Does this mean that we will have a new measurement for 'sea level'[ and as a consequence Everest will effectively be 'shorter' than it is now...in fact all measurements that are quoted as a height above sea level.
This possibly means that some munro's in Scotland will fall below 3,000 feet above sea level and will no longer be classified as Munro's...or does it!
2007-06-07 23:25:06 · 15 answers · asked by PollyPocket 4 in Environment ➔ Global Warming
Dick,
Munro's have been called so since a bloke (named Munro funnily enough) climbed them all and catalogued them all.
They have not been munro's since ancient times!
Today even it has been announced that another mountain has grown tall enough to be added to the munro list and in the past, mountains have been taken off the list.
There is a second catalogue named Corbetts. these mountains, I believe, are above 2,000 feet.
2007-06-08 00:55:42 · update #1
I wouldn't worry about it. Last year the alleged rise was less than a whopping 4 millimeters. How they can come to a result that small, considering wave action, tides, etc., is beyond me.
2007-06-07 23:31:52 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Lets look at your question the way around. And on a smaller scale. I live in the Netherlands. When sealevel rises about half of the countrie will live with wet feet. Unless we make our dikes higher. When the sea, so to say flushes through your living, it is hard to say We live above sea level. And the Munro's stay the Munro's because we just called them so since ancient times
2007-06-08 06:34:57 · answer #2 · answered by dick v 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Everest won't be shorter, it just won't be as high above sea level and it's height above sea level will go down. Depending on how high the sea rises, it could do that to some of the Munros everywhere.
2007-06-08 09:42:48 · answer #3 · answered by da-dum 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Sea levels won't rise, if the ice melts, sea levels will go down. Easy experiment to demonstrate this, take a glass of water, put an ice cube in it, mark the level, let the ice sube melt, mark the level. It's called displacement. As for mountains getting taller, that's a good question, I guess they will in relation to sea level.
2007-06-09 05:25:00 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Try the ice in a glass and then fill it the remaining with water ,just to the rim. Now watch closely for it to run over. It will not as Ice occupies more space than the water. Almost all the northern parts are very similar ,so if the ice melts it will do nothing.
2007-06-08 11:00:16 · answer #5 · answered by JOHNNIE B 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
What i find more exciting, is that, according to Al Gore's movie, if the sea level rises as he thinks it will, most of Florida and the San Francisco Bay Area will be under water. I can't wait. It almost makes me want to burn a lump of coal right now.
2007-06-08 08:27:02 · answer #6 · answered by Francis K 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes you got that right. Global warming means the ice bergs at the poles are melting therefore the sea levels rises.
2007-06-08 13:19:22 · answer #7 · answered by Black 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The yearly rate of sea level rise is 3 mm, so this is not currently having that much of an effect.
2007-06-08 06:30:05 · answer #8 · answered by Anders 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I have lived and played on the coast for 40+ years, yes the tides are getting higher. Not drastic, but is noticeable. Look at npr.org..
http://www7.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0706/feature2/index.html
That was one of the lead ins,,,,
Also is a new tricity! Wiitricity, it rocks!
2007-06-08 06:35:39 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Scotland is rising
2007-06-09 18:42:40 · answer #10 · answered by willow 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