It is estimated that Antarctica, if fully melted, would contribute more than 60 metres of sea level rise, and Greenland would contribute more than 7 metres. Small glaciers and ice caps might contribute about 0.5 metres. While the latter figure is much smaller than for Antarctica or Greenland it could occur relatively quickly (within the coming century) whereas melting of Greenland would be slow (perhaps 1500 years to fully deglaciate at the fastest likely rate) and Antarctica even slower.
It looks like you have a long long time to wait if you want to be like Kevin Costner in Water World
... unless you live in the Republic of Maldives has the lowest mean elevation of any country at 0.8 meter above mean sea level.
2007-03-19 00:18:53
·
answer #1
·
answered by Lochdan 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Not all land will be under water, there is not enough Ice in all of the Ice caps, Glaciers and Tundra to cause that much of a flood.
However Low lying countires and those that are more plains than raised would be flodded to a certain point, the same if there was an Ice age, there would be more water captured, so increasing the land availiable for use.
Quite frankly, Move to a higher position in your country whilst the prices are low.
2007-03-18 23:57:06
·
answer #2
·
answered by Kevan M 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
If all the ice in all the world melted it would raise sea levels by 120 metres, this would flood all coastal and low lying areas but most of the land mass would still be above the new water level.
In any event, it would require a huge rise in global temperatures to melt all the ice, many times more than is predicted even in the worst case scenarios.
2007-03-18 23:54:37
·
answer #3
·
answered by Trevor 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
The ice caps will not melt all together, they would melt until the gulf stream would shut down, causing the weather patterns to change, and start another ice age since there would be no more exchange of warm air/water. Since the earth is tilted all of the ice on the planet couldn't melt unless we were under an extreme greenhouse condition and the composition of the atmosphere changed.
2007-03-18 23:55:46
·
answer #4
·
answered by dv4unme 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
I believe the best estimate is that complete melting of all land based ice fields would result in an 80 meter increase in sea levels. Hardly sufficient to flood all land.
Sorry, you need to stop using Hollywood as a basis for scientific analysis
2007-03-19 10:21:10
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Al Gore's movie announced that the water level could rise 20 feet. The latest UN research shows that the MAXIMUM it could rise would be 23 inches. Al was only 18.08 FEET off. So they have asked Al Gore to stop all the hype: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/13/science/13gore.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
If you look up any global temperature chart on the net, you'll find the earth's temperature has only increased by about 6/10 of one degree (C) - that's 1.1 degree (F), in the last 125 years. So yes, the globe is warming up, but it's not overheating like some would have you to believe. http://data.giss.nasa.gov:80/gistemp/2005/2005cal_fig1.gif
The latest research shows that the methane from cows and pigs is a major factor in the increase of "heat trapping gas". It's actually 23 times more potent as a heat trapping gas than is carbon dioxide. http://www.greenpeace.org/international/campaigns/climate-change/science/other_gases
According to the newest UN report on Global Warming, "Livestock are responsible for 18 per cent of the greenhouse gases that cause global warming, more than cars, planes and all other forms of transport put together." http://news.independent.co.uk:80/environment/article2062484.ece
So if Al Gore and all the alarmists really want to do something about climate change, they MUST become vegetarians and shut down cow and pig farms. I mean seriously, if they truly believe that global warming is as disastrous as they are preaching then they need to stop eating meat, period! I seriously doubt that will happen. If not, then they are the hypocrites that some of us already suspect they are.
Also Al Gore preaches to you to conserve, but he does not practice it himself. He uses 20 times more energy in his Nashville mansion than the national average. http://www.tennesseepolicy.org/main/article.php?article_id=367
One thing he has not learned is that you MUST practice what you preach... at some point you will get caught as he has.
2007-03-18 23:53:07
·
answer #6
·
answered by capnemo 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
If all polar ice caps melt we'd see a 600ft sea level rise. I'm aware of a 400ft increase on current surface levels in the Jurrasic and that why you can find dinosaur fossils in antarctic rocks - it became heavily forrested during this period. Al Gore's 20ft comes from half of the greenland ice sheet plus half of the west antartic iceshelves - which is far from all of the ice.
2007-03-19 07:24:51
·
answer #7
·
answered by Moebious 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Nope. Not even if all the ice melted which it won't before the next ice age. Remember the climate is always changing in cycles.
2007-03-18 23:48:06
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
No. If all of the icecaps melted (extremely unlikely) the ocean levels would rise about 300 feet. Whilethis would obviously flood extensive coastal regions, most of Earth's land surfice is at higher elevations than that.
2007-03-19 00:58:01
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
according to archimedes Any solid lighter than a fluid will, if placed in the fluid, be so far immersed that the weight of the solid will be equal to the weight of the fluid displaced.
therefore all that floating ice is already displaceing its weight in the oceans and if it melted would make no difference
2007-03-18 23:53:07
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