Question:
Does anyone belive that the polar ice caps will melt and cause our costal cities to be flooded?
2007-05-29 16:41:04 UTC
Does anyone belive that the polar ice caps will melt and cause our costal cities to be flooded?
23 answers:
Jiggs
2007-05-29 16:50:44 UTC
Well yes. It is a measurable fact that the Polar ice caps are melting to some degree and several large antarctic ice shelfs have broken off and have begun melting. That much is a fact. Any measurable effect on our land masses will take decades or centuries though.



As for the other answer below from Amy....don't forget that most of the world's ice is ABOVE sea level so when it melts the runoff goes into the sea and raises the sea level.
roz super-library
2007-05-29 17:48:21 UTC
Yes, OF COURSE there is a possibility that the polar ice caps will melt enough to cause enough flooding to inundate our coastal cities! There are many scientific reports out in the last few months, showing how the rate of melting has been speeded up dramatically. There was something on "60 Minutes" not long ago, in which a scientist and an interviewer from that program went in a boat to an area of the Arctic, observing polar ice fields and a huge iceberg that the scientist had taken data on about 2-5 years ago. Now, taking new data, he showed that the area that WAS completely covered by something like 500-ft.-thick ice is bare, and the two men were walking over it, and the huge iceberg was shrinking visibly. Large chunks of it were falling into the sea, as they filmed it. The calculations made by scientists studying the probable effect of melting ice caps are pretty much unanimous that major floods will sweep over the coasts of many countries in the next 20 to 50 years.
2007-05-29 19:00:42 UTC
Its very unlikely the ice caps would melt enough to entirely flood coastal areas. The danger from this aspect of global warming has to do with selected areas that are low-lying and that would require an unrealistic amount of levees, dikes, etc to protect. The most vulnerable ares are the following (US only): New York City and environs, Cheasapeake Bay, Florida (except north central), southern Mississsippi, Alabama, and most of Louisiana, San francisco environs, port area of Seattle. There are some other points as well, but not heabily built up--or such that they can be readily protected.



Now think about the fact that that the degree of vulnerability of the US is comparable to the rest of the world. This is NOT a trivial problem--especially since these regions produce a large pat of the food in most parts of the world.



That's based on a 5-10 foot (1.5-3.0 meter) rise in sea level--in the range of what is currently predicted within this century. But the rate of melting appears to be accelerating.
Rahrah
2007-05-29 18:19:29 UTC
Believe it - it is fact. In 2005 a piece of the polar ice cap the size of Rhode Island broke off and is melting into the sea. It is the largest chunk to have ever broken off at one time. Scientists have also said that the caps over Greenland are speeding up in the melting process and are melting at "triple speed" (when measured from April 2002 to Nov 2005 as opposed to the prior 18 month measurement). Pictures taken from the space shuttle show dramatic differences between 1999 and 2005 and shocked scientist by the alarming rate of melting. You can got to www.ask.com and type in polar ice caps and find numerous articles and pictures about this.
Trevor
2007-05-29 17:28:55 UTC
The polar ice caps are melting and it is a serious concern but the rate of melting is such that the Arctic will be around for more than 100 years and Antarctica will be around for many thousands of years - it's that big and cold in the interior that it will require serious long term global warming to melt all of it.



Coastal cities will be flooded but not for a long time yet.



The Arctic is melting comparatively fast but this is a huge block of floating ice and it's already displacing it's own mass of water, it could melt completely and sea levels would be unaffected.



Meltwater runoff from Antarctica and the Greenland Ice Sheet is causing sea levels to rise - very slightly.



An overall warmer climate causes the oceans to warm and expand. The cold meltwater runoff has a cooling effect on the oceans but overall it's the warming that wins. It's further complicated by the strange physical property that water has in that below 4 degrees C it expands as it cools.



Overall the effect is one of rising sea levels which are currently averaging 3mm per year around the world, locally up to 30mm in some places. This rising is expected to accelerate in the coming years but all the same, it's unlikely to reach more than 10mm a year even in the worst case scenario, the reality will probably be 5 or 6mm a year.



We can expect to see sea levels rise by about 500mm (20 inches) by the end of the century. In some paces we can construct flood defences against rising tides and protect vulnerable towns and cities but in some places this won't be feasible.



