it (but not a lot)

Gawd I hate politicians trying desperately to scare the crap out of us to help empty our pockets so they can fund their anti-human agenda which is FILLED with half-truths, the conveniently left out facts about the so-called hockey stick theory and grapes grown in England (amung others), and constant rhetoric that we, as humans driving our SUVs here and on Mars, are responsible for something that has been clearly and plainly happening in thousands of years cycles as far back as we can measure.


Sea levels rise during interglacial periods such as that in which we (happily) find ourselves. Even the distorted United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change reports refute the hysteria, finding no statistically significant change in the rate of increase over the past century of man’s greatest influence, despite green claims of massive melting already occurring. Small island nations seeking welfare and asylum for their citizens such as in socially generous New Zealand and Australia have no sea-level rise at all and in some cases see instead a drop. These societies’ real problem is typically that they have made a mess of their own situation. One archipelago nation is even spending lavishly to lobby the European Union for development money to build beachfront hotel resorts, at the same time it shrieks about a watery and imminent grave. So, which time are they lying?

As good fortune has it, frozen things do in fact melt or at least recede after cooling periods mercifully end. The glacial retreat we read about is selective, however. Glaciers are also advancing all over, including lonely glaciers nearby their more popular retreating neighbors. If retreating glaciers were proof of global warming, then advancing glaciers are evidence of global cooling. They cannot both be true, and in fact, neither is. Also, retreat often seems to be unrelated to warming. For example, the snow cap on Mount Kilimanjaro is receding -- despite decades of cooling in Kenya -- due to regional land use and atmospheric moisture.

Stop being so cogently lazy and easily scared, ignoring numerous obvious facts about the myth of man made global warming.
 
Last edited:

benbradley

It's a doggy dog world
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Dec 5, 2006
Messages
20,322
Reaction score
3,513
Location
Transcending Canines
Another issue - ice is less dense than water. Only the portions of the polar areas that are actually above sea level would increase the level of the oceans, melting of the subsurface ice would decrease it (but not a lot)
The distinction is whether the ice is sitting on land (as is, IIRC, the majority of Antarctica) or if it's a big chunk of ice on the water (IIRC the area around the North Pole). If ice on land melts, it flows into the oceans and raises the level, but ice that has ocean under it will rise when some of the ice on top melts and flows into the ocean, keeping the ocean level the same (just as ice floating in a glass of water won't raise the water level as it melts).
 

Higgins

Banned
Joined
Sep 1, 2006
Messages
4,302
Reaction score
414
Some thermal expansion

The distinction is whether the ice is sitting on land (as is, IIRC, the majority of Antarctica) or if it's a big chunk of ice on the water (IIRC the area around the North Pole). If ice on land melts, it flows into the oceans and raises the level, but ice that has ocean under it will rise when some of the ice on top melts and flows into the ocean, keeping the ocean level the same (just as ice floating in a glass of water won't raise the water level as it melts).

There will be some thermal expansion, so even the melting of floating ice will raise sea level a bit. Presently the biggest sea-level catastrophe would be if the ice started sliding off of Greenland a lot faster than it is at the moment (though it is already accellerating). That and thermal expansion could raise sea level a few feet in the next few decades and the results would not be pretty.
 

blacbird

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 21, 2005
Messages
36,987
Reaction score
6,158
Location
The right earlobe of North America
Stop being so cogently lazy and easily scared, ignoring numerous obvious facts about the myth of man made global warming.

You're missing more than a few cogent points here, Rekd, but enumerating them would take more space than this forum, or my time limits, allow. Go read a few books.

Perhaps of more importance, however, is the fact that there are a whole lot of effects from warming and melting ice that will profoundly affect human welfare long before sea-level rise gets to be an acute problem. Notably, and there are signs its already happening to some extent, is the suppression of the "global conveyor" of circulating cold oxygenated ocean water. That water circulation is what keeps the oceans productive of life, what feeds the base of the marine food chain, worldwide. If it shuts down, and the ocean basins become stably stratified, that food chain will be greatly suppressed. If you want a small example of what it will be like, look at the Black Sea, which is a stratified basin. Below the photic zone, where light penetrates, this body of water is dead. The bottom is a stinking mass of black ooze, permeated by hydrogen sulfide.

