One day in the future, we will all sit around and tell our grandchildren where we were on December 13, 2013, the day that some wingnut bloggers realized was the anniversary of Al Gore’s 2008 prediction that the North Pole ice cap would be gone in five years.
Good point. I'm not qualified to offer a real analysis, but a back-of-the-cerebrum sketch would seem to say: (1) if the relaxing landmass is below the ocean surface, it will cause the surface to rise with respect to non-rebounding landmasses (i.e., dry land); (2) if the relaxing landmass is (partly) above-water, its rise will reduce the oceanic surface area -- albeit not much -- and therefore also cause the ocean surface to rise.
Now, of course, in the short run the melting of Antarctic ice would also cool the ocean and therefore reduce its volume, thus opposing sea-level rise.
Sounds like this needs some kind of computer model. Oh, wait....
Don't forget to include how the re-distributed mass changes the planet's rotation. Days will be just a wee bit longer, land will get a wee bit more sun, making the air a wee bit warmer . . . wee, wee, wee, all the way to hell in a handbasket.
It's already well established that insurance will simply not be available in low-lying coastal areas, unless one can afford truly monstrous premiums. If you want to live on the beach, you'll have to be rich enough to walk away from the property. Poorz need not apply.
I wonder if that's why the 1% seem to be working so hard to make sure the CO2 shit hits the climate fan.
That was then, this is now: the people who will starve are the ones without lawyers, guns, or money. South Sudan, Somalia and Rwanda aren't going to invade anybody. We'll quickly get bored by videos of bodies being buried, and the news networks won't show stuff that bores people. It will be "sad", on Faux Snooze, and maybe "tragic" on MSNBC.
And the average height of human tables.
Although, only regional climate.
And getting closer all the time.
Good point. I'm not qualified to offer a real analysis, but a back-of-the-cerebrum sketch would seem to say: (1) if the relaxing landmass is below the ocean surface, it will cause the surface to rise with respect to non-rebounding landmasses (i.e., dry land); (2) if the relaxing landmass is (partly) above-water, its rise will reduce the oceanic surface area -- albeit not much -- and therefore also cause the ocean surface to rise.
Now, of course, in the short run the melting of Antarctic ice would also cool the ocean and therefore reduce its volume, thus opposing sea-level rise.
Sounds like this needs some kind of computer model. Oh, wait....
Nah. They have better teeth.
Positive feedback FTW!
Cheny did say we might get our hair musssed, didn't he?
Valid, until the toast reaches relativistic velocity.
Aberdeen? Hoquiam? Stanwood?
Don't forget to include how the re-distributed mass changes the planet's rotation. Days will be just a wee bit longer, land will get a wee bit more sun, making the air a wee bit warmer . . . wee, wee, wee, all the way to hell in a handbasket.
Indeed - the bottom of the ocean isn't going anywhere, so that 1% is all going to be laid on top, where we have to contend with it.
Of course, that&#039;s what the liberal-biased mathematics <i>would</i> say.
Maybe . . . what&#039;s Cuba&#039;s average elevation above sea level?
It&#039;s already well established that insurance will simply not be available in low-lying coastal areas, unless one can afford truly monstrous premiums. If you want to live on the beach, you&#039;ll have to be rich enough to walk away from the property. Poorz need not apply.
I wonder if that&#039;s why the 1% seem to be working so hard to make sure the CO2 shit hits the climate fan.
Besides, God promised no more floods. It&#039;s in the Bible.
Sadly, not snark: this is the actual &quot;reasoning&quot; asserted by Gov. Sam Brownback (R-Derpistan).
Conservatives misunderstanding science? Unpossible.
That was then, this is now: the people who will starve are the ones without lawyers, guns, or money. South Sudan, Somalia and Rwanda aren&#039;t going to invade anybody. We&#039;ll quickly get bored by videos of bodies being buried, and the news networks won&#039;t show stuff that bores people. It will be &quot;sad&quot;, on Faux Snooze, and maybe &quot;tragic&quot; on MSNBC.