Signs of the Last Hour

Australia is considered to be a continent, not an island. If continents are included as islands (which technically they are), then both the Asian/European/African mass and the Americas are much larger than Australia.
Pedantically,
Thersites

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

A quick look in the Oxford English dictionary ( I don't have an Encyclopeadia) Australia is considered to be "An island Continent"
Continent shows as " any of the main expanses of land ( Europe, Asia......Australia)"

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

That's totally correct Bell. But runoff of ice on land, may not cause any significant increase in surface water elevations due to the fact that the recieving system is much more vast than the contributing drainage area. In addition, this is not a static problem, where water transport is the only conern. Sediment transported by water plays a big factor in the final geometry. Continuous erosion and sediment transport caused by this runoff may create a compensentory storage areas for the additional water, and what we might end up with is not a rise in surface water elevation, but a new formation of land equal or so in volume to the melted ice.

Greenland will also become lighter in bulk density without the weight of ice on it....That will make it's rate of moisture absorbtion in the soil much higher than existing conditions which are highly compacted by the weight. Greenland will most likely act as a sponge and absorb most of the melted water within it's ground water aquifers.

 

actually i asked ALL of my science teachers

and how the hell do you explain over 100,000 results on Google for "global warming, rising sea levels"

and what about ALL of those sources by SCIENTISTS i posted. everything they said went completely against what you think.

 

Alright James.

ill settle this once and for all.

give me the website name for the most accurate and reliable website about Science (preferably about enviromental and climate science).

anyway, what website?

give a website with a large number of hits and very credible.

 

Preacher X,

actually i asked ALL of my science teachers

and how the hell do you explain over 100,000 results on Google for "global warming, rising sea levels"

and what about ALL of those sources by SCIENTISTS i posted. everything they said went completely against what you think

At what level do you do science? Or perhaps the better question would be at what level have your teachers studied science to?

Because I can tell you right now they should know about displacement. If not, which you seem to indicate, I would move schools because if you or your parents are paying for your education you are getting ripped off. Either way, move schools if the people you asked claim they are scientists.

There is no doubt in my mind that if global temperatures rise the sea level will rise. But, the North Pole will not cause the sea to rise if it melts because the North Pole floats on top on the sea- therefore it displaces the sea water. The North Pole which you have been talking about the whole time with James will not cause the sea level to rise if it melts

Global warming is a dubious science. It's new; we don't have that many years of recorded data to compare it to; and we're just coming out of an ice age which means the CO2 trapped in the ice around the world is beinging released as the ice melts from the higher temperatures causing more green house effects, and so on. There are many arguments to global warming, but- the argument you are having with James is about the North Pole melting and causing the sea level to rise. You don't know enough of what you're talking about to understand the other side of the argument (James), therefore it is going right over the top of your head. That you've continued to argue this for 9 pages and only just started questioning people about it, i.e. your "teachers", makes me wonder at why you aren't making a better effort to expand your knowledge of something, i.e. displacement, instead of expanding the breadth of your ignorance. You can't expect me to take any of either yours or Proud Muslims arguments seriously when both of you have shown a fundamental lack of knowledge in subjects you have both tried to argue about. Tectonic Plates for gods sake- PM didn't know what tectonic plates were and tried to argue with me about the cause of earthquakes. How can you expect anyone to respect someone with such a gaping hole in their basic general knowledge- such ignorance- who had the arrogance to argue and claim that they were right? If you read this PM I hope you realise how little weight I put on any of your opinions or on anything you say and is based on "fact". And how transparent your claims are of righteousness or humility or any other so called gracious traits you might like to think you have that outways the all dominating arrogance you carry around in your head. I wonder at what litte space your brain actually occupies your cranium. Or do I need to explain another long word to you?

I'll grant you that at first the concept of the ice in the North Pole melting won't cause the sea level to rise- it seems like reverse logic. But believe me when I say James is right. You are wrong. Be more of a man than PM and acknowledge James is right, but do it beacuse you've gone and got the knowledge and have seen that it is a sound theory and aren't just accepting it without understanding- or you're just perpetuating your ignorance further.

 

ATHEORY

i know displacement but what im saying is what about the ice ABOVE the sea level which is not accounting for the displacemtn of water? how else is the worlds sea level rising then? (and if you want a source go on google and type "global warming, worlds sea level rising" it will give you over 100,000 results and read them.

 

Preacher X

i know displacement but what im saying is what about the ice ABOVE the sea level which is not accounting for the displacemtn of water? how else is the worlds sea level rising then? (and if you want a source go on google and type "global warming, worlds sea level rising" it will give you over 100,000 results and read them.

100,000 hits doesn't mean anything- It's not even relevant to the argument you're having with James. Have you even read what I posted? You are and have been arguing for the last 9!!! pages about the North Pole. Not "global warming, worlds sea level rising", but the North Pole melting and causing the sea to rise. Of course global warming will cause the worlds sea levels to rise, I said as much in my last post but your wilful ignorance seems to keep you from reading what people actually write.

The ice above the level of the sea of the North Pole does account for displacement because it is floating on the water.

Seriously. This here is a quote from the site which bell most courteously provided:
"Remember that when water freezes, it expands. This means that ice will take up more space than liquid water. Ice in the water should take up more space than when it melts. Ice floating on water, like in the Arctic, will not raise water levels. Ice on land, as it is in Antarctica, will raise water levels, because as it melts, it will flow into the surrounding ocean. There is so much water tied up in Antarctica that melting even a portion of it would raise sea levels worldwide."
-The University of Illinois
Do you study at a university? I would be surprised if you even managed to ask your teachers the right question because if you did they would concur with what everyone else in here thinks but you and the ever so dull brained PM.

The difference between the Arctic and the Antarctic is this:

Arctic= North Pole

Antarctic= South Pole

You have been talking about the North Pole or the Artic this WHOLE thread.

It has been spelled out for you time and again. You know displacement just as well as Proud Muslim knows earthquakes. Don't make this a futile effort from several parties to educate you so when you open your mouth and talk to someone in the real world and not under this veil of anonymity on the net, you don't make a fool of yourself.

 

Anything lighter than water would displace water equal to its total weight. Ice is lighter than water and when the floating ice melts into water it is just the same amount of water it has displaced earlier. No matter how much ice was above the sea level. This simple fact is known to us for ~2000 years since archimedes.

Sea level will rise when the land based ice melts.

Preacher, None is saying that sea level will not raise due to global warming. The issue is PM's assertion that north pole ice metling would raise the sea level. Due to your young age you tend to believe whatever the scientific-illiterates like PM tell. You are right when you said north pole has nothing to with the prophesy. Then you do you still cling to the north pole like that Proud_Monkey.?!!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!