There have been episodes in the geologic past during which such conditions existed in ocean basins worldwide. The most notable one took place about 85-90 million years ago, and is known as the Turonian Anoxic Event. Black shales preserved from this period form the most prolific sources of hydrocarbons known in the geologic record (in particular the La Luna and Querecual Formations of northern South America, the source for Hugo Chavez's pile of oil in Venezuela). They are rich in undecayed organic matter because the ocean bottoms were dead, devoid of oxygen which would have permitted the residues of surface organisms (dominantly microscopic) to decay as they sank. It's this organic material that gets cooked, slowly, into petroleum compounds.

Anyone living in the Midwest, places like eastern Kansas/western Missouri, can drive along highways and see roadcuts containing thin black shale horizons sandwiched in white limestone ledges. These derive from similar depositional conditions, 300 million years ago, or so.

For the oceanic conveyor to function, we need a cold ice-bound polar continent that is not in the process of shedding lots of melting fresh water across the adjacent oceanic surface. Those conditions haven't existed always in earth's history.

That's the fifty-cent lecture; my invoice will appear shortly.

caw
 

Higgins

Banned
Joined
Sep 1, 2006
Messages
4,302
Reaction score
414
Bravo

For the oceanic conveyor to function, we need a cold ice-bound polar continent that is not in the process of shedding lots of melting fresh water across the adjacent oceanic surface. Those conditions haven't existed always in earth's history.

That's the fifty-cent lecture; my invoice will appear shortly.

caw

Very Nice caw...and then there's the Strangelove Ocean:

http://geology.about.com/library/weekly/aa051798.htm

http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/largeimpacts2003/pdf/4077.pdf

http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/short/282/5387/276

And the original article:

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v316/n6031/abs/316809a0.html

And some more early Triassic:

http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1365-3121.2005.00648.x
 

Rekd

Banned
Joined
Jan 10, 2007
Messages
116
Reaction score
4
Location
teh Debug Window
Website
undermyhelmet.com
That's the fifty-cent lecture; my invoice will appear shortly.

Save it. I'm not interested in given MORE money to support scare tactics. I'm already getting raped enough as it is.

To some extent the Man Made Global Warming Threat is the scare of the week or year or until something else comes along.

Surely you can remember back to the advent of computers when everyone was going to get cancer from cathode ray tubes. Or everyone is going to get cancer from high voltage transmission lines. Or everyone is going to get cancer from cellphone radiation. Or 30 years ago when the big thing was global cooling.

Global warming comes and goes and has come and gone by varying amounts over varying periods of time. Fortunately since around 25,000 years ago the overall trend has been upwards with a few jiggles down every now and then. You would have to do one h*** of a lot of digging in ice to find Central Park if it hadn't.

Anthropogenic Global Warming, or at least the Man Made Anthropogenic part is probably 98% myth. Real Global Warming since the Little Ice Age a few hundred years ago certainly has happened. However it has not been a steady rise but has bobbed around a bit. If you carefully select which 'bobs' you look at, up or down, you can prove almost anything. Well you can't prove it but if you shout loud enough you can drown out the moderate voices pointing out that you have selected things to favor your conclusion. And once you have a lot of people with a vested interest in supporting your conclusions you become difficult to stop.

I think we should be more concerned with how legislation put into place by those who stand on the GW platform is going to affect us...It's not GW itself that is the real threat...it's all the junk that is going to come out of the GW crisis mentality that is going to hurt us all. 'All of us' being the 'we' that make a living with both our hands and our brains...more legislation, rules, licenses, certifications yada yada...It would be easier to just hang your head out the front door each morning and get choked all in one shot. This is just another example of problem-reaction-solution. The solution already exists ~ more legislation (which means money)...they have presented the 'problem' and are waiting for enough to rally together with their fear-full reactions to present the solution...which is the intended agenda anyway. (how many times can we fall for this?)

Most people can't think for themselves, and adopt the herd mentality because they don't want to be on the 'unpopular team' regardless of what is factually correct. "The nail that sticks up will be hammered down." It is unplausible to believe that more than a handful of people could come up with such a 'crisis' on their own without it being spoon fed to them via the media to get us to react or be fearful so they can step in and be the benevolent hero.

