It is wrong. 90% of the world's ice is on the Antarctic continent and enough ice covers Greenland to add 20 feet to the ocean alone. So, you're theory applies to the arctic ice cap, but not the remainder of the ice - which covers land.
However, if the Arctic ice cap melts, it would warm the oceans world-wide. How? Ice reflects the sun's energy, ocean absorbs it. If there's more ocean more energy is absorbed and the ocean gets warmer. Why does that matter? Without the cooling effects of the Arctic ice cap, the tracks of the major currents would be altered. Thus the Gulf Stream (which travels across the Atlantic and north to the ice caps, where the cooler temperatures send the cool water down, where it heads back south to the equator) would stop bringing the warmer, milder winters to Europe. So Europe would get significantly colder as a result of global warming.
Check out the link below for basics:
2006-07-12 08:56:38
·
answer #1
·
answered by WBrian_28 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
There are several problems with your thesis.
A) The ice in question is on land, and some is on sea, but if you change the temprature of your water it expands and overflows the cup. When seawater raises in temprature it's mass expands.
B) It's not rising seas that cause the big problems with global warming models. Desalinization of seawater can cause bigger problems with the way sea currents rotate and cause climate shifts, like the desertification of the American mid-west.
C) Nobody claims that the rising seas will climb more than 30 feet. Even the most doomsday models (that might be far fetched, but they exist) have a total of a 30 foot increase in sea level. Most models claim lower shifts of anywhere from 1 to 10 feet.
D) The biggest problems in most global warming models are more of food production and climate problems. Rising seas, while could cause costal areas more problems, aren't the big deal here.
No matter what you think of the Global Warming situation, information never hurt anybody. For the lazy, Tom Brokaw is doing a special on Discovery Channel this Sunday night, probably a good Idea to watch it.
2006-07-12 08:44:58
·
answer #2
·
answered by vertical732 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Take a glass of water. Fill it *almost* to the brim. Add ice until the water reaches the brim and the ice cubes are sticking out *above* the rim (like glaciers). As the ice melts it will add more water and so the water will spill over. Do this in a cool room (or refrigerator) to lessen the condensation and evaporation.
There you go. The water spilled over.
2006-07-12 08:41:40
·
answer #3
·
answered by Vacation hungry 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Good melt the ice. Flood New York, New Orleans, Boston, San Francisco, and a lot of other places that are close to sea level. *LOL* Most of them are Democrat strongholds anyway.
By the way your idea is flawed. If the majority of ice melts the sea levels will rise. They did after every ice age.
2006-07-12 08:51:06
·
answer #4
·
answered by namsaev 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
the individuals now repeating the declare listed lower than are telling you better effectively than I ever ought to. the reason being person-pleasant. the challenge is complicated, as Trevor factors out, and by technique of picking your records you could decrease it to a soundbite that means that climate scientists should be disregarded, pondering they were incorrect contained in the previous. those who purchase that argument are unlikely to modify their minds about it; that ought to represent admitting their personal fallibility. by technique of the time you've defined that (a) they did not say that, (b) movements taken materially change issues, and (c) we've actual realized some thing because the Nineteen Nineteen Seventies, you're starting up to sound protecting, it truly is each and each and every of the Singers, Rohrabachers and Inhofes of this international quite pick. then back, i do not realize Flossie.She keeps on bringing this up. Early contained in the Nineteen Nineteen Seventies, Lamb concept cooling became a difficulty. Later, as all of us realized better, he replaced his suggestions. marvel, horror! A scientist replacing his suggestions contained in the face of fixing circumstances and new info! Flossie, one gathers, may under no circumstances do a ingredient like that! sparkling air acts on each and each and every aspect of the Atlantic decreased international dimming, precisely as envisioned, and as became actual mandatory (I bear in mind the whole London fog of 1952) And one ingredient that became for sure authentic in 1970, became that we did not understand climate properly adequate, and had to benefit better. apparently, Eric has a difficulty with that.
2016-12-01 03:52:48
·
answer #5
·
answered by rodges 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
ummmmmmm.................NO, actually ice floats because for some reason it has less density than water,not because of air,and actually the water does rise it just doesnt overflow usually,so even though global warming is only a natural part of earth that we really arent causing because theres other factors than humans (i know huh,shocking isnt it?)like the fact that trees and animals release greenhouse gas,like the tropical rainforests like the amazon release huge amounts of methane and so do animals.al gore is just a douche man dont listen to his douchyness lol.
2006-07-12 08:39:52
·
answer #6
·
answered by chevyman502 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
that is a great point, but there is another issue other than global waarming that most people don't know about, it is called GLOBAL COOLING this is no joke look it up they just realized that pollution may not only eat a hole in the o-zone it may actually be blanketing the earth so that not enough sunlight can get through like it should.
food for thought....
2006-07-12 08:38:07
·
answer #7
·
answered by blue_eyed_woman_23 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Good theory....but I think wrong...maybe you should watch the Al Gore documentary?
2006-07-12 08:38:56
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Dude, did you actually *try* this before you posted the question?? Might have been a good plan...
2006-07-12 08:46:54
·
answer #9
·
answered by browneyedgirl 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Interesting!
Ricardo F, how is it wrong? You have to have a theory behind what you think, or else YOU are wrong.
2006-07-12 08:36:57
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