tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8268551755123531151.post2129425887922555023..comments2023-12-14T20:59:24.369-08:00Comments on Thoughts on the Roof: Arctic melting - no problem???William Hughes-Gameshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06184766974497951683noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8268551755123531151.post-50963719916527967552012-08-26T00:38:29.035-07:002012-08-26T00:38:29.035-07:00I copied a part of the post and added a link here ...I copied a part of the post and added a link here <br />http://neven1.typepad.com/blog/2012/08/record-dominoes-8-nsidc-daily-sea-ice-extent.html?cid=6a0133f03a1e37970b017c317a428b970b#comment-6a0133f03a1e37970b017c317a428b970b<br />johnm33Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8268551755123531151.post-19131126652768225312012-08-17T02:33:04.109-07:002012-08-17T02:33:04.109-07:00Hello William
Interesting post!
I really don't...Hello William<br />Interesting post!<br />I really don't like the sound of that potential methane scenario. <br />I've wondered if when the ice melts out there could be enough evaporation to actually increase the speed of the currents flowing into the arctic, another uneasy thought is that the kinetic energy, from the earths rotation, contained in the ocean will drive whatever 'cell' gets established at the pole. It just seems that slowing from 290kph [at 80degN] to zero has to generate significant amounts of heat not neccasarily a huge increase in temperature given the specific heat of salt water but certainly enough to stop a refreeze. The turbulence is only going to mix the layers and make things worse. I'm only an amateur so this is just speculation, what do you think? <br /> It seems to me that north america is going to bear the brunt of the consequences having no lattitudinal mountains to prevent storms blowing all the way to texas. <br /> When i looked into the last great climate change i got the sense that the 'flicker' effect went on for a millenia and a half, and behaved more like someone in agony jerking between postures to try to find ease.<br />johnm33Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8268551755123531151.post-6543063395969516852011-10-12T15:06:29.628-07:002011-10-12T15:06:29.628-07:00Floating ice, like floating anything, displaces on...Floating ice, like floating anything, displaces only its weight in water. If you think about it some, you can see that means when it melts the water level doesn't change.<br /><br />The problem is, as alluded to in the article, ice which is on land, i.e. Greenland. Obviously, when that melts and runs into the ocean, sea level rises. And there is an awful lot of ice on Greenland, second only to Antarctica.gzuckiernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8268551755123531151.post-65540768071184848872009-06-13T22:06:01.943-07:002009-06-13T22:06:01.943-07:00@Ray
A simple experiment. Put a big chunk (or man...@Ray<br />A simple experiment. Put a big chunk (or many small chunks) of ice in a container filled to a certain level with water. Mark the level of water.<br /><br />When all the ice melts, not the level of water. I think you'll be surprised.zefirielhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11792895283256095075noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8268551755123531151.post-40936297828778016342009-05-15T04:49:00.000-07:002009-05-15T04:49:00.000-07:00I get your point about the reflected light causng ...I get your point about the reflected light causng a problem, however, I'm a tad confused about the water level as a result of the melting.<br /><br />If you put water in the freezer in a bottle, the wtare (ice?) expands as it freezes. so If you don't leave enough room and you have the lid on the bottle suffers, as does your freezer.<br /><br />So my point is, surely the opposite is true, when the artic ice caps melt then surely the water levels will lower. Or have I got it all wrong.<br /><br />Anyway, the melting isn't a good thing.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com