Replies

If I remember my geography correctly, there is no land mass under the North Pole anyway, so if the ice cover melts, the water levels won’t rise an inch

true except for Greenland. But there are a few caveats to Greenland, while the whole thing melting would cause about 30 feet (IIRC) of sea level rise, the whole thing won't melt even if temps get back to Medieval levels. The proof is fairly simple, although Greenland was tree and habitable on the edges back then, sea levels were no more than 1/2 meter higher.

Another caveat is that while Greenland's glaciers sped up a bit in the 80's, 90's and early 00's, in 2005 they abruptly slowed to pre-80's speeds. The faster motion was not going to flood the world either. A final caveat is that even taking all of Greenland's ice and sticking it in the Sahara, it would take centuries to melt absorbing all the Saharan sunshine. The only flood would come from it somehow turning into slush and flowing into the ocean which would obviously raise sea levels. But there is no realistic danger of that and the current trend is the other direction.

Hardastarboard: If I remember my geography correctly, there is no land mass under the North Pole anyway, so if the ice cover melts, the water levels won’t rise an inch. The Inuits can all buy convertibles and cut off jean shorts and start growing vegetables instead of killing all those furry little innocents for food. Sounds like everybody wins with GW to me.

palmer: true except for Greenland. But there are a few caveats to Greenland, while the whole thing melting would cause about 30 feet (IIRC) of sea level rise, the whole thing won't melt even if temps get back to Medieval levels. The proof is fairly simple, although Greenland was tree and habitable on the edges back then, sea levels were no more than 1/2 meter higher.

Another caveat is that while Greenland's glaciers sped up a bit in the 80's, 90's and early 00's, in 2005 they abruptly slowed to pre-80's speeds. The faster motion was not going to flood the world either. A final caveat is that even taking all of Greenland's ice and sticking it in the Sahara, it would take centuries to melt absorbing all the Saharan sunshine. The only flood would come from it somehow turning into slush and flowing into the ocean which would obviously raise sea levels. But there is no realistic danger of that and the current trend is the other direction.

True to a certain extent, but oversimplified. Global warming could open enormous tracts of agriculturally useless land in Siberia, Mongolia, Canada, Scandinavia, Alaska and Manchuria for human development. On the other hand, removing the weight of the ice on millions of square miles of land will increase volcanic activity. Deep inside the earth's crust, the pressure can reach thousands of pounds per square inch. The weight of the ice presses down on the earth's crust, increasing this pressure and prevents the formation of magma, in parts of the earth that would otherwise be sprouting active volcanoes like a 14-year-old sprouting zits. (See Iceland and the Aleutian Islands for examples.)

I was an Air Force Inspector on the DEW Line in 1970. I traveled to ALL the sites from Pt Lay Alaska, about 100 miles from Siberia to Kulusuk Greenland about 250 miles to Iceland. I saw it all. The oil rigs on the ANWAR, Polar Bears, Elk Herd migration, (24,000 then 130,000 now!), whales, walrus herds, seals and white falcons!

When we visited the two icecap sites they were at approximately 10,000' above sea level. I spoke with several geologist who were studying Greenland and here's what the said. The icecap was so heavy that the land on which they stood was actually below sealevel. The ice was melting due to the pressure of two miles of ice. Every year the snow replaced the ice melting below and thus the top of the icecap varied a few feet over time.

The DEW Line stations were built on stilts and ever few years the tops of the stilts were opened and additional I Beam were attached ad the jacks attached to the site would jack the site back up to operational height. We traveled to these sites on the pictured ski equipped C-130s. Supplies and stuff was flown in as required. The temperature at these sites were approximately the temperature on Mars! A high of 30 degrees and a low of -60 degrees. When the wind blow and storms formed the temperature might reach -90 degrees below zero. While traveling from Dye 2 to Dye 3 we had to wait because the Air forec would not let it's aircraft fly when the temp was -65 or lower. On that day it was -73 and it was five days before it "warmed up" to -63!

First picture was 1986 and second in 2006. See the snow build up!