The richer nations have the ability to protect their cities (at a cost) but it's the poorer nations that will be most significantly affected.
2007-05-29 18:58:34 UTC
Go have a look they are melting .

use Google Earth



what used to be permanent arms of Ice (they even had names)have disapeared in Antarctica .

And polar bears are swimming around the north pole

looking for a home

trying to find a home



The ice from the North pole will not make any difference to water lavels ,but the water from the meling Glaziers ,Antarctica and Greenland will,because it is ice on the land .



The biggest disaster is the loss of potable water



Here you can see why



25% of the planets surface is land

75%of the surface is water and it is rising



------------------------------...



97%of the Earths water is salt



fresh water is only 3% of all the Earths water

most of it is beyond out reach



now much ice is melting and running into the seas fresh water lost for ever.



STORAGE or Location of % of the fresh water

ice and glaziers 74%

groundwater 800 meters + 13.5 %

groundwater less than 800meters 11.o%

Lakes 0.3%

soils 0.006%

Atmospheric in circulation 0.0035%

rivers 0.03%





frozen land or permafrost is not included and represent an unavailable storage of 40%



so of the 3% about 11.6 ,is easily available to us ,in rivers, lakes and ground water surface aquifers,more and more of this is becoming contaminated
CrazyConservative
2007-05-29 18:31:25 UTC
Sure they can. During most of earth's history (not man's), there have been no polar ice caps. The current ice caps formed during the last ice age 10,000 years ago, and have been melting ever since. As for coastal flooding, it is possible. And you could say we even caused it, but not because we have any effect on the climate, but because we like to live right near the ocean. We have even built coastal cities below sea level (New Orleans).



If you look at history, Raleigh, NC (currently about 135 miles from ocean), used to be right on the shores. Wilmington, NC (currently a coastal town), used to be 100 miles from the ocean. And there were no SUV's driving around then.
dnott.geo
2007-05-29 17:30:06 UTC
The polar ice caps will shirnk but I don't believe it will disappear completely. I do believe that the ice around Greenland will completely melt because of GW. The oceans will rise and the coastal cities will flood. The scientific evidwence is all there. Government does not want to believe it.
armandoj365
2007-05-29 19:39:47 UTC
In this case, yes there is a possibility if they melt[ice caps] mainly because we will just get getting warmer and warmer unless we do something, we will all suffer the consqunces with cities being gone and floods all over, and becaue we caused this.
2007-05-30 07:32:15 UTC
If the polar ice caps and the Greenland ice sheet all melt, lower Manhattan will have to do something, other than that we're pretty cool.
Bob
2007-05-29 17:19:06 UTC
Sure. Most all scientists.



The questions outstanding are when and how badly.



Note that the Arctic ice cap doesn't count, it's ice on land melting and running into the sea that's the problem, along with thermal expansion of warmer ocean waters.
...
2007-05-29 18:52:38 UTC
Yes, because I've read online about this guy named Edgar Cayce and he made a ton of predictions that have come true, he predicted the Stock Market Crash and Great Depression , Foresaw revolutions in foreign lands, Foresaw the rise and fall of Adolf Hitler, Foresaw a world war that would begin in 1936, Foresaw America's 1941 entry into the war, Foresaw a decisive World War II battle, Foresaw the deaths of Presidents FDR and JFK, Foresaw India's independent from Britain, Foretold archeological facts which later proved true, etc. And he also predicted America's west coast will be destroyed, and The ocean level will rise significantly. If you would like to look for yourself, please click on the link and tell me what you think.:

http://www.near-death.com/experiences/cayce11.html
gigemzach
2007-05-29 17:22:10 UTC
If it ever did get to that point, which there is a chance, I don't think it would flood a whole city, maybe bring up the level of the water a couple of feet. This might flood a city like New Orleans, but not much to alot of the other cities. But just to be on the safe side, everyone should pitch in the help to reduce pollution.
Jimmy K
2007-05-29 19:05:33 UTC
Manhattan
Buffy
2007-05-29 17:41:31 UTC
Yes, I do. If you've watched the 'Inconvient Truth' you'd see why. I know, some people nod off while watching it, but its a good documentary. A bit long, but *lol* it has a music video! XD But seriously, it will happen.
corkeoes
2007-05-29 17:06:03 UTC
it would only be a problem if the earth heated up more after the ice caps melted. Otherwise, the water would displace as much as the ice would; but if we heat up more, everything will expand.
Amy
2007-05-29 16:46:09 UTC
I'm not so sure about the flooding issue. Ice is actually less compact than water, so if the ice melted, the resulting water would take up less space, right?
Crispy
2007-05-29 17:33:11 UTC
The earth can flood but it is not likely. Shorelines are changing but nothing too drastic. Just don't live below sea level.
eddygordo19
2007-05-29 17:52:31 UTC
Anyone who thinks they can predict the weather more than 2 weeks out is delusional.
2007-05-29 16:46:15 UTC
It's not a matter of believing - it's a matter of a science. Yes or no.
out for justice.
2007-05-29 17:18:17 UTC
no i do not. and even if they did, man had very little to do with it.
Mrs B
2007-05-29 22:56:40 UTC
yes, i do.
2007-05-31 06:37:30 UTC
Earth Day Report by Captain Paul Watson

Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.

- Albert Einstein 1879 - 1955)



Earth Day is almost here. I don't believe in Earth Day myself. I think it's a little silly to devote one single day of the year to being concerned about the environment, but I suppose one day is better than no day at all.



Having been an environmental activist since 1968, I have seen the movement go up and down like a roller coaster in popularity. It was big in 1972 with the Environmental Conference in Stockholm which I attended and it became big again in 1992 with the U.N. Environmental Conference in Rio De Janeiro that I also attended. I remember that the priority issue in 1972 was the danger of escalating human populations but by 1992, that concern was not even on the agenda.



Well we are approaching the end of another 20 year period and it looks like ecology is in vogue again thanks to global warming and a few other scary things. Green is once again popular.



I can always tell when the environment is getting to be faddish again. My indicator is the number of lectures I am booked for around this time of year. It reached its peak in 1992, practically disappeared for awhile and now it's coming around again.



What worries me is that the movement is constantly being sidetracked by the issue of the day.



It's global warming now. When we were trying to warn people about global warming and climate change twenty years ago, no one was interested. Now it's become the "in" issue and the big organizations are tapping the public for donations to address the problem although no one has come up with anything that makes much sense. But global warming is good for business if you're one of the big bureaucratic organizations whose primary concern is really corporate self preservation.



Greenpeace is even telling people that they can slow down global warming by (and I kid you not) "singing in the shower". Yep, you see all you have to do is run the water, then get wet, shut the water off, and sing in the shower as you lather up and then open up the faucet and rinse off. Ah, so simple to save the world.



The problem is that these big organizations are too politically correct to address the ecologically correct solutions.



Instead they are baffling everyone with abstract concepts like carbon trading and carbon storage or trying to sell us a new hybrid Japanese car.



Even Al Gore with his Inconvenient Truth totally ignored the most inconvenient truth of all. I'll get to that in a moment.



But let's look at the number one cause of global greenhouse gas emissions.



First and foremost it is human over-population, the very same issue that was the priority concern at the 1972 United Nations Conference on the Environment in Stockholm.



It's 6.5 billion people folks.



Remember in 1950, the world population was 3 billion. It's now more than doubled.



6.5 billion people produce one hell of an annual output of waste and utilize an unbelievable amount of resources and energy.



And this number is rising minute by minute, day, by day, year by year.



And most of the people having children have no idea why they are even having children other than that's what you do. Most of them don't really love their children because if they did they would be very much involved in trying to ensure that their children have a world to survive in.



Unless over-population is addressed, there is absolutely no way of slowing down global greenhouse gas emissions.



But how do you do that within the context of economic systems that require larger and larger numbers to perform the essential task of consuming products?



Corporations need workers and buyers. Governments need tax-payers, bureaucrats and soldiers. More people means more money.



I've said for decades that the solution to all of our problems is simple. We just need to live in accordance with the three basic laws of ecology.



First is the Law of Diversity. The strength of an eco-system lies in diversity of species within it. Weaken diversity and the entire system will be weakened and will ultimately collapse.



Second is the Law of Interdependence. All of the species within an eco-system are interdependent. We need each other.



And the third law of Ecology is the Law of Finite Resources. There is a limit to growth because there is a limit to carrying capacity.



Human populations are exceeding ecological carrying capacity.



Exceeding ecological carrying capacity is diminishing both resources and diversity of species.



The diminishment of diversity is causing serious problems with interdependence.



