Anyone else concerned that all the future great flat water spots will have buildings one them?
yesterday I watched in disbelief and horror as the sea levels rose...
but roughly six hours later, they went back down..
it was all good,
so I went back to eating mushies
Mean sea level rise in Australia since balinda occupation is 1.6 mm per year. It's currently 3.2 mm per year.
Those clever Dutch sea stoppers are planning for 1.3 m rise in the North Sea by 2100.
I can't help thinking that's optimistic given that there is supposed to be about 70 m of water locked up in ice.
Select to expand quotetheDoctor said..
yesterday I watched in disbelief and horror as the sea levels rose...
but roughly six hours later, they went back down..
it was all good,
so I went back to eating mushies
That's so funny...
Maybe there is just too many ships, boats and wind surfers with large displacement hulls in the oceans causing the sea level to rise ????????????????
Select to expand quoteNotWal said..
Mean sea level rise in Australia since balinda occupation is 1.6 mm per year. It's currently 3.2 mm per year.
Those clever Dutch sea stoppers are planning for 1.3 m rise in the North Sea by 2100.
Hmm, that's still too slow. I don't really want to wait that long to have a waterfront property.
Select to expand quoteNotWal said..
I can't help thinking that's optimistic given that there is supposed to be about 70 m of water locked up in ice.
Archimedes Principle:- A body floating in equilibrium displaces it's own weight in water.
Therefore melting of the Arctic ice Cap will have zero effect on sea levels.
It is only ice sitting on land masses that can possibly have an effect on sea levels if it melts. I doubt that eventuality will happen within the lifetime of anybody on earth today.
Further, evidence suggests that the earth is heading into another "Ice Age" which is also doubtful of eventuating within the lifetime of anybody on earth today, so what is the panic all about???
So stop panicking and go do what you normally do!!!
Select to expand quoteCraig66 said..
Maybe there is just too many ships, boats and wind surfers with large displacement hulls in the oceans causing the sea level to rise ????????????????
I blame the boat people
Select to expand quotejbshack said..Craig66 said..
Maybe there is just too many ships, boats and wind surfers with large displacement hulls in the oceans causing the sea level to rise ????????????????
I blame the boat people
Did you sell them one
Select to expand quotecisco said...NotWal said..
I can't help thinking that's optimistic given that there is supposed to be about 70 m of water locked up in ice.
Archimedes Principle:- A body floating in equilibrium displaces it's own weight in water.
Therefore melting of the Arctic ice Cap will have zero effect on sea levels.
I think you're confusing weight with volume.
Select to expand quoteCambodge said..cisco said...NotWal said..
I can't help thinking that's optimistic given that there is supposed to be about 70 m of water locked up in ice.
Archimedes Principle:- A body floating in equilibrium displaces it's own weight in water.
Therefore melting of the Arctic ice Cap will have zero effect on sea levels.
I think you're confusing weight with volume.
Actually, I think you don't know what Archimedes' Principle is.
Select to expand quoteCambodge said..cisco said...NotWal said..
I can't help thinking that's optimistic given that there is supposed to be about 70 m of water locked up in ice.
Archimedes Principle:- A body floating in equilibrium displaces it's own weight in water.
Therefore melting of the Arctic ice Cap will have zero effect on sea levels.
I think you're confusing weight with volume.
Except that a lot of the ice cap is on land, so if it melted it would flow into the ocean and sea levels would rise.
Select to expand quoteHarrow said..Cambodge said..cisco said...NotWal said..
I can't help thinking that's optimistic given that there is supposed to be about 70 m of water locked up in ice.
Archimedes Principle:- A body floating in equilibrium displaces it's own weight in water.
Therefore melting of the Arctic ice Cap will have zero effect on sea levels.
I think you're confusing weight with volume.
Except that a lot of the ice cap is on land, so if it melted it would flow into the ocean and sea levels would rise.
He did say "Arctic" nor "Antarctic". The snow/ice in Antarctica is at its thickest/deepest in known history, whilst the Arctic ice cap is the bit that seems to be decreasing - and it's a floating "ice cap". It appears that most in here are a tad confused.
Select to expand quoteCambodge said..
I think you're confusing weight with volume.
Just try a little experiment for me.
Fill a plastic bottle with water right to the top, cap it tightly, freeze it and observe what happens.
Another one:-
Fill a glass sitting on a saucer right to the brim with water then gently float an ice cube in the water. Then very gently lift the glass onto a dry saucer. Allow the ice cube to melt and observe how much water overflows into the saucer.
Maybe you never had the privilege of seeing Dr Julius Sumner-Miller on TV when you were a kid.
Select to expand quotecisco said..
...within the lifetime of anybody on earth today, so what is the panic all about??? So stop panicking and go do what you normally do!!!
Surely there was supposed to be one of these "" at the end of that!?
Select to expand quotecisco said..
Maybe you never had the privilege of seeing Dr Julius Sumner-Miller on TV when you were a kid.
He used to live around the corner from me when I was a kid. I me him once, and he told me that I spelt my name wrong.
Select to expand quoteHarrow said...cisco said..
Maybe you never had the privilege of seeing Dr Julius Sumner-Miller on TV when you were a kid.
He used to live around the corner from me when I was a kid. I me him once, and he told me that I spelt my name wrong.
How many ways can you spell 'Cadbury?'
Select to expand quotecisco said..NotWal said..
I can't help thinking that's optimistic given that there is supposed to be about 70 m of water locked up in ice.
Archimedes Principle:- A body floating in equilibrium displaces it's own weight in water.
Therefore melting of the Arctic ice Cap will have zero effect on sea levels.
...
Sheesh - to clarify: There are still 70+ metres of water locked up in ice in Antarctica, Greenland, and sundry cold places. The geological record shows the mean sea level at its highest was more than 70m higher than it is currently. This takes into account variations in land levels due to tectonic movement and the overburden mass of ice.
Just to clarify, I did say:-Select to expand quotecisco said..
Therefore melting of the Arctic ice Cap will have zero effect on sea levels.
It is only ice sitting on land masses that can possibly have an effect on sea levels if it melts. 
Select to expand quotecisco said..
Just to clarify, I did say:-cisco said..
Therefore melting of the Arctic ice Cap will have zero effect on sea levels.
It is only ice sitting on land masses that can possibly have an effect on sea levels if it melts.
It's as if you expect me to read everything I reply to! 
Local rag "Mandurah mail" from Thurs 22Aug says says a leaked draft of a UN climate change report reckons an 80cm rise this century.
So 80 cm is around about our tide range here. On the positive side is those reefs that are dry sucking now at low tide are gonna have 80cm more water on them making those sections kiteable on low tide.