GW is the new 'empire approved' crisis of the moment...funny how totally screwed up everything else is and they choose to focus on events (real, perceived or concocted) that are mostly out of our control. How convenient. What many fail to realize is that the masses are never going to evolve to the point that you hope they will in your lifetime. You have to evolve on your terms at your pace...doing what you know is right, without needed to 'check in' with status quo when the street lights come on...

Furthermore, what the U.S. government is doing when it backs the global warming agenda, 'alternative energy', and CAFE rules, is to effectively ship the productive capacity wholesale out of this country and into countries that do not suffer from these restrictions.

I mean this literally. In my industry, (CNC Machining) scrapped machines are no longer melted down -- they are shipped to China, where they are being refitted and put back to work. Same thing with a lot of electrical motors. Just talk to the industrial scrap yards. Ask them why the price of scrap copper and steel is at historic levels.

As the domestic automotive industry coughs out its last gasps, having almost completely walked away from its domestic supplier base, you bet this affects the CNC machining community. In Michigan, over 200,000 manufacturing jobs are permanently gone -- this is a conservative estimate, because numbers don't get counted on all of them. (And multiples more jobs gone from the ripple effect.) Worst hit are the small employers, who are going bankrupt or closing up and retiring. Same for California, where companies are leaving in droves because they can't afford to do business here and be competitive with other countries or even other states.

And what strategy do we get from government? Increased taxes. Increased regulations. CAFE rules aiming to torpedo pickup trucks, the last refuge of customer preference for vehicles and the last dying hope of the teetering, clueless bureaucracies of the big 2.5. Increased health care costs, due directly to government intervention in the market. Increased environmental compliance costs at all levels. Energy policy that guarantees increased cost of energy. And promises of more, more, more of the same.

As always the blame will be placed on overseas workers who make a few cents per hour. Just ask any businessman who owns a manufacturing operation what percentage of the cost of his product actually makes it into the pocket of his employees, who are an order of magnitude more productive than anyone in a third world country. The answer is very little.

The costs are dwarfed by the taxes he must pay for the employees, the cost of complying with tax policy (90% of bookkeeping and accounting expense), complying with environmental regulations, fire regulations, OSHA regulations, disability regulations, family leave act, local building codes, and so on forever. The huge productivity value of our ability to gain economies of scale is being sucked out of every enterprise at every level, to the point where it is cheaper to make something overseas under appalling conditions and ship it halfway around the world, where it gets purchased with ever fewer locally generated dollars.

"Globalization" is not just a buzzword, it's a keyword -- it means get your assets out of the U.S. if you want your company to survive.

The ultimate perversion is that there is now more freedom to create wealth in COMMUNIST countries than there is in the United States of America. All of this can be laid at the feet of the nanny state and those who support it or don't loudly oppose it.

This movement will continue, because we have passed the tipping point where politicians can promise more unearned loot to more people than can oppose it. Of the remainder, they are intellectuuote]ally unarmed, powerless to argue against the majority opinions put out in the popular press in such Orwellian fashion. It will continue while we eat our assets (seed corn), until the assets are no longer ours.

More than just an economic crime, the wholesale destruction of our productive capacity is also a huge strategic national security blunder. As we overextend ourselves in the international intrigues our founding fathers warned us about, our ability to withstand calamity and overcome any mechanized force is being demolished.

Everything we are squandering was built out of the surpluses made possible by the freedom of a man to keep what he earned, and the ability of individuals to trade with one another on mutually agreeable terms without interference by any agent of force. As we whittled away at these basic tenets of our civilization, we likewise erased the huge productivity gains that came from it and briefly gave mankind the best standard of living in human history.

Now we have come to take the benefits for granted, while joining the intellectuals in sneering at such outmoded concepts as property ownership. We have a society that would probably lose up to 50% of its population to starvation, exposure, and disease within months of losing power, whose members are openly antagonistic to the energy supply that allows them to be so helpless about basic survival skills that they don't even know how vulnerable they are.

They have been brainwashed into thinking that everything including their energy supply would be better off run by government Al-Gore types than by greedy capitalists, having been deprived of the mental capacity to judge what kind of inventions, what standard of living ever came out of the governmental systems they pine for. They fall for the envy ploy, putting themselves at the mercy of those who would (will) control them. The man who has a gun and controls your heat, your electricity, your employment, your children's education, and your food supply, controls YOU.