Albert Einstein once wrote that "if the bee disappeared off the surface of the globe, then man would have only four years of life left. No more bees, no more pollination, no more plants, no more animals, no more man."



That is the Law of Interdependence.



Forget global warming folks. The disappearance of the honeybee could end our existence as human beings on this planet far sooner than we think.



And the honey bee is in fact now disappearing. Why? We don't know why. It could be genetically modified crops, It could be pesticides or it could be that our cell phones are interfering with their ability to navigate.



Whatever the cause the fact is that they are disappearing. All around the world bees are disappearing in a crisis called Colony Collapse Disorder.



And bees pollinate our plants. Everywhere on the planet, bees are hard at work making it possible for you to live and enjoy life.



We hold on to our place on this planet by only a toehold. If anything happens to the grass family, we are screwed. If the earthworms disappear, we are in big trouble. If the bees disappear, well according to Albert Einstein who was considered somewhat smarter than most of us, we will have only four years. Just enough time to get a college degree to discover that everything you learned is relatively useless when sitting on the doorstep of global ecological annihilation.



We are cutting down the forest and plundering the oceans of life. We are polluting the soil, the air and the water and we are rapidly running out of fresh water to drink.



Only corporations like Coke and Pepsi have figured out that water is more valuable than gold. That is why they are bottling it in plastic bottles and selling it. This week I saw a bottle of water in my hotel room that I could have drunk for only $4.



Unbelievable. That means that water is now being sold for more than the equivalent amount of gasoline. I hope that I'm not the only one who thinks this is insanity.



Now for Al Gore's really inconvenient truth. In his film he does not mention once that the meat and dairy industry that produces the bacon, the steaks, the chicken wings and the milk is a larger contributor to greenhouse gas emissions than the automobile industry. You see, Al may drive a Prius but he likes his burgers.



This is why the big organizations like Greenpeace and the Sierra Club will not say a thing about the meat industry. Last year I saw Greenpeacers sitting down for a baked fish meal onboard the Greenpeace ship Esperanza while engaged in a campaign to oppose over-fishing.



When we pointed out that our Sea Shepherd ships serve only vegan meals, the Greenpeace cook replied, "that's just silly."



We see what we want to see and we rationalize everything else.



The oceans have been plundered to the point that 90% of the fish have been removed from their eco-systems and at this very moment there is over 65,000 miles of long lines set in the Pacific Ocean alone and there are tens of thousands of fishing vessels scouring the seas in a rapacious quest to scoop up everything that swims or crawls.



This is ecological insanity.



The largest marine predator on the planet right now is the cow. More than half the fish taken from the sea is rendered into fish meal and fed to domestic livestock. Puffins are starving in the North sea to feed sand eels to chickens in Denmark. Sheep and pigs have replaced the shark and the sea lion as the dominant predators in the ocean and domestic house cats are eating more fish than all the world's seals combined. We are extracting some fifty to sixty fish from the sea to raise one farm reared salmon.



This is ecological insanity.



Yet the demand for shark fin is rising in China. Ignorant people still want to wear fur coats. In America, we order fries, a cheeseburger and a "diet" coke.



Ecological insanity folks.



Last week a reporter called to ask me if I had really said that earth worms are more important than people. I answered that yes I had. He then asked how I could justify such a statement.



"Simple," I answered. "Earthworms can live on the planet without people. We cannot live on the planet without earthworms thus from an ecological point of view, earthworms are more important than people."



He said that I was insane for suggesting such a ridiculous idea when people were made in the image of God, and earthworms were not.



What we have here of course is a failure to communicate between two radically different world views. His which is anthropocentric and sees reality as human centred and mine which is biocentric and sees reality as including all species equally working in interdependence. He sees us as divine and better than all the other species and I see us as a bunch of arrogant primates out of control.



But that's my two cents worth for Earth Day 2007.



Consider the humble honey bee and remember that the little black and yellow insect you see flitting busily from flower to flower is all that stands between us and our demise as a species on this planet.



We better see to it that they don't disappear.



May be freely published and distributed



Captain Paul Watson



Founder and President of the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society (1977-

Co-Founder - The Greenpeace Foundation (1972)

Co-Founder - Greenpeace International (1979)

Director of the Sierra Club USA (2003-2006)

Director - The Farley Mowat Institute

Director - www.harpseals.org


This content was originally posted on Y! Answers, a Q&A website that shut down in 2021.
Loading...