Worried About Floods Due to Rising Sea Level? Forget It: Not Happening

Powerlineblog ^ | John Hinderaker

[BonRad]

Posted on May 22, 2014

The global warming hysterics’ favorite fantasy these days is that Antarctic ice will melt due to hypothetical warming, leading to catastrophic flooding as the level of the oceans rises. It is commonly asserted that sea level will rise at least three feet by the end of the century. Put aside whether the Earth actually will warm and whether a three-foot rise would really be catastrophic. Put aside, too, any doubts about how much melting will occur even if the Earth warms by a few degrees, given that the average annual high temperature in Antarctica is -49 F. Does the reality of melting ice bear any mathematical relation to the oft-predicted flood scenario?

A reader who is familiar with geometry and arithmetic–which means he is not a reporter–decided to test the hysterical claim. I will reproduce his email in full:

[Buffalo Head]

Maybe, but I believe that I’ve read that the bulk of ice in the Antarctic is floating. Not certain how to verify or refute that from a reliable source.

[353FMG]

You forgot to mention Kim Kardashian’s wedding in Paris.

It is in Paris, France and not Paris, GA.

[BonRad]

Its been a while so I can’t give links etc but Biblical Flood came from great standing heavily moisture laden stratospheric somethingorother...also to explain great size of creatures and super-flourishing plant growth of Pre Flood Times.

This somethingorother let loose to drown the world. Of course God too gave us the rainbow as sign of a promise He would never so drown the world again.

[SunkenCiv]

Thanks BonRad.

[GOPJ]

This compares to the required 930 cubic miles of water per year for 86 years to get to a sea level rise of 3 feet at the end of the century — a factor of almost 7 times what is said to be observed. Stated differently, at the new alarmingly increased level of ice melt it would take about 600 years for the purported 3 foot rise in sea level to obtain; the implied rise is 6 one-hundreds of an inch per year, or about 5.25 inches by the year 2100.

I'm not saying it's impossible, but in the long years of my life I've only met one reporter who could do math beyond high school algebra ...

[mosesdapoet]

In the News/Activism forum, on a thread titled Worried About Floods Due to Rising Sea Level? Forget It: Not Happening, William Tell wrote:
mosesdapoet said: “There is no increase in the volume of liquid.”
Check your assumptions.

There is an old saying that “a pint’s a pound the world around”. This is describing that the volume of a pint, 16 ounces volume, is equal to 16 ounces of weight. This applies to water. A pint of mercury would weigh considerably more than a pound

We’re talking a liquid measurement in weight not the volume size of a pint glass.

[William Tell]

mosesdapoet said: "We’re talking a liquid measurement in weight not the volume size of a pint glass."

"Liquid measurement" refers to volume. The added "in weight" makes your reference quite ambiguous.

To use your original example, if I start out with 5 ounces of LIQUID water and 5 ounces of ICE (non-liquid water), then I will most assuredly have MORE liquid after the melting than before. The additional amount will depend upon whether the "5 ounces of ice" refers to the volume of the ice or the weight of the ice.

Five ounces of water by volume is roughly the same as five ounces of water by weight. Five ounces of ice by volume, since water expands when freezing, is less than five ounces of ice by weight because ice is less dense than water.

[William Tell]

I think I see how to get us both on the same page.

When you say, "There is no increase in the volume of liquid", you are referring to the indicated level of the liquid in the 12 ounce glass. This indicated level IS NOT the volume of the liquid. It is the volume of the liquid plus the water displaced by the weight of the ice.