Proponents of governmental control over energy usage (and this includes any 'carbon tax' scheme) or any other broad restriction on industry in general, cannot be given the benefit of the doubt as to their motives. Their aims cannot be realized without putting the man of productive ability under the gun of a man with no productive ability whatsoever.

That's my U.S.-centric, manufacturer-capitalist, totally biased view of the situation.
 
Last edited:

Higgins

Banned
Joined
Sep 1, 2006
Messages
4,302
Reaction score
414
What does any of that have to do with the facts of Global Warming? I mean if 6-8 undefinable conspiracies of billions of people are the real problem and you and your "money" are the victims, you have a much worse problem than just having the climate go wild.
 

pdr

Banned
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
4,259
Reaction score
832
Location
Home - but for how long?
Come and live...

in New Zealand, Rekd.

If America had that great Ozone hole over it as we have, growing year by year as it has for may years...

If Americans had to cover up when they went outside and their TV weather reports carried warnings saying: 'burn time in the sun today is one minute' as we do...

If America had to watch its little island neighbours suffering from higher sea levels and raging storms which made their homes unhabitable and have to take them in as we do...

If Americans could see what is happening to the Antarctic ice and measure how fast it is melting... We had icebergs off Dunedin this year and a summer as icy to match!

Then perhaps Americans would see that there is a problem and they too are majorily responsible for the speed up of global warming. If it affected America as visibly and nastily (the rise in skin cancers in NZ is horrific!) then perhaps America might extract a digit and do something?
 

blacbird

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 21, 2005
Messages
36,987
Reaction score
6,158
Location
The right earlobe of North America
in New Zealand, Rekd.

If America had that great Ozone hole over it as we have, growing year by year as it has for may years...

If Americans had to cover up when they went outside and their TV weather reports carried warnings saying: 'burn time in the sun today is one minute' as we do...

If America had to watch its little island neighbours suffering from higher sea levels and raging storms which made their homes unhabitable and have to take them in as we do...

If Americans could see what is happening to the Antarctic ice and measure how fast it is melting... We had icebergs off Dunedin this year and a summer as icy to match!

Then perhaps Americans would see that there is a problem and they too are majorily responsible for the speed up of global warming. If it affected America as visibly and nastily (the rise in skin cancers in NZ is horrific!) then perhaps America might extract a digit and do something?

Some Americans do recognize the problem, pdr, especially those of us who live in the very far north, where the melting of sea ice is creating a variety of severe environmental problems already. But obviously Rekd is a member of that dwindling club that believes we can continue to consume fossil fuel energy and produce CO2 endlessly and it won't matter. Not much point in discussing the matter further. Perhaps he'll be raptured.

caw
 

Lyra Jean

Two years old now.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 10, 2005
Messages
5,329
Reaction score
794
Location
Boca Raton - Mouth of the Rat
Website
beyondtourism.wordpress.com
So do hybrid cars really work? I'm going to be buying a car in March and was wondering what your opinion on them was?

Winter here in Florida was hot and I mean hot for Floridians not the Yankee tourists. I don't even want to know how hot it will be this summer.
 

benbradley

It's a doggy dog world
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Dec 5, 2006
Messages
20,322
Reaction score
3,513
Location
Transcending Canines
So do hybrid cars really work? I'm going to be buying a car in March and was wondering what your opinion on them was?

Really work? Work in what way? I wish I could afford the all-electric Tesla Roadster, all the reviews say it works great!

Winter here in Florida was hot and I mean hot for Floridians not the Yankee tourists. I don't even want to know how hot it will be this summer.

And if this isn't a good reason to stop driving SUVs, I don't know what is!
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2006/15aug_backwards.htm
 

Higgins

Banned
Joined
Sep 1, 2006
Messages
4,302
Reaction score
414
Auroras

Really work? Work in what way? I wish I could afford the all-electric Tesla Roadster, all the reviews say it works great!



And if this isn't a good reason to stop driving SUVs, I don't know what is!
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2006/15aug_backwards.htm


We should be seeing some nice Auroras soon though and SUVs might be less sensitive to the effects of ion storms than electric cars (hard to be sure...I don't think most cars are tested for resistance to electromagnetic flux). Look out though, probably the Government invented Auroras to take your money or at least to change its color slightly under certain conditions.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.