Global Warming

[T-Man007]

Re: Global Warming

Mick, look for yourself, this is not a gvernment link

http://oceandrilling.coe.tamu.edu/curriculum/Sea_Level/Ice_Volume/activity.html

As you can clearly see, the majority of ice is below the surface just as I told you it would be. And, just to let you know, I went and did you experiemnt. Here are the photos: LOL, you still think glaciers have more mass under water than this cube?

[T-Man007]

Re: Global Warming

In your experiment almost the whole cube was below water, now do you believe me? And, since I'm in Colorado where the cleanist water in the USA is there is no dscrepency because glaciers and icebergs are also fresh water and pure at that because when water evaporates the hydrogen and oxygen atoms form perfectly fresh water before coming back down to land on earth.

[T-Man007]

Re: Global Warming

Oh, by the way Mick, YGM! LOL

[Fit2bLarge]

Re: Global Warming

Of course I don't take salt water into account when comparing ice to ice bergs because ice bergs and glaciers are FRESH WATER, not salt water! So, I'm not wrong. I stated that ice and ice bergs are the same and you come back with somethign about salt water. That's out of context because salt water does not make become glaciers or ice bergs.

we're talking about density of fresh water versus salt water

how do you account for iceberg buoyancy?

if you have two tanks, one with fresh water and one with salt water and drop an egg in both tanks, will they both float? no, why? because salt water has higher density.

so yes, you're wrong. if you take 100ml of fresh water and 100ml of salt water and freeze it, the density is different. i never said icebergs were made of salt water.

again, oversimplification

[Fit2bLarge]

Re: Global Warming

t-man, do this, add 2 more ice cubes, so 1 of the cubes is completely above water level. lets see what happens now. this scenerio is recreating on land ice above sea level

[T-Man007]

Re: Global Warming

t-man, do this, add 2 more ice cubes, so 1 of the cubes is completely above water level. lets see what happens now. this scenerio is recreating on land ice above sea level

Nope, the experiment was to put an ice cube in water and Mick said that most of it would be above the water. I've proven my point. LOL

I don't want to play anymore, I'm taking my ball and going home. LOL

[Fit2bLarge]

Re: Global Warming

lol ok ok

it was a good discussion. i can see both points of view.

last link from Nasa

http://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/stories/greenland/

then again, what the hell does Nasa know

[T-Man007]

Re: Global Warming

we're talking about density of fresh water versus salt water

how do you account for iceberg buoyancy?

if you have two tanks, one with fresh water and one with salt water and drop an egg in both tanks, will they both float? no, why? because salt water has higher density.

so yes, you're wrong. if you take 100ml of fresh water and 100ml of salt water and freeze it, the density is different. i never said icebergs were made of salt water.

again, oversimplification

Bro, all the info I posted on icebergs came directly from how they function in the ocean. It stated that an iceberg will be 1/5 above water because of the lighter snow. Then, after it tumbles several times and the snow is removed then only 1/10 will be above water. These are scientific facts on how ice bergs function in the ocean. I'm not making this up. And, if you look at my ice cube experiment, this makes perfect sense with what you are saying. My ice cube, in fresh water, was about level with the water, right? An iceberg, in the ocean, is 1/10 to 1/5 above water. So, even though you are correct about the boyance of ice in salt water versus fresh water that was never my arguement. I misunderstood what you were talking about, but my argument stays the same. The boyancy of an ice cube and an iceberg will be the same if placed in the same type of water. And the link I posted about icebergs was based on their boyancyin the ocean, not fresh water.

[T-Man007]

Re: Global Warming

lol ok ok

it was a good discussion. i can see both points of view.

last link from Nasa

http://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/stories/greenland/

then again, what the hell does Nasa know

You are a good and honest man to post that! I think I love you! LOL

This is exactly what I have been arguing the whole time. Of course, I did not expect the inner ice to actually get thicker but that just goes to show you that nature will protect itself. Which is what I was saying.

I have the utmost respect for you for posting that because I probably would never have found it!

[Fit2bLarge]

Re: Global Warming

You are a good and honest man to post that! I think I love you! LOL

This is exactly what I have been arguing the whole time. Of course, I did not expect the inner ice to actually get thicker but that just goes to show you that nature will protect itself. Which is what I was saying.

I have the utmost respect for you for posting that because I probably would never have found it!

lol your very welcome. and i quote from the article ..cough cough ehem

What's happening? After Antarctica, Greenland's ice cap contains the second largest mass of frozen freshwater in the world. This new research indicates enough ice loss to cause a measurable rise in sea levels. Quantified conservatively, the study indicates a net loss of roughly 51 cubic kilometers of ice per year from the entirety of the Greenland ice sheet. That's enough to raise the average sea level worldwide about .13 millimeters per year. While that might not sound like much, consider that in the space of only a single lifetime, it's nearly 1 centimeter of rise, and that's only if we assume the rate of increase remains the same.

[mick-G]

Re: Global Warming

All this talk of icecubes is making me thursty, lol! We will see how this effects us in the future is all i can say.

[mtnmedic]

Re: Global Warming

Wow, this is a really good debate going on. It's going to evaporate and come back down,..then creating a mass somewhere else.

[mick-G]

Re: Global Warming

Nope, the experiment was to put an ice cube in water and Mick said that most of it would be above the water. I've proven my point. LOL

I don't want to play anymore, I'm taking my ball and going home. LOL

Common..I never said that, lol! I said that there would be maybe equal amounts. My point thou is that you can't explain what is going to happen with this icecube test, it just doesn't relate to Glaciers. I also said this meterologist is very high level. Its been awhile since i saw the story, but i don't think he belongs to any group.

[T-Man007]

Re: Global Warming

Common..I never said that, lol! I said that there would be maybe equal amounts. My point thou is that you can't explain what is going to happen with this icecube test, it just doesn't relate to Glaciers. I also said this meterologist is very high level. Its been awhile since i saw the story, but i don't think he belongs to any group.

I was just messing around with that last post! LOL

[pigmeat]

Re: Global Warming

so you agree then that your theory of glass full ice is flawed...

During the last warm spell, 125,000 years ago, the seas were about 18 feet higher than they are today. About three million years ago the seas could have been up to 165 feet higher.

http://ga.water.usgs.gov/edu/earthglacier.html

Imagine that? 165 feet higher 125,000 years ago. this is NOT accounting the abuse now.

165+ feet would do quite a bit of damage to the coast line

Point proven The last warm spell? What caused that? Coal fired generators, smog from vehicles. NO...There were none then!!!!..It is natures own way. Why are we blaming it on emisions now, when the earth does this on its own