I've done plenty of projects and research papers on global warming. I fully agree with your theory. I'm practicaly an expert on global warming and actually wrote my latest editorial for my school newspaper on global warming harming the planet and humanity.
2006-12-08 13:41:09
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
4⤋
i do not agree in many of your ponts. i must question your theory:
As we all know our climate is getting hotter and the ice caps are melting causing waters to rise. Also due to the climate shifts deadly supper storms have appeared, and will increase exponentially as temperatures rise.Further causes of ice melt down will result in sea levels rising and costal cities shall flood causing human relocations on massive levels.
- sea leven increase is fast but i does not come all at once, obiously ppl are going to notice water geting nearer to the building near the sore and there will be plenty of anticipation. its NOT a tidal wave, people would have time to ebacuate in like 10 years when/if sea level gets higer enough to be menacing to human life.
I believe as it progresses the earth will shift violently due to increased pressures on the plates in turn creating or speeding up the process of volcanic activity and earthquakes.
-its more probable that the atmosphere will expand trough extra gases than to the plates to feel any presure. if u are atlking about the water, the plates are holding the same presure in thousands of years, the ice takes space and if it melts that space or weigth will spread its the same wigth as the ice just made liquid and in balanced levels aroown the glove (if they fully melt)
I surmise that in places the waters will flash boil killing much of the oceans sea life and cause severe torrential rains lasting for months even maybe years at a time. In turn due to violent earth eruptions...
- volcanos underwater are NO new thing the only way that oceans would boil is if the crust would sudenly dispear exposing it to the Magma equally (which aint gonna hapen) or if the earth gets TO close to the sun, though life on earth woukld die first than on the oceans.
evaporation from the oceans is no new thing it hapens all the time during the day and its what causes most of our normal storms.
the possibilities of a nuclear winter could eventually put the earth in a cooling trend repairing the planet but most of the life on earth would be destroyed and whoever is left will have to rebuild. As we all know we use up this planet and abuse it daily we are only destroying ourselves.
- this could hapen only if the boiling of the ocen ocurs, covering the earth in storms blocking the sun lowering temperatures. though consider this proses takes a lot of time. onsider the ice age, which was infact a nuclear winter as you say. I agree, the climate changes, global warming is due to the ozone caps geting holes from many of the gases we produce, though i consider many of the sections of your theory too radical for THIS changes.
2006-12-08 21:59:36
·
answer #2
·
answered by Poseidon 2
·
0⤊
1⤋
Well it's obvious we're going through some dramatic climate changes. The polar ice caps are shrinking and if they continue to do so could result in major coastal flooding or permanent submersion.
However the cause for these changes hasn't been proven and besides there's only been a one degree temperature rise in the last hundred years and even that can't be substantiated due to sporadic and shoddy record keeping the first half of the century.
In regard to your earth sciences theory, all these events could just as easily be part of natural cycle never before witnessed in the short length of recorded human history.
But your concern about volcanos is justifiable, there could possibly be several eruptions that could end most of the life on the planet, and it's not a question of if, but rather when, but that also remains to be seen.
:
2006-12-08 21:45:35
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
The earth's climate has virtually no measurable impact on its geological or tectonic forces. The mass of the earth's crust and oceans alone (just the thin shell on the planet earth) exceeds that of the atmosphere by at least a thousand-fold. It would have about the same effect as an insect on a dog. And if all the ice and snow in the world were to melt, it would only raise sea levels by approximately 200 feet, inundating only a small percentage of the world's land masses. There is no question that unchecked global warming can lead to significant climatic changes, putting humankind and life in stress, even causing extinctions, but it won't be comparable to a big asteroid impact.
2006-12-08 22:25:16
·
answer #4
·
answered by Scythian1950 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
It might fly as a Hollywood script.
It is technically not a theory, just a series of hypotheses.
Why shouldn't the volcanic activity you propose just cool the Earth back down?
2006-12-08 21:40:04
·
answer #5
·
answered by novangelis 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
You forgot a couple of other factors in your theory. Depleting ozone - will allow solar radiation to increase penitration through the atmosphere, mutating or killing life on earth. The Sun - its been putting out more energy than ever before in recorded in human history. Things could get hotter very fast!
2006-12-09 00:01:11
·
answer #6
·
answered by alaskasourdoughman 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
This all sounds like another "scientific" prediction, known as Armageddon. I don't believe in the bible, and don't believe in Armageddon, so I don't agree with your theory. I also don't think volcanic activity, storm activity, or earthquakes have increased dramatically, or will, any time soon. And the polar caps have a long, long, long way to go.
2006-12-08 21:47:16
·
answer #7
·
answered by Jeff 2
·
0⤊
2⤋
Melting ice will no doubt shift weight around enough to trigger some seismic & volcanic activity, but I seriously doubt it will cause the oceans to boil.
2006-12-08 21:42:06
·
answer #8
·
answered by John's Secret Identity™ 6
·
0⤊
2⤋
Here's what a theory is;
In science, a theory is a proposed description, explanation, or model of the manner of interaction of a set of natural phenomena, capable of predicting future occurrences or observations of the same kind, and capable of being tested through experiment or otherwise falsified through empirical observation.
You're giving me an opinion. I don't agree with it.
2006-12-08 21:54:30
·
answer #9
·
answered by Gene 7
·
2⤊
1⤋
Whats putting pressure on the plates?
2006-12-08 22:15:14
·
answer #10
·
answered by cmb 2
·
0⤊
1⤋